Child Sacrifice: Should Women Who Murder Their Unborn Children Be Drawn And Quartered? Part 1

Warning, the following message may be offensive to some audiences. These audiences may include but are not limited to professing Christians who never read their

Bible, sissies, sodomites, men with man buns, those who approve of men with man buns, man bun enablers, white knights for men with man buns, homemakers who have finished

Netflix but don't know how to meal plan, and people who refer to their pets as fur babies. Viewer discretion is advised. People are tired of hearing nothing but doom and despair on the radio.

The message of Christianity is that salvation is found in Christ alone, and any who reject

Christ therefore forfeit any hope of salvation, any hope of heaven.

The issue is that humanity is in sin, and the wrath of almighty

God is hanging over our heads.

They will hear his words, they will not act upon them, and when the floods of divine judgment, when the fires of wrath come, they will be consumed and they will perish.

God wrapped himself in flesh, condescended, and became a man, died on the cross for sin, was resurrected on the third day, has ascended to the right hand of the

Father, where he sits now to make intercession for us. Jesus is saying there is a group of people who will hear his words, they will act upon them, and when the floods of divine judgment come in that final day, their house will stand.

Welcome to Bible Bashed, where we aim to equip the saints for the works of ministry. We're your hosts

Harrison Kerrig and Pastor Tim Mullett, and today we seek to answer the age old question, should women who murder their unborn children be drawn and quartered?

And before we ask this title question and kind of dive right into it, Tim, do you mind just explaining to us what drawn and quartered actually means for those who might not be acquainted with this term?

Yeah, I was actually looking that up, and it seems like there's some discussion about what that really meant.

Oh, really? Yeah, I assumed it meant you have essentially a body that is tied between four horses, and the four horses are spurred outward, and you basically split the body into four that way.

And I think that's probably what it is, but then some of the other websites were basically saying that it means cutting the body into four pieces too.

But yeah, essentially the drawn part is, I guess it's essentially a cruel form of punishment that happened in the late, let's see, 12th century, something along that line.

And basically the drawn part is that you're tied to a horse and dragged to the gallows, and then you're hung, and usually you're going to be disemboweled live.

And then after being disemboweled, you have your entrails burned, you're normally beheaded, and then you're quartered, meaning put between the four horses and have them run in opposite directions.

So you might want to think of the William Wallace scene and Braveheart kind of deal.

So basically what you're saying is definitely a gentleman's death, right? That's right.

Well, apparently it was the kind of death that was reserved for traitors. I think that's what people agree upon.

Yeah. Well, I didn't know that. I just assumed it was you tie each limb to a different horse, and then you just smack the horse, and then it runs off.

Yeah, I think that's probably what it is, but I don't know. There's some dispute, but who knows. It's something bad. Definitely.

Cut into four pieces somehow. Quartered. Yeah, whatever it is, it doesn't sound pleasant.

Sure. Okay, so going back to the title question itself, now that we know at least somewhat what drawn and quartered means, what do you think?

Should women who murder their unborn children be drawn and quartered? Sure. Well, I think it's a difficult question to answer, and not for the reasons we think.

I would say that right now it's kind of blasphemy to think that a woman should face any punishment for murdering her unborn child.

But I think what's hard about it is, if you're trying to think about it from a biblical perspective, there's several types of passages which seem to come to mind.

So you have the principle of lex talionis, which essentially is the principle in the

Bible that the punishment should fit the crime. So that's the eye for eye, the tooth for tooth, the life for life kind of principle.

And then related to individuals who are making false accusations against another person, if you're laying in wait for your brother and seeking to do them harm, and it's found out that you're making a false accusation, the

Israelites are told to do to the person making that false accusation what they intended to do to their brother, essentially.

In the Old Covenant Law, there is this principle of equal retribution, essentially, that if you seek to do your brother harm, the punishment has kind of like a maximum amount of, if you take their eye, the punishment should fit the crime.

So an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, a life for a life. What you seek to do to the other person or do to the other person, that's what should be done to you.

So there's this principle of that being defined as justice, and so then when you compare that to the idea of a mother basically conscripting an abortionist or a hitman to kill her child, essentially there is a kind of justice there to be thought that if you actually understand what's happening to an unborn baby in an abortion, they are essentially being chopped into pieces in their mother's womb while they're alive, and then in order that they'll fit into the birth canal without as much difficulty.

So if you look into how they do these sorts of things, it's a pretty grisly process as far as that goes, which often involves, depending on what stage it is, dismembering while in the mother's womb.

So then you think about, well, should she be drawn and quartered? Well, it seems to me that that would be an example of the lex talionis type of thing in operation, if that makes sense.

I think what makes it difficult, though, is that there's obviously a long legal tradition in our country of an attempt to ban cruel and unusual punishment as far as that goes, and so there is kind of a moral intuition there that seems to be something that we should resonate with to some degree, which is to say that there are types of barbaric and cruel punishments for crimes that we should be somewhat skeptical about in general, because there's a distortion of the eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth, life for life kind of principle that basically says that whatever a person does, that needs to be done to them, period, without any forethought, right?

And the problem with that kind of thing is that if you were to imagine a person rapes someone else, well, a rape for a rape, is that what the

Bible is intending there? Well, no, clearly not. So there's some kinds of punishments that you can't really mete out without being guilty of the same thing that you're doing, right?

So you can imagine some kind of punishments that it would be sinful to carry out. And then, you know,

I think with something like this drawn and quartered kind of thing, this lengthy torture for the traitor kind of person, it does seem to me that there are types of things like that that would stain you in the process of carrying out to where, while capital punishment might be a live option in the case of certain things, particularly murder, it does seem to me that there's ways to execute, no pun intended, punishment without being stained morally in the process.

Now, I mean, I would say that, though, it's even more complicated, though, because stoning in the law was a prescription given to the people.

And by modern standards, that would be considered cruel and unusual punishment. And, you know, many people attack the

Bible for exactly that reason, essentially saying the Bible is a Stone Age barbaric book that's just primitive tribal violence based on an angry deity and all that kind of stuff.

And so then basically, you know, if you read your Bible honestly, you have to admit, yeah, stoning is there.

And so it must be that God's ethic is a little bit different than man's at that point. And so there are some sorts of crimes so heinous that they ought to be made into a public spectacle and everything else.

And so modern sensibilities don't always prevail in that kind of way. But I would think, though, with the drawn and quartering issue,

I think, well, I think a woman should obviously a woman who murders her child should be put to death.

And I'm not sure if that's the right method, but I think part of the reason why I don't know that that's the right method is because it seems that, honestly, it's, you know, from a biblical perspective,

I don't think it's the cruelty of the method so much that is the issue. But although that may be a factor, but I think it's more the contempt for the human body that would be the issue, if that makes sense.

OK, what do you mean? Well, I mean, in order to quarter someone, you have to literally rip their body apart.

Yeah, you're definitely getting stained in that process. Well, I think it shows contempt for the image of God in a pretty high handed and fundamental way, meaning like that, you know, there's a there's part of the reason why

Christians show respect for bodies, even in death. And we want to bury those bodies and not just casually destroy those bodies is because there is this hope that God will raise this body in the last day in some sense.

Right. And so just to like mutilate the body beyond recognition or destroy it or tear it up shows contempt for God and for his design and design in a pretty fundamental way.

And even, you know, bodies that are fit for destruction, like they're going to like even even the unbeliever will be given a resurrection body, which is fit for destruction, which will have some correlation to the body on Earth as far as that goes.

And so I think there is some kind of, you know, intuition there to say, hey, let's show respect for the body in that kind of way.

And it's not the kind of like thing that the Greeks believe, you know, if you cut the tongue out and pluck out the eyes and forever on all eternity, they're going to be eyeless and tongueless or something like that.

Right. But I do think there is a kind of Christian intuition to say we have to show the body some more respect than that, even if it deserves a good killing.

Right. So, OK, so so essentially, you know, maybe maybe asserting that someone who gets an abortion should be drawn and quartered is a little overzealous.

But but then at the same time, you know, maybe maybe a rope in a tree isn't.

Is that kind of what you're saying? Yeah. Hang him by the neck till the feet stop kicking. Yeah, sure. Right. So obviously, we live in a world that really doesn't agree with what you're saying at all.

And honestly, if when people hear what you're saying, they might actually be saying, hey, you know what, let's get a rope in a tree and take you out instead, because because we don't like what you're saying.

You know, most people in our society, even even pro -life people, even people who say they're against abortion, will assert that the women are they're just victims.

And this process there, we shouldn't view them as murderers the same way we would, you know, if someone plunged a knife into someone else's chest, we would view that person as a murderer.

We shouldn't view the women who are getting abortions this way. So so why exactly do you think they should be?

They should, you know, opposed to what society says. Why do you think they should actually be treated as murderers in this process?

I mean, you know, normally it's not like they're the ones doing any performing, you know, performing the action.

So so what are they what's the reasoning behind saying, hey, you know what, they do deserve the death penalty from the you know, from the government.

Sure. Yeah. When I well, that's a good start. Well, let me start with that qualification.

When we talk about should a woman because you live in a like an insane society, that's going to misunderstand everything that you're saying.

You might want to just clarify that when you're answering a question like this, you are talking about capital punishment.

You're talking about just capital punishment. You're not talking about individual vigilante justice or something like that.

Yeah, that's an that's an important point. We're not advocating that anyone take the law into their hand and we don't need any

Batman running around throwing batarangs. That's not the discussion we're having, you know, although I'm sure that plenty of people will hear that immediately, even though it's because at least listening comprehension problems, not because of what we're saying.

But having that clarification, what you're saying about the pro -life movement is right.

I when I was in seminary, I one of my classes was an applied ministry class.

And I part of that class is you have to do a practical kind of ministry on the ground.

And I was doing nursing home chaplain ministry. And then I also during that time did speak for the unborn ministry.

And, you know, a lot of a lot of the people that were going out there were we thought abortion was a murder and rightfully so.

And we were trying to speak to women who were going to get get abortions performed or have the child children killed, essentially.

But we were doing that. And it was very clear that I think the vast majority of people who were doing it were just looking at for it as an opportunity to have the gospel presented.

But then there was a few people who were the ones who were mostly in charge of the ministry who seemed to be overzealous and committed to the in kind of an unthinking way to the principles of the pro -life movement.

And I think, you know, tied to the whole pro -life strategy has very much been to identify the women procuring the abortions as victims.

And so that's right. I mean, and that's, you know, we were encouraged not to try to proselytize by some of these people.

And that was one of the things that we were encouraged not to do. And then, which

I mean, my goodness. Yeah. What do you say that? But then, you know, part of it is there has been a whole strategy to kind of view the women as a victim victims as far as that goes, and to think of them in that kind of way.

And so then the question along those lines is why should they be culpable for their actions, particularly when they're not?

Necessarily the ones taking the coat hanger up and trying to kill the baby themself. Is that kind of the impulse or?

Well, I think part of the issue here is that, you know, with everything critical theory has infected our brains.

And this is just another example of how critical in theory it has infected us in almost every level.

And the way critical theory works is that the world's divided up in the oppressor and oppressed classes.

And then that's carried over into how we even understand women. So women in our society are viewed as marginalized and protected classes, despite the fact that they're actually the majority of people in the world, right?

There's more women than men. So they're not actually a minority group, but then they're viewed as a protected class.

And part of what that means is that anytime you talk about a woman being held responsible for her actions in almost any way, everyone is trained automatically to kind of cringe and to think, oh, you know, you're not really allowed to talk about that.

That's taboo. It is. It really is. And I mean, it's a very strange thing. And it's but it's a very obvious thing when you open your eyes and look and you see, hey, what's actually happening?

Anytime a man like I'm a man and I'm and you're asking me as a man, like a question, should women be put to death for murder?

And it's like, well, you know, like instantaneously I'm viewed as a member of the oppressor class.

And then, you know, and me even answering the question, it's like I'm exercising patriarchal dominance over women and, you know, reabusing them by my words.

And so, I mean, it's really kind of absurd when you think about it, but then everyone's playing by this playbook, whether they realize it or not.

And that's why everyone cringes and that's why everyone thinks like, oh, you're not allowed to go there. But then part of the strategy has been to view women in that kind of way.

And part of that is coming from, I think the reason why

I put it this way, I think the reason why Christians kind of thoughtlessly fall into this kind of rhetoric is because we do realize that it takes two to have a baby, right?

Right. And so you think to yourself, well, there obviously is some man involved in that equation somewhere.

Where is he at, you know, and everything else. And so then, you know, when

Eve eats of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil and Adam ate of it,

Adam's the one held fundamentally responsible in a more primary way. And I think that, you know, for those kind of reasons that Christians just kind of thoughtlessly attach themselves onto this strategy, which really is doing a lot more than that and essentially removing all moral accountability for women, period, you know, and dramatically oversimplifying, you know, what's actually happening here on the ground.

But all other things being equal, it's not true that, you know, every – part of the rhetoric has been to basically paint women in this scenario as victims.

And in a pretty thoughtless way, I mean, it's almost – you say, hey, you know, abortion is murder.

And it's like, well, you know, what's a woman supposed to do if she gets raped or, you know, incest and those kind of situations.

And it's like, yeah, well, that's a very small percent of what we're talking about, but that isn't relevant, you know, to the moral question behind it, period.

And so put all that together and basically just – the idea though is that – the

Bible says that over and over and over again that the individual who takes another's life is going to be guilty of bloodshed.

And the punishment for that is always, in the Bible, murder. So if this is a baby, if this is a human being and a woman is seeking to actively end their life, you know, generally speaking, it doesn't really –

I mean, it doesn't matter who pulls the trigger. I mean, if she hired a hitman to do it, she's involved in the same act.

And so, yes, she should be punished for it. So, obviously, there's going to be – you've already mentioned this.

There's going to be a lot of people who don't listen very well to what you're saying and they're just going to throw out the generic accusations against you that they always try to use to drown out any kind of thought out response to what they're pushing.

And so I want to give you the opportunity to prove them wrong.

Basically, they're going to say that, well, you just care about punishing the woman.

You just hate women. You know, those types of arguments are often brought up and I'm sure that people listening who are for abortion will think those things about you and I as well.

So, I want to give you the opportunity to maybe dispel some of their arguments, whether they listen or not is another topic altogether.

But what do you – you know, you talked a little bit about, yeah, the women, they're responsible, right?

It doesn't matter if they're the ones actually doing it or not. They are responsible. So, that's clear.

But then, you know, what about the doctors who are actually killing the babies while they're still in the womb?

And, you know, obviously, like we said, it takes two people to make a baby, right?

Normally, it takes two people to make a baby. So, what kind of punishment should the father face as well when it comes to abortion?

So, what punishment should the doctors face? What kind of punishment should the father face?

Trevor Burrus Sure. Yeah. Well, you started by saying, hey, you know, people will hear this as an attack on women.

And the issue is not – I mean let's try to do both parts of that.

So, is it an attack on women? And then what about the other people involved, right? So, is it an attack on women kind of thing?

What's funny about that is it's like, well, abortion is obviously an attack on women. Think about it.

Like I'm the one saying we should quit killing, you know, women. Trevor Burrus Right. Right.

Yeah. I don't mean to hijack everything you're about to say and throw off your train of thought.

But I did see a tweet from – I think maybe it was Hillary Clinton who said – who, you know, was saying, hey, we want to protect the rights of our granddaughters.

And she was talking about that in the context of abortion. And I just had to laugh at that because what she was saying was actual insanity.

You know, hey, we need to protect our rights to kill our granddaughters so that our granddaughters will have rights.

Like, how does that make any sense? Trevor Burrus Well, I know. And this was funny. I mean this was funny about the whole discussion because it's happening on that level. But then it's also happening with the race discussion.

I mean Margaret Sanger's project was to put Planned Parenthood in the ghettos so that they could kill off as many black people as they possibly can, right?

And then abortion is seen as like a civil rights issue. You have to have the right to get an abortion because you wouldn't want to bring a child into poverty and everything else.

But then it's like if you care about black people, you're going to vote Democrat. But then the problem is if you care about black people, you're going to want to stop abortion, right?

And who's trying to do that? The republicans? At least they say they're trying to do that. But you wonder if they're as committed to it as they say.

But the issue though is it's just like, hey, yeah, I want to protect the rights of black people to be alive, right?

To be born. And I want to protect the rights of women to be born and not to be murdered by their bloodthirsty mothers, right?

So which – like the issue is it's not like – it's which women are you going to support, right?

And I want to support the ones who are just wanting to be alive, not the ones who are trying to kill other people.

So it's not whether you care about women. It's just like if you do care about women, then you probably want to keep them from being ripped apart in their mother's womb.

Like that's the point. Trevor Burrus, Jr.: Seems like at least a good starting point. Yes, I care about them, and they've not done anything worthy of being ripped apart.

So I would rather protect them from their moms who are not being very motherly -like to them.

So there's that. But then the question, what should happen to the other people? And I just – I think it's – it all depends on the scenario.

I mean, obviously, whatever you're talking – like here's the thing. It's just like I think the pro -life rhetoric has been, hey, let's criminalize abortion.

Let's go after the doctors or whatever. Well, pro -life is often not even going after the doctors and then it's more just let's try to make it safe and legal and rare – or make it legal and rare or have some kind of heartbeat bills or whatever else.

But I mean, I think at its strongest, the pro -life movement was like, okay, let's penalize the doctors.

And I would say, hey, yeah, I mean, whoever the doctor are, whether that's a woman doctor or a man doctor, whatever we're saying related to the woman, that should be happening to them too, right?

I mean I think abortionists are on the level of evil as Hitler when it comes right down to it.

And I mean just like someone like Hermit Gosnell or whatever the guy's name was who has jars of baby parts inside of his lab or whatever.

I mean you are – I don't know. This is a special place in hell for abortion doctors and the ones who wake up and actually repent of it are the individuals who are the most –

I would say that they're culpable even to a greater degree, sure, right? They're the ones cutting them apart.

And I mean there's no – I think that there is a category particularly in the past of a woman who could be deceived into thinking, oh, it's just a clump of tissue and cells and everything else.

It's not a person. I think as technology is progressing, that kind of thing is like less reasonable.

But I do think that these doctors are certainly preying upon people and filling their head full of lies.

But I think those lies have to kind of be willfully believed particularly at this point to where it's not just some – it's not just a simple scenario as far as that goes.

But certainly, yeah, I think the doctor, the one chopping the baby up, like whatever capital punishment applies to them too.

Now with the men involved in their life, I mean I'm sure that there are scenarios – like that's more complicated.

It's just more complicated because there's scenarios all across the spectrum, right? So in the case where the man rapes the woman, which is less than one percent of reported cases, sure,

I mean that is a gross sin equally deserving of condemnation,

OK? In a scenario where a man is pressuring the woman to go get the abortion, he's in on it too.

Everything we've said about the woman applies to him, right? So in that scenario – but I'm also sure that there's been plenty of scenarios where like the woman gets pregnant.

She doesn't want to have a baby right now because it would mess up her career and she doesn't even tell the guy that she's getting an abortion.

So I don't know what to tell you at that point if they're married and she hides it from him and everything else.

Like it's not as if he even knows at that point. And so like that is a scenario that is real, that has happened, that's not uncommon.

So what scenario are we talking about? And we can't just pretend like that kind of thing never happened either, right?

So if you're talking about a guy getting a woman pregnant out of wedlock and putting her in a bad situation where she feels like there's no way out of it and that's where she goes, that still isn't the right response.

Did he know about it? Did he pressure her? Is he involved in it? If in any sense he's pressuring her and he's refusing to take care of the baby, then

I would say – like if he's pressuring – whatever man is pressuring her to get an abortion is basically doing the moral equivalent of taking out a hit on the baby's life.

Does that make sense? But if he's not pressuring her to get it and she's doing it against his will and against his wishes, then that's on her.

That's on her and the doctor. Does that make sense? So basically whenever an abortion happens, it's not just grab a rope and find a tree.

It's grab two, maybe three ropes and find a tree.

Well, yeah, depending on who's involved. When I was doing sidewalk counseling, it was interesting because it's one of those ministries that doesn't bear a lot of fruit and we're kind of encouraged to not speak in moral condemnation kind of categories and that kind of stuff.

I remember there was an African -American lady who was taking her 15 -year -old daughter.

I'm guessing her age, but she's 13 to 15 kind of years old, something like that.

Not all the ladies were that age. That's not what was happening as far as I could see as a frequent thing, but this one was.

She was taking her daughter in to get an abortion. I looked at the girl.

I didn't even look at the mom. I said, hey, your mom doesn't love you. That's what I said. I said, your mom doesn't love you.

Hey, was that on your script that they gave you? No, it wasn't on my script.

This was shaming the victim. Hey, I was shaming the victim here. I'm blaming them. That's what

I was doing. But I looked at her and I said, hey, your mom doesn't love you. Because you only have about 15 seconds to kind of talk to these people as they hurriedly rush past you into the clinic and you have these escorts up there who are going to do that.

But I looked at her and I said, hey, your mom doesn't love you. I said, if she loved you, she wouldn't take you to this place where they're going to go and kill your baby.

If she loved you, she would protect you from this. You're going to have to deal with this for the rest of your life and you're never going to be able to forget that you killed your child.

If she loved you and she cared about you, she would take you as far away from here as she possibly could, but she doesn't.

She only cares about herself and how this is going to make her look. That's what I said. But then what was interesting was she looked at me with this look of disgust.

The mother, right? I don't know if it was disgust. It was more just like, how dare you, white boy, say this to me.

But she grabbed her daughter with her right hand and pulled her close to her and she turned around and she walked the other way.

I'll tell you that that was one of the only times I ever saw a mother walk away. You're supposed to not say things like that, but I hope

I don't know what happened from there. I hope she didn't just come back later. But that was the only time

I ever saw a mother walk away. One of the only times I've ever seen a person really walk away.

But that's right though. That's right.

If she loved her, she wouldn't have been there. But how did I get there? What was the question again?

We were talking about what's the punishment for the doctor, for the guy involved.

You had been explaining that it's complicated, especially for the guy involved.

It kind of depends on what really happened.

Were they pressuring the person to get an abortion? Did they know about the abortion?

I think you're specifically talking at this point about pressuring the girl to get an abortion.

That young girl was clearly being pressured by her mother. I think her mother at that point, when you call her on it, maybe it woke her up a little bit.

But what you're supposed to do is you're supposed to view everyone in some simplistic category as if they're a victim, essentially.

So everyone is just the 13 -year -old girl being pressured. And certainly that happens in those kind of cases.

And certainly the people who are pressuring are involved in the process, sure. So with that kind of mother, yeah, she is conspiring to commit murder and she's guilty of that too.

And if there's a guy behind the scenes, whoever the guy is, is conspiring to commit murder, sure.

Whatever he's seeking to do to this child, it should be done to him. But it's not as if every scenario is exactly the same in that kind of way.

But the real offensive thing is to say the woman is to be held with any moral responsibility for anything.

And the Purlock movement doesn't want to do that because they're basically afraid of the feminist.

So let's just – the strategy has been just to accept basically the premise that all men are just abusers and rapists and by definition of them having power, essentially.

And that the women are the innocent victims and let's not go there and speak on those terms.

And the problem with that is that you remove – here's the problem is when you do that, everyone knows that it's not a serious argument you're making at that point, right?

Do you see what I'm saying? Explain a little bit. Well, if you refuse to – is it murder or not?

If we're saying it's murder, then why aren't we treating them as if they commit murder? Right. And if you don't treat them as if you commit murder, you'll forgive the pagans for thinking we don't actually believe it's murder.

Yeah, yeah. If we thought it was murder, we would treat it as murder. But if you're just like, oh, they're just an innocent victim caught up in a system that's designed to oppress them.

It's just like, well, you obviously aren't – you don't actually think this is what you're saying it is. If you did, you'd have a different reaction to this.

Let's call your bluff. And quite frankly, I think that many Christians are – they really, deep down, they don't think it's murder.

If they did, they would handle it differently than what they do. Oh, yeah. Absolutely. The more

I've looked into organizations like End Abortion Now with – what's the name of the guy who founded it?

I'm totally blanking on him right now. Oh. At Apologia.

You talking about Jeff Gerwin? Yeah, yeah, Jeff. The more I've watched a lot of their things and really listened to him explain a lot of their positions, it really has been kind of eye -opening in terms of comparing guys like him to a lot of the pro -life people out there, especially in government right now.

It's just strange. It really doesn't make sense to say that the woman is a victim.

It doesn't make any sense at all. If you're some person and you hate your brother and so you go and you hire an assassin to go kill your brother, who in their right mind is going to look at that scenario and say, hey, look, the brother's just a victim of his circumstance?

They're going to say, that was a horrible thing that he did, and he needs to at least go to prison for what he's done.

But then people refuse to think that way when it comes to abortion. We always want – most pro -life people always want to view the mother as just a poor, helpless victim who is being taken advantage of and she's been forced into this position, and what else was she supposed to do?

Like lying, for instance. In order to – I mean people, they learn to lie based on –

I mean we don't all start out innocent. We start out deeply flawed. So there are sins that are inherent to us, period.

But then at the same time, we have examples of people who take those inborn tendencies towards sin and give them expression.

So I mean if you grew up in a family full of liars and swindlers, sure, like are you a victim of your upbringing?

Well, yeah, sure, right? Like you weren't – you're taught from an early age how to be deceitful and how to be a liar and everything else.

And like if you live in like a Jewish society in the first century, then Jesus is going to look at Nathanael and he's going to say, hey, behold an

Israelite in whom there is no deceit. Ha, ha, ha. We all know that you guys are swindlers just like Jacob was, right?

And Laban, right? Like well, they learn that kind of thing and that becomes characteristic of a certain society, right?

But at the same time, it's like are you a victim or are you a villain? Well, the answer is yes, right? Yes, yes, and both, right?

So I mean the same thing with like individuals who rape people to talk about something that is with the

Me Too movement and everything else. It's like most people who rape other people, they were raped at an early age, right?

And so – but then like you can't just – well, you were raped at – and that's how most people come to practice sodomy is that they had some early sexual encounter with an older man early on in their life.

And it's like well, yeah, I mean you were a victim and now you have transitioned at some point in your life into a perpetrator.

That's the way it works, right? And so the same thing is true of even like the 13 -year -old or 14 -year -old girl who is just forced into this and just –

I mean in most scenarios, no matter what you tell yourself, like there is like some sort of knowledge that you're killing your baby and your parents are telling you you have to and you have to.

But you're not objecting too strongly because you want it all to go away too, right? So it's not just simple like you're a victim, you're a villain, and I think that a lot of these discussions just go along those lines of well, either they're full villain or they're full victim.

It's like hey, yeah, maybe they're a little bit of both. Like maybe they're – like okay, let's take a scenario where a woman is sleeping around with a man who she's not married to.

She's 19 years old. They're in college. Both of them had too much to drink and whatever else and they're engaged in consensual sex, whatever, right?

And then she gets pregnant and she doesn't tell the guy about it and then she goes and has an abortion.

All right. Was she victimized, right? Well, yes to some degree.

Is she a villain? Yes. So like it's not as simple. So like whose fault was it that they slept around – they both had intercourse?

Well, isn't it both their fault? They're both drunk. Who do you blame? Well, if you're a feminist, you say, well, the man was a rapist because he shouldn't have had sex with her when she was drunk.

It's like well, she was drunk and he was drunk. They're both drunk. Whose fault is it? Both their faults, right? Does the man bear more responsibility because God is going to look at him?

Sure, maybe, right? But at the same time, they're both involved in that. She got pregnant. He didn't even know that she was – he might not have even known in that scenario she was pregnant.

Now she goes and gets an abortion. Well, if he had respect and he wouldn't have got – he wouldn't have been drinking with her knowing that that's the kind of thing.

If she was – resisted the urge to drink and it wasn't coerced drinking or something like that.

Like both of them bear some moral responsibility for this outcome, right? To some degree, but then they're both victims.

They're both villains in a certain sense. Like he's a victim in that she killed his child without knowing about it.

She's a victim in that he had sex with her before wedlock, right?

So it's just – I think these scenarios are typically pretty complicated and like just waving a victim, universal victim flag over anyone is just – probably doesn't fit the vast majority of situations when it comes down to it.

But then I mean I think the opposite is true too. I mean it may just be that waving your universal villain over it is maybe an oversimplification.

But I mean at the end of the day, here's the thing. I mean it's just like if we are talking about murder, if that's what we're talking about, it doesn't matter all the things that preceded to it – up to it.

It's still wrong, right? That's the point and I get tired of looking at all the pro -life tweets or whatever out there who – 13 -year -old girl bravely decides to have her baby despite the fact that she's 13 and blah, blah, blah.

It's like that isn't an act of bravery. It's not. Like that's just called not being Hitler, right?

Like why did we lower the standard? Like I'm glad she had the baby but I mean don't act like it's bravery to not like rip your baby in shreds because it was – you had it at an inconvenient time.

I mean like come on. This isn't bravery. This is called just being a decent human being. Yeah, this can't be the ceiling.

This needs to be the floor. Sure, sure. Yes, thank you for not savagely murdering someone.

Like okay, but whatever that is, that's not virtuous.

That's just – that's something else, right? But then I think we surrender the whole argument when we even think in those terms.

But anyways, what else you got? So this might feel kind of like a stupid question at this point but I feel like we need to take some time to talk about it.

So I mean we've been saying hey, this is wrong, this is bad, this is murder, whatever else.

So is there any like scripture that can help us when it comes to abortion specifically to help explain for those who don't understand how it could be anything other than a women's right issue that might help them, some scripture that might kind of speak to what we're talking about?

Oh, sure. I mean I think the classic passage that most people go to is Psalm 139 .13

which basically says, for you God, for you formed my inward parts and you knitted me together in my mother's womb, right?

So notice how it says you knitted me together in my mother's womb, meaning that essentially there is a person who is being formed,

David who is being formed and he exists as a person while he's still within his mother's womb, right?

That's one of the ways that you go to talk about establishing abortion as being murder is that you appeal to passages like that.

But then also within the law, I mean if a man basically harms a woman and her unborn child within her, like let's say he harms her to such a degree that the unborn child is killed within her, he's going to be put to death for that.

And so the Bible considers the unborn child a human being. It doesn't consider the unborn child just some thing, you know, he will be avenged life for life, you know, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, life for life.

And that's applied, the lex hallelujah principle is applied to the unborn baby even. So from a biblical perspective,

God's the one who's knitting the baby together. This is considered a baby. If you are involved in terminating that, you're going to be put to death, biblically speaking.

So, you know, it's funny that you bring up the passage about the man, if a man accidentally kills an unborn baby.

I think it's essentially like if two men begin to fight and in the chaos of the moment, there's a pregnant woman nearby and she gets struck or something and it kills the unborn baby.

Then the man needs to be put to death. It's funny you mentioned that because I actually had someone try to tell me that that exact passage is actually arguing for abortion.

And it, you know, it was an idiotic argument where the person was basically,

I don't know if they just didn't understand what the passage was saying or if they were trying to be dishonest in what the passage was saying and try to deceive people.

But, I mean, it's a pretty clear passage that's saying there is life in the womb and when it is terminated, when it is killed, then there's a penalty that must be paid.

And that's what the Israelites were held to. So, not the other way around where if something happens to the unborn baby, then, you know, oh well, big deal.

It wasn't a human, so we're not going to kill someone over it. So, Exodus 21, 22 -25, it says,

When men strive together and hit a pregnant woman so her children come out, but there is no harm, the one who hit her shall surely be fined, thus the woman's husband shall impose on him, and he shall pay as the judge determines.

But if there is harm, he shall pay life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe by stripe.

I think when you told me about that, I think he was reading it in the King James and he was making a poor assumption about it based on that or something like that.

Let's see, what does the King James say? It says, let's see,

I can pull it up. If men strive and hurt a woman child so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow, he shall surely be punished according to the court lay upon him, and he shall pay as the judge, if any mischief follows, then thou shalt give life for life.

I can't remember what his argument was. It's been a while, but I think he was saying something about the fruit depart or something along those lines.

I think that's a clear passage, though, that is definitely saying if no harm, then no foul, right?

But if the fruit depart, if the miscarriage happens, it's life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, stripe for stripe.

There's a lot of, Jeremiah 2017, because he did not kill me before birth so that my mother would have been my grave in a room ever pregnant.

He's just lamenting that God didn't kill him before his birth, meaning he was alive. Right, and he was a person.

He was a person, yeah. You can even think about the children not being born yet in Romans 9,

Jacob and Esau not being born. They were in their mother's womb not being born. The forbidden chapter. Yeah, they haven't even done evil or good yet, but God made a choice even in that condition.

I think there's so many passages like this that could come to mind, and that's just a few that instantaneously kind of come to mind.

So not only – oh, sorry, keep going, keep going. Well, like John the Baptist leaping in his mother's womb kind of thing, too.

There's just so many, I can't say them all. So obviously there's a lot of scripture where God tells us babies who are unborn, they're still in their mother's womb, they're still babies.

They're still people. They're human beings made in God's image, and God has told us to unjustly take life from another human being made in the image of God is wrong.

And evil and sinful. But then not only does the Bible tell us this, but obviously science also tells us a similar thing.

It's the same genetic code that the fetus has compared to us.

They're obviously still developing, but then in definitional terms they're still a human being.

It's not a matter of they will one day be a human being. It's they are actually right now from the moment of conception a human being.

So in one sense when we're having this discussion and we're talking about people who are pro -baby murder, who are pro -abortion, it seems like to take this position not only do you have to deny the

Bible, you have to deny scripture, but you also have to deny modern science and really just common sense too.

But then you hear from Democrats and progressives a lot of times, you hear a lot the term being thrown around, science denier, especially as it relates to COVID and the right's response to COVID essentially asserting, hey, you guys are denying the science, you're denying the science.

If you would just believe the science, you would come to the same conclusions we're coming to, which is funny and ironic because while they're making that claim, they are actually the ones who are denying clear science, much more clear than the

COVID stuff right now, much more clear. And they're denying it, but then no one's really coming out and saying, hey, y 'all are a bunch of science deniers, y 'all are a bunch of lunatics.

So why do you think that's the case that while it's happening, they're denying science, no one's actually coming out and saying, hey, you're the science denier.

Yeah, I think it's, but that's happening in almost every single level. And I think that's part of the reason why, like one of the things that just let me change the subject for a second in order to answer the question, but just to give you some,

I mean, just to give some examples of what you're talking about, but I remember with the 2020 election, it was very funny because it was like for, you know, basically from 2016 to 2020, you basically had a group of people like on the left, who were just screaming and just refusing whatsoever to accept the results of the 2016 election.

I mean, you had the media, you had everyone is just refusing to accept the results of this 2016 election.

I've never seen a meltdown on the left so much as with that, the aftermath of that.

I mean, when Trump was elected, it was like, I knew he was going to get elected because I saw, you know, where things were headed. But then when he was elected, you could just like, you could see these people who were just, their world was shattered, you know, and they didn't even know how to do life anymore.

Yeah, I remember the video of the girl screaming no at the inauguration.

It was one of those humorous things where you just see people just like utterly unable to see reality at that point.

But, you know, for four years, you know, for four years, it was just like, you know, that you see a group of people not accepting the outcome of an election.

But then, you know, leading up to the 2020 election, I mean, over and over and over again, if you remember what happened in the news, they kept on saying over and over and over again, like, you know,

Trump, if you lose, will you accept the outcome of the election, right? You know, and Trump was going to, you know, stage a coup, and he's not going to leave office, and he's just going to do all this stuff.

And it's just like, what in the world is going on here, you know? Like, what in the world is going, like, what makes you think he's not going to accept the outcome of an election, right?

Like, what makes you think that he's, like, you guys are the ones who've been doing this for four years, you know? But then, almost at every point, so you remember, like, the

Russian collusion hoax? Like, so they did that the whole time. Like, the left did that the whole time, this

Russian collusion hoax. And then it turns out that, oh, maybe that was Hillary Clinton who was in bed with the

Russians and everything else. But then you hear about it, and one of the things, I bring those kind of things up just to say that it was really startling.

Because in case after case after case, it seems to me that on the left, what's happening is everything they're accusing the right of doing, that's what they're doing themselves.

And it's painfully obvious, too. It's painfully obvious. I mean, think about, like, the science denier myth kind of stuff, right?

What's like, you Christians, you're science deniers. It's like, well, look, I know that there's a kind of, you know, ignorant

Christian out there who is, you know, anti all science. And probably for good reason, because science has clowned themselves to such a degree.

But, like, think about, like, the areas of life that are out there right now that are under dispute.

So, we're told, like, all of science right now is pointing to the reality that you're, like, the world is increasingly complex, right?

So, I mean, that's what science, like, it's irreducibly complex. Meaning, like, to say something is irreducibly complex, it's like you're talking about a mousetrap analogy.

So, if you think about a mousetrap, every single component to a mousetrap is necessary for it to be a mousetrap.

You have to have the base, you have to have the spring, you have to have the, you know, the…

Pressure plate. The lever, pressure plate, you have to have all that. You take any part of it away, it ceases to function in any meaningful way.

And you look at the world, it's kind of like that. And so, there's no way to, like, gradually evolve into a mousetrap, right?

Like, you need each part. It's irreducibly complex. Now, one of the things that Darwin said was, like, if you want to disprove my theory, you have to show that the world is essentially…

The world is irreducibly complex. And as science keeps on rolling in, we see, oh, it's way more complex.

Now, what we can see, like, it's way more complex than they thought, right? Like, the very thing that would disprove this idea of a random blind chance having evolved, you know, things evolving from simple things into complexes to show how complex it actually is.

Well, we have the science to show that now, and yet we're not abandoning that theory. You know, with all the

COVID masking stuff, we've had, like, study after study after study showing that masks are ineffective for respiratory viruses for years.

We had all of these, and COVID comes up, and we throw all that out the door. And now, I mean, even Fauci at the beginning of the thing told us that masks don't work, so don't go buy them.

Then it became a political talking point, and now we need two. And everyone knows that, hey, like, this isn't like a spacesuit, you know?

Like, air comes through these things, right? And, like, viruses are just like throwing a baby through a tennis racket.

It's not going to work, you know? We understand, like, that respiratory viruses, the size of them are pretty small, you know?

And so we know that, but then we're called the science deniers as far as that goes.

We say, hey, you know, maybe these masks don't work, you know? Like, you're saying that they're going to work because they obviously don't have a self -contained oxygen unit within them.

They're just a piece of cloth, you know? So, but then, you know, think about the transgender nonsense.

Like, if there's anything that settled science at this point, like, just think about, like, what has actually settled science.

That male and female are different. They have different chromosomes. We can look at their genetics and we can see. X, Y, XX, you know?

Like, this is different, you know? Like, their DNA, their very body composition points to it. So it seems to me that almost at every single point, the point of this is just to say, at almost every single point, the left is doing what they're accusing us of.

And so they're saying, hey, we're science deniers. It's like, hey, I think the science actually backs up the fact that God made them male and female.

The science backs up the fact that we're made irreducible. In fact, we didn't, you know, evolve from simple life forms.

There's nothing in, like, that isn't the way that actually things work. The science backs up the fact that, you know, in this case that,

I mean, you could do an ultrasound. We have 3D ultrasounds to see that this is a baby. We know that the babies feel pain. You can look at ultrasounds as this baby is being ripped apart and seeing it jerk away violently from the knife that's, like, cutting its limbs apart.

Or the, you know, the puncture that's vacuuming, sucking its brains out so that its head can fit through the birth canal.

We can see what's actually happening here. We have vivid pictures of what's happening. We see babies that are being born alive who are being killed, you know?

Being scalped and having their, you know, scalps put on mysis. Like, we have the technology now to show what we've all known for years and what every mother knows, right?

And that's what's so absurd about it. Like, honestly, what's so absurd about it is that, you know, women know.

Women know. Like, that's why they cry. You can have a woman who's pregnant for, you know, a few weeks and she has a miscarriage and she cries.

And it's like, why are you crying? You know, that's just a clump of cells, right? She knows what it is. She knows it's a baby, you know?

And women who get abortion, they can tell themselves this all day long, but they know, and that's the point.

Like, they know if you loved them and cared about them, you wouldn't try to validate this delusion because they know they killed their baby. And they have a natural intuition to know what, you know, science shows us and confirms.

They have the intuition to know what they're doing. And that's why, you know, there's no recovering from it, really.

I'll never forget. I'll never forget when all of the riots were going on,

I guess in the summer of 2020 now, man, it's almost 2022.

In the summer of 2020, when all those riots were going on, I remember seeing an article at some point about some woman who was out during these riots and she got hit in,

I guess, the stomach with a bean bag from a police bean bag rifle.

And everyone was making a big deal out of this. And I don't really remember what the outcome of it was in terms of, you know, was the lady all right?

And was the baby all right? I can't remember. I really hope that they were both fine. But I remember people making such a huge deal out of it.

And look at how brutal the police are and whatnot. And I remember thinking while I was reading that, this is a really strange argument to make if you're pro -abortion.

To use this as an example of violence. Because essentially what was happening is they were using it as like, look, you can't hurt pregnant people.

Especially, if there's anyone you don't hurt, it's pregnant people. And if something were to happen, this would be, this is essentially a much higher stake situation if there were damage to be done than to a normal lady who's not pregnant.

And I remember thinking, well, why? If your whole stance is that it's just a clump of cells, then why?

Yeah, and I think that's where it's just so, like the whole, the idea of choice now and the evolutionary framework, it all revolves around this idea of my truth.

So when you're in a relativistic society, a postmodern society where there is no such thing as real truth, then essentially reality is what you define it to be.

So then if you want the baby, then the baby becomes a baby.

In my reality, this is a baby. This is my truth. And so everything is up to the subjective whim of the individual.

If you are a man who thinks you're a woman, you want to be a woman. Well, the very act of desiring to be is real.

If it's real to you, then it's real. And that's where it's just like, you look at it on the outside, and if you're looking at it through the lens of, hey, there is an objective truth, it's nonsense.

But then to these kind of people, the reason why they can't see it is because reality is determined by their whims at the moment, right?

And they could change those whims at any moment, and then you're guilty of a crime as far as that goes.

But, you know, so it's my body, my choice, right? So if I decide that I want this baby, it becomes a baby.

If I don't want it, it is a clump of cells. It's all up to me and how I wish to define it, right?

But surely there's no objective basis for any law that can be imposed at that point.

I think, so right now, we're at, I think, about the one hour mark, and I have a lot more questions that I want to ask you,

Tim, about this. Do you want to do a part two on should women who murder their unborn children be drawn and quartered?

Do you feel like that would be helpful? Yeah, we could do another week. That's fine. Okay. Well, I want to ask you one more question, and this actually isn't one that I had on my script, so I'm going off script here a little bit, but I've been thinking about this as I've been listening to you, and I think it might be helpful just to hear your reasoning behind why you're doing this.

As we've been talking, as we've been having this discussion, you haven't really shied away from being very descriptive in terms of what's happening.

So, for example, earlier, when we were talking about, you were talking about the response that babies have in terms of when the doctor is performing the abortion, he's sticking the knife in, he's vacuuming out the brain, ripping the arms and the legs off of the baby while it's still alive.

You've not really shied away from describing these things in detail, and I want to know, is that purposeful?

Whenever I've heard pro -life people, in general, talk about abortion,

I've never really heard people explain in detail what's going on and use that as part of their argument.

It seems like normally they try to shy away from all of the details of abortion, I guess because maybe it's too grotesque or it's taboo or something.

I'm not really sure, but is that purposeful on your end in terms of describing what is actually happening when someone gets an abortion?

Yeah, I know the pro -life movement pretty much discourages that sort of thing in a pretty comprehensive way.

The pro -life movement is not like a monolith or whatever, but there's clear structure and organization, and one of the things that they discourage is being overly graphic and that kind of thing.

And one of the things that they, I think, showing the pictures of the baby and that kind of stuff and showing the pictures of the pile of baby body parts on the table next to the syringes next to the scalpels and stuff like that, they typically discourage that kind of thing.

And I think that people who are more on the abolitionist end of things are more graphic as far as that goes.

And there's a whole discussion about abolitionism versus incrementalism as it relates to that thing that probably needs its own episode or whatever.

Right. But in general, I'm not really looking at it as a pro -life leader or something like that.

I'm just looking at it as a Christian. And I know that there's plenty of people in Nazi Germany during the Holocaust that basically are just trying to pretend like they don't know what's happening.

Right? So, I mean, I know just based on my study of Scripture and counseling background that people have a great capacity towards self -deception.

And if something's out of sight, it's kind of out of mind. And abortion is one of those things where I think for the vast majority of people we just want to pretend like it's not happening.

Yeah. In the same way we want to pretend like we don't know what is happening to the train full of Jews headed to Auschwitz with the smokestacks and everything else.

It's like you keep your head down, mind your own business, don't worry about it. And if you do that then you kind of don't feel any imperative to really do much as far as that goes.

You can just pretend like, hey, out of sight, out of mind. You're like the ostrich who's sticking your head in the sand and hoping everything goes away.

And so in my mind the issue is this is a moral issue.

We're ripping babies up in their mother's womb and it's a pretty gruesome procedure.

I think the subject itself is kind of clouded in terms of our use of euphemisms like abortion and that kind of stuff and fetus language and everything else.

I think we try to do everything we can to soften the blow and I think essentially that's what the pro -life movement is trying to do is to do everything they can to soften the moral issues that are at play in order to gain some sort of consensus.

But then the problem is I think you're starting with a faulty framework, right? And so I think what the pro -life movement is failing to do is they're failing to speak to this as a moral issue.

And so they're stripping all their language and their tools. They're stripping all the moral issues involved because the truth is if this is these are babies that are being ripped up and all you have to do is watch an ultrasound of it happening and you'll probably be scarred for life and can't get it out of your brain.

And the point though is just to say that there's a type of I don't think the right response is to try to hide people from this but then the problem is if you do that then you force people to draw sides in a very clear way because when it comes right down to it the abortionists if people understand what's actually happening they'll understand that these abortionists are worse than Nazis.

And there's going to be an awful punishment waiting for them on the last day.

The worst intensity of hell is going to be reserved for that kind of person who just is destroying lives.

I mean I've heard testimony of former abortionists who've killed thousands of babies. They've done this thousands of times.

Can you imagine what it would be like to rip babies apart? Thousands of babies apart.

How could you do it? But we just out of sight, out of mind. We wrap it in euphemism. We pretend it's a clump of cells.

We're filled with a bunch of lies and there are lies that we want to know and you know I just don't I haven't adopted this kind of framework that says that in order to be loving you lie to people.

And so my moral intuition doesn't go that way. I don't think that I think the truth will set us free and we need to be honest and truthful about what's actually happening and that's the only hope for people.

And that's why I responded to the lady I talked about the way I did and the girl I talked about the way I did is because I feel like the truth will set us free and you know you have to speak about it in moral categories.

You know? Yeah. That's what you have to do. Yeah. And so if you try to shelter people from that like you're not helping them to see clearly

Yeah. What the actual danger is. I remember I didn't really understand what the answer that you just gave

I didn't really understand it for a long time and I remember at one point I think I can't

I can't remember if if my wife was was pregnant with our baby or if she had already been born but I remember watching a video from End Abortion Now where it showed a guy who was a part of their group holding you know he was holding up a sign standing out on the sidewalk and the sign it showed a picture of a baby who had been killed in the womb and and it was a horrific picture

I mean the baby the baby's head had been crushed and and it was covered in you know blood mangled and and its eyes were were open still and you know obviously not you know not showing any kind of life and just kind of like a thousand yard stare type thing and and below the picture the sign just said does anyone even care and I think when

I saw that that was probably that was probably the the turning point for me not in terms of of you know

I was for abortion and then all of a sudden I wasn't anymore when I saw that that picture but more what

I mean is just I had always been against abortion I didn't think it was right but then I think when

I saw that picture that that was the point where I realized just how awful this is and just how serious the situation is and how much something needs to be done about what's going on because I mean like you said this is a picture of one baby but then there's people doing this thousands of times you know and and so that picture that I saw has happened at this point over 60 million times and you know

I just don't think anyone who can look at that picture and then still say yes we should have the right to kill our own baby in the womb

I just don't get it and I really

I really do see I remember asking you like why why would they show these things is this really the most helpful thing and I remember asking you and you kind of telling me a similar response to what you just said and and now

I'm I'm totally 100 % on the same page you know we can't once you see these pictures you're forced you're forced to pick a side it's too it's too graphic it's it's too yeah it's just too graphic to not have to not have a response to it one way or the other and and you know hopefully more people start doing that and just start addressing the fact that this is gross and disgusting and wicked and evil and that'll actually open people's eyes to the truth of the matter yeah yeah

I think you the problem is that we're told like in order to like love people essentially you try to shelter them from right all the harsh realities that there are in the world and so I mean that's what we're trying to do to the women is like in order to be loving to the women to gain consensus you know you don't put it in the moral categories that you're doing

I mean we're trained to lie to people at every conceivable level right and so I mean men are trained to lie to women like we're trained to lie to I mean we're basically just like you know think about all the masking stuff we know it doesn't work we're told to lie to each other in order to make everyone feel better and the same thing's happening with this kind of moral issue is that we're we're basically and we the church is telling people to do that you know and that's what all the friendship evangelism kind of stuff is it's just like you don't go in there and you say hey repent the kingdom of heaven is at hand you hateful bigot

I mean come on like what you do what you do is you try to win you know earn the right to be heard be a friend first and you know let them know you care about them and you know

I think that there's like a lot of strategies like that trying to soften people from the harsh truth when

I mean really like in order for them to turn from their wicked ways like you have to you know present it as what it is and I mean

I think you know like the truth is that we're worse than Nazis and we don't even see it you know we're way worse than Nazis you know we're an evil immoral reprobate society that has lost its way and and like the thing is that like it's like when

Jesus confronted the rich young ruler you know he confronted him with the law and like that's you know when you see

Stephen's preaching to the Jews he says you know he murdered the Holy One of God and they were they gnashed their teeth and went on the attack and killed him you know and like that's what's gonna happen like in our society

I mean like the thing is it's just like if you speak the truth and you do so boldly the society's gonna be mad at you you're not gonna win the consensus that way but why would you wanna win the consensus with a bunch of Nazis you know why would you wanna do that like just you want the

Nazis to repent and convert and no longer be Nazis and the only way they're gonna do that is if you you know if the guy's at work and you speak clearly about what they're doing but I think like part of the problem is that the pro -life movement is you know not as fully committed to the propositions that they say they are and I think people know it you know and that's why you know plenty of your pro -life people don't seem overly committed to actually ending this thing you know when it comes right down to it is because like deep down it's like I don't know that they believe what they're saying you know so so my impulse isn't really to lie to a bunch of people it's to say okay let's treat it like what it is you know right well okay we'll end it there and then we'll do a part two episode on this cause like I said

I still have a lot of questions that I wanna ask you that I think might be helpful for people who are listening to us talk about this topic but until until next week this has been another episode of Bible Bashed we hope you have been encouraged and blessed through our discussion now go boldly and obey the truth in the midst of a biblically illiterate world who will be perpetually offended by your every move