Category Archives: Current Events

ORWELLIAN: Associated Press Forbids Even Discussing Transgenderism as an Ideology

——

After Life 2 – Man identifies as an 8 year old girl

Spelling Bee Contestant Asks The Definition of “Woman”

——

Activist marches with a sign reading

The Associated Press directs journalists to abide by transgender ideology while denying that such an ideology exists. Pictured: A protester at the Stonewall Inn on Feb. 23, 2017, in the Greenwich Village area of New York City. (Photo: Kena Betancur/AFP/Getty Images)

Forget debates over bathrooms or pronouns. The Associated Press recently released new guidelines suppressing the very concept of transgenderism as an ideology that can be debated, while forcing that ideology on reporters in the name of promoting good journalism.

The AP is the most common stylebook among journalists and news outlets on the Left and Right, including The Daily Signal. The Daily Signal does depart from AP style when the style guide adopts ideological messaging on abortion, transgender identity, and other issues, however.

In a classic example of “1984”-style doublethink, good journalists are required to abide by transgender ideology, while denying that such an ideology exists. AP’s most recent style guide update—published Thursday—instructs them to use a person’s “preferred” pronouns, deny that sex is a biological fact recognized at or before birth, and use the euphemism “gender-affirming care” when describing experimental medical interventions that leave patients stunted, scarred, and infertile.

Reporters are to adopt wholesale the claim that a person’s internal sense of gender overrides his or her biological sex and to discount opposition to these claims.

Yet they are apparently barred from discussing the ideas behind this ideology, or the ideology itself.

The most recent update to the AP style guide is quite clear: “Do not use the term transgenderism, which frames transgender identity as an ideology.”

Yet the entire document is dripping with this ideology.

“Avoid references to a transgender person being born a boy or girl, or phrasing like birth gender,” the guide urges. “Sex assigned at birth is the accurate terminology.” The document goes on to claim that “sex is usually assigned at birth by parents or attendants, sometimes inaccurately.”

While the document acknowledges that gender—not sex—is a “social construct,” the use of the phrase “sex assigned at birth” implies that biological sex is also socially constructed, rather than a central reality of humanity that enables people to reproduce. Transgender ideology relieson muddying the waters in this way, suggesting that transgender identity is the real fact, so changing a person’s body to match a gender identity opposite his or her biological sex is “affirming,” rather than destructive.

This is an extremely controversial claim, but the AP guidelines actively suppress dissent.

The update parrots pro-transgender claims that are hotly debated in the medical community. The document states that children can take “puberty blockers,” which it describes as “fully reversible prescription medication that pauses sexual maturation.” It does not note that the Food and Drug Administration has not approved drugs such as Lupron for that purpose, nor that authorities use Lupron to chemically castrate sex offenders.

It also fails to mention that many doctors have raised alarms about “gender-affirming care,” or that European countries are moving to restrict it for children.

The AP guide accuses “opponents of youth transgender medical treatment” of citing “widely discredited research,” failing to note that many of the studies pro-transgender activists use to endorse experimental interventions have themselves been discredited. For example, doctors have condemned as “fatally flawed” a recent study claiming to show improvements from cross-sex hormones.

Perhaps most horrifically, the much-touted Dutch study that first gave credence to the idea of transgender medical interventions ultimately involved a male subject who died from an infection after surgeons tried to use some of his digestive tract to construct a false vagina.

While the AP guide acknowledges that “all these treatments have potential side effects,” it nonetheless endorses them. It urges reporters to “avoid the word mutilation, a politicized and subjective term often used to mischaracterize surgery.”

The document urges journalists to “avoid terms like biological sex, along with biological male and biological female, which opponents of transgender rights sometimes use to refer to transgender women and transgender men, respectively.” AP argues that such terms are “redundant because sex is inherently biological.” Yet opponents of transgenderism use “biological” to emphasize the truth of biology against the very ideology AP insists journalists never mention.

In a few instances, the AP guide rightly discourages obnoxious or outdated terms like “tranny” and “transgendered.” It also urges journalists to avoid the terms “trans-exclusionary radical feminist” or the acronym “TERF,” to refer to critics of transgenderism.

However, the guidelines also discourage reporters from using “gender-critical” to describe those who oppose transgenderism, even though many advocates have consciously embraced that term.

The guidelines also encourage reporters to avoid using the term “groomer,” without acknowledging critics’ concerns that events such as Drag Queen Story Hour and LGBT lessons at young ages make children vulnerable to abuse.

The Associated Press style guide has long urged journalists to adopt a person’s preferred pronouns, regardless of biological sex, but the guide also forbids journalists from referring to “preferred or chosen pronouns,” instead using phrases such as “the pronouns they use, whose pronouns are, who uses the pronouns.”

When it comes to sports, the new AP entry urges journalists to avoid “phrasing that misgenders people or implies doubt, such as former men’s swimmer or currently competes as a woman.”

Journalists should not even imply doubt, much less actually express it.

God forbid they actually use a specific term to discuss this ideology, rather than merely adopting it wholesale.

Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the url or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.

———

Tucker Carlson speaks during 2022 FOX Nation Patriot Awards.

Then-Fox News host Tucker Carlson—seen here speaking at the 2022 Fox Nation Patriot Awards Nov. 17 in Hollywood, Florida—remains a much-needed voice for civilizational sanity, columnist Josh Hammer says. (Photo: Jason Koerner/ Getty Images)

I attended The Heritage Foundation’s 50th Anniversary Gala on April 21, a sprawling and swanky affair featuring many fine presentations, a surprise Dierks Bentley mini-concert for the country music enthusiasts (yours truly among them) and an extravagant post-dinner fireworks show over the Potomac River.

But the highlight of the evening, bar none, was former Fox News star Tucker Carlson‘s electric keynote address and his (all-too-brief) colloquy on stage afterward with Heritage’s exceptional new president, Kevin Roberts. (The Daily Signal is the news outlet of The Heritage Foundation.)

Carlson’s speech was both wildly entertaining and poignant, at times slapstick funny and at other times humorously self-deprecating about his Episcopalian faith. But as Carlson began to reach his peroration, the key substantive takeaway he wished to impart unto his audience became clear.

The relevant political and cultural battle lines in the year 2023 are not those befitting a civil and polite discussion, where both sides are reasonable, both sides pursue their own version of the common good, and the best think tank white paper wins out in the end, Carlson cautioned. No, our current civilizational struggle is not reflective of a refined policy debate between amicable partisans; rather, it is one that implicates fundamentally distinct theological and anthropological visions of mankind—of man’s very biology and his relation with his fellow man, the state, and God Himself.

I immediately hearkened back to an interview Claremont Institute President Ryan Williams did with The Atlantic in October 2021, in which Williams had this provocative (but accurate) line about America’s contemporary fault lines: “Even during the Civil War—I think we’re more divided now than we were then. As Lincoln said, we all prayed to the same God. We all believed in the same Constitution. We just differed over the question of slavery.”

This is the precise sentiment that Carlson was getting at in his keynote speech at the Heritage gala.

We in the audience did not know it yet, at the time of Carlson’s speech—nor did Carlson, for that matter—but the broadcasting star had already given his last searing monologue for Fox News. In a stunning development, Fox News broke the news to their highest-rated host on Monday morning that he was fired.

Hopefully, Carlson will retain something approximating his exceptional level of cultural and political influence in whatever role he next serves, because his witness to truth and civilizational sanity have never been more necessary.

This is perhaps most clearly true when it comes to gender ideology and transgenderism, which is the issue most directly implicated by Carlson’s framing of America’s fundamental divide as a struggle between differing theological and anthropological conceptions of man.

Is sexual dimorphism an obvious empirical reality, rooted in Genesis 1:27, and mandating legal codification for any regime that claims a basis in truth and justice? Or is gender instead “fluid,” wherein man can replace God and change his gender on a lark, and wherein it is contemptible bigotry to deny anyone’s subjective sense of biological or sexual reality?

Tucker Carlson certainly knew his answer: He opened a memorable 2021 interview of Republican Asa Hutchinson by asking the then-governor of Arkansas, who had shamefully vetoed a bill to protect vulnerable children from the predatory scalpels of the woke-besotted medical establishment, why he had “come out publicly as ‘pro-choice’ on the question of chemical castration of children.”

Oof.

That is not a debate where the “best white paper wins.” It is a zero-sum contestation of clashing visions of the human person, rooted in diametrically opposed substantive underpinnings. And, more to the point, the forces of godlessness, paganism, and civilizational arson certainly already treat the debate over gender ideology as a vicious winner-take-all battle.

The recent mini-insurrection in Nashville, Tennessee, which followed the tragic shooting at a Christian school and the temporary expulsions of two insurrection-complicit state lawmakers, can best be understood as one elaborate attempt to distract the public from the real issue: That a transgender lunatic shot up a Christian school, and that law enforcement has thus far been unwilling to defy the transgender lobby’s not-so-thinly-veiled blackmail, opting instead to deep-six the deceased shooter’s presumptively anti-Christian manifesto.

More recently, a similar situation unfolded in Montana, where Republicans who control the state House banned a transgender lawmaker from attending or speaking during floor sessions following the lawmaker’s comment—during the debate over an anti-chemical castration bill similar to the one Hutchinson vetoed in Arkansas—that the lawmaker hoped colleagues would see “blood on [their] hands” when they bowed their heads in prayer.

Numerous protesters were arrested and forcibly removed from the legislature last week, as they agitated in favor of the uncouth transgender lawmaker.

Large swaths of the modern Left have made the fight for gender ideology and transgenderism their foremost hill to die on precisely because they are so infatuated with their own vogue anthropology and “theology” that they view the other side—the side of sanity—as wholly undeserving of the civility and respect that a normal exchange over public policy might entail.

I know this all too well, myself: My writing that invariably elicits the most protests when I speak on university campuses is a short piece I wrote a few years ago praising U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Kyle Duncan’s admirable use of biologically correct pronouns in a judicial opinion.

I’d write the same thing again today.

But those protesters, whether in Nashville; Helena, Montana; Stanford Law School or another academic corridor, are not open to rational debate. They are not willing to be reasoned with. Rather, they know their conclusions, because they have fully imbibed a highly fashionable—if false—anthropological and “theological” conception of man.

Those of us on the side of civilizational sanity need all the help we can get in pushing back against the onslaught. Tucker Carlson, please come back soon.

NBC’s Chuck Todd ridiculed for saying ‘gender is a spectrum

Todd made the comment during a spirited interview on Sunday with GOP presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy, who has argued for limitations on gender affirming treatments for those under the age of 18.

“Below the age of 18, I think it’s perfectly legitimate to say that we won’t allow genital mutilation or chemical castration through puberty blockers,” Ramaswamy, the biopharmaceutical mogul and author, told Todd during the interview on Sunday.

“You’re calling it that, but how do you know it’s that?” Todd pressed Ramaswamy.

“Again, how do you know? Are you confident that you know that gender is as binary as you’re describing it? Are you confident?”

“I am,” Ramaswamy replied.

“That there isn’t a spectrum?” Todd asked.

Chuck Todd on "Meet the Press"
Chuck Todd, moderator of NBC’s “Meet the Press,” said on Sunday that “gender is a spectrum.”
NBC News

Ramaswamy answered: “I am.”

“Do you know this as a scientist?” Todd asked.

“Well, there’s two X chromosomes if you’re a woman, and an X and a Y that means you’re a man…,” Ramaswamy said.

The two men talk over each other before Todd says: “There is a lot of scientific research that says gender is a spectrum.”

“Chuck, I respectfully disagree,” Ramaswamy said.

The GOP candidate said gender dysphoria — which is characterized by the American Psychiatric Association as “clinically significant distress or impairment related to gender incongruence” — “has been characterized as a mental health disorder and I don’t think it’s compassionate to affirm that.”

<img class=”i-amphtml-intrinsic-sizer” role=”presentation” src=”data:;base64,” alt=”” aria-hidden=”true” />GOP presidential hopeful Vivek Ramaswamy on "Meet the Press"
Todd made the remark during an interview with GOP presidential hopeful Vivek Ramaswamy.
NBC News

“I think that’s cruelty,” Ramaswamy said.

“When a kid is crying out for help … you’ve got to ask the question of what else is going wrong at home,” the GOP hopeful said.

“What else is going wrong at school, let’s be compassionate and get to the heart of that rather than playing this game as though we’re actually changing our medical understanding for the last hundred years.”

Todd conceded that “the last thing [parents] want to do is consider something like [gender affirming treatments]” for their children.

<img class=”i-amphtml-intrinsic-sizer” role=”presentation” src=”data:;base64,” alt=”” aria-hidden=”true” />GOP presidential hopeful Vivek Ramaswamy on NBC's "Meet the Press" with Chuck Todd.
“Are you confident that you know that gender is as binary as you’re describing it?” Todd asked Ramaswamy.
NBC News

“But if that is what they think could help their child pursue happiness or not to kill themselves … why take away that option?” Todd asked.

“Again, why shouldn’t it be up to the parent?”

Ramaswamy replied that “we’ve created a culture that teaches parents that they’re being bigoted or that they’re bad people if they don’t actually take those steps.”

“Gender dysphoria for the rare few people who’ve suffered it, is a condition of suffering,” he added.

“My question is why on Earth are we going out of our way to create even more of it?”

<img class=”i-amphtml-intrinsic-sizer” role=”presentation” src=”data:;base64,” alt=”” aria-hidden=”true” />GOP presidential hopeful Vivek Ramaswamy
Ramaswamy has urged a ban on gender affirming treatments for people under the age of 18.
NBC News

Todd’s comments sparked reaction on Twitter.

“Didn’t you know? Cable news pundits became the best TV scientists and physicians during COVID. The government talking points made them experts,” one Twitter user wrote.

Another Twitter user commented: “There is literally no real science suggesting there are more than 2 sex chromosomes.”

“This is very simple to resolve. Show us what the non-male and non-female chromosomes look like on these ‘gender spectrums’,” a Twitter user wrote.

Others on Twitter supported Todd’s assertion, citing a 2018 article by Scientific American which claimed that biologists “now think there is a larger spectrum than just binary female and male.”

What do you think? Post a comment.

Republicans have sought to curtail the availability of gender transitioning methods to youngsters while LGBTQ activists said the limitations could place children’s mental health in danger.

Bud Light, the iconic beer brand which is the property of Anheuser-Busch, came under fire for its decision to hire Dylan Mulvaney, a social media influencer who garnered a following of millions who watched as she transitioned from a male to a female during the COVID-19 pandemic, as a pitchwoman.

The Post has sought comment from NBC News.

These 3 Women Tried Transgenderism, and Then Stopped

Jennifer Lahl’s documentary “The Detransition Diaries,” released Monday, tracks the stories of three female detransitioners, including Helena Kerschner. (Photo: The Center for Bioethics and Culture Network)

A documentary, released Monday, unveils the stories of three women who previously identified as transgender in a futile attempt to escape depression and suicidal thoughts.

Jennifer Lahl, a former pediatric nurse and current president of The Center for Bioethics and Culture Network, produced her most recent documentary, “The Detransition Diaries,” after a series of films highlighting bioethical issues.

Her film tracks the stories of Helena Kerschner, Grace Lidinsky-Smith, and Cat Cattinson, three women who believed their mental and emotional trauma would be solved by transitioning to the opposite sex. Each woman underwent hormone treatment and one had her breasts removed as well.

“We are following the news and the studies, and the evidence that shows this uptick in rapid-onset gender dysphoria [is something] young girls are particularly prone to,” Lahl told The Daily Signal in a phone call. Gender dysphoria refers to the condition of persistently and painfully identifying as the gender opposite one’s biological sex. “Young girls are getting sucked into this.”

Rapid-onset gender dysphoria is a recent phenomenon in which children and adolescents are suddenly, and without prior indication, identifying as the opposite sex.

Lahl found that her previous documentary “Trans Mission: What’s the Rush to Reassign Gender?” struck a chord with a broad audience. Firsthand accounts of men and women who “believed they were born in the wrong body” and thought gender transition “was the solution to all their problems” resonated with thousands of people, Lahl explained.

“As documentary filmmakers, we made the editorial decision that we are going to focus on women, realizing that this applies to men too,” she remarked on her most recent film.

“The Detransition Diaries” cover. (Photo: The Center for Bioethics and Culture Network)

Helena Kerschner, one of the detransitioners featured in Lahl’s film, says she struggled with depression, isolation, self-harm, an eating disorder, and suicidal thoughts as an early teen. She was introduced to the transgender belief system through Tumblr culture at 13.

Tumblr’s message was: “If you don’t like your body, that’s a sign you’re trans,” she notes.

After she came out as transgender, teachers and adults who never noticed her struggles before suddenly “bent over backward” to accommodate her new-found identity.

She did everything to make herself appear masculine. Eventually, Kerschner was prescribed testosterone at 18 after a single consultation at Planned Parenthood.

After a few weeks, she noticed how irritable she had become. “I couldn’t control myself,” Kerschner recalls in the documentary. When she got angry, she felt she needed to hurt someone—so she hurt herself. She eventually resorted to the emergency room, where staff directed her to the psych unit. Doctors diagnosed her with borderline personality disorder and psychosis, and sent her home with prescriptions for four different medications. She wound up in the hospital a few weeks later.

“My life became a total disaster,” she says. “I wasn’t functioning, I couldn’t hold a job, I wasn’t going to school—I felt like a monster.”

Seventeen months later, she stopped taking testosterone. Her negative symptoms vanished. During this time, not a single medical professional suggested that her hormone treatment was causing these symptoms, she remarks in the film.

Grace Lidinsky-Smith, another detransitioner featured in the film, noted that she felt a rush of energy when she first started testosterone treatment. Though she had some underlying anxiety, she told herself this was “internalized transphobia,” she says to the filmmakers.

Grace Lidinsky-Smith in “The Detransition Diaries.” (Photo: The Center for Bioethics and Culture Network)

Cat Cattinson describes a similar euphoric feeling when she first went on testosterone.  It was “one of the better antidepressants I had taken,” she recalls.

Cat Cattinson in “The Detransition Diaries.” (Photo: The Center for Bioethics and Culture Network)

Lidinsky-Smith, unlike the other two women, went forward with a double mastectomy. Looking back, she believed she would feel better “because she’d be in a body that fit her better.” After her breasts were removed, she recalls, she looked down at the gashes on her chest. “I had the most awful feeling.”

She found others online also had an “intense, suicidal despair after surgery … and then got over it and felt better.” But the experience planted a seed of doubt, she explains. She found a testimony of another person who had transitioned from female to male. As the person described, a desire for “a small amount of masculinization” led to full-out body dysphoria.

At that point, Lidinsky-Smith stopped testosterone and slowly reversed course, eventually growing comfortable enough to use her birth name. “It became important to just accept myself as myself,” she explains.

Kershner and Cattinson described similar breaking points. Kershner realized: “This is not what I thought it would be,” adding that she believed “once I’m a boy, my confidence is gonna come out.” Instead, as she describes, she became dysfunctional.

As Cattinson explains, three months into her testosterone treatment, she found a dramatic drop in her voice. “Nothing was coming out except air and squeaks,” she describes. She stopped going to social events and performing live.

Like the other women, she found an online community of detransitioners and doctors who revealed the hidden underbelly of the trans movement.

She began questioning the basis of transgender ideology: the “idea that we should define a woman based on what’s in a person’s head,” as she describes it. Does “what you believe in your head … really trump the biological reality of being an adult female?” she wondered.

As the documentary concludes, Lidinsky-Smith notes that she is worried about those who continue to get sucked into gender transition treatment, when they can find the answer to their problems elsewhere.

All three women interviewed suffered from suicidal ideation and depression. Each believed that changing her name, pronouns, appearance, and hormones would solve her problems, yet each found her emotional state dramatically worsened as a result.

“I think the fallout will be severe,” Lidinsky-Smith notes. Remarking on the growing community of detransitioners, she adds, “Our voices can no longer be denied.”

Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the url or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.

The Woke Zone Trilogy

John Stossel takes up for Babylon Bee and notes “Even a few left-leaning comedians like Ricky Gervais and Dave Chappelle are mocking the intolerant left!”

Late night hosts like Stephen Colbert, seen speaking during the Montclair Film Festival on Oct. 23, passionately defend leftists to the point of lecturing, rather than providing comedic relief. (Photo: Manny Carabel/Getty Images)

A woman tells the cop who stopped her in a carpool lane she’s allowed to drive there because her pronouns are “they” and “them.”

That’s from a video by a conservative Christian satire site called the Babylon Bee. Their humor gets millions of views.

“Christian conservatives used to … be very dour and self-serious,” says Bee editor-in-chief Kyle Mann in my new video.

Today, he says, it’s the left who are self-serious. “They’re the ones that have trouble laughing at themselves.”

For example, late night hosts like Jimmy Kimmel and Stephen Colbert passionately defend COVID-19 vaccines.

“It is a lecture,” complains Mann.

“The left used to be anti-establishment,” adds Bee actress Chandler Juliet. Now, she says, ‘They’ve become the blob. … We’re super happy to be leading the comedic conversation on the right.”

One Babylon Bee video, “The Woke Zone,” makes fun of the way the media ignored violence and arson during the George Floyd protests.

“Do you ever feel gratitude to the left that they give you so much material?” I ask.

“We have to write things that are funnier than things they’re actually doing,” Mann responds. “That makes our job very difficult.”

One Bee sketch portrays its writers struggling to find new material.

“John Kerry warns that the war in Ukraine might distract from climate change!” suggests one.

Can’t do it, explains another. “It actually happened.” Yes, Kerry really did say that.

“Cosmo magazine features a morbidly obese woman on the cover as the picture of health” and, “Math professor says ‘two plus two equals four’ is racist!” are among other ideas that can’t be used as jokes.

“A math professor really said two plus two equals four is racist?” I ask.

It’s “a colonialist, white supremacist idea,” explains Mann.

Today the Bee reaches more people than The Onion. The establishment doesn’t like that, so some people actually sic so-called fact checkers on the Bee.

One article fact-checked by Snopes was titled, “Bernie Sanders Vows To Round Up Remaining ISIS Members, Allow Them To Vote.”

“Does Snopes not understand that you’re making jokes?” I ask.

“I think that they know what our intention is,” answers Juliet. “They just don’t like us.”

Recently, Twitter banned the Bee. Their offense was tweeting an article that named Assistant Secretary of Health Rachel Levine “Babylon Bee’s Man of the Year.”

Levine is a transgender woman. Calling her the man of the year is a joke I wouldn’t make. But it doesn’t need to be censored.

Twitter says they’ll allow the Bee back on the platform only if they delete the tweet. Mann says he won’t.

“Twitter has the capability to just delete the tweet themselves. They want us to bend the knee and be the ones to click, ‘Yes, we acknowledge hateful conduct.’ We’re not going to do that.”

Today, a lot of comedians attract sizable audiences by mocking the left. Some I found funny are JP Sears, Ryan Long and FreedomToons.

The culture is changing.

The highest rating late-night comic these days is often not Colbert, Kimmel or Fallon, but Greg Gutfeld of Fox.

Even a few left-leaning comedians like Ricky Gervais and Dave Chappelle are mocking the intolerant left.

“I talk about AIDS, famine, cancer, the Holocaust, rape, pedophilia … the one thing you mustn’t joke about is identity politics,” says Gervais in his recent Netflix special.

Professional media critics trashed him for that. But the special was hugely popular with the public.

The Rotten Tomatoes ratings are revealing. Critics gave Gervais’ special a 29% rating, calling it “terribly unfunny” and “a detestable combination of smug and obtuse.”

Viewers gave it a 92% rating.

The same is true of Chapelle’s latest special, “The Closer.” Critics give it just 40%. The audience gives it 95%.

Clearly, many people are tired of smug, condescending humor.

I’m glad the Babylon Bee, and others, give us an alternative.

COPYRIGHT 2022 BY JFS PRODUCTIONS INC.

The Daily Signal publishes a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Heritage Foundation.

Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the url or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.

After Life 2 – Man identifies as an 8 year old girl

—-

After Life on Netflix

——

Before I get into the fine article by Brendan O’Neill which I present in its entirety, I wanted to quote Francis Schaeffer who spent his life examining the humanism that now Ricky Gervais embraces!

All humans have moral motions and that is why Ricky Gervais knows it is wrong to let biological men use ladies’ bathrooms!!!!!!

Francis Schaffer in his book THE GOD WHO IS THERE addresses these same issues:

“[in Christianity] there is a sufficient basis for morals. Nobody has ever discovered a way of having real “morals” without a moral absolute. If there is no moral absolute, we are left with hedonism (doing what I like) or some form of the social contract theory (what is best for society as a a hole is right). However, neither of these alternative corresponds to the moral motions that men have. Talk to people long enough and deeply enough, and you will find that they consider some things are really right and something are really wrong. Without absolutes, morals as morals cease to exist, and humanistic mean starting from himself is unable to find the absolute he needs. But because the God of the Bible is there, real morals exist. Within this framework I can say one action is right and another wrong, without talking nonsense.” 117

Francis Schaeffer in the film WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE HUMAN RACE?

Francis and Edith Schaeffer

Brendan O’Neill

Ricky Gervais is guilty of blasphemy

He has mocked identity politics – the god of our times

I have long thought that if Life of Brian came out today, it wouldn’t be Christians kicking up a fuss about it — it would be trans activists.

When Monty Python’s classic tale of a man mistaken for a Messiah came to cinemas in 1979, people of faith weren’t happy. They saw it as taking the mick out of Christ and they aired their displeasure noisily. Nuns in New York picketed cinemas. In Ireland the film was banned for eight years.

In 2022 I reckon it would be a very different story. It wouldn’t be Monty Python’s ribbing of the gospels that would outrage the chattering classes — it would be their mockery of trans people.

Life of Brian was way ahead of time. It was Terf before Terf was even a thing. There is a brilliantly observed scene in which Stan of the People’s Front of Judea — or is it the Judean People’s Front? — says he wants to become Loretta.

‘I want to be a woman. From now on, I want you all to call me Loretta’, says Stan, played by Eric Idle. When the others push back and say he can’t just become a woman, he says: ‘It’s my right as a man.’ Which was remarkably perspicacious.

‘I want to have babies’, says Stan / Loretta. ‘You can’t have babies! You haven’t got a womb!’, barks John Cleese’s Reg. Transphobic or what? To calm things down, Francis (Michael Palin) says they should accept Stan’s desire to be Loretta as being ‘symbolic of our struggle against oppression’. ‘Symbolic of his struggle against reality…’ Reg mutters.

——

Imagine if a film or TV show did something like that today. Showed an aspiring ‘trans woman’ being mocked for not having the right body parts to be a woman. Showed a man who wants to be a woman being told — for laughs, remember — that the only thing he’s struggling against is reality.

The cancel-culture mob would kick into action. There’d be a Change.org petition, maybe even a physical protest outside the offices of the production company or streaming service that was foolish enough to broadcast such trans-poking humour. ‘Jokes kill!’, we would be told, day and night.

Hell, JK Rowling can’t even very politely say ‘men aren’t women’ without being subjected to weeks of hatred and violent threats — so heaven help the film company that tried to air a Stan / Loretta skit in these febrile times.

This week, my theory about Life of Brianin 2022 was kind of proven right. For we had the pretty extraordinary sight of Ricky Gervais getting a very free ride for his God-mocking while being dragged into the Twitter stocks for his gags about trans issues.

In his new Netflix special SuperNature, Gervais vents his atheistic spleen. The Christian God is cruel and perverted, he says. Those Christian fundamentalists who believe Aids is the Almighty’s way of punishing gay sex clearly believe in a God who’s up in heaven thinking, ‘I’m sick of all this bumming’. And so just as God once said ‘Let there be light’, according to Gervais in the 1980s He said, ‘Let there be Aids’. What a rotter.

This isn’t the first time Gervais has made fun of God and those who believe in him. He’s famously an atheist. He talks about it all the time. (Rather too much, in my view.) But God-bashing is fine these days. Cool, even. Christians tend to take it in their stride. Believers have mostly kept their counsel following Gervais’s latest mockery of their wicked, ridiculous God.

The same cannot be said of trans activists and their allies. Not even remotely. They have responded with fury to Gervais’s blasphemy against the new god of genderfluidity.

He’s been called all the usual names. Transphobe, Terf, bigot. His crime? Choosing not to adhere to the ideology of transgenderism, daring to dissent from that pseudo-religious mantra we are all now pressured into saying: ‘Trans women are women.’

What’s funny about this spittle-flecked response to Gervais’s trans jokes is that he was really only saying what trans activists themselves have said. He had a bit on ‘old-fashioned women’ — ‘you know, the ones with wombs’ — complaining about born males using their bathrooms. ‘What if he rapes me?’, these women say. To which Gervais, playing the trans activist, responds: ‘What if she rapes you, you… Terf whore.’

Cutting, yes. But also incredibly accurate. Some police forces and courts do indeed refer to rapists as ‘she’ and ‘her’, if that’s how they identify. And, as feminists have pointed out, this results in rape victims being pressured to refer to their rapist with female pronouns. As for the language, anyone who has spent more than five minutes online in recent years will know that that kind of thing is said to gender-critical women all the time.

Like all great blasphemous comics, Gervais is merely shining a light on things that really are said, and things which really do happen, and inviting us, his audience, to laugh and say: ‘Yeah, that is kind of ridiculous.’ Much as Monty Python did with the Bible, in fact.

But, say Gervais’s humourless critics, while the likes of Monty Python were punching up — against God, no less — Gervais is punching down, against vulnerable, marginalised trans people. I don’t buy this at all. Gervais has made it clear that he fully supports rights for trans people. His issue is with the excesses of trans activism and the authoritarianism of identity politics more broadly.

‘I talk about Aids, famine, cancer, the Holocaust, rape, paedophilia’, he says in SuperNature. ‘But no, the one thing you mustn’t joke about is identity politics.’

Absolutely. And that’s because identitarianism is the god of our times. It’s the new religion of the elites, their means of controlling and reprimanding the masses. Ridiculing identity politics is to the 21st century what questioning the authority of God was to the 15th. The woke rage against Gervais really does echo earlier outbursts of intolerant religious fury against anyone who dared to dissent from the Word of God.

A.F. Branco for Jan 12, 2022

—-

Dennett wearing a button-up shirt and a jacket

I was referred this subject by a tweet by Daniel Dennett which referenced a fine article by Robyn E. Blumner in defense of her boss at the RICHARD DAWKINS FOUNDATION and you can read my response at this link.
Richard Dawkins Cooper Union Shankbone.jpg

Ricky Gervais is a secular humanist just like his good friend Richard Dawkins and it is the humanists who have bought into this trans-identity politics and as a result the AMERICAN HUMANIST ASSOCIATION has stripped Dawkins of his 1996 HUMANIST OF THE YEAR award.

As an evangelical I have had the opportunity to correspond with more more secular humanists that have signed the Humanist Manifestos than any other evangelical alive (at least that has been one of my goals since reading Francis Schaeffer’s books and watching his films since 1979).

Not everyone I have corresponded with is a secular humanist but  many are the top scientists and atheist thinkers of today and hold this same secular views. Many of these scholars have taken the time to respond back to me in the last 20 years and some of the names  included are  Ernest Mayr (1904-2005), George Wald (1906-1997), Carl Sagan (1934-1996),  Robert Shapiro (1935-2011), Nicolaas Bloembergen (1920-),  Brian Charlesworth (1945-),  Francisco J. Ayala (1934-) Elliott Sober (1948-), Kevin Padian (1951-), Matt Cartmill (1943-) , Milton Fingerman (1928-), John J. Shea (1969-), , Michael A. Crawford (1938-), (Paul Kurtz (1925-2012), Sol Gordon (1923-2008), Albert Ellis (1913-2007), Barbara Marie Tabler (1915-1996), Renate Vambery (1916-2005), Archie J. Bahm (1907-1996), Aron S “Gil” Martin ( 1910-1997), Matthew I. Spetter (1921-2012), H. J. Eysenck (1916-1997), Robert L. Erdmann (1929-2006), Mary Morain (1911-1999), Lloyd Morain (1917-2010),  Warren Allen Smith (1921-), Bette Chambers (1930-),  Gordon Stein (1941-1996) , Milton Friedman (1912-2006), John Hospers (1918-2011), and Michael Martin (1932-), Harry Kroto (1939-), Marty E. Martin (1928-), Richard Rubenstein (1924-), James Terry McCollum (1936-), Edward O. WIlson (1929-), Lewis Wolpert (1929), Gerald Holton(1922-), Martin Rees (1942-), Alan Macfarlane (1941-),  Roald Hoffmann (1937-), Herbert Kroemer (1928-), Thomas H. Jukes(1906-1999) and  Ray T. Cragun (1976-). 

Let me make a few points about Ricky personally and then a few about this comedy routine by the secular humanist Ricky Gervais.

Notice below in AFTER LIFE how he suspects Anne of being a Christian when she tells him “We are not just here for us. We are here for others,“

After Life Ricky GervaisRicky Gervais and Penelope Wilton in ‘After Life’ (CREDIT: Netflix)

(Above) Tony (played by Ricky) and Anne on the bench at the graveyard where their spouses are buried.

In the fourth episode of season 1 of AFTER LIFE is the following discussion between Anne and Tony:

Tony: My brother-in-law wants me to try dating again.
Anne: Oh excellent! You need some tips.
Tony: why would I need some tips?

Anne: I imagine you are awful with women…Well all men are awful with women but grumpy selfish ones are the worst.

Tony: Let me take notes. This is dynamite.

Tony: I would just be honest. Tell them my situation and tell them what I am going through. Be honest up front.
Anne: So it is all about you then?

Tony: I can’t win can I? I don’t want to date again. I don’t want to live without Lisa.

Anne: But is not just about you is it? That is what I am saying. What if a nice date made her feel good? That might feel nice right? We are just here for us. We are here for others.

Tony: I don’t do the whole God thing I am afraid.

Anne: Neither do I. It is a load of rubbish. All we got is each other. We have to help each other struggle until we die then we are done. No point in felling sorry for ourselves and making everyone else unhappy too. Might as [kill] yourself if you feel that bad.
Tony: Are you sure you want to work for the Samaritans?

Christ came to this world and his followers have changed this world for the better more than any other group that ever existed. When Anne makes the assertions, “But is not just about you is it? That is what I am saying. What if a nice date made her feel good? That might feel nice right? We are not just here for us. We are here for others,” Tony assumes she is a Christian.

If you found yourself in a dark alley late at night, with a group of rough-looking, burly young men walking swiftly toward you, would you feel better knowing they were coming from a Bible study?

If we are only cosmic accidents, how can there be any meaning in our lives? If this is true, which it is in an atheistic world view, our lives are for nothing. It would not matter in the slightest bit if I ever existed. This is why the atheist, if honest and consistent, must face death with despair. Their life is for nothing. Once they are gone, they are gone forever.

I highly recommend Ricky Gervais series AFTER LIFE which is running on NETFLIX because it reminds me of King Solomon trying to find meaning in life UNDER THE SUN without God in the picture!!!

God put Solomon’s story in Ecclesiastes in the Bible with the sole purpose of telling people like Ricky that without God in the picture you  will find out the emptiness one feels when possessions are trying to fill the void that God can only fill.

Then in the last chapter of Ecclesiastes Solomon returns to looking above the sun and he says that obeying the Lord is the proper way to live your life. The  answer to find meaning in life is found in putting your faith and trust in Jesus Christ. The Bible is true from cover to cover and can be trusted. If you need more evidence then go to You Tube and watch the short video:

NOW TO RICKY’S COMEDY:

Brendan O’Neill noted above:

‘I want to have babies’, says Stan / Loretta. ‘You can’t have babies! You haven’t got a womb!’, barks John Cleese’s Reg. Transphobic or what? To calm things down, Francis (Michael Palin) says they should accept Stan’s desire to be Loretta as being ‘symbolic of our struggle against oppression’. ‘Symbolic of his struggle against reality…’ Reg mutters….

He’s been called all the usual names. Transphobe, Terf, bigot. His crime? Choosing not to adhere to the ideology of transgenderism, daring to dissent from that pseudo-religious mantra we are all now pressured into saying: ‘Trans women are women.’

What’s funny about this spittle-flecked response to Gervais’s trans jokes is that he was really only saying what trans activists themselves have said. He had a bit on ‘old-fashioned women’ — ‘you know, the ones with wombs’ — complaining about born males using their bathrooms. ‘What if he rapes me?’, these women say. To which Gervais, playing the trans activist, responds: ‘What if she rapes you, you… Terf whore.’

Ricky  is trying to use common sense (through sarcasm) on people that “GOD GAVE…OVER to depraved [minds]. Romans 1 states:

26 For this reason (M)GOD GAVE THEM OVER  to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural…

28 And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, GOD GAVE THEM OVER to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper, 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are…inventors of evil,

—-

Francis Schaeffer.jpg

Francis Schaeffer later in this blog post discusses what the unbelievers in Romans 1 were rejecting, but first John MacArthur discusses what the unbelievers in the Democratic Party today are affirming and how these same activities were condemned 2000 years ago in Romans 1.

Christians Cannot And MUST Not Vote Democrat – John MacArthur

A Democrat witness testifying before the HouseJudiciary Committee on abortion rights Thursday declared that men can get pregnant and have abortions. This reminds of Romans chapter 1 and also John MacArthur’s commentary on the 2022 Agenda of the Democratic Party:

25 For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator…26 For this reason (M)GOD GAVE THEM OVER  to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.28 And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, GOD GAVE THEM OVER to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper, 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are…inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31 without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, unmerciful; 32 but also give hearty approval to those who practice them.

Here is what John MacArthur had to say:

Now, all of a sudden, not only is this characteristic of our nation, but we now promote it. One of the parties, the Democratic Party, has now made Romans 1, the sins of Romans 1, their agenda. What God condemns, they affirm.

I know from last week’s message that there was some response from people who said, “Why are you getting political?”

Romans 1 is not politics. This has to do with speaking the Word of God through the culture in which we live….it’s about iniquity and judgment. And why do we say this? Because this must be recognized for what it is–sin, serious sin, damning sin, destructive sin.

Dem witness tells House committee men can get pregnant, have abortions

‘I believe that everyone can identify for themselves,’ Aimee Arrambide tells House Judiciary Committee

Aimee Arrambide, the executive director of the abortion rights nonprofit Avow Texas, was asked by Rep. Dan Bishop, R-N.C., to define what “a woman is,” to which she responded, “I believe that everyone can identify for themselves.”
“Do you believe that men can become pregnant and have abortions?” Bishop asked.

“Yes,” Arrambide replied.

The remarks from Arrambide followed a tense exchange between Bishop and Dr. Yashica Robinson, another Democrat witness, after he similarly asked her to define “woman.”

Aimee Arrambide testifies before the House Judiciary Committee on May 11, 2020.  (YouTube screenshot)

Aimee Arrambide testifies before the House Judiciary Committee on May 11, 2020.  (YouTube screenshot) (Screenshot/ House Committee on the Judiciary)

“Dr. Robinson, I noticed in your written testimony you said that you use she/her pronouns. You’re a medical doctor – what is a woman?” Bishop asked Robinson, an OBGYN and board member with Physicians for Reproductive Health.

“I think it’s important that we educate people like you about why we’re doing the things that we do,” Robinson responded. “And so the reason that I use she and her pronouns is because I understand that there are people who become pregnant that may not identify that way. And I think it is discriminatory to speak to people or to call them in such a way as they desire not to be called.”

“Are you going to answer my question? Can you answer the question, what’s a woman?” Bishop asked.

Donna Howard and Aimee Arrambide speaks at Making Virtual Storytelling and Activism Personal during the 2022 SXSW Conference and Festivals at Austin Convention Center on March 14, 2022 in Austin, Texas.

Donna Howard and Aimee Arrambide speaks at Making Virtual Storytelling and Activism Personal during the 2022 SXSW Conference and Festivals at Austin Convention Center on March 14, 2022 in Austin, Texas. (Photo by Hubert Vestil/Getty Images for SXSW)

“I’m a woman, and I will ask you which pronouns do you use?” Robinson replied. “If you tell me that you use she and her pronouns … I’m going to respect you for how you want me to address you.”

“So you gave me an example of a woman, you say that you are a woman, can you tell me otherwise what a woman is?” Bishop asked.

“Yes, I’m telling you, I’m a woman,” Robinson responded.

“Is that as comprehensive a definition as you can give me?” Bishop asked.

“That’s as comprehensive a definition as I will give you today,” Robinson said. “Because I think that it’s important that we focus on what we’re here for, and it’s to talk about access to abortion.”

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

“So you’re not interested in answering the question that I asked unless it’s part of a message you want to deliver…” Bishop fired back.

Wednesday’s hearing, titled, “Revoking your Rights,” addressed the threat to abortion rights after the leaked Supreme Court draft opinion signaled the high court is poised to soon strike down Roe v. Wade.
John MacArthur explains God’s Wrath on unrighteousness from Romans Chapt…

First is what Romans says:

Romans 1:18-32

New American Standard Bible (NASB)

Unbelief and Its Consequences

18 For (A)the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who (B)suppress the truth [a]in unrighteousness, 19 because (C)that which is known about God is evident [b]within them; for God made it evident to them. 20 For (D)since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, (E)being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. 21 For even though they knew God, they did not [c]honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became (F)futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 (G)Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and (H)exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and [d]crawling creatures.

24 Therefore (I)God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be (J)dishonored among them. 25 For they exchanged the truth of God for [e]a (K)lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, (L)who is blessed [f]forever. Amen.

26 For this reason (M)God gave them over to (N)degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is [g]unnatural, 27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, (O)men with men committing [h]indecent acts and receiving in [i]their own persons the due penalty of their error.

28 And just as they did not see fit [j]to acknowledge God any longer, (P)God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper, 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are (Q)gossips, 30 slanderers, [k](R)haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, (S)disobedient to parents, 31 without understanding, untrustworthy, (T)unloving, unmerciful; 32 and although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of (U)death, they not only do the same, but also (V)give hearty approval to those who practice them.

Here is what John MacArthur had to say:

Now, all of a sudden, not only is this characteristic of our nation, but we now promote it. One of the parties, the Democratic Party, has now made Romans 1, the sins of Romans 1, their agenda. What God condemns, they affirm. What God punishes, they exalt. Shocking, really. The Democratic Party has become the anti-God party, the sin-promoting party. By the way, there are seventy-two million registered Democrats in this country who have identified themselves with that party and maybe they need to rethink that identification.

I know from last week’s message that there was some response from people who said, “Why are you getting political?”

Romans 1 is not politics. The Bible is not politics. This has nothing to do with politics. This has to do with speaking the Word of God through the culture in which we live. It has nothing to do with politics. It’s not about personalities; it’s about iniquity and judgment. And why do we say this? Because this must be recognized for what it is–sin, serious sin, damning sin, destructive sin.

WHAT HAS THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY REJECTED? THE ANSWER IS THE GOD WHO HAS REVEALED HIM SELF THROUGH THE BOOK OF NATURE AND THE BOOK OF SCRIPTURE!

God Is There And He Is Not Silent
Psalm 19
Intro. 1) Francis Schaeffer lived from 1912-1984. He was one of the Christian
intellectual giants of the 20th century. He taught us that you could be a Christian and not abandon the mind. One of the books he wrote was entitled He Is There And He Is Not Silent. In that work he makes a crucial and thought provoking statement, “The infinite- personal God is there, but also he is not silent; that changes the whole world…He is there and is not a silent, nor far-off God.” (Works of F.S., Vol 1, 276).
2) God is there and He is not silent. In fact He has revealed Himself to us in 2 books: the book of nature and the book of Scripture. Francis Bacon, a 15th century scientist who is credited by many with developing the scientific method said it this way: “There are 2 books laid before us to study, to prevent us from falling into error: first the volume to the Scriptures, which reveal the will of God; then the volume of the creation, which expresses His power.”
3) Psalm 19 addresses both of God’s books, the book of nature in vs 1-6 and the book of Scripture in vs. 7-14. Described as a wisdom Psalm, its beauty, poetry and splendor led C.S. Lewis to say, “I take this to be the greatest poem in the Psalter and one of the greatest lyrics in the world” (Reflections on the Psalms, 63).
Trans. God is there and He is not silent. How should we hear and listen to the God who talks?
I. Listen To God Speak Through Nature 19:1-6
God has revealed himself to ever rational human on the earth in two ways: 1) nature and 2) conscience. We call this natural or general revelation. In vs. 1-6 David addresses the wonder of nature and creation.

Whatever Happened To The Human Race? | Episode 5 | Truth and History

Related posts:

John MacArthur on Romans 1 and the Democratic Party

First is what Romans says: Romans 1:18-32 New American Standard Bible (NASB) Unbelief and Its Consequences 18 For (A)the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who (B)suppress the truth [a]in unrighteousness, 19 because (C)that which is known about God is evident [b]within them; for God made it evident to […]

Abortion and the Campaign for Immorality (Selected Scriptures) John MacArthur

Abortion and the Campaign for Immorality (Selected Scriptures) John MacArthur Published on Sep 30, 2012 by JohnMacArthurGTY http://www.gty.org/resources/sermons/90-448 What a privilege and joy it is to worship the Lord here at Grace Church. Patricia and I miss it when we’re not here. There’s no place like this. Our hearts are full to overflowing to be […]

John MacArthur: Fulfilled prophecy in the Bible? (Ezekiel 26-28 and the story of Tyre, video clips)

Prophecy–The Biblical Prophesy About Tyre.mp4 Uploaded by TruthIsLife7 on Dec 5, 2010 A short summary of the prophecy about Tyre and it’s precise fulfillment. Go to this link and watch the whole series for the amazing fulfillment from secular sources. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qvt4mDZUefo ________________ John MacArthur on the amazing fulfilled prophecy on Tyre and how it was fulfilled […]

Did God kill someone that I knew? What does I John 5:14-17 mean?

1 John 5:14-17 New American Standard Bible (NASB) 14 This is (A)the confidence which we have [a]before Him, that, (B)if we ask anything according to His will, He hears us. 15 And if we know that He hears us in whatever we ask, (C)we know that we have the requests which we have asked from […]

MUSIC MONDAY The Beatles albums ranked Part 3 “Magical Mystery Tour” (1967)

_—

The Beatles albums ranked

The Beatles discography ranked

It’s difficult to have the albums created by the most important band in the history of music ranked from worst to best. After all, it’s unlikely that you’ll find any band or musical artist unwilling to share their admiration for the Fab Four. Their fingerprints are over everything created in popular music.

The Liverpool quartet recorded albums at a significant pace between 1963 and 1970. Many of these are classics that redefined what pop-rock could be. Most of these are tremendously experimental, adventurous affairs.

Still, which one’s the best? Is there any one album worth avoiding?

I’ve looked at the evidence and listened to the whole discography once more, and I think that I have an answer or two.

For simplicity’s sake, I have only included official UK releases. That means that the early US-released records aren’t on here. Neither are compilations such as “Anthology,” “Rarities,” or “Hey Jude.” “Yellow Submarine” is included as it included mostly unreleased material and was crafted as a studio album.

With this in mind, here’s a quick initiation into the musical world created by John, Paul, George, and Ringo, The Beatles albums ranked.

3. “Magical Mystery Tour” (1967)

It’s hard to find an underrated album by The Beatles. If such a thing does exist, it is “Magical Mystery Tour.” If “Sgt. Pepper’s” was one of the very first concept albums, this is its untidy follow-up.

The record’s release was accompanied by mistrust from the public. This was largely due to the accompanying movie, a charming if slightly unguided, project. Paul McCartney has called it a “Beatles student film.”

Still, just try getting the scene of Lennon shoveling pasta down the throat of a woman out of your mind!

“Magical Mystery Tour” contains some truly memorable tracks, such as “I Am the Walrus” and “All You Need Is Love.” On no other record, perhaps, was the band working more freely with colorful, psychedelic elements.

The Beatles were at a creative crossroads at this time, and it shows in the somewhat disjointed nature of the album. While there are clear highlights when compared to their more successful releases, it is not relatively as cohesive.

This is no small part due to what was going on in the band members’ personal lives. 1967 was a significant year for The Beatles. Of course, they released their landmark album “Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band,” which was a major critical and commercial success. It is considered one of their greatest works.

Famously, the band also took a trip to Rishikesh, India, in order to study with the Maharishi Mahesh Yogi.

Even more importantly, the band’s manager Brian Epstein tragically died of a drug overdose in August of the same year. This had a significant impact on their music and their worldview.

“Magical Mystery Tour” was released later in the year and was accompanied by a television film of the same name, which was a departure from the band’s previous work and featured more experimental and avant-garde elements.

Some reviewers felt that the film was overly experimental and confusing and that it failed to capture the magic of the Beatles’ music. Others thought that the film was an ambitious but ultimately unsuccessful attempt at creating something new and different.

John Lennon provided many of the more important tracks, including the Lewis Carroll-inspired “I Am the Walrus” and the childhood playground-inspired “Strawberry Fields Forever.”

Paul McCartney offered the adventure-theme title track, the lighthearted “Your Mother Should Know,” “The Fool on the Hill,” as well as “Hello, Goodbye,” and “Penny Lane.”

McCartney was also the creative force leading the production of the movie for which these songs were to serve as a psych-rock soundtrack.

George Harrison contributed the trippy “Blue Jay Way.” It’s a tune begging to be played on a loop while sitting in a quiet room.

The Beatles released “Magical Mystery Tour” in 1967. This was, of course, a time of great social and cultural upheaval. The late 1960s were marked by significant events such as the civil rights movement, the Vietnam War, and the counterculture movement.

These events had a major influence on the music and culture of the time. Still, few things were quite as relevant as the rock music made by four lads from Liverpool.

The Beatles were at the forefront of the counterculture movement, and their music reflected the themes of rebellion, social change, and personal freedom that were prevalent during this time.

You may be interested in links to the other posts I have done on the Beatles and you can click on the link below: FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE PART 288, LINKS TO 3 YEARS OF BEATLES POSTS (March of 2015 to Feb of 2018) Featured artist is Mark Dion


The Beatles A Hard Day’s Night sottotitolato in italiano

—-

—-

Pardon me for asking, but who’s that little old man?
-What little old man? -That little old man.
-Oh, that one. That’s my grandfather. -Your grandfather?
-That’s not your grandfather. -It is, you know.
But I’ve seen your grandfather. He lives in your house.
That’s my other grandfather, but he’s my grandfather as well.
How do you reckon that one out?
Everyone’s entitled to two, aren’t they? And that’s my other one.
We know all that, but what’s he doing here?
-Mother thought the trip’d do him good. -How’s that?
He’s nursing a broken heart.
Poor old thing.
Are you nursing a broken heart?
He’s a nice old man, isn’t he?
He’s very clean.
-Hello, Grandfather. -Hello.
He can talk then, can he?
Of course. He’s a human being, isn’t he?
If he’s your grandfather, who knows?
-And we’re looking after him, are we? -I’ll look after meself.
Yeah, that’s what I’m afraid of.
He’s got you worried, then?
Him? He’s a villain, a real mixer.
And he’ll cost you a fortune in breach of promise cases.
-Get on. -No, straight up.
-Hello, Shake. -Hello, Shake.
You got on all right, then?
No.
We’re here. Norm will be along in a minute with the tickets.
Who’s the little old man?
It’s Paul’s grandfather.
-But I thought– -No, That’s his other one.
Oh, that’s all right, then.
Clean though, isn’t he?
Aye. He’s very clean.
Thank God, you all got here. I’ve had a marvelous idea.
Once, let’s all try to behave like ordinary respectable citizens.
Let’s not cause trouble or pull any strokes.
Or do anything I’d be sorry for inj that television theater.*
Are you listening to me, Lennon?
You’re a swine. Isn’t he, George?
Yeah, a swine.
Thanks.
Hey!
Who’s that little old man?
-Well, who is he? -He belongs to Paul.
I’m going down for a cup of coffee. Anyone coming?
We’ll follow you down.
-I want me coffee. -You can come with Shake and me.
And look after him. I don’t want to find you’ve lost him.
Don’t be cheeky. I’ll bind him to me with promises.
Very clean, isn’t he?
Come on, Granddad.
Make up your mind, will you?
Hello. Morning.
All right.
Do you mind if we have it open?
Yes, I do.
Four of us want it open, if it’s all the same to you.
It isn’t. I travel on this train regularly twice a week…
…so I suppose I have some rights.
So have we.
We’ll have that thing off as well.
Knowledge of the Railway Acts tell you I’m within my rights.
But we want to hear it.
We’re a community, majority vote, up the workers and all that stuff.
Then I suggest you take that damn thing into the corridor…
…or some other part of the train where you obviously belong.
Give us a kiss.
Look, we paid for our seats too, you know.
I travel on this train regularly, twice a week.
Knock it off, Paul. You can’t win with his sort.
After all, it’s his train. Isn’t it, mister?
And don’t take that tone with me, young man.
I fought the war for your sort.
I bet you’re sorry you won.
-I shall call the guard. -Ah, but what?
They don’t take kindly to insults, you know.
Let’s go have some coffee and leave the kennel to Lassie.
Hey, mister, can we have our ball back?
Look, mister!
Mister, can we have our ball back?
-You want to watch it! -Well, it’s not my fault.
-You stick to that story, son. -I can’t help it. I’m taller than you.
They always say that.
I’ve got me eye on you.
I’m sorry, Norm. I can’t help being taller than you.
Don’t rub it in. I’ve a good mind to thump you, Shake.
If you have a barney, can I hold your coat?
-He started it. -I did not, you did.
What happened?
The old fellow said could he have these pictures and Norm said no.
I said “Why not be big about it?”
And?
Your grandfather said that Shake was always being taller just to spite me.
I knew it. He started it.
-I should’ve known. -You what?
You two never argue and in two minutes flat he’s got you at it.
He’s a king mixer.
He hates group unity, so he gets everyone at it.
I suggest you just give him the photos and have done with it.
All right, you old devil. Here you are.
Hey, Pauly, would you ever sign one of them for us?
Come on, Shake.
Hey, look at the talent.
-Let’s give them a pull. -Should l?
Don’t rush. None of your five-bar gate jumps.
What’s that supposed to mean?
I don’t know. I thought it just sounded distinguished.
George Harrison, The Scouse of Distinction.
Excuse me, madam.
These young men I’m with wondered if two of us could come over and join you.
I’d ask you meself only I’m shy.
I’m sorry, miss. You mustn’t fraternize with me prisoners.
-Prisoners? -Convicts in transit.
-Typical old lags, the lot of them. -You what?
Get out, ladies! Get out, while you can!
SON OF MAD
He’s been gone a long time.
-Who? -Paul’s grandfather.
-I didn’t notice. Where did he go? -Down the, uh….
-Oh, down the, uh…. -Yeah. Down the, uh….
Give him a couple of minutes, then.
Hey, have you seen Paul’s grandfather?
Of course. He’s concealed about me person.
He must have slipped off somewhere.
-Have you lost him? -Don’t exaggerate.
-You’ve lost him! -Look, put it this way, Pauly….
He’s mislaid him.
Honest, you can’ t trust you with anything, Norm.
-If you’ve lost him, I’ll cripple you. -He can’t have gone far.
Come, lads, let’s look up the sharp end.
What’s the matter with you, then?
It’s his grandfather. He doesn’t like me ’cause I’m little.
You’ve got an inferiority complex.
That’s why I play the drums. It’s me active compensatory factor.
Going in, then?
No. She’ll only reject me in the end and I’ll be frustrated.
You may be lucky this time.
No, I know the psychological pattern. It plays havoc with me drum skins.
-You seen that old man we were with? -We’ve broken out!
The blessed freedom of it all.
Have you got a nail file? These handcuffs are killing me.
I was framed. I’m innocent.
Sorry for disturbing you girls.
I bet you can’t guess what I was in for.
Should we go in here?
No, it’s probably a honeymoon couple or a company director.
I don’t care. I’m going to broaden me outlook.
-Congratulate me, boys. I’m engaged. -Oh, no you’re not.
And to think me own grandson would’ve let them put me behind bars.
Don’t dramatize. You’re lucky to be here.
If they’d have had their own way you’d have been dropped off already.
You’ve got to admit you’ve upset a lot of people.
At least I can keep my eye on you while you’re stuck in here.
Shove up.
-Odds or evens? -Odds.
Don’t worry, son. We’ll get the best lawyer green stamps can buy.
It’s a laugh a line with Lennon.
-Anyway, it’s your fault. -Why me?
Why not you?
God, it’s depressing in here, isn’t it?
Funny. They usually reckon dogs more than people in England.
You’d expect something more palatial.
-Let’s do something, then. -Like what?
Okay.
There’s the girls.
I’ll deal.
The Liverpool Shuffle.
1 for you, 2 for me, 3 for him.
-He’s wearing his lucky rings. -All mine.
They won’t buy you happiness, my son.
Hey! Don’t move, any of you.
They’ve gone potty out there. The place is surging with girls.
Please, sir, can I have one?
No, you can’t.
When I tell you, get out through this door into that big car that’s waiting.
Come on, lads! Go ahead!
-I don’t snore. -You do. Repeatedly.
-Do I snore, John? -Yeah. You’re a window rattler, son.
It’s just your opinion. Do I snore, Paul?
With a trombone hooter like yours it would be unnatural if you didn’t.
No, Pauly. Don’t mock the afflicted.
Come off it. It’s only a joke.
It may be a joke, but it’s his nose.
He can’t help having a hideous, great hooter.
And the poor little head trembling under the weight of it.
John, Paul, George, come on.
Get at it.
The income tax caught up with us at last.
-None for me, then? -Sorry.
This will keep you busy.
It’s your nose, you know. Fans are funny that way.
They take a dislike to things. They’ll pick on a nose.
You pick on your own.
Here.
-Are those yours? -No. They’re for Ringo.
It must have cost you a fortune in stamps, Ringo.
He comes from a large family.
Well.
What’s The Circle Club?
“The Circle Club requests the company of Mr. Richard Starkey”…that’s you–
“…to their gaming rooms. Chemin de fer, baccarat and champagne buffet.”
-They want me. -It’s got round you’re a big spender.
You’re not going.
Quite right. Invites to gambling dens full of easy money and fast women…
…chicken sandwiches and cornets of caviar. Disgusting.
That’s mine.
Get your pens out.
Why?
It’s homework time for you load of college puddings.
I want this lot answered tonight.
I want to go out.
‘ll brook no denial.
You couldn’t get a pen in your foot, you swine.
Chatter on, son, chatter on.
A touch of the writer’s cramp will soon sort you out. Come on, Shake.
For now, then.
-Where you going, then? -He told us to stay, didn’t he?
-Come, lad. -What?
I just got to get me jacket.
-Couldn’t we get a taxi? -No, we couldn’t get a taxi.
Come in.
I’ll clear up, sir.
Suivez.
Alors, monsieur?
Soufflé.
I bet you’re a great swimmer.
My turn?
Bingo!
Pas “Bingo”, monsieur. “Banco.”
I’ll take the little darlings anyway.
Two and one are three, carry one is four.
Bingo!
The manager!
Come on!
Now, come on you lot, get on with it.
-We were gonna do them, but you know. -Aye. Well, now, now, now!
I’m starting.
Hey? Any of you lot put a man in the cupboard?
No.
Well, somebody did.
He’s right, you know.
There you go.
Hey?
What’s all this?
Oh, him. He’s been lurking.
He looks a right lurker, doesn’t he?
You’re undressed. Where are your clothes?
Well, the old gentlemen, he borrowed them to go gambling at the Circ’.
-He’s gone to my club, has he? -Yeah. It’s all your fault.
-What? -Getting invites to gambling clubs.
He’s probably in the middle of some orgy by now.
Orgy!
-Yeah, but what about me? -You’re too old.
Encore du champagne, monsieur?
Oh, yeah. And I’ll have some more champagne as well.
Lord John McCartney, millionaire, lrish peer, filthy rich, of course.
I don’t know. He looks quite clean to me.
Try to act with a bit of decorum. This is a posh place.
We know how to behave. We’ve had lessons.
I’m sorry, sir, members and invited guests only.
Aye, well, uh….
I’m with them. I’m Ringo’s sister.
-Have you got a little old man here? -Do you mean Lord McCartney?
He’s at it again. I’m his grandfather. I mean….
It must be the dolly floor show.
Put me down!
Who are these ruffians?
Before you go, gentlemen, there’s the little matter of the bill.
I’ll take care of that.
-A hundred and eighty pounds?! -I beg your pardon, guineas.
Your winnings, my Lord, one hundred and ninety pounds.
-What about me change? -Cloak room charge.
Ah, well, easy come, easy go.
Well?
Ah, the filthy Englander.
Keep boating, Tiny.
-Go on, George. -Don’t be ridiculous.
-But you said I could. -Me mind boggles at the very idea.
A grown man and you haven’t shaved with a safety razor.
It’s not my fault. I come from a long line of electricians.
-Well, you’re not practicing on me. -All right, then. But show us.
Come on, then.
Rule Britannia! Britannia, rule the–
Put your tongue away. It looks disgusting hanging there.
One slip of the razor and….
Henreich! Headphones!
Help!
Torpedoed again, eh?
The car’s waiting to take you to the studio. Where’s John?
In the bath.
All right, Lennon, let’s have you.
Come on, John, stop larking about.
John?
John? John?
What are you messing around with that boat for?
There’s a car waiting. Come on!
Ready, John? As soon as we draw up, open that door and straight in.
-Can’t be waiting much longer. -I knew they’d be late.
It’s your press conference.
Where have you been?
Give us a couple of shakes to get our breath.
Give us a shout when it’s over.
I have a suit just like him, you know.
This lot means it. They’re even taking hostages.
I don’t like the handkerchief. I have it in me trouser pocket.
You can’t blow your nose on it up there, can you, mister?
No, you can’t.
I’ve always liked that question.
I never notice his nose till about six months ago.
Me mother asked me before we left for America if we wanted any sandwiches.
And when I plugged her in she just blew up.
Tell me, how did you find America?
Turn left at Greenland.
-Has success changed your life? -Yes.
I’d like to keep Britain tidy.
Are you a mod or a rocker?
Um, no. I’m a mocker.
Have you any hobbies?
No, actually we’re just good friends.
Do you think these haircuts have come to stay?
Well, this one has, you know, it’s stuck on good and proper now.
Frightfully nice.
-What would you call that hairstyle? -Arthur.
No, actually we’re just good friends.
Yours are brown, aren’t they?
What do you call that collar?
Oh, a collar.
-Do you often see your father? -No, actually we’re just good friends.
How do you like your girlfriends to dress?
That was a drag. I’m starving.
-Didn’t even get a jam butty. Did you? -No.
Anything left?
We just finished, Pauly.
Hey, George, give us your John Henry on that picture.
-Look at that! -What’s there?
-It’s our set down there. -Should we go down and have a go?
-There’s trees and everything. -That’s a lot of fellows for one set.
-That’s not a tree. -It is.
It’s a bird.
Just passing through.
-Where are they? -On the stage. Down here.
Leave them drums alone.
Surely, I could have just a little touch.
You so much as breathe, I’m out on strike.
Aren’t you being rather arbitrary?
There you go. Hiding behind a smoke screen of bourgeois clichés.
I don’t go messing about with your earphones, do l?
Spoilsport.
Well.
He’s very fussy about his drums, you know. They loom large in his legend.
-What’s up? -He’s sulking again.
I’ll show him.
Pardon, Tiny. I’d like more drums there.
-I think it’s on the third bit. -It sounds like a cover.
On the third bit, more bang!
All right, let’s hear no more about it. You’re probably right.
Look.
If you think I’m unsuitable, let’s be open. I can’t stand backstage politics.
Aren’t you tending to black-and-white the situation somewhat?
Well, quite honestly, I wasn’t expecting a musical arranger…
…to question my ability picture- wise.
I could listen to him for hours.
What’s all this about a musical arranger?
Mr. McCartney, Sr.
Pauly, they’re trying to fob you off with this musical charlatan…
…but I gave him the test.
I’m quite happy to be replaced.
He’s a typical buck-passer.
-I won an award. -A likely story.
It’s on the wall in my office.
Hello, our lot. Everybody happy?
All right. If you don’t need them, I’ll lock them up in the dressing room.
Please do. I’ll not need them for half an hour. Thank you.
Get me a bottle of milk and some tranquilizers.
It’s a I see it all now. It’s a plot.
Tranquilizers.
Come on, I’ve got the key.
Come on, Ringo.
Come on.
Leslie Jackson?
I saw your father in the old Empire in 1 909.
If you’re as good as him, son, you’re all right.
Gear costume.
-Swap? -Cheeky.
Come on, lads. No messing about.
Lennon, put them girls down or I’ll tell your mother.
Stop messing about.
Stay in here until that rehearsal.
If I have to, I’ll put the key in the lock and turn it.
We’re out!
I suppose you realize this is private property.
Sorry we hurt your field, mister.
Not here. Hello, Dicky.
Probably gone to the canteen.
No, that’s too easy for Lennon.
He’s out there somewhere causing trouble, just to upset me.
You’re imagining it, letting it prey on your mind.
No, this is a battle of nerves between John and me.
John hasn’t got any.
-What? -Nerves.
No, that’s just the trouble.
I’ve toyed with the idea of a ball and chain…
…but he’d just rattle them at me.
Sometimes I think he enjoys seeing me suffer.
-Hello! -Hello.
-Don’t tell me you’re– -No, I’m not.
-You are. -I’m not.
I know you are.
I’m not, no.
-You look just like him. -Do l?
You’re the first one that’s said that, ever.
Yes, you do. Look.
No, my eyes are lighter. All right, Noddy.
-The nose. -Yes, your nose is, very.
-Is it? -I would have said so.
-You know him better. -He’s only a casual acquaintance.
-That’s what you say. -What have you heard?
-It’s all over the place. -Is it really?
But I wouldn’t have it. I stuck up for you.
-I knew I could rely on you. -Thanks.
You don’t look like him at all.
She looks more like him than I do.
There will be a full rehearsal in ten minutes.
Ten minutes from now, a full rehearsal.
There you are.
Sorry, I must have made a mistake.
No, you’re just late. Actually, I think he’ll be very pleased with you.
-Really? -You’re quite a feather in the cap.
I’ve got one.
I think so.
Yes, he can talk.
No, and I think you ought to see him.
All right.
Come on.
Sorry.
You don’t see many of these nowadays, do you?
Come on.
Simon, will this do?
Not bad, dolly, not really bad. Turn around, chicky baby.
He’s a definite poss. He’ll look good alongside Susan.
This will be quite painless. Don’t breathe on me, Adrian.
I’m terribly sorry, but there seems to be some sort of misunderstanding.
You can come off it with us.
Don’t do all the old adenoidal glottal stop and carry on for our benefit.
I’m afraid I don’t understand.
-My God, he’s a natural. -I told them not to send real ones.
They know by now, the phonies are much easier to handle.
Still, he’s a good type.
We’d like you to give us your opinion on some clothes for teenagers.
By all means, I’d be quite prepared for that eventuality.
Not your real opinion. You’ll learn it.
-Can he read? -Of course I can.
I mean lines. Can you handle lines?
I’ll have a bash.
Give him whatever it is they drink, a cokerama?
Ta.
At least he’s polite.
Show him the shirts. Adrian.
You’ll like these.
You’ll really dig them. They’re fab and all the other pimply hyperboles.
I wouldn’t be seen dead in them. They’re dead grotty.
-Grotty? -Yeah, grotesque.
Make a note of that word and give it to Susan.
It’s rather touching, really.
This kid is trying to give me his utterly valueless opinion…
…when I know that within a month…
…he’ll be suffering from a violent inferiority complex…
…and loss of status because he isn’t wearing one of these nasty things.
Of course they’re grotty, you wretched nit! That’s why they were designed.
-But that’s what you’ll want. -I won’t.
-You can be replaced, chicky baby. -I don’t care.
And that pose is out too, Sunny Jim.
The new thing is to care passionately and be right wing.
Anyway, if you don’t cooperate, you won’t meet Susan.
And who’s this Susan when she’s at home?
Only Susan Campey, our resident teenager.
You’ll have to love her. She’s your symbol.
You mean that posh bird who gets everything wrong?
I beg your pardon?
The lads frequently sit round the television and watch her for a giggle.
Once we wrote these letters saying how gear she was and all that rubbish.
She’s a trendsetter. It’s her profession.
She’s a drag. A well-known drag.
We turn the sound down on her and say rude things.
-Get him out of here. -Have I said something amiss?
He’s mocking the program’s image.
-Sorry about the shirts. -Get him out!
You don’t think he’s a new phenomenon, do you?
You mean an early clue to the new direction?
Where’s the calendar?
No. It’s all right. He’s just a troublemaker.
The change isn’t due for three weeks yet.
All the same, make a note not to extend Susan’s contract.
Let’s not take any unnecessary chances.
So I explained to my mommy he was a very clean man.
There’s no one here.
Where have they gone?
Surely, that’s wrong, isn’t it? Not you.
Get him out!
Someone’s coming! Quick, hide!
Stop being taller than me.
It’s not my fault.
Right on time.
-What are you doing here? -Hiding.
-You must be soft or something. -We weren’t hiding. We were resting.
I thought I told you lot to stay here.
When I say stay put, I mean stay put.
Don’t cane me, sir. I was led astray.
Shut up, John. They’re waiting for you in the studio.
Gear, I’m dying to do a bit of work.
God bless you, Ringo.
-Teacher’s pet. -Crawler.
-Betrayed the class, eh? -Lay off.
-Temper! -Well!
Get a move on, they’re waiting for you!
Sorry.
I now declare this bridge open.
Where are they?
Where are they?
Where are they?
They’re coming.
They’re coming. I promise you.
If they’re not on this floor in thirty seconds there’ll be trouble.
Understand me?
Trouble.
Standing about?
-Some people have it dead easy. -Once your over thirty, your past it.
It’s a young man’s medium. I just can’t stand the pace.
-As young as that, then? -I was.
There he goes. Look at him. Bet his wife doesn’t know about her.
If he’s got one. Look at his sweater.
You never know. She might have knitted it.
She knitted him.
Run through your number and try not to jiggle out of position.
Hello, three? Coming to you.
Three? Three? Coming to you. Three?
We are on three.
-What? -We’re on three.
Oh, yes.
Music.
Thank you. Very nice.
-Make-up? -Not really. They don’t need any.
-We’ll powder them off for the shine. -Yes.
Norm, take them down to Make-up and powder them off. The shine, you know.
Sure.
You blinked!
Your grandfather’s not talking to me. I think he’s got a sulk on.
It must be catching on. He’s given it to Ringo here.
-Stop picking on him. -I don’t need you to protect me.
Got a touch of the swine fever, haven’t you?
Come on, lads. Sit down.
This is impossible. We’ll never get them all done in time.
Then do us first. It doesn’t matter to them whether they’re made up or not.
By the way, what’s that?
My name’s Betty.
Do you want a punch up your frogged tunic?
John, behave yourself or I’ll murder you.
Shake, take that wig off. It suits you.
Ringo, what are you up to?
Page five.
You always fancied yourself as a guardsman, didn’t you?
“That this too too solid flesh would melt.”
You won’t interfere with the rugged concept of my personality, will you?
QUEEN
He’s reading “The Queen”. That’s an in-joke, you know.
It’s my considered opinion that you’re a bunch of sissies.
You’re just jealous.
Leave him alone, Lennon, or I’ll tell them all the truth about you.
-You wouldn’t. -I would, though.
Lookit, I thought I was supposed to be getting a change of scenery…
…and so far I’ve been in a train and a room…
…and a car and a room and a room and a room.
Maybe that’s all right for a bunch of powdered gewgaws like you.
But I’m feeling decidedly straight-jacketed.
What a clean old man.
Don’t press your luck.
He’s sex-obsessed. The older generation leading this country to galloping ruin.
What’s a pretty girl like you doing in a place like this?
They’re nearly ready for you, lads. Just finishing the band call.
I say, did you go to Harrod’s?
I was there in fifty-eight, you know.
-I can get you on the stage. -How?
Turn right at the corridor and go past the fireplace.
I don’t like yours.
Kids, I got an idea.
Why don’t we do the show right here?
Two, three, four.
Very good, that, George.
We’re trying.
-You’re trying. Let’s go. -That was great, lads.
You’ve got about an hour, but don’t leave the theater.
Where are you going, John?
She’s gonna show me her stamp collection.
So’s mine.
John, I’m talking to you.
This final run-through is important, understand? lmportant!
I want a cup of tea!
Shake?
I gotta adjust the decibels on the imbalance, Norm.
Clever. George?
Ringo, look after him, will you?
Aw, Norm!
Do I have to raise my voice?
All right. Come on, Granddad.
I’m a drummer, not a wet nurse. Why does it have to be me?
Look at him sitting there with his hooter scraping away at that book.
Well, what’s the matter with that?
Have you no natural resources of your own?
Have they even robbed you of that?
You can learn from books.
You can, can you?
Sheeps heads!
You could learn more by getting out there and living.
Out where?
Any old where!
But not our little Richard. Oh, no.
When you’re not thumping them pagan skins…
…you’re tormenting your eyes with that rubbish.
Books are good.
Parading’s better.
Parading?
Parading the streets…
…trailing your coat, bowling along, living!
-Well, I am living. -You? Living?
When was the last time you gave a girl a pink-edged daisy?
When did you last embarrass a sheila with your…
…cool appraising stare?
You’re a bit old for that sort of chat, aren’t you?
At least I’ve got a backlog of memories.
All you’ve got is that book!
Stop picking on me. You’re as bad as the rest of them.
So you are a man after all!
What’s that mean?
Do you think I haven’t noticed?
Do you think I wasn’t aware of the drift?
You poor, unfortunate scruff.
They’ve driven you into books with their cruel, unnatural treatment…
…exploiting your good nature.
I don’t know.
Sure, that lot’s never happier unless they’re jeering you.
Where’d they be without the steady support of your drum beat…
…that’s what I’d like to know.
Yeah, that’s right.
And what’s it all come to in the end?
Yeah, what’s in it for me?
A book.
Yeah, a blooming book!
When you could be out there betraying a rich American widow…
…or sipping palm wine in Tahiti before you’re too old like me.
Funny, being middle-aged and old…
…takes up most of your time, doesn’t it?
You’re only right.
Where are you going?
I’m going parading before it’s too late.
-Do you know what just happened to me? -No, I don’t.
Stop looking so scornful. It’s twisting your face.
Tell you about–
Here he is, the middle-aged boy wonder.
I thought you were looking after the old man.
We’ve only half an hour till the final run-through. He can’t walk out on us.
Can’t he? He’s done it, son.
-You know what happened? -We know.
-Your grandfather stirred him up. -He hasn’t.
Yeah, he filled his head with notions, seemingly.
The old mixer! Come on, we’ll have to put him right.
Can we have all dancers on stage for rehearsal, please?
Split up and look for him.
We’ve become a limited company.
I’ll look in here again.
WE BUY ANYTHING
-Hello, there. -Get out of it, Shorty.
You should have more sense than to go round chucking bricks about!
Southerner!
That’s my hoop! Stop playing with it!
That no hoop, it’s a lethal weapon. Have you got a license for it?
Don’t be so stroppy!
A boy your age bowling hoops at people.
-How old are you? -Eleven.
I bet you’re only ten and a half.
Ten and two-thirds.
There you are, then, and don’t be bowling people.
You can have it. I’m packing it in. It depresses me.
-You what? -It gets on me wick.
-Why aren’t you at school? -I’m a deserter.
Are you, now?
-I’ve blown school out. -Just you?
No. Ginger, Eddie Fallon and Ding Dong.
-Ding Dong bell, eh? -That’s right.
They were supposed to come with us, but they chickened.
They’re your mates?
-Not much cop without them, is it? -It’s all right.
What’re they like?
Ginger’s mad. He says things all the time.
-Eddie’s good at spitting and punching. -How about Ding Dong?
He fancies himself. It’s all right though, he’s one of the gang.
Why aren’t you at work?
I’m a deserter, too.
Charlie!
See you.
Come in, number seven, your time’s up!
I’m sorry, boys. I didn’t mean it, honest.
If he says that again, I’ll strike him.
They’re good lads. They’ll be back.
Yes, but we’ve only twenty minutes to the final run-through.
I meant no harm. I was trying to encourage Ringo to enjoy himself.
God knows what you’ve unleashed on the unsuspecting South.
It’ll be wine, women and song all the way when he gets the taste for it.
That was fresh this morning. Two and nine.
Right! On your way!
-You what? -You heard.
On your way, troublemaker.
Watch it!
-What? -Worry, will you?
That’s it, two minutes to the final run-through.
-They’re bound to miss it now. -I’ll murder that Lennon!
-We could survive a missed run-through. -As long as they head up for the show?
You’re right, I wouldn’t do to miss the show.
Shut up, cheerful.
You don’t think–
-Don’t worry. -They can’t do this to me!
It’s all your fault.
-Me? -Yes, it is.
If they don’t turn up, I wouldn’t be in your shoes–
For all the tea in China. Neither would l.
-You dirty traitor! -Well, of course.
Yes, of course.
-Did you want something? -I could eat the lot of you.
You’d look great with an apple in your gob.
Do you realize you could have missed the final run-through?
We’re sorry about that.
Norm? There’s only three of them.
We were looking for Ringo, but we realized he must have come back here.
Would you realize that we’re on the air…
…live, in front of an audience in 45 minutes and you’re one short?
Control yourself. He must be here somewhere.
We’ll look in the dressing room.
Yes, to the dressing rooms.
Where’s me grandfather?
-He can look after himself. -I suppose so.
Personally signed and hand-written by your own sweet boys!
The chance of a lifetime!
Be the envy of your less fortunate sisters!
Me photos! Where’s me hat?
Break it up! Move up!
Come on, move along.
Why don’t you go?
-Will you just move along? -They’ll take you apart if you stay.
I’ll have the law on you!
Let’s take you in.
Thank you.
Got you! You nasty little person, you.
You what?
I’m Ringo Starr! I’ve got a show to do. I’m on in a few minutes.
You’ve got to let me go. I’m Ringo!
That’s what they all say.
I don’t care who you are. You can save that for the stipendiary.
Here you are, Sarge.
-What is he? -I’ve got a little list here.
“Wandering abroad, malicious intent, acting in a suspicious manner…
…conduct liable to cause a breach of the peace.”
-You name it, he’s done it. -A little savage, is he?
-A proper little aborigine. -I demand to see my solicitor.
What’s his name?
If you’re going to get technical about it.
It’s going to be one of those nights, is it?
Sit Charlie Peace down over there.
You got me here, so do your worst!
But by God, I’ll take one of you with me.
I know your game!
You’ll get me into tiled room and then out come the rubber hoses!
There’s a fire, is there?
You ugly, great brute!
You have sadism stamped all over your bloated British kisser!
I’ll go on hunger strike!
I know your caper.
The kidney punch and the rabbit-clout…
…and the size twelve boot ankle-tap.
What’s he on about?
I’m a soldier of the Republic!
You’ll need a mahogany truncheon on this boy-o.
A nation once again
A nation once again
Get Lloyd George over there next to the mechanic in the cloth cap…
…and I’ll sort this lot out.
Come on, Dad. Sit down over here.
Ringo, me old scout, they grabbed your leg for the iron too.
I’m not exactly a voluntary patient.
Have they roughed you up yet? -What?
They’re a desperate crew of drippings and they’ve fists like matured hams…
…for pounding poor, defenseless lads like you.
One of us has got to escape. I’ll get the boys.
-Hold on, son, I’ll be back for you. -For me?
And if they get you on the floor, watch out for your brisket.
They seem all right to me.
That’s what they want you to think. All coppers are villains.
Would you two like a cup of tea?
You see? Sly villains.
No, thank you, Mister Sergeant, sir.
No, not for me. Please, don’t.
So you just brought the old chap out of the crowd for his own good?
He was getting a bit nasty, so we had to bring him in.
He can’t stop here.
This is the stuff he’s been hawking round?
-Yes, Sarge. Photographs. -Photographs.
Well, son, it’s now or never.
Johnny McCartney will give you a run for your threepence ha’penny!
You forgot your photographs.
Only half an hour and you’re on.
-Can I say something? -Yes, anything.
It seems highly unlikely we’ll be on.
I mean, the law of averages are against it.
If you could get the juggler on with a couple more clubs…
…that would fill in a bit of time.
You can’t go in here.
I’ll have the hides of you lot.
You ought to be ashamed of yourself. Go home.
-I must see Pauly. -Go home and see him on the telly.
-Can you fix him for me? -Yeah.
Sixpence.
-Each. -In advance.
Mercenaries.
It’s all right. Leave him alone.
What’s happening here?
Paul, where are you?
Granddad, where’s Ringo?
The police have the poor, unfortunate lad in the Bridewell.
-The police station! -He’ll be pulp by now.
-Go get him! -We’ll get him. We’ll fix it, Norm.
We’ve only got twenty minutes.
What is all this?
Hold on until we get our breath.
Are you all right now?
Yeah.
-Yeah? -See you.
Quick, follow them!
I’d have to laugh even when they kick the stool away.
Lads! You’re back, thank goodness. Where’s Ringo?
-There he is. We got him. -Great!
If you hadn’t come back it would have meant…
…the epilogue or the news in Welsh for life.
Aren’t you supposed to be in that box?
Where’s the old mixer?
Here, Pauly.
I’ve got a few words to say to you, two-faced John McCartney.
Leave him alone. He’s back, isn’t he? It’s not his fault he’s old.
What’s old got to do with it? He’s a troublemaker and a mixer.
You’re right, but he’s only asking for attention.
Your trouble is you should have gone west to America.
You would have been a senior citizen of Boston.
You took a wrong turn and you’re a lonely old man from Liverpool.
Well, I’m clean.
Are you?
-Norm? -What?
-I’ve been thinking, it’s not my fault. -What isn’t?
I’m not taller than you are. You’re smaller than I am.
Anyone at home?
Shake, where’s me boot?
-Will you get us some tea? -All right.
Lads, get changed. We’re going out in five minutes.
I’ve got the stuff. Come on, lads.
Aren’t we going–
The office thinks it’s best if we go to Wolverhampton straight away.
-Tonight? We’ll never make it. -You’ve got a midnight matinee.
There’s only one thing I’ve got to say to you, John Lennon.
-What? -You’re a swine.
Come on, you’re hanging up the parade!
Get rid of those things.

SCOREBOOK LIVE STORY by Nate Olson: “Bryant (Arkansas) football coach Buck James leaving for league rival Conway”

Bryant Hornet Head Coach Buck James

“Jerry ‘Buck’ James 

Bryant (Arkansas) football coach Buck James leaving for league rival Conway

James departs in the midst of a 53-game in-state win streak and a run of five Class 7A state championships

By Nate Olson | Photo by Tommy Land 

The dominant Bryant High School football program has lost two key cogs over the past week and Tuesday in a stunning turn of events lost the head coach who took the program to historic heights.

The Bryant School District confirmed in a statement Tuesday morning that head coach Buck James has resigned his post and is taking the open job at league rival Conway High School. The Wampus Cats began looking for a replacement this month when former head coach Keith Fimple took the Springdale athletic director job.

James’ bombshell comes on the heels of rising senior quarterback Gideon Motes, last year’s state championship game MVP and a University of Arkansas baseball commit, announcing he is giving up football to stay healthy for baseball and four-star defensive end TJ Lindsey announcing he is playing his senior season at the prestigious IMG Academy.

James finishes his seven-year tenure at Bryant with an 80-9 mark. The Hornets were 12-0 last season, marking the third time he helped the Hornets to an unblemished record. Bryant currently rides a 53-game in-state win streak. The only team to beat them since a league loss to North Little Rock in 2017 is Longview (Texas), which held on to knock them off 24-21 in 2021. That loss snapped a 32-game win streak.

James takes over a Wampus Cats program that he has been a thorn in the side of, never losing to the league rival in his tenure at BHS. In 2021, Bryant trailed by double-digits in the second half at Conway but pulled out a dramatic win to seal the 7A-Central Conference championship. Last season, James and Bryant beat Conway twice – 34-16 in the regular season and 42-21 in the 7A state playoff semifinals.

The Wampus Cats have been one of the top teams in Class 7A the past three seasons, qualifying for the state playoff semifinals those years — losing to Bryant twice. Conway, which finished 10-3 last season, was No. 3 in the final SBLive Arkansas Top 25 rankings and expected to be in the Top 5 when the preseason rankings are released in August.

Before the Bryant news, the Hornets would have been a favorite to repeat as conference champions with Cabot, which finished second in the Top 25 and beat Conway last season, and the Wampus Cats fighting for the No. 2 spot.

Major change was already expected on the coaching staff and in the Bryant athletic department as longtime athletic director Mike Lee announced he was taking a maintenance supervisor job with the South Conway School District. His last day in Bryant is June 30. Bryant named offensive coordinator and longtime James confidant Kirk Bock as the Lee’s replacement. Later, defensive coordinator Quad Sanders took the Jonesboro High School head-coaching job. James was reportedly promoting current assistants to fill those key vacancies.

James, who is a University of Arkansas at Monticello Hall of Fame football player, began his career at Star City and moved to Camden Fairview, where he won a 5A state championship in 2012 with the Cardinals after losing to Greenwood in the 2010 title game. After briefly serving as the offensive line coach and assistant athletic director at Little Rock Christian, he was hired by his former professional baseball scouting colleague, Lee, at Bryant in 2015.

After promising parents a state title at the initial meeting at the school, he had BHS in the state playoff semifinals for the first time in school history in a 9-4 debut season in 2016. After another state semifinals loss in 2017, the Hornets embarked on their run of five consecutive state titles.

In 2018, Bryant jumped to a big early lead on North Little Rock only to lose that game, 34-28. Bryant beat North Little Rock a few weeks later in the 7A state championship game, 27-7, and hasn’t lost to an in-state opponent since that late October 2018 game at North Little Rock.

Midway through his tenure, James adopted the ‘212’ mantra. Water is only hot at 211 degrees but with the extra degree at 212, it boils. That has become a rallying cry for his program and, overall, for the commuter town just outside of Little Rock. It is common to see ‘212’ on T-shirts, store windows, car windows and even scrawled on trashcans at the Hornet Stadium. It is perhaps fitting that James will end his Bryant career with an overall record of 212-37

Hornets hold off Cabot on homecoming

The No. 1 Hornets (7-0, 5-0) found themselves in a dog fight Friday in front of a standing-room-only homecoming crowd as No. 2 Cabot (6-2, 4-1) strolled into Hornet Stadium looking for an upset.

Searching for their 49th straight win over an Arkansas team, the Hornets held down the fort for the 24-10 victory, scoring the second fewest points in a game this season.

“When we played good on first down, we were able to stop them,” said Head Coach Buck James. “It was a great game. My hat is off to Cabot. They have a great offense and were very good on defense. It was a good, hard-fought win.”

Bryant’s 10 points allowed is the highest of the year.

Beginning with the ball, Bryant’s first series was uneventful as the Hornets went three-and-out with a punt.

Cabot, though, would run more than 7 minutes off the clock on its first series, going 88 yards in 14 plays. The Panthers capped their impressive drive with a 1-yard TD on the quarterback keep from Abe Owen.

Cabot led 7-0 with 2:32 left in the quarter.

The score would stand after one, marking the first time Bryant was held off the scoreboard in the first 12 minutes of any game this season.

Bryant, though, would get things together on its second drive of the game, going 79 yards in 11 plays as running back James Martin ended the series with a 5-yard TD run.

Following swapped punts, Cabot would commit the first turnover of the game as Bryant star linemen TJ Lindsey hit Owen for the sack and fumble. Tyler Mosely would recover, setting the Hornets up nicely at the Cabot 36 with 6:42 to go in the half.

Bryant would not be able to get much, going as far as the Panthers 18 before sending Stephen Fuller on for the 35-yard field goal.

The good kick would make it 10-7 with 5:07 left in the half.

Neither team would add to the scoreboard as the game remained in the Hornets favor heading into the break.

Receiving the ball and searching for some momentum, the Panthers put together an impressive drive, but would stall at their own 44 before punting.

Bryant, too, would get something going after it looked like a quick three-and-out. However, a roughing the punter call would give Bryant new life. Nonetheless, it would all go for naught as quarterback Jordan Walker threw his only interception of the game moments later.

With both defenses playing well, the game would go into the final quarter still at 10-7 Hornets.

But Cabot would made things interesting in the fourth, tying the contest at 10-10 thanks to a 21-yard field goal off the boot of Kade Martin.

The drive was powered by a long 41-yard reception by Hayes Cox, taking the Panthers to the Bryant 17. After getting as close as the 2, Cabot would meet the Hornets impressive front three straight times before kicking the tying field goal.

With the ball at its own 20, Bryant would march 80 yards on nine plays as Walker kept it from 2 yards and the score. Bryant would lead 17-10 with 5:03 left in the game.

Receiver Mytorian Singleton made the biggest play of the drive, collecting a 27-yard pass for a first down on third-and-4.

Cabot had its chances still, but an interception from Owen to Bryant’s Bryson Adamoh all but ended the upset bid.

Bryant would add another score, this time a 26-yard pass from Walker to Cason Trickey, making it 24-10 Hornets.

Time would run out on Cabot as the Hornets moved closer to another 7A Central title with only two games remaining on the regular-season schedule.

Both teams combined to throw 51 times in the contest.

Walker finished 16 for 20 for 160 yards and a score.

Owen, who carried the Panthers most of the night, ended 16 for 30 for 183 yards and an interception.

On the ground, Martin paced Bryant with big runs on first and second down, finishing with 54 yards and a score on 14 carries. Chris Gannaway, too, ran well, going for 30 on six carries in the win.

“I thought James and Chris both played well. When we got loose, we were able to move the ball,” James said. “When we ran it well, we could throw it well and move the football.”

Martin would give his team and the crowd a scare in the fourth as he came up lame on a play before being helped to the sideline. James, though, said his running back was “running around after the game,” and seems to be fine.

Bryant had a big name in the house on homecoming. Arkansas Head Coach Sam Pittman walked the Bryant sidelines. Pittman was reportedly in town to watch Lindsey.

The senior defensive standout finished his night with 2.5 sacks, a number of quarterback hurries and tackles and a pass breakup on the final snap of the game. Lindsey leads Saline County in tackles for loss.

“He played well,” James said. “I was proud of him. We have been looking for that kind of game out of him and he answered in a big way.”

The Hornets will take to the road likely for the last time next week as they take on rival North Little Rock — the last in-state team to defeat the Hornets (2018).

“It is going to be a big challenge,” James said. “They play us hard. I think it is going to be a tough game. I think every game we play from here on out is going to be tough.”

Kickoff is set for 7 p.m.

North Little Rock took down Fort Smith Northside on Friday, winning 38-14.

Bryant also has Conway remaining on the schedule in Week 10. Conway sits at 7-1 overall and 4-1 in conference play after downing Central 49-0 on Friday. Both teams will battle under the lights of Hornet Stadium in Week 10.


2014 Salt Bowl

salt-bowl-benton-vs-bryant

My Hornets came up short on winning the Salt Bowl this year but they played hard and another crowd of 25,000 showed up to see the game!!!!

SALT BOWL Benton 14, Bryant 14

Benton, Bryant solve nothing

By Jeff Reed Special to the Democrat-Gazette

This article was published September 6, 2014 at 2:55 a.m.

bentons-drew-harris-2-tries-to-run-past-bryant-defensive-back-steven-murdock-during-the-panthers-14-14-tie-with-the-hornets-on-friday-at-war-memorial-stadium-in-little-rock

Benton’s Drew Harris (2) tries to run past Bryant defensive back Steven Murdock during the Panthers’ 14-14 tie with the Hornets on Friday at War Memorial Stadium in Little Rock.

No one carried the Salt Bowl Trophy home Friday night.

Saline County rivals Benton and Bryant battled to a 14-14 tie in a game that featured an emotional final few minutes in front of a crowd of 24,816 at War Memorial Stadium.

Benton, which had lost eight consecutive to its I-30 rivals, had the last gasp, but Casey Maertens’ pass to the goal line was intercepted by Steven Murdock, who returned it to the 30 as time ran out.

Benton’s final possession was set up when Stone Paul intercepted Gunnar Burks at the Panthers 40 with 1:37 left.

Benton’s offense got moving on a face-guarding penalty, then a 15-yard pass to Drew Harris to set up first-down at the Hornets 42 with 35 seconds left.

A completion to Sam Baker gained 5 yards, but the Panthers were out of timeouts ended up with a desperation heave to the end zone on the final play.

Benton tied the score 14-14 on Drew Harris’ 6-yard run and Grant Hinze’s extra point with 2:48 left in the half.

Benton did not allow Bryant inside the Benton 40 in the final 24 minutes.

The Panthers’ best second-half drive ended inside the Bryant 10 when Drew Tipton deflected a pass and teammate Kyle Lovelace intercepted with 6:46 left in the third quarter.

Benton went up 7-0 on its first drive, but Bryant scored on consecutive possessions to take the lead.

Kylon Boyle completed a 27-yard scoring drive on a 6-yard run with 8:38 left in the half. Ben Bruick’s interception and 43-yard return set up the drive. Alex Denker kicked the extra point for the 14-7 lead.

Benton drove 68 yards in 8 plays on its first possession, with Maertens hitting Casey Green with a 14-yard scoring pass with 8:46 left in the first quarter. Hinze hit the extra point.

Boyle’s 3-yard run with 33 seconds left in the first quarter tied the game. The score was set up by a 33-yard scramble by Brandan Warner to the 3. Denker kicked the extra point for a 7-7 score.

Sports on 09/06/2014

Print Headline: Benton, Bryant solve nothing

Related posts:

Outland Trophy winner Barrett Jones comes to Fayetteville for second time

Two years ago Barrett Jones and his Alabama Crimson Tide teammates came to Fayetteville and left town with a hard fought come from behind victory. This year things look a little easier on the front end at least. I wrote an article last year about Barrett and I just wrote one today and they both were […]

Barrett Jones of Alabama

FR111446 AP Alabama Coach Nick Saban speaks to the media at the Southeastern Conference NCAA college football media days in Hoover, Ala. on Thursday, July 19, 2012. (AP Photo/Butch Dill) ___________ Yesterday I talked about Alabama in the SEC football preview and I today I am profiling their best player. I really respect Barrett Jones […]

Barrett Jones and Tim Tebow are very similar

For   Barrett Jones is a Tim Tebow type of person and I am glad that people like Jones and Tebow are not ashamed of their Savior Jesus Christ. They don’t try to live two lives, one in church and one that is different in the lockerroom. Barrett Jones is the 2011 Outland Trophy winner […]

Barrett Jones wins Outland Trophy

Knoxnews.com reports: LAKE BUENA VISTA, Fla. (AP) — Alabama’s Barrett Jones has won the Outland Trophy as the nation’s most outstanding interior lineman. The announcement was made during the College Football Awards show at Disney World. Stanford’s David DeCastro and Penn State’s Devon Still were the other finalists. Jones is the third Alabama player to […]

Barrett Jones of Alabama Crimson Tide (Part 1 of series “Christians in Athletics”)

Today I am starting a new series called “Christians in Athletics.”  Barrett Jones grew up under the ministry of Adrian Rogers at Bellevue. Below is a clip from the Memorial Service for Dr. Rogers.   Barrett Jones of Alabama Crimson Tide has spent time the last two years ministering to earthquake victims in Haiti. Actually […]

MUSIC MONDAY The Beatles albums ranked Part 2 “The White Album” (1968)

___________

_—

The Beatles albums ranked

The Beatles discography ranked

It’s difficult to have the albums created by the most important band in the history of music ranked from worst to best. After all, it’s unlikely that you’ll find any band or musical artist unwilling to share their admiration for the Fab Four. Their fingerprints are over everything created in popular music.

The Liverpool quartet recorded albums at a significant pace between 1963 and 1970. Many of these are classics that redefined what pop-rock could be. Most of these are tremendously experimental, adventurous affairs.

Still, which one’s the best? Is there any one album worth avoiding?

I’ve looked at the evidence and listened to the whole discography once more, and I think that I have an answer or two.

For simplicity’s sake, I have only included official UK releases. That means that the early US-released records aren’t on here. Neither are compilations such as “Anthology,” “Rarities,” or “Hey Jude.” “Yellow Submarine” is included as it included mostly unreleased material and was crafted as a studio album.

With this in mind, here’s a quick initiation into the musical world created by John, Paul, George, and Ringo, The Beatles albums ranked.

2. “The White Album” (1968)

This was The Beatles’ ninth album. It’s the record on which The Beatles’ confidence reached its peak.

They could tackle any style, present themselves in any way they wanted, and… often record songs separately from the other band members.

Most importantly, this zig-zagging through musical interests is happening while they are undoubtedly the biggest band on the planet. Many of the songs on the album were written during The Beatles’ visit to Rishikesh, India. Here, in 1968, they studied meditation and yoga at the Maharishi Mahesh Yogi’s ashram.

The album features a diverse mix of genres, including rock, pop, folk, country, blues, and experimental music. This diversity is reflected in the album’s songwriting, which features contributions from all four members.

Ringo Starr sings on the carefree “Don’t Pass Me By” and “Good Night.” He also gets a rare songwriting credit on the former.

George Harrison contributes the marvelous “While My Guitar Gently Weeps,” the silly “Piggies,” and “Long, Long, Long.”

John Lennon is finding ways to balance his interest in politics, Oriental philosophy, and modern artist and future love interest, Yoko Ono.

On “Revolution 1,” the song’s lyrics express Lennon’s ambivalence about political revolution and call for people to find their own personal revolutions. On “Revolution 9” plays with Musique concrète. And, on “Julia,” he provides one of the most beautiful, earnest testimonies of love and loss.

Paul McCartney contributes a number of songs to The Beatles’ self-titled album. “Martha My Dear” and “I Will” are as tender as you’d expect. Meanwhile, however, “Helter Skelter” and “Honey Pie” are bizarre proto-hard-rockers.

There’s a lot to choose from here. So many songs came during these writing sessions that, for example, McCartney’s “Hey Jude,” ended up being released as a non-album single.

“Blackbird” is a gentle, acoustic guitar-based song inspired by the civil rights movement in the United States. “Mother Nature’s Son” is a folk-influenced song inspired by Donovan’s hippiesque fantasies.

Overall, McCartney matches Lennon every step of the way. In fact, many of the records’ songs could be interpreted as scenes of a friendly rivalry between pop-rock’s best writers of that period.

Could this album have been edited down to a single record? Sure! Still, the public would’ve lost a lot if that had happened.

You may be interested in links to the other posts I have done on the Beatles and you can click on the link below: FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE PART 288, LINKS TO 3 YEARS OF BEATLES POSTS (March of 2015 to Feb of 2018) Featured artist is Mark Dion

DAY TRIPPING: THE 10 DRUGGIEST BEATLES SONGS

1

‘Strawberry Fields Forever’

From 1967 Single

‘Strawberry Fields Forever’ has become synonymous with John Lennon. The portion of New York’s Central Park where fans celebrate his memory is named for the 1967 song — a giant psychedelic leap forward for a band that had been holding girls’ hands and loving them eight days a week just a few years prior. The song gets its drippy, droney melody from then-futuristic Mellotron keyboard, and it features absurdest lyrics that at one point place the narrator in a “tree” he figures “must be high or low.” There’s no “or” there, buddy. You’re just high.

Read More: Day Tripping: The 10 Druggiest Beatles Songs | https://diffuser.fm/druggiest-beatles-songs/?utm_source=tsmclip&utm_medium=referral

2

‘Tomorrow Never Knows’

From ‘Revolver’

“Turn off your mind, relax, and float downstream / It is not dying.” That’s how the Beatles’ ‘Tomorrow Never Knows,’ on 1966’s ‘Revolver,’ kicks off. It’s the “This is your captain speaking” moment, delivered by Capt. John of the Airship High. Yes, folks, you’re eight miles high, flying at an altitude unknown to your parents — your head is spinning right ’round like a record on your friend’s sofa, your eyes following the needle as it creates a strange, warm, crackling sound in the black groove on the circular disc that’s turning, turning, turning. This was a new sound to say the least, and all these years later, it still has the power to amaze.

https://youtu.be/pHNbHn3i9S4

Read More: Day Tripping: The 10 Druggiest Beatles Songs | https://diffuser.fm/druggiest-beatles-songs/?utm_source=tsmclip&utm_medium=referral

Capitol/Parlophone
3

‘Lucy in the Sky With Diamonds’

Lennon always claimed ‘Lucy in the Sky With Diamonds’ has nothing to do with LSD (or Lysergic Acid Diethylamide), and that it was his son that came up with the idea for the song’s title. But come on — this ‘Sgt. Pepper’s’ classic is obviously about psychedelic drug use. No sober person could have written something this bizarre. It’d be like asking Salvador Dalí to paint a watercolor of a house and a yard with a lemon-yellow sun. Not gonna happen.

Read More: Day Tripping: The 10 Druggiest Beatles Songs | https://diffuser.fm/druggiest-beatles-songs/?utm_source=tsmclip&utm_medium=referral

The Beatles call for the legalisation of marijuana

A full-page advertisement appeared in The Times newspaper on this day, signed by 64 of the most prominent members of British society, which called for the legalisation of marijuana. Among the signatories were The Beatles and Brian Epstein.

Advertisement calling for the legalisation of marijuana, The Times, 24 July 1967

The advertisement was instigated as a response to the nine-month prison sentence for possession received on 1 June 1967 by John Hopkins, founder of International Times, the UFO Club and the 24 Hour Technicolour Dream. The following day an emergency meeting was held at the Indica Bookshop, during which Steve Abrams of drug-research organisation SOMA suggested bringing the issue into public debate by running a full-page advertisement.

Abrams agreed to organise the signatures, but the question of financing the advertisement proved temporarily problematic. None of The Beatles were present at the Indica, but the bookshop’s co-owner Barry Miles telephoned Paul McCartney, who agreed to finance the advertisement.

On 3 June Miles and Abrams visited McCartney’s house in Cavendish Avenue. McCartney listened to the plans, told Abrams that all The Beatles and Epstein would put their names to it, and told them how to contact the rest of the group for their signatures.

On 23 July, the day before publication, the ad was mentioned in The Sunday Times’ Atticus column, written by Philip Oates. Behind the scenes, however, The Times’ advertising manager, R Grant Davidson, nervously insisted on checking that all the people had indeed agreed for their names to be associated with the article.

Davidson also insisted on advance payment. Steve Abrams contacted Peter Brown at Brian Epstein’s office, and shortly afterwards received a personal cheque for £1,800 made out to The Times. At the time the amount was twice the average annual wage.

Although McCartney had wanted to keep the funding a secret, in fear of negative publicity, it soon proved impossible. The day after the advertisement appeared, the information appeared in the Evening Standard’s Londoner’s Diary.

Within a week of its appearance, the advertisement led to questions being asked in the House of Commons, and began a public debate which eventually led to liberalisation in the laws against cannabis use in Britain.

ADVERTISEMENT
This advertisement is sponsored by SOMA*
The law against marijuana is immoral in principle and unworkable in practice.

“All laws which can be violated without doing anyone any injury are laughed at. Nay, so far are they from doing anything to control the desires and passions of man that, on the contrary, they direct and incite men’s thoughts toward these very objects; for we always strive toward what is forbidden and desire the things we are not allowed to have. And men of leisure are never deficient in the ingenuity needed to enable them to outwit laws framed to regulate things which cannot be entirely forbidden. …He who tries to determine everything by law will foment crime rather than lessen it.”- Spinoza

The herb Cannabis sativa, known as ‘Marihuana’ or ‘Hashish’, is prohibited under the Dangerous Drugs Act (1965). The maximum penalty for smoking cannabis is ten years’ imprisonment and a fine of £1,000. Yet informed medical opinion supports the view that cannabis is the least harmful of pleasure-giving drugs, and is, in particular, far less harmful than alcohol. Cannabis is non-addictive, and prosecutions for disorderly behaviour under its influence are unknown.

The use of cannabis is increasing, and the rate of increase is accelerating. Cannabis smoking is widespread in the universities, and the custom has been taken up by writers, teachers, doctors, businessmen, musicians, scientists, and priests. Such persons do not fit the stereotype of the unemployed criminal dope fiend. Smoking the herb also forms a traditional part of the social and religious life of hundreds of thousands of immigrants to Britain.

A leading article in The Lancet (9 November, 1963) has suggested that it is “worth considering … giving cannabis the same status as alcohol by legalising its import and consumption … Besides the undoubted attraction of reducing, for once, the number of crimes that a member of our society can commit, and of allowing the wider spread of something that can give pleasure, a greater revenue would certainly come to the State from taxation than from fines. …Additional gains might be the reduction of inter-racial tension, as well as that between generations.”

The main justification for the prohibition of cannabis has been the contention that its use leads to heroin addiction. This contention does not seem to be supported by any documented evidence, and has been specifically refuted by several authoritative studies. It is almost certainly correct to state that the risk to cannabis smokers of becoming heroin addicts is far less than the risk to drinkers of becoming alcoholics.

Cannabis is usually taken by normal persons for the purpose of enhancing sensory experience. Heroin is taken almost exclusively by weak and disturbed individuals for the purpose of withdrawing from reality. By prohibiting cannabis Parliament has created a black market where heroin could occasionally be offered to persons who would not otherwise have had access to it. Potential addicts, having found cannabis to be a poor escape route, have doubtless been tempted to try heroin; and it is probable that their experience of the harmlessness and non-addictive quality of cannabis has led them to underestimate the dangers of heroin. It is the prohibition of cannabis, and not cannabis itself, which may contribute to heroin addiction.

The present system of controls has strongly discouraged the use of cannabis preparations in medicine. It is arguable that claims which were formerly made for the effectiveness of cannabis in psychiatric treatment might now bear re-examination in the light of modern views on drug therapy; and a case could also be made out for further investigation of the antibiotic properties of cannabidiolic acid, one of the constituents of the herb. The possibility of alleviating suffering through the medical use of cannabis preparations should not be dismissed because of prejudice concerning the social effects of ‘drugs’.

The Government ought to welcome and encourage research into all aspects of cannabis smoking, but according to the law as it stands no one is permitted to smoke cannabis under any circumstances, and exceptions cannot be made for scientific and medical research. It is a scandal that doctors who are entitled to prescribe heroin, cocaine, amphetamines and barbiturates risk being sent to prison for personally investigating a drug which is known to be less damaging than alcohol or even tobacco.

A recent leader in The Times called attention to the great danger of the “deliberate sensationalism” which underlies the present campaign against ‘drugs’ and cautioned that: “Past cases have shown what can happen when press, police and public all join in a manhunt at a moment of national anxiety”. In recent months the persecution of cannabis smokers has been intensified. Much larger fines and an increasing proportion of unreasonable prison sentences suggest that, the crime at issue is not so much drug abuse as heresy.

The prohibition of cannabis has brought the law into disrepute and has demoralized police officers faced with the necessity of enforcing an unjust law. Uncounted thousands of frightened persons have been arbitrarily classified as criminals and threatened with arrest, victimisation and loss of livelihood. Many of them have been exposed to public contempt in the courts, insulted by uninformed magistrates and sent to suffer in prison. They have been hunted down with Alsatian dogs or stopped on the street at random and improperly searched. The National Council for Civil Liberties has called attention to instances where drugs have apparently been ‘planted’ on suspected cannabis smokers. Chief Constables have appealed to the public to inform on their neighbours and children. Yet despite these gross impositions and the threat to civil liberties which they pose the police freely admit that they have been unable to prevent the spread of cannabis smoking.

Abuse of opiates, amphetamines and barbiturates has become a serious national problem, but very little can be done about it so long as the prohibition of cannabis remains in force. The police do not have the resources or the manpower to deal with both cannabis and the dangerous drugs at the same time. Furthermore prohibition provides a potential breeding ground for many forms of drug abuse and gangsterism. Similar legislation in America in the ‘twenties brought the sale of both alcohol and heroin under the control of an immensely powerful criminal conspiracy which still thrives today. We in Britain must not lose sight of the parallel.


MEDICAL OPINION

“There are no lasting ill-effects from the acute use of marihuana and no fatalities have ever been recorded. … The causal relationship between these two events (marihuana smoking and heroin addiction) has never been substantiated. In spite of the once heated interchanges among members of the medical profession and between the medical profession and law enforcement officers there seems to be a growing agreement within the medical community, at least, that marihuana does not directly cause criminal behaviour, juvenile delinquency, sexual excitement, or addiction.”
Dr. J. H. Jaffe, in The Pharmacological Basis of Therapeutics, L. Goodman and A. Gillman, Eds., 3rd Ed. 1965

“Certain specific myths require objective confrontation since otherwise they recurrently confuse the issue, and incidentally divert the energy and attention of police and customs and immigration authorities in directions which have very little to do with the facts and much more to do with prejudiced beliefs. The relative innocence of marijuana by comparison with alcohol is one such fact, its social denial a comparable myth.”
Dr. David Stafford-Clark, Director of Psychological Medicine, Guy’s Hospital. The Times, 12 April 1967.

“Marijuana is not a drug of addiction and is, medically speaking, far less harmful than alcohol or tobacco … It is generally smoked in the company of others and its chief effect seems to be an enhanced appreciation of music and colour and together with a feeling of relaxation and peace. A mystical experience of being at one with the universe is common, which is why the drug has been highly valued in Eastern religions. Unlike alcohol, marijuana does not lead to aggressive behaviour, nor is it aphrodisiac. There is no hangover, nor, so far as it is known, any deleterious physical effect.”
Dr. Anthony Storr, Sunday Times, 5 February 1967

“The available evidence shows that marijuana is not a drug of addiction and has no harmful effects … (the problem of marijuana) has been created by an ill-informed society rather than the drug itself.”
Guy’s Hospital Gazette, 17, 1965

“I think we can now say that marijuana does not lead to degeneration, does not affect the brain cells, is not habit-forming, and does not lead to heroin addiction.”
Dr James H. Fox, Director of the Bureau of Drug abuse Control, U.S. Food and Drug administration. Quoted Champaign, Illinois News-Gazette, 25 August 1966

“Cannabis is taken for euphoria, reduction of fatigue, and relief from tension, … (it) is a valuable pleasure-giving drug, probably much safer than alcohol.”
Dr. Joel Fort, Consultant on Drug Addiction to the World Health Organisation, Lecturer in School of Criminology, University of California. From Blum, Richard Ed., Utopiates 1965

“(Smoking cannabis) only occasionally is followed by heroin use, probably in those who would have become heroin addicts as readily without the marijuana.”
Dr L. Bender, Comprehens. Psychiat. 1963, 4, 181-94


The signatories to this petition suggest to the Home Secretary that he implement a five point programme of cannabis reform:
1 THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD PERMIT AND ENCOURAGE RESEARCH INTO ALL ASPECTS OF CANNABIS USE, INCLUDING ITS MEDICAL APPLICATIONS.
2 ALLOWING THE SMOKING OF CANNABIS ON PRIVATE PREMISES SHOULD NO LONGER CONSTITUTE AN OFFENCE.
3 CANNABIS SHOULD BE TAKEN OFF THE DANGEROUS DRUGS LIST AND CONTROLLED, RATHER THAN PROHIBITED, BY A NEW AD HOC INSTRUMENT.
4 POSSESSION OF CANNABIS SHOULD EITHER BE LEGALLY PERMITTED OR AT MOST BE CONSIDERED A MISDEMEANOUR, PUNISHABLE BY A FINE OF NOT MORE THAN ukp10 FOR A FIRST OFFENCE AND NOT MORE THAN ukp25 FOR ANY SUBSEQUENT OFFENCE.
5 ALL PERSONS NOW IMPRISONED FOR POSSESSION OF CANNABIS OR FOR ALLOWING CANNABIS TO BE SMOKED ON PRIVATE PREMISES SHOULD HAVE THEIR SENTENCES COMMUTED.

  1. Jonathan Aitken
  2. Tariq Ali
  3. David Bailey
  4. Humphrey Berkeley
  5. Anthony Blond
  6. Derek Boshier
  7. Sidney Briskin
  8. Peter Brook
  9. Dr. David Cooper
  10. Dr. Francis Crick, F.R.S.
  11. David Dimbleby
  12. Tom Driberg, M.P.
  13. Dr. Ian Dunbar
  14. Brian Epstein
  15. Dr. Aaron Esterson
  16. Peter Fryer
  17. John Furnival
  18. Tony Garnett
  19. Clive Goodwin
  20. Graham Greene
  21. Richard Hamilton
  22. George Harrison, M.B.E.
  23. Michael Hastings
  24. Dr. J.M. Heaton
  25. David Hockney
  26. Jeremy Hornsby
  27. Dr. S. Hutt
  28. Francis Huxley
  29. Dr. Brian Inglis
  30. The Revd. Dr. Victor E.S. Kenna, O.B.E.
  31. George Kiloh
  32. Herbert Kretzmer
  33. Dr. R.D. Laing
  34. Dr. Calvin Mark Lee
  35. John Lennon, M.B.E.
  36. Dr. D.M. Lewis
  37. Paul McCartney, M.B.E.
  38. David McEwen
  39. Alasdair MacIntyre
  40. Dr. O.D. Macrae-Gibson
  41. Tom Mashler
  42. Michael Abul Malik
  43. George Melly
  44. Dr. Jonathan Miller
  45. Adrian Mitchell
  46. Dr. Ann Mully
  47. P.H. Nowell-Smith
  48. Dr. Christopher Pallis
  49. John Piper
  50. Patrick Procktor
  51. John Pudney
  52. Alastair Reid
  53. L. Jeffrey Selznick
  54. Nathan Silver
  55. Tony Smythe
  56. Michael Schofield
  57. Dr. David Stafford-Clark
  58. Richard Starkey, M.B.E.
  59. Dr. Anthony Storr
  60. Kenneth Tynan
  61. Dr. W. Grey Walter
  62. Brian Walden, M.P.
  63. Michael White
  64. Pat Williams

DISCLAIMER – Signatures should in no way be taken to imply affiliation to SOMA or support of its aims or objectives.

*SOMA is applying for recognition as a company limited by guarantee with Charitable Trusts. It is being formed to examine without prejudice the scientific, medical, legal, moral, social, and philosophical aspects of heightened mental awareness, with special reference to the effects of pleasure-giving drugs. SOMA will sponsor research and discussion on the mechanisms, potentialities and dangers of heightened mental awareness and will publish its findings. Contributions can now be accepted. Cheques and postal orders should be made payable to SOMA, and sent to Michael Henshaw, Accountant, 20, Fitzroy Square, W.1.

______

The Walton Arts Center in Fayetteville, Arkansas, named after the Walton family for its donations, announced this month that it is no longer hosting drag shows and story hours for kids during the annual LGBTQ+ celebration, Northwest Arkansas Pride.

LGBTQ+ groups, accustomed to getting their way, are upset that the Walton Arts Center in Fayetteville, Arkansas, has pulled the plug on drag queen shows for children there. Pictured: The pro-family pushback is not limited to Arkansas. Opponents of drag queen story hours for kids gather March 11 outside of a bookshop in Royal Oak, Michigan, that was planning to host such events. (Photo: Jeff Kowalsky/AFP/Getty Images)

O’Sullivan’s First Law—named after former National Review editor John O’Sullivan, a one-time speechwriter for then-British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher—states that any institution that’s not explicitly right-wing will become left-wing over time.

The Walton Family Foundation has proved to be a prime example of that rule. For the past decade or more, second- and third-generation heirs of the Walmart fortune have funneled millions of dollarsinto LGBTQ+ initiatives in their home state of Arkansas.

But the recent decision of a Walton-funded institution suggests the foundation might be pumping the brakes on its slide into woke extremism.

The Walton Arts Center in Fayetteville, Arkansas, named after the Walton family for its donations, announced this month that it is no longer hosting drag shows and story hours for kids during the annual LGBTQ+ celebration, Northwest Arkansas Pride.

The LGBTQ+ advocacy group Northwest Arkansas Equality, also funded by the Waltons, sponsors that yearly “pride” celebration and the accompanying “Youth Zone” events at the arts center. Among other things, the “Youth Zone” featured drag queen story time for younger kids and drag shows for teens.

While it’s not clear what went on behind the scenes in the Walton Arts Center board discussions, it could be that it was some bad publicity that factored into the board’s decision.

“Due to the charged nationwide political conversations around drag and minors … , we asked if there was any way we could help NWA Pride reach its intended goals for the Youth Zone without drag performances for minors,” the board of directors explained in a May statement.

“Our concern was not simply around the physical safety surrounding these events, but the policy to not allow parents, guardians, and caregivers into the Youth Zone,” it later wrote.

That seemed like a reasonable concern, but Northwest Arkansas Equality didn’t think so. The group issued a statement calling the art center’s decision “surprising, disappointing, and inconsistent.” Yeah, not having a drag show for unaccompanied minors is really out of left field.

What’s more, the group stated, “These events have included performances by drag celebrities that youth can often only access through television and movies.” Oh, the horror. Kids really should be allowed to witness grown men prancing about in hooker-style costumes in person, preferably without adult supervision. But don’t worry, Northwest Arkansas Equality takes “great care to create age-appropriate content during this event.” Yes, an “age-appropriate” drag show for your child. That’s quite the assurance.

The arts center even tried to reach an agreementwith Northwest Arkansas Equality. The Walton Arts Center would still host “pride” events in June, just not drag story hours and performances by adults specifically for minors.

Northwest Arkansas Equality couldn’t accept any such compromise. The group decided to pause its partnership with the arts center and move its “kid-friendly” drag shows to the Fayetteville Town Center in June.

Seems like it got its way, right?

Not quite—apparently the Walton Arts Center committed such an egregious offense that a gaggle of protesters showed up May 20 and called for the CEO and other arts center executives to resign.

“WAC [Walton Arts Center] is wack. Let the drag queens act,” they chanted. “Say ‘no’ to bigots.” They forgot to add: “Let the drag queens act—in front of your kids.” But then the chant would’ve been less pithy.

As of Tuesday, nine of the 22 Walton Arts Center board members resigned as a result of the decision. One such member said that he “cannot in good conscience remain affiliated with an institution which refuses to acknowledge the harm it has caused to members of our community.”

The Walton Arts Center’s modest decision not to let drag queens perform in front of kids this year elicited reactions that defy all reason. The outrage is revealing: Those pushing for the “Youth Zone” didn’t care about creating a safe and welcoming environment for kids. The nine board members who have walked out thus far didn’t care. Had they cared, they would have reached some compromise with the arts center.

Don’t be fooled: This is about the explicit sexualization of minors. Nothing less.

Kudos to the Walton Arts Center for not yielding to this outrage. It’s a small victory, but it offers a glimmer of hope. Maybe the Waltons will put a pause on their entropy. If they keep it up, they might even reverse the fate O’Sullivan’s First Law ordains.

Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the url or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.

The Woke Zone Trilogy

John Stossel takes up for Babylon Bee and notes “Even a few left-leaning comedians like Ricky Gervais and Dave Chappelle are mocking the intolerant left!”

Late night hosts like Stephen Colbert, seen speaking during the Montclair Film Festival on Oct. 23, passionately defend leftists to the point of lecturing, rather than providing comedic relief. (Photo: Manny Carabel/Getty Images)

A woman tells the cop who stopped her in a carpool lane she’s allowed to drive there because her pronouns are “they” and “them.”

That’s from a video by a conservative Christian satire site called the Babylon Bee. Their humor gets millions of views.

“Christian conservatives used to … be very dour and self-serious,” says Bee editor-in-chief Kyle Mann in my new video.

Today, he says, it’s the left who are self-serious. “They’re the ones that have trouble laughing at themselves.”

For example, late night hosts like Jimmy Kimmel and Stephen Colbert passionately defend COVID-19 vaccines.

“It is a lecture,” complains Mann.

“The left used to be anti-establishment,” adds Bee actress Chandler Juliet. Now, she says, ‘They’ve become the blob. … We’re super happy to be leading the comedic conversation on the right.”

One Babylon Bee video, “The Woke Zone,” makes fun of the way the media ignored violence and arson during the George Floyd protests.

“Do you ever feel gratitude to the left that they give you so much material?” I ask.

“We have to write things that are funnier than things they’re actually doing,” Mann responds. “That makes our job very difficult.”

One Bee sketch portrays its writers struggling to find new material.

“John Kerry warns that the war in Ukraine might distract from climate change!” suggests one.

Can’t do it, explains another. “It actually happened.” Yes, Kerry really did say that.

“Cosmo magazine features a morbidly obese woman on the cover as the picture of health” and, “Math professor says ‘two plus two equals four’ is racist!” are among other ideas that can’t be used as jokes.

“A math professor really said two plus two equals four is racist?” I ask.

It’s “a colonialist, white supremacist idea,” explains Mann.

Today the Bee reaches more people than The Onion. The establishment doesn’t like that, so some people actually sic so-called fact checkers on the Bee.

One article fact-checked by Snopes was titled, “Bernie Sanders Vows To Round Up Remaining ISIS Members, Allow Them To Vote.”

“Does Snopes not understand that you’re making jokes?” I ask.

“I think that they know what our intention is,” answers Juliet. “They just don’t like us.”

Recently, Twitter banned the Bee. Their offense was tweeting an article that named Assistant Secretary of Health Rachel Levine “Babylon Bee’s Man of the Year.”

Levine is a transgender woman. Calling her the man of the year is a joke I wouldn’t make. But it doesn’t need to be censored.

Twitter says they’ll allow the Bee back on the platform only if they delete the tweet. Mann says he won’t.

“Twitter has the capability to just delete the tweet themselves. They want us to bend the knee and be the ones to click, ‘Yes, we acknowledge hateful conduct.’ We’re not going to do that.”

Today, a lot of comedians attract sizable audiences by mocking the left. Some I found funny are JP Sears, Ryan Long and FreedomToons.

The culture is changing.

The highest rating late-night comic these days is often not Colbert, Kimmel or Fallon, but Greg Gutfeld of Fox.

Even a few left-leaning comedians like Ricky Gervais and Dave Chappelle are mocking the intolerant left.

“I talk about AIDS, famine, cancer, the Holocaust, rape, pedophilia … the one thing you mustn’t joke about is identity politics,” says Gervais in his recent Netflix special.

Professional media critics trashed him for that. But the special was hugely popular with the public.

The Rotten Tomatoes ratings are revealing. Critics gave Gervais’ special a 29% rating, calling it “terribly unfunny” and “a detestable combination of smug and obtuse.”

Viewers gave it a 92% rating.

The same is true of Chapelle’s latest special, “The Closer.” Critics give it just 40%. The audience gives it 95%.

Clearly, many people are tired of smug, condescending humor.

I’m glad the Babylon Bee, and others, give us an alternative.

COPYRIGHT 2022 BY JFS PRODUCTIONS INC.

The Daily Signal publishes a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Heritage Foundation.

Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the url or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.

After Life 2 – Man identifies as an 8 year old girl

—-

After Life on Netflix

——

Before I get into the fine article by Brendan O’Neill which I present in its entirety, I wanted to quote Francis Schaeffer who spent his life examining the humanism that now Ricky Gervais embraces!

All humans have moral motions and that is why Ricky Gervais knows it is wrong to let biological men use ladies’ bathrooms!!!!!!

Francis Schaffer in his book THE GOD WHO IS THERE addresses these same issues:

“[in Christianity] there is a sufficient basis for morals. Nobody has ever discovered a way of having real “morals” without a moral absolute. If there is no moral absolute, we are left with hedonism (doing what I like) or some form of the social contract theory (what is best for society as a a hole is right). However, neither of these alternative corresponds to the moral motions that men have. Talk to people long enough and deeply enough, and you will find that they consider some things are really right and something are really wrong. Without absolutes, morals as morals cease to exist, and humanistic mean starting from himself is unable to find the absolute he needs. But because the God of the Bible is there, real morals exist. Within this framework I can say one action is right and another wrong, without talking nonsense.” 117

Francis Schaeffer in the film WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE HUMAN RACE?

Francis and Edith Schaeffer

Brendan O’Neill

Ricky Gervais is guilty of blasphemy

He has mocked identity politics – the god of our times

I have long thought that if Life of Brian came out today, it wouldn’t be Christians kicking up a fuss about it — it would be trans activists.

When Monty Python’s classic tale of a man mistaken for a Messiah came to cinemas in 1979, people of faith weren’t happy. They saw it as taking the mick out of Christ and they aired their displeasure noisily. Nuns in New York picketed cinemas. In Ireland the film was banned for eight years.

In 2022 I reckon it would be a very different story. It wouldn’t be Monty Python’s ribbing of the gospels that would outrage the chattering classes — it would be their mockery of trans people.

Life of Brian was way ahead of time. It was Terf before Terf was even a thing. There is a brilliantly observed scene in which Stan of the People’s Front of Judea — or is it the Judean People’s Front? — says he wants to become Loretta.

‘I want to be a woman. From now on, I want you all to call me Loretta’, says Stan, played by Eric Idle. When the others push back and say he can’t just become a woman, he says: ‘It’s my right as a man.’ Which was remarkably perspicacious.

‘I want to have babies’, says Stan / Loretta. ‘You can’t have babies! You haven’t got a womb!’, barks John Cleese’s Reg. Transphobic or what? To calm things down, Francis (Michael Palin) says they should accept Stan’s desire to be Loretta as being ‘symbolic of our struggle against oppression’. ‘Symbolic of his struggle against reality…’ Reg mutters.

——

Imagine if a film or TV show did something like that today. Showed an aspiring ‘trans woman’ being mocked for not having the right body parts to be a woman. Showed a man who wants to be a woman being told — for laughs, remember — that the only thing he’s struggling against is reality.

The cancel-culture mob would kick into action. There’d be a Change.org petition, maybe even a physical protest outside the offices of the production company or streaming service that was foolish enough to broadcast such trans-poking humour. ‘Jokes kill!’, we would be told, day and night.

Hell, JK Rowling can’t even very politely say ‘men aren’t women’ without being subjected to weeks of hatred and violent threats — so heaven help the film company that tried to air a Stan / Loretta skit in these febrile times.

This week, my theory about Life of Brianin 2022 was kind of proven right. For we had the pretty extraordinary sight of Ricky Gervais getting a very free ride for his God-mocking while being dragged into the Twitter stocks for his gags about trans issues.

In his new Netflix special SuperNature, Gervais vents his atheistic spleen. The Christian God is cruel and perverted, he says. Those Christian fundamentalists who believe Aids is the Almighty’s way of punishing gay sex clearly believe in a God who’s up in heaven thinking, ‘I’m sick of all this bumming’. And so just as God once said ‘Let there be light’, according to Gervais in the 1980s He said, ‘Let there be Aids’. What a rotter.

This isn’t the first time Gervais has made fun of God and those who believe in him. He’s famously an atheist. He talks about it all the time. (Rather too much, in my view.) But God-bashing is fine these days. Cool, even. Christians tend to take it in their stride. Believers have mostly kept their counsel following Gervais’s latest mockery of their wicked, ridiculous God.

The same cannot be said of trans activists and their allies. Not even remotely. They have responded with fury to Gervais’s blasphemy against the new god of genderfluidity.

He’s been called all the usual names. Transphobe, Terf, bigot. His crime? Choosing not to adhere to the ideology of transgenderism, daring to dissent from that pseudo-religious mantra we are all now pressured into saying: ‘Trans women are women.’

What’s funny about this spittle-flecked response to Gervais’s trans jokes is that he was really only saying what trans activists themselves have said. He had a bit on ‘old-fashioned women’ — ‘you know, the ones with wombs’ — complaining about born males using their bathrooms. ‘What if he rapes me?’, these women say. To which Gervais, playing the trans activist, responds: ‘What if she rapes you, you… Terf whore.’

Cutting, yes. But also incredibly accurate. Some police forces and courts do indeed refer to rapists as ‘she’ and ‘her’, if that’s how they identify. And, as feminists have pointed out, this results in rape victims being pressured to refer to their rapist with female pronouns. As for the language, anyone who has spent more than five minutes online in recent years will know that that kind of thing is said to gender-critical women all the time.

Like all great blasphemous comics, Gervais is merely shining a light on things that really are said, and things which really do happen, and inviting us, his audience, to laugh and say: ‘Yeah, that is kind of ridiculous.’ Much as Monty Python did with the Bible, in fact.

But, say Gervais’s humourless critics, while the likes of Monty Python were punching up — against God, no less — Gervais is punching down, against vulnerable, marginalised trans people. I don’t buy this at all. Gervais has made it clear that he fully supports rights for trans people. His issue is with the excesses of trans activism and the authoritarianism of identity politics more broadly.

‘I talk about Aids, famine, cancer, the Holocaust, rape, paedophilia’, he says in SuperNature. ‘But no, the one thing you mustn’t joke about is identity politics.’

Absolutely. And that’s because identitarianism is the god of our times. It’s the new religion of the elites, their means of controlling and reprimanding the masses. Ridiculing identity politics is to the 21st century what questioning the authority of God was to the 15th. The woke rage against Gervais really does echo earlier outbursts of intolerant religious fury against anyone who dared to dissent from the Word of God.

A.F. Branco for Jan 12, 2022

—-

Dennett wearing a button-up shirt and a jacket

I was referred this subject by a tweet by Daniel Dennett which referenced a fine article by Robyn E. Blumner in defense of her boss at the RICHARD DAWKINS FOUNDATION and you can read my response at this link.
Richard Dawkins Cooper Union Shankbone.jpg

Ricky Gervais is a secular humanist just like his good friend Richard Dawkins and it is the humanists who have bought into this trans-identity politics and as a result the AMERICAN HUMANIST ASSOCIATION has stripped Dawkins of his 1996 HUMANIST OF THE YEAR award.

As an evangelical I have had the opportunity to correspond with more more secular humanists that have signed the Humanist Manifestos than any other evangelical alive (at least that has been one of my goals since reading Francis Schaeffer’s books and watching his films since 1979).

Not everyone I have corresponded with is a secular humanist but  many are the top scientists and atheist thinkers of today and hold this same secular views. Many of these scholars have taken the time to respond back to me in the last 20 years and some of the names  included are  Ernest Mayr (1904-2005), George Wald (1906-1997), Carl Sagan (1934-1996),  Robert Shapiro (1935-2011), Nicolaas Bloembergen (1920-),  Brian Charlesworth (1945-),  Francisco J. Ayala (1934-) Elliott Sober (1948-), Kevin Padian (1951-), Matt Cartmill (1943-) , Milton Fingerman (1928-), John J. Shea (1969-), , Michael A. Crawford (1938-), (Paul Kurtz (1925-2012), Sol Gordon (1923-2008), Albert Ellis (1913-2007), Barbara Marie Tabler (1915-1996), Renate Vambery (1916-2005), Archie J. Bahm (1907-1996), Aron S “Gil” Martin ( 1910-1997), Matthew I. Spetter (1921-2012), H. J. Eysenck (1916-1997), Robert L. Erdmann (1929-2006), Mary Morain (1911-1999), Lloyd Morain (1917-2010),  Warren Allen Smith (1921-), Bette Chambers (1930-),  Gordon Stein (1941-1996) , Milton Friedman (1912-2006), John Hospers (1918-2011), and Michael Martin (1932-), Harry Kroto (1939-), Marty E. Martin (1928-), Richard Rubenstein (1924-), James Terry McCollum (1936-), Edward O. WIlson (1929-), Lewis Wolpert (1929), Gerald Holton(1922-), Martin Rees (1942-), Alan Macfarlane (1941-),  Roald Hoffmann (1937-), Herbert Kroemer (1928-), Thomas H. Jukes(1906-1999) and  Ray T. Cragun (1976-). 

Let me make a few points about Ricky personally and then a few about this comedy routine by the secular humanist Ricky Gervais.

Notice below in AFTER LIFE how he suspects Anne of being a Christian when she tells him “We are not just here for us. We are here for others,“

After Life Ricky GervaisRicky Gervais and Penelope Wilton in ‘After Life’ (CREDIT: Netflix)

(Above) Tony (played by Ricky) and Anne on the bench at the graveyard where their spouses are buried.

In the fourth episode of season 1 of AFTER LIFE is the following discussion between Anne and Tony:

Tony: My brother-in-law wants me to try dating again.
Anne: Oh excellent! You need some tips.
Tony: why would I need some tips?

Anne: I imagine you are awful with women…Well all men are awful with women but grumpy selfish ones are the worst.

Tony: Let me take notes. This is dynamite.

Tony: I would just be honest. Tell them my situation and tell them what I am going through. Be honest up front.
Anne: So it is all about you then?

Tony: I can’t win can I? I don’t want to date again. I don’t want to live without Lisa.

Anne: But is not just about you is it? That is what I am saying. What if a nice date made her feel good? That might feel nice right? We are just here for us. We are here for others.

Tony: I don’t do the whole God thing I am afraid.

Anne: Neither do I. It is a load of rubbish. All we got is each other. We have to help each other struggle until we die then we are done. No point in felling sorry for ourselves and making everyone else unhappy too. Might as [kill] yourself if you feel that bad.
Tony: Are you sure you want to work for the Samaritans?

Christ came to this world and his followers have changed this world for the better more than any other group that ever existed. When Anne makes the assertions, “But is not just about you is it? That is what I am saying. What if a nice date made her feel good? That might feel nice right? We are not just here for us. We are here for others,” Tony assumes she is a Christian.

If you found yourself in a dark alley late at night, with a group of rough-looking, burly young men walking swiftly toward you, would you feel better knowing they were coming from a Bible study?

If we are only cosmic accidents, how can there be any meaning in our lives? If this is true, which it is in an atheistic world view, our lives are for nothing. It would not matter in the slightest bit if I ever existed. This is why the atheist, if honest and consistent, must face death with despair. Their life is for nothing. Once they are gone, they are gone forever.

I highly recommend Ricky Gervais series AFTER LIFE which is running on NETFLIX because it reminds me of King Solomon trying to find meaning in life UNDER THE SUN without God in the picture!!!

God put Solomon’s story in Ecclesiastes in the Bible with the sole purpose of telling people like Ricky that without God in the picture you  will find out the emptiness one feels when possessions are trying to fill the void that God can only fill.

Then in the last chapter of Ecclesiastes Solomon returns to looking above the sun and he says that obeying the Lord is the proper way to live your life. The  answer to find meaning in life is found in putting your faith and trust in Jesus Christ. The Bible is true from cover to cover and can be trusted. If you need more evidence then go to You Tube and watch the short video:

NOW TO RICKY’S COMEDY:

Brendan O’Neill noted above:

‘I want to have babies’, says Stan / Loretta. ‘You can’t have babies! You haven’t got a womb!’, barks John Cleese’s Reg. Transphobic or what? To calm things down, Francis (Michael Palin) says they should accept Stan’s desire to be Loretta as being ‘symbolic of our struggle against oppression’. ‘Symbolic of his struggle against reality…’ Reg mutters….

He’s been called all the usual names. Transphobe, Terf, bigot. His crime? Choosing not to adhere to the ideology of transgenderism, daring to dissent from that pseudo-religious mantra we are all now pressured into saying: ‘Trans women are women.’

What’s funny about this spittle-flecked response to Gervais’s trans jokes is that he was really only saying what trans activists themselves have said. He had a bit on ‘old-fashioned women’ — ‘you know, the ones with wombs’ — complaining about born males using their bathrooms. ‘What if he rapes me?’, these women say. To which Gervais, playing the trans activist, responds: ‘What if she rapes you, you… Terf whore.’

Ricky  is trying to use common sense (through sarcasm) on people that “GOD GAVE…OVER to depraved [minds]. Romans 1 states:

26 For this reason (M)GOD GAVE THEM OVER  to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural…

28 And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, GOD GAVE THEM OVER to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper, 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are…inventors of evil,

—-

Francis Schaeffer.jpg

Francis Schaeffer later in this blog post discusses what the unbelievers in Romans 1 were rejecting, but first John MacArthur discusses what the unbelievers in the Democratic Party today are affirming and how these same activities were condemned 2000 years ago in Romans 1.

Christians Cannot And MUST Not Vote Democrat – John MacArthur

A Democrat witness testifying before the HouseJudiciary Committee on abortion rights Thursday declared that men can get pregnant and have abortions. This reminds of Romans chapter 1 and also John MacArthur’s commentary on the 2022 Agenda of the Democratic Party:

25 For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator…26 For this reason (M)GOD GAVE THEM OVER  to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.28 And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, GOD GAVE THEM OVER to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper, 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are…inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31 without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, unmerciful; 32 but also give hearty approval to those who practice them.

Here is what John MacArthur had to say:

Now, all of a sudden, not only is this characteristic of our nation, but we now promote it. One of the parties, the Democratic Party, has now made Romans 1, the sins of Romans 1, their agenda. What God condemns, they affirm.

I know from last week’s message that there was some response from people who said, “Why are you getting political?”

Romans 1 is not politics. This has to do with speaking the Word of God through the culture in which we live….it’s about iniquity and judgment. And why do we say this? Because this must be recognized for what it is–sin, serious sin, damning sin, destructive sin.

Dem witness tells House committee men can get pregnant, have abortions

‘I believe that everyone can identify for themselves,’ Aimee Arrambide tells House Judiciary Committee

Aimee Arrambide, the executive director of the abortion rights nonprofit Avow Texas, was asked by Rep. Dan Bishop, R-N.C., to define what “a woman is,” to which she responded, “I believe that everyone can identify for themselves.”
“Do you believe that men can become pregnant and have abortions?” Bishop asked.

“Yes,” Arrambide replied.

The remarks from Arrambide followed a tense exchange between Bishop and Dr. Yashica Robinson, another Democrat witness, after he similarly asked her to define “woman.”

Aimee Arrambide testifies before the House Judiciary Committee on May 11, 2020.  (YouTube screenshot)

Aimee Arrambide testifies before the House Judiciary Committee on May 11, 2020.  (YouTube screenshot) (Screenshot/ House Committee on the Judiciary)

“Dr. Robinson, I noticed in your written testimony you said that you use she/her pronouns. You’re a medical doctor – what is a woman?” Bishop asked Robinson, an OBGYN and board member with Physicians for Reproductive Health.

“I think it’s important that we educate people like you about why we’re doing the things that we do,” Robinson responded. “And so the reason that I use she and her pronouns is because I understand that there are people who become pregnant that may not identify that way. And I think it is discriminatory to speak to people or to call them in such a way as they desire not to be called.”

“Are you going to answer my question? Can you answer the question, what’s a woman?” Bishop asked.

Donna Howard and Aimee Arrambide speaks at Making Virtual Storytelling and Activism Personal during the 2022 SXSW Conference and Festivals at Austin Convention Center on March 14, 2022 in Austin, Texas.

Donna Howard and Aimee Arrambide speaks at Making Virtual Storytelling and Activism Personal during the 2022 SXSW Conference and Festivals at Austin Convention Center on March 14, 2022 in Austin, Texas. (Photo by Hubert Vestil/Getty Images for SXSW)

“I’m a woman, and I will ask you which pronouns do you use?” Robinson replied. “If you tell me that you use she and her pronouns … I’m going to respect you for how you want me to address you.”

“So you gave me an example of a woman, you say that you are a woman, can you tell me otherwise what a woman is?” Bishop asked.

“Yes, I’m telling you, I’m a woman,” Robinson responded.

“Is that as comprehensive a definition as you can give me?” Bishop asked.

“That’s as comprehensive a definition as I will give you today,” Robinson said. “Because I think that it’s important that we focus on what we’re here for, and it’s to talk about access to abortion.”

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

“So you’re not interested in answering the question that I asked unless it’s part of a message you want to deliver…” Bishop fired back.

Wednesday’s hearing, titled, “Revoking your Rights,” addressed the threat to abortion rights after the leaked Supreme Court draft opinion signaled the high court is poised to soon strike down Roe v. Wade.
John MacArthur explains God’s Wrath on unrighteousness from Romans Chapt…

First is what Romans says:

Romans 1:18-32

New American Standard Bible (NASB)

Unbelief and Its Consequences

18 For (A)the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who (B)suppress the truth [a]in unrighteousness, 19 because (C)that which is known about God is evident [b]within them; for God made it evident to them. 20 For (D)since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, (E)being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. 21 For even though they knew God, they did not [c]honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became (F)futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 (G)Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and (H)exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and [d]crawling creatures.

24 Therefore (I)God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be (J)dishonored among them. 25 For they exchanged the truth of God for [e]a (K)lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, (L)who is blessed [f]forever. Amen.

26 For this reason (M)God gave them over to (N)degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is [g]unnatural, 27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, (O)men with men committing [h]indecent acts and receiving in [i]their own persons the due penalty of their error.

28 And just as they did not see fit [j]to acknowledge God any longer, (P)God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper, 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are (Q)gossips, 30 slanderers, [k](R)haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, (S)disobedient to parents, 31 without understanding, untrustworthy, (T)unloving, unmerciful; 32 and although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of (U)death, they not only do the same, but also (V)give hearty approval to those who practice them.

Here is what John MacArthur had to say:

Now, all of a sudden, not only is this characteristic of our nation, but we now promote it. One of the parties, the Democratic Party, has now made Romans 1, the sins of Romans 1, their agenda. What God condemns, they affirm. What God punishes, they exalt. Shocking, really. The Democratic Party has become the anti-God party, the sin-promoting party. By the way, there are seventy-two million registered Democrats in this country who have identified themselves with that party and maybe they need to rethink that identification.

I know from last week’s message that there was some response from people who said, “Why are you getting political?”

Romans 1 is not politics. The Bible is not politics. This has nothing to do with politics. This has to do with speaking the Word of God through the culture in which we live. It has nothing to do with politics. It’s not about personalities; it’s about iniquity and judgment. And why do we say this? Because this must be recognized for what it is–sin, serious sin, damning sin, destructive sin.

WHAT HAS THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY REJECTED? THE ANSWER IS THE GOD WHO HAS REVEALED HIM SELF THROUGH THE BOOK OF NATURE AND THE BOOK OF SCRIPTURE!

God Is There And He Is Not Silent
Psalm 19
Intro. 1) Francis Schaeffer lived from 1912-1984. He was one of the Christian
intellectual giants of the 20th century. He taught us that you could be a Christian and not abandon the mind. One of the books he wrote was entitled He Is There And He Is Not Silent. In that work he makes a crucial and thought provoking statement, “The infinite- personal God is there, but also he is not silent; that changes the whole world…He is there and is not a silent, nor far-off God.” (Works of F.S., Vol 1, 276).
2) God is there and He is not silent. In fact He has revealed Himself to us in 2 books: the book of nature and the book of Scripture. Francis Bacon, a 15th century scientist who is credited by many with developing the scientific method said it this way: “There are 2 books laid before us to study, to prevent us from falling into error: first the volume to the Scriptures, which reveal the will of God; then the volume of the creation, which expresses His power.”
3) Psalm 19 addresses both of God’s books, the book of nature in vs 1-6 and the book of Scripture in vs. 7-14. Described as a wisdom Psalm, its beauty, poetry and splendor led C.S. Lewis to say, “I take this to be the greatest poem in the Psalter and one of the greatest lyrics in the world” (Reflections on the Psalms, 63).
Trans. God is there and He is not silent. How should we hear and listen to the God who talks?
I. Listen To God Speak Through Nature 19:1-6
God has revealed himself to ever rational human on the earth in two ways: 1) nature and 2) conscience. We call this natural or general revelation. In vs. 1-6 David addresses the wonder of nature and creation.

Whatever Happened To The Human Race? | Episode 5 | Truth and History

Related posts:

John MacArthur on Romans 1 and the Democratic Party

First is what Romans says: Romans 1:18-32 New American Standard Bible (NASB) Unbelief and Its Consequences 18 For (A)the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who (B)suppress the truth [a]in unrighteousness, 19 because (C)that which is known about God is evident [b]within them; for God made it evident to […]

Abortion and the Campaign for Immorality (Selected Scriptures) John MacArthur

Abortion and the Campaign for Immorality (Selected Scriptures) John MacArthur Published on Sep 30, 2012 by JohnMacArthurGTY http://www.gty.org/resources/sermons/90-448 What a privilege and joy it is to worship the Lord here at Grace Church. Patricia and I miss it when we’re not here. There’s no place like this. Our hearts are full to overflowing to be […]

John MacArthur: Fulfilled prophecy in the Bible? (Ezekiel 26-28 and the story of Tyre, video clips)

Prophecy–The Biblical Prophesy About Tyre.mp4 Uploaded by TruthIsLife7 on Dec 5, 2010 A short summary of the prophecy about Tyre and it’s precise fulfillment. Go to this link and watch the whole series for the amazing fulfillment from secular sources. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qvt4mDZUefo ________________ John MacArthur on the amazing fulfilled prophecy on Tyre and how it was fulfilled […]

Did God kill someone that I knew? What does I John 5:14-17 mean?

1 John 5:14-17 New American Standard Bible (NASB) 14 This is (A)the confidence which we have [a]before Him, that, (B)if we ask anything according to His will, He hears us. 15 And if we know that He hears us in whatever we ask, (C)we know that we have the requests which we have asked from […]

This Mother’s Day, Let’s Stand Up for Real Women

Those of us who remember women must stand up for them, now more than ever. As we celebrate Mother’s Day this Sunday, we find ourselves fending off men who seek to debase motherhood with two words: birthing person. (Photo illustration: PeopleImages/Getty Images)

It’s a man’s world again. We’ve won. We’ve seized women’s sports, parenting titles, and Woman of the Year and Prom Queen awards. The gals were making headway there for a while, but now the men are back on top.

I can still remember them, although their memory fades by the day—actual women, that is. Once upon a time, women had domains all to themselves, free from male interference—their own sports, doctors, locker rooms, and dressing rooms.

Not to mention achievements such as “first female four-star officer of the U.S. Public Health Service Commissioned Corps.” Famously, that title was nabbed by Rachel Levine, born male, and never will be held by an actual woman.

It’s shameful. Those of us who remember women must stand up for them, now more than ever. As we celebrate Mother’s Day, honor motherhood, and thank God for the gift of mothers this Sunday, we find ourselves fending off men who seek to debase motherhood with two words: birthing person.

At this rate, celebrating Mother’s Day might even get you canceled, especially if you live in the liberal bastion of New York City. The City Council’s lefty leadership has become so woke that many members have started to replace “mother” in legislation and official correspondence with nongender terms such as “birthing people” and “birthing parents.”

Birthing persons don’t exist. Mothers do. Yes, mothers give birth, and in so doing they give life. They are sacred. The ability to give life elevates women over men.

Men can’t and never will be able to get pregnant, carry children in their bodies, and give birth. Men cannot feel a child moving inside them, and they can never nourish a baby with their own body. Birthing persons don’t exist in a sane world; women and mothers do.

Mother’s Day is not a day to scream that men can give birth or men can be women. It is a day to celebrate that men can never give birth and men can never be mothers. It is not bigoted or shameful to recognize the biological reality of women—it’s a celebration of women.

The degradation of women by the transgender movement is at an all-time high, and too many women are submitting to it out of fear of the cultish mob. As a result, the trans activist is out to destroy women. This has led to the death of the tomboy.

It is no longer acceptable to be an athletic woman; you were either supposed to be a boy, or you need to have your sport taken over by a boy who mistakenly thinks he’s a girl. The moment a child decides he is unhappy in his own skin (which was perfectly normal until now), the trans movement moves to capitalize on the confusion and rush to diagnose and co-opt this unhappiness.

A U.K. journalist highlighted the war on tomboysby sharing her experience as a young teen, during which she dressed in androgynous, masculine clothing until around age 23. Back then, no one ever suggested that her preferences made her a boy or a man. And fortunately, her parents didn’t resort to drastic measures such as removing her healthy breasts simply because she preferred playing with Legos over Barbies.

Indeed, society has taken a step backward. This backward shift also has led to women losing their OB-GYNs to men who believe they are women. The OB-GYN field once served as a unique, vital celebration of women’s health.

However, with many doctors adhering to the new ideology, men now occupy the waiting room for themselves rather than accompanying their wives. Perhaps nothing is more awkward than an OB-GYN having to examine the private parts of some guy who thinks he’s a girl.

Indeed, the trans movement has successfully commandeered the medical community, hijacking the education of future doctors at once prestigious institutions such as Harvard Medical School. According to a publicly available course description, Harvard students are now taught how to care for infant patients who identify as “LGBTQIA+”. The so-called experts claim that babies (who don’t even know if they’re tired, hungry, or need a diaper change) supposedly know if they’re trans.

Astonishingly, some leading medical professionals even suggest that babies can know they are transgender “from the womb.” And when you say “womb,” don’t imply that only a woman can have one. In fact, if you find these concepts perplexing or confusing—or idiotic—be cautious in expressing your concerns, as you may be labeled as an anti-trans bigot.

The trans movement is following the recipe of the abortion industry: Degrade women, promote men, and convince women they’re winning.

Abortion is absolutely a man’s issue, in all the wrong ways. An all-male Supreme Court gave us Roe vs. Wade and a much more diverse group of justices overturned it. Most abortion doctors in America are men, and men own most abortion facilities. No one profits from the killing of unborn babies more than men. Most pro-abortion politicians are men.

In fact, according to recent polling, the gender divide between men and women who support abortion is smaller than ever. Women are only slightly more likely to support abortion than men, with PRRI finding that 65% of women want abortion to be legal, versus 62% of men.

No one benefits from abortion except for bad men. Unscrupulous men who want to shirk their responsibilities to the women they’ve impregnated, men who use women as sex objects, they win big.

These men hardly ever show up to the abortion appointment with their conquest. They will never have to lie on that cold table and hear the vacuum as their baby is sucked out or watch the baby pass in the bathroom as part of a chemical abortion they got at CVS.

Bad men get all the benefits and none of the suffering in abortion. Bad men are also the big winners in the trans movement.

A guy who couldn’t excel at a sport but wanted to be champion anyway can just “become a girl” and snatch the trophies away from all the women who worked and trained their whole lives. An unpopular guy who can’t win “Man of the Year” or “Prom King” can “become a girl” and be “so brave.” A man who is desperate for attention and wants to earn truckloads of money as a social media influencer can just “become a girl” and watch the endorsements roll in.

This Mother’s Day, I will celebrate actual women, those we love and respect and to whom we owe our very existence. All others are fake, insulting charades who, under the guise of tolerance, are harming women.

So let’s stand up for real women and recognize their unique and irreplaceable role in our lives—before it’s too late.

The Daily Signal publishes a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Heritage Foundation.

Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the url or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.

EXCLUSIVE: Vermont Family Accuses School District of Retaliating Against Them for Pushing Back Against Biological Male in Girls’ Locker Room

Travis Allen and his daughter Blake have faced repercussions from speaking out against a biological boy being in the girls’ locker room at Blake’s school. (Photo courtesy of the Allen family.)

A Vermont school district punished both 14-year-old Blake Allen and her father for stating that a biologically male student who identifies as a transgender girl is male. Now the Allens are suing the school district—and accusing it of retaliating against their family for speaking out.

Represented by the Alliance Defending Freedom, Travis and Jessica Allen alleged in a lawsuit filed Thursday in the United States District Court for the District of Vermont that Travis and Blake “were punished for expressing their view on a matter of profound public concern: whether a teenage male who identifies as female should be permitted to change in a girls’ locker room regardless of the discomfort experienced by the girls in that room.”

“In objecting to a male being in the room while the girls are changing, Travis and Blake each made comments underscoring that the trans-identifying student is in fact a male, including by using male pronouns,” said the lawsuit, which was first obtained by The Daily Signal. “Indeed, their view of the student’s maleness was foundational to their opinions on appropriate use of the locker room.”

“Yet, their remarks were too much for Defendants’ transgender orthodoxy—Travis was deemed to have ‘misgendered’ the student, while Blake was found guilty of ‘harassment’ and ‘bullying’—so Defendants disciplined both of them.”

Superintendent Layne Millington, co-principals Lisa Floyd and Caty Sutton, and the Orange Southwest School District Board are state actors and “violate the First Amendment” by attempting to dictate “what may be said on matters of public concern,” the lawsuit said, noting that these school district officials also cannot discriminate against speech on the basis of its viewpoint.

“Yet, that is exactly what happened here,” the filing states. “Defendants punished Travis and Blake for saying that a male is a male, as a matter of sex and biology, regardless of the gender identity that the male has assumed.”

The Daily Signal first reported that Travis Allen has been suspended without pay from his job as the Randolph Union Middle School girls soccer coach for calling the trans-identifying student a male. His suspension followed a Daily Signal video and report highlighting Blake’s discomfort at a biological male using her locker room while she was changing. Jessica Allen also spoke out in the video.

Several of Blake’s fellow female students who spoke with The Daily Signal shared they asked the student to leave, but said the student did not immediately do so. The girls said that the student stood in the corner and looked at them while they were changing, causing them to feel uncomfortable.

The trans-identifying student’s guardian told The Daily Signal that her child is a girl, belongs in girls’ spaces, and did not behave inappropriately.

“A male was in our locker room when volleyball girls were trying to get changed,” Blake said in the mid-October interview. “And after I asked him to leave, he didn’t, and later looked over at girls with their shirts off. And it made many people uncomfortable and feel violated. And I left as soon as I could in a panic.”

“It’s not fully the trans student’s fault,” she added. “It is much more the school board’s fault and they’re failing everyone. Not just the volleyball team, not the transgender student. They did nothing to help this situation. They still aren’t. They just want people to be in trouble and they’re not trying to help make a change.”

According to the lawsuit, the trans-identifying student repeatedly made remarks like “I am going to f—ing kill Blake Allen” and “I’m gonna f—ng kill somebody” after Blake spoke up about the matter.

School officials reportedly deemed the threats low-risk (The Daily Signal previously pressed the school on these alleged threats without direct response) and “no action as taken” against the student, according to the lawsuit.

Blake’s high school, Randolph Union High School, concluded its investigation into the incident in the locker room on Oct. 14, according to the lawsuit. She was not offered an opportunity to “present evidence or otherwise defend herself,” and the family was not informed of the school’s decision to suspend Blake until Oct. 21, according to the suit, though the school knew that Blake and the trans-identifying student would be playing in multiple volleyball games together.

In its Oct. 21 notification, the school reportedly told the Allens that Blake had violated its Harassment, Hazing, and Bullying policy and must serve a two-day out of school suspension, write an essay, and take part in a “restorative circle” with the school’s equity coordinator “and at least two students who can help her understand the rights of students to access public accommodations.”

If Blake’s required essay is found to be “lacking good faith” by the school, she would have to serve an additional three days’ out of school suspension, the lawsuit said.

ADF told The Daily Signal on Thursday that the school lifted Blake’s suspension shortly after the lawsuit was filed. It is not immediately clear whether the school was aware the lawsuit was filed when it lifted Blake’s suspension.

The school district also demanded that Travis Allen apologize publicly, The Daily Signal previously reported. The father’s refusal resulted in his suspension.

“When he asked me to publicly apologize, I thought about it,” Travis Allen said earlier this month. “I did pause and waited a few seconds. And I’m thinking, ‘If I say that I’ll apologize, I’ll be able to coach my youngest daughter for the rest of the season, but I’m going to, in turn, hurt my other daughter, because I’m not standing up for what we believe in, I’m just cowing to them like so many other people have done. And I just can’t do that.’”

Allen also said in a previous interview with The Daily Signal that neither he nor his family were seeking attention through their actions, adding: “We’re a family that pretty much goes with the flow. And this time we just couldn’t do it.”

In a Thursday statement to The Daily Signal, Alliance Defending Freedom senior counsel Phil Sechler emphasized that “all Blake and Travis did, in discussing whether males should be in the girls’ locker room, is point out that a transgender student is in fact a male and it cost Travis his coaching position and got Blake suspended from school.”

“No one should lose their job or get suspended from school for voicing their opinion or calling a male a male—when one person is silenced for speaking freely, everyone’s rights are threatened,” Sechler said.

The Allens are not the only family in the Randolph, Vermont, community that has expressed frustration with the school district’s handling of the situation.

Multiple parents who spoke with The Daily Signal said that they are outraged that the school district and the high school would allow such an incident to even occur—they don’t want biological boys in their daughters’ locker rooms, and they are bewildered as to why the school system is apparently prioritizing the needs of students who identify as transgender over their daughters. They also strongly pushed back against allegations that speaking up is hateful.

“I feel it’s not the place for them,” said Eric Messier, the father of another volleyball player who spoke with The Daily Signal, referring to biological males using the girls’ locker room.

“All that matters is she’s uncomfortable. It’s pretty simple,” he added.

Blake previously shared with The Daily Signal that she does not regret speaking out.

I’m glad I spoke out because there’s still so much that could be done, that the law could be changed, because now it’s national news,” she said, adding of the trans-identifying student, “He had the right to go in, but once we said we were uncomfortable, he should have just left. It should have been that simple.”

“I don’t want other girls to have to feel uncomfortable about it,” Blake added. “I think everyone should be able to just get changed in a locker room that they were born as. If you were born a girl, you can go in the girls’ locker room, get out when you’re done. It should be simple and it’s not anymore.”

These 3 Women Tried Transgenderism, and Then Stopped

Jennifer Lahl’s documentary “The Detransition Diaries,” released Monday, tracks the stories of three female detransitioners, including Helena Kerschner. (Photo: The Center for Bioethics and Culture Network)

A documentary, released Monday, unveils the stories of three women who previously identified as transgender in a futile attempt to escape depression and suicidal thoughts.

Jennifer Lahl, a former pediatric nurse and current president of The Center for Bioethics and Culture Network, produced her most recent documentary, “The Detransition Diaries,” after a series of films highlighting bioethical issues.

Her film tracks the stories of Helena Kerschner, Grace Lidinsky-Smith, and Cat Cattinson, three women who believed their mental and emotional trauma would be solved by transitioning to the opposite sex. Each woman underwent hormone treatment and one had her breasts removed as well.

“We are following the news and the studies, and the evidence that shows this uptick in rapid-onset gender dysphoria [is something] young girls are particularly prone to,” Lahl told The Daily Signal in a phone call. Gender dysphoria refers to the condition of persistently and painfully identifying as the gender opposite one’s biological sex. “Young girls are getting sucked into this.”

Rapid-onset gender dysphoria is a recent phenomenon in which children and adolescents are suddenly, and without prior indication, identifying as the opposite sex.

Lahl found that her previous documentary “Trans Mission: What’s the Rush to Reassign Gender?” struck a chord with a broad audience. Firsthand accounts of men and women who “believed they were born in the wrong body” and thought gender transition “was the solution to all their problems” resonated with thousands of people, Lahl explained.

“As documentary filmmakers, we made the editorial decision that we are going to focus on women, realizing that this applies to men too,” she remarked on her most recent film.

“The Detransition Diaries” cover. (Photo: The Center for Bioethics and Culture Network)

Helena Kerschner, one of the detransitioners featured in Lahl’s film, says she struggled with depression, isolation, self-harm, an eating disorder, and suicidal thoughts as an early teen. She was introduced to the transgender belief system through Tumblr culture at 13.

Tumblr’s message was: “If you don’t like your body, that’s a sign you’re trans,” she notes.

After she came out as transgender, teachers and adults who never noticed her struggles before suddenly “bent over backward” to accommodate her new-found identity.

She did everything to make herself appear masculine. Eventually, Kerschner was prescribed testosterone at 18 after a single consultation at Planned Parenthood.

After a few weeks, she noticed how irritable she had become. “I couldn’t control myself,” Kerschner recalls in the documentary. When she got angry, she felt she needed to hurt someone—so she hurt herself. She eventually resorted to the emergency room, where staff directed her to the psych unit. Doctors diagnosed her with borderline personality disorder and psychosis, and sent her home with prescriptions for four different medications. She wound up in the hospital a few weeks later.

“My life became a total disaster,” she says. “I wasn’t functioning, I couldn’t hold a job, I wasn’t going to school—I felt like a monster.”

Seventeen months later, she stopped taking testosterone. Her negative symptoms vanished. During this time, not a single medical professional suggested that her hormone treatment was causing these symptoms, she remarks in the film.

Grace Lidinsky-Smith, another detransitioner featured in the film, noted that she felt a rush of energy when she first started testosterone treatment. Though she had some underlying anxiety, she told herself this was “internalized transphobia,” she says to the filmmakers.

Grace Lidinsky-Smith in “The Detransition Diaries.” (Photo: The Center for Bioethics and Culture Network)

Cat Cattinson describes a similar euphoric feeling when she first went on testosterone.  It was “one of the better antidepressants I had taken,” she recalls.

Cat Cattinson in “The Detransition Diaries.” (Photo: The Center for Bioethics and Culture Network)

Lidinsky-Smith, unlike the other two women, went forward with a double mastectomy. Looking back, she believed she would feel better “because she’d be in a body that fit her better.” After her breasts were removed, she recalls, she looked down at the gashes on her chest. “I had the most awful feeling.”

She found others online also had an “intense, suicidal despair after surgery … and then got over it and felt better.” But the experience planted a seed of doubt, she explains. She found a testimony of another person who had transitioned from female to male. As the person described, a desire for “a small amount of masculinization” led to full-out body dysphoria.

At that point, Lidinsky-Smith stopped testosterone and slowly reversed course, eventually growing comfortable enough to use her birth name. “It became important to just accept myself as myself,” she explains.

Kershner and Cattinson described similar breaking points. Kershner realized: “This is not what I thought it would be,” adding that she believed “once I’m a boy, my confidence is gonna come out.” Instead, as she describes, she became dysfunctional.

As Cattinson explains, three months into her testosterone treatment, she found a dramatic drop in her voice. “Nothing was coming out except air and squeaks,” she describes. She stopped going to social events and performing live.

Like the other women, she found an online community of detransitioners and doctors who revealed the hidden underbelly of the trans movement.

She began questioning the basis of transgender ideology: the “idea that we should define a woman based on what’s in a person’s head,” as she describes it. Does “what you believe in your head … really trump the biological reality of being an adult female?” she wondered.

As the documentary concludes, Lidinsky-Smith notes that she is worried about those who continue to get sucked into gender transition treatment, when they can find the answer to their problems elsewhere.

All three women interviewed suffered from suicidal ideation and depression. Each believed that changing her name, pronouns, appearance, and hormones would solve her problems, yet each found her emotional state dramatically worsened as a result.

“I think the fallout will be severe,” Lidinsky-Smith notes. Remarking on the growing community of detransitioners, she adds, “Our voices can no longer be denied.”

Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the url or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.

The Woke Zone Trilogy

John Stossel takes up for Babylon Bee and notes “Even a few left-leaning comedians like Ricky Gervais and Dave Chappelle are mocking the intolerant left!”

Late night hosts like Stephen Colbert, seen speaking during the Montclair Film Festival on Oct. 23, passionately defend leftists to the point of lecturing, rather than providing comedic relief. (Photo: Manny Carabel/Getty Images)

A woman tells the cop who stopped her in a carpool lane she’s allowed to drive there because her pronouns are “they” and “them.”

That’s from a video by a conservative Christian satire site called the Babylon Bee. Their humor gets millions of views.

“Christian conservatives used to … be very dour and self-serious,” says Bee editor-in-chief Kyle Mann in my new video.

Today, he says, it’s the left who are self-serious. “They’re the ones that have trouble laughing at themselves.”

For example, late night hosts like Jimmy Kimmel and Stephen Colbert passionately defend COVID-19 vaccines.

“It is a lecture,” complains Mann.

“The left used to be anti-establishment,” adds Bee actress Chandler Juliet. Now, she says, ‘They’ve become the blob. … We’re super happy to be leading the comedic conversation on the right.”

One Babylon Bee video, “The Woke Zone,” makes fun of the way the media ignored violence and arson during the George Floyd protests.

“Do you ever feel gratitude to the left that they give you so much material?” I ask.

“We have to write things that are funnier than things they’re actually doing,” Mann responds. “That makes our job very difficult.”

One Bee sketch portrays its writers struggling to find new material.

“John Kerry warns that the war in Ukraine might distract from climate change!” suggests one.

Can’t do it, explains another. “It actually happened.” Yes, Kerry really did say that.

“Cosmo magazine features a morbidly obese woman on the cover as the picture of health” and, “Math professor says ‘two plus two equals four’ is racist!” are among other ideas that can’t be used as jokes.

“A math professor really said two plus two equals four is racist?” I ask.

It’s “a colonialist, white supremacist idea,” explains Mann.

Today the Bee reaches more people than The Onion. The establishment doesn’t like that, so some people actually sic so-called fact checkers on the Bee.

One article fact-checked by Snopes was titled, “Bernie Sanders Vows To Round Up Remaining ISIS Members, Allow Them To Vote.”

“Does Snopes not understand that you’re making jokes?” I ask.

“I think that they know what our intention is,” answers Juliet. “They just don’t like us.”

Recently, Twitter banned the Bee. Their offense was tweeting an article that named Assistant Secretary of Health Rachel Levine “Babylon Bee’s Man of the Year.”

Levine is a transgender woman. Calling her the man of the year is a joke I wouldn’t make. But it doesn’t need to be censored.

Twitter says they’ll allow the Bee back on the platform only if they delete the tweet. Mann says he won’t.

“Twitter has the capability to just delete the tweet themselves. They want us to bend the knee and be the ones to click, ‘Yes, we acknowledge hateful conduct.’ We’re not going to do that.”

Today, a lot of comedians attract sizable audiences by mocking the left. Some I found funny are JP Sears, Ryan Long and FreedomToons.

The culture is changing.

The highest rating late-night comic these days is often not Colbert, Kimmel or Fallon, but Greg Gutfeld of Fox.

Even a few left-leaning comedians like Ricky Gervais and Dave Chappelle are mocking the intolerant left.

“I talk about AIDS, famine, cancer, the Holocaust, rape, pedophilia … the one thing you mustn’t joke about is identity politics,” says Gervais in his recent Netflix special.

Professional media critics trashed him for that. But the special was hugely popular with the public.

The Rotten Tomatoes ratings are revealing. Critics gave Gervais’ special a 29% rating, calling it “terribly unfunny” and “a detestable combination of smug and obtuse.”

Viewers gave it a 92% rating.

The same is true of Chapelle’s latest special, “The Closer.” Critics give it just 40%. The audience gives it 95%.

Clearly, many people are tired of smug, condescending humor.

I’m glad the Babylon Bee, and others, give us an alternative.

COPYRIGHT 2022 BY JFS PRODUCTIONS INC.

The Daily Signal publishes a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Heritage Foundation.

Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the url or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.

After Life 2 – Man identifies as an 8 year old girl

—-

After Life on Netflix

——

Before I get into the fine article by Brendan O’Neill which I present in its entirety, I wanted to quote Francis Schaeffer who spent his life examining the humanism that now Ricky Gervais embraces!

All humans have moral motions and that is why Ricky Gervais knows it is wrong to let biological men use ladies’ bathrooms!!!!!!

Francis Schaffer in his book THE GOD WHO IS THERE addresses these same issues:

“[in Christianity] there is a sufficient basis for morals. Nobody has ever discovered a way of having real “morals” without a moral absolute. If there is no moral absolute, we are left with hedonism (doing what I like) or some form of the social contract theory (what is best for society as a a hole is right). However, neither of these alternative corresponds to the moral motions that men have. Talk to people long enough and deeply enough, and you will find that they consider some things are really right and something are really wrong. Without absolutes, morals as morals cease to exist, and humanistic mean starting from himself is unable to find the absolute he needs. But because the God of the Bible is there, real morals exist. Within this framework I can say one action is right and another wrong, without talking nonsense.” 117

Francis Schaeffer in the film WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE HUMAN RACE?

Francis and Edith Schaeffer

Brendan O’Neill

Ricky Gervais is guilty of blasphemy

He has mocked identity politics – the god of our times

I have long thought that if Life of Brian came out today, it wouldn’t be Christians kicking up a fuss about it — it would be trans activists.

When Monty Python’s classic tale of a man mistaken for a Messiah came to cinemas in 1979, people of faith weren’t happy. They saw it as taking the mick out of Christ and they aired their displeasure noisily. Nuns in New York picketed cinemas. In Ireland the film was banned for eight years.

In 2022 I reckon it would be a very different story. It wouldn’t be Monty Python’s ribbing of the gospels that would outrage the chattering classes — it would be their mockery of trans people.

Life of Brian was way ahead of time. It was Terf before Terf was even a thing. There is a brilliantly observed scene in which Stan of the People’s Front of Judea — or is it the Judean People’s Front? — says he wants to become Loretta.

‘I want to be a woman. From now on, I want you all to call me Loretta’, says Stan, played by Eric Idle. When the others push back and say he can’t just become a woman, he says: ‘It’s my right as a man.’ Which was remarkably perspicacious.

‘I want to have babies’, says Stan / Loretta. ‘You can’t have babies! You haven’t got a womb!’, barks John Cleese’s Reg. Transphobic or what? To calm things down, Francis (Michael Palin) says they should accept Stan’s desire to be Loretta as being ‘symbolic of our struggle against oppression’. ‘Symbolic of his struggle against reality…’ Reg mutters.

——

Imagine if a film or TV show did something like that today. Showed an aspiring ‘trans woman’ being mocked for not having the right body parts to be a woman. Showed a man who wants to be a woman being told — for laughs, remember — that the only thing he’s struggling against is reality.

The cancel-culture mob would kick into action. There’d be a Change.org petition, maybe even a physical protest outside the offices of the production company or streaming service that was foolish enough to broadcast such trans-poking humour. ‘Jokes kill!’, we would be told, day and night.

Hell, JK Rowling can’t even very politely say ‘men aren’t women’ without being subjected to weeks of hatred and violent threats — so heaven help the film company that tried to air a Stan / Loretta skit in these febrile times.

This week, my theory about Life of Brianin 2022 was kind of proven right. For we had the pretty extraordinary sight of Ricky Gervais getting a very free ride for his God-mocking while being dragged into the Twitter stocks for his gags about trans issues.

In his new Netflix special SuperNature, Gervais vents his atheistic spleen. The Christian God is cruel and perverted, he says. Those Christian fundamentalists who believe Aids is the Almighty’s way of punishing gay sex clearly believe in a God who’s up in heaven thinking, ‘I’m sick of all this bumming’. And so just as God once said ‘Let there be light’, according to Gervais in the 1980s He said, ‘Let there be Aids’. What a rotter.

This isn’t the first time Gervais has made fun of God and those who believe in him. He’s famously an atheist. He talks about it all the time. (Rather too much, in my view.) But God-bashing is fine these days. Cool, even. Christians tend to take it in their stride. Believers have mostly kept their counsel following Gervais’s latest mockery of their wicked, ridiculous God.

The same cannot be said of trans activists and their allies. Not even remotely. They have responded with fury to Gervais’s blasphemy against the new god of genderfluidity.

He’s been called all the usual names. Transphobe, Terf, bigot. His crime? Choosing not to adhere to the ideology of transgenderism, daring to dissent from that pseudo-religious mantra we are all now pressured into saying: ‘Trans women are women.’

What’s funny about this spittle-flecked response to Gervais’s trans jokes is that he was really only saying what trans activists themselves have said. He had a bit on ‘old-fashioned women’ — ‘you know, the ones with wombs’ — complaining about born males using their bathrooms. ‘What if he rapes me?’, these women say. To which Gervais, playing the trans activist, responds: ‘What if she rapes you, you… Terf whore.’

Cutting, yes. But also incredibly accurate. Some police forces and courts do indeed refer to rapists as ‘she’ and ‘her’, if that’s how they identify. And, as feminists have pointed out, this results in rape victims being pressured to refer to their rapist with female pronouns. As for the language, anyone who has spent more than five minutes online in recent years will know that that kind of thing is said to gender-critical women all the time.

Like all great blasphemous comics, Gervais is merely shining a light on things that really are said, and things which really do happen, and inviting us, his audience, to laugh and say: ‘Yeah, that is kind of ridiculous.’ Much as Monty Python did with the Bible, in fact.

But, say Gervais’s humourless critics, while the likes of Monty Python were punching up — against God, no less — Gervais is punching down, against vulnerable, marginalised trans people. I don’t buy this at all. Gervais has made it clear that he fully supports rights for trans people. His issue is with the excesses of trans activism and the authoritarianism of identity politics more broadly.

‘I talk about Aids, famine, cancer, the Holocaust, rape, paedophilia’, he says in SuperNature. ‘But no, the one thing you mustn’t joke about is identity politics.’

Absolutely. And that’s because identitarianism is the god of our times. It’s the new religion of the elites, their means of controlling and reprimanding the masses. Ridiculing identity politics is to the 21st century what questioning the authority of God was to the 15th. The woke rage against Gervais really does echo earlier outbursts of intolerant religious fury against anyone who dared to dissent from the Word of God.

A.F. Branco for Jan 12, 2022

—-

Dennett wearing a button-up shirt and a jacket

I was referred this subject by a tweet by Daniel Dennett which referenced a fine article by Robyn E. Blumner in defense of her boss at the RICHARD DAWKINS FOUNDATION and you can read my response at this link.
Richard Dawkins Cooper Union Shankbone.jpg

Ricky Gervais is a secular humanist just like his good friend Richard Dawkins and it is the humanists who have bought into this trans-identity politics and as a result the AMERICAN HUMANIST ASSOCIATION has stripped Dawkins of his 1996 HUMANIST OF THE YEAR award.

As an evangelical I have had the opportunity to correspond with more more secular humanists that have signed the Humanist Manifestos than any other evangelical alive (at least that has been one of my goals since reading Francis Schaeffer’s books and watching his films since 1979).

Not everyone I have corresponded with is a secular humanist but  many are the top scientists and atheist thinkers of today and hold this same secular views. Many of these scholars have taken the time to respond back to me in the last 20 years and some of the names  included are  Ernest Mayr (1904-2005), George Wald (1906-1997), Carl Sagan (1934-1996),  Robert Shapiro (1935-2011), Nicolaas Bloembergen (1920-),  Brian Charlesworth (1945-),  Francisco J. Ayala (1934-) Elliott Sober (1948-), Kevin Padian (1951-), Matt Cartmill (1943-) , Milton Fingerman (1928-), John J. Shea (1969-), , Michael A. Crawford (1938-), (Paul Kurtz (1925-2012), Sol Gordon (1923-2008), Albert Ellis (1913-2007), Barbara Marie Tabler (1915-1996), Renate Vambery (1916-2005), Archie J. Bahm (1907-1996), Aron S “Gil” Martin ( 1910-1997), Matthew I. Spetter (1921-2012), H. J. Eysenck (1916-1997), Robert L. Erdmann (1929-2006), Mary Morain (1911-1999), Lloyd Morain (1917-2010),  Warren Allen Smith (1921-), Bette Chambers (1930-),  Gordon Stein (1941-1996) , Milton Friedman (1912-2006), John Hospers (1918-2011), and Michael Martin (1932-), Harry Kroto (1939-), Marty E. Martin (1928-), Richard Rubenstein (1924-), James Terry McCollum (1936-), Edward O. WIlson (1929-), Lewis Wolpert (1929), Gerald Holton(1922-), Martin Rees (1942-), Alan Macfarlane (1941-),  Roald Hoffmann (1937-), Herbert Kroemer (1928-), Thomas H. Jukes(1906-1999) and  Ray T. Cragun (1976-). 

Let me make a few points about Ricky personally and then a few about this comedy routine by the secular humanist Ricky Gervais.

Notice below in AFTER LIFE how he suspects Anne of being a Christian when she tells him “We are not just here for us. We are here for others,“

After Life Ricky GervaisRicky Gervais and Penelope Wilton in ‘After Life’ (CREDIT: Netflix)

(Above) Tony (played by Ricky) and Anne on the bench at the graveyard where their spouses are buried.

In the fourth episode of season 1 of AFTER LIFE is the following discussion between Anne and Tony:

Tony: My brother-in-law wants me to try dating again.
Anne: Oh excellent! You need some tips.
Tony: why would I need some tips?

Anne: I imagine you are awful with women…Well all men are awful with women but grumpy selfish ones are the worst.

Tony: Let me take notes. This is dynamite.

Tony: I would just be honest. Tell them my situation and tell them what I am going through. Be honest up front.
Anne: So it is all about you then?

Tony: I can’t win can I? I don’t want to date again. I don’t want to live without Lisa.

Anne: But is not just about you is it? That is what I am saying. What if a nice date made her feel good? That might feel nice right? We are just here for us. We are here for others.

Tony: I don’t do the whole God thing I am afraid.

Anne: Neither do I. It is a load of rubbish. All we got is each other. We have to help each other struggle until we die then we are done. No point in felling sorry for ourselves and making everyone else unhappy too. Might as [kill] yourself if you feel that bad.
Tony: Are you sure you want to work for the Samaritans?

Christ came to this world and his followers have changed this world for the better more than any other group that ever existed. When Anne makes the assertions, “But is not just about you is it? That is what I am saying. What if a nice date made her feel good? That might feel nice right? We are not just here for us. We are here for others,” Tony assumes she is a Christian.

If you found yourself in a dark alley late at night, with a group of rough-looking, burly young men walking swiftly toward you, would you feel better knowing they were coming from a Bible study?

If we are only cosmic accidents, how can there be any meaning in our lives? If this is true, which it is in an atheistic world view, our lives are for nothing. It would not matter in the slightest bit if I ever existed. This is why the atheist, if honest and consistent, must face death with despair. Their life is for nothing. Once they are gone, they are gone forever.

I highly recommend Ricky Gervais series AFTER LIFE which is running on NETFLIX because it reminds me of King Solomon trying to find meaning in life UNDER THE SUN without God in the picture!!!

God put Solomon’s story in Ecclesiastes in the Bible with the sole purpose of telling people like Ricky that without God in the picture you  will find out the emptiness one feels when possessions are trying to fill the void that God can only fill.

Then in the last chapter of Ecclesiastes Solomon returns to looking above the sun and he says that obeying the Lord is the proper way to live your life. The  answer to find meaning in life is found in putting your faith and trust in Jesus Christ. The Bible is true from cover to cover and can be trusted. If you need more evidence then go to You Tube and watch the short video:

NOW TO RICKY’S COMEDY:

Brendan O’Neill noted above:

‘I want to have babies’, says Stan / Loretta. ‘You can’t have babies! You haven’t got a womb!’, barks John Cleese’s Reg. Transphobic or what? To calm things down, Francis (Michael Palin) says they should accept Stan’s desire to be Loretta as being ‘symbolic of our struggle against oppression’. ‘Symbolic of his struggle against reality…’ Reg mutters….

He’s been called all the usual names. Transphobe, Terf, bigot. His crime? Choosing not to adhere to the ideology of transgenderism, daring to dissent from that pseudo-religious mantra we are all now pressured into saying: ‘Trans women are women.’

What’s funny about this spittle-flecked response to Gervais’s trans jokes is that he was really only saying what trans activists themselves have said. He had a bit on ‘old-fashioned women’ — ‘you know, the ones with wombs’ — complaining about born males using their bathrooms. ‘What if he rapes me?’, these women say. To which Gervais, playing the trans activist, responds: ‘What if she rapes you, you… Terf whore.’

Ricky  is trying to use common sense (through sarcasm) on people that “GOD GAVE…OVER to depraved [minds]. Romans 1 states:

26 For this reason (M)GOD GAVE THEM OVER  to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural…

28 And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, GOD GAVE THEM OVER to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper, 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are…inventors of evil,

—-

Francis Schaeffer.jpg

Francis Schaeffer later in this blog post discusses what the unbelievers in Romans 1 were rejecting, but first John MacArthur discusses what the unbelievers in the Democratic Party today are affirming and how these same activities were condemned 2000 years ago in Romans 1.

Christians Cannot And MUST Not Vote Democrat – John MacArthur

A Democrat witness testifying before the HouseJudiciary Committee on abortion rights Thursday declared that men can get pregnant and have abortions. This reminds of Romans chapter 1 and also John MacArthur’s commentary on the 2022 Agenda of the Democratic Party:

25 For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator…26 For this reason (M)GOD GAVE THEM OVER  to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.28 And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, GOD GAVE THEM OVER to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper, 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are…inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31 without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, unmerciful; 32 but also give hearty approval to those who practice them.

Here is what John MacArthur had to say:

Now, all of a sudden, not only is this characteristic of our nation, but we now promote it. One of the parties, the Democratic Party, has now made Romans 1, the sins of Romans 1, their agenda. What God condemns, they affirm.

I know from last week’s message that there was some response from people who said, “Why are you getting political?”

Romans 1 is not politics. This has to do with speaking the Word of God through the culture in which we live….it’s about iniquity and judgment. And why do we say this? Because this must be recognized for what it is–sin, serious sin, damning sin, destructive sin.

Dem witness tells House committee men can get pregnant, have abortions

‘I believe that everyone can identify for themselves,’ Aimee Arrambide tells House Judiciary Committee

Aimee Arrambide, the executive director of the abortion rights nonprofit Avow Texas, was asked by Rep. Dan Bishop, R-N.C., to define what “a woman is,” to which she responded, “I believe that everyone can identify for themselves.”
“Do you believe that men can become pregnant and have abortions?” Bishop asked.

“Yes,” Arrambide replied.

The remarks from Arrambide followed a tense exchange between Bishop and Dr. Yashica Robinson, another Democrat witness, after he similarly asked her to define “woman.”

Aimee Arrambide testifies before the House Judiciary Committee on May 11, 2020.  (YouTube screenshot)

Aimee Arrambide testifies before the House Judiciary Committee on May 11, 2020.  (YouTube screenshot) (Screenshot/ House Committee on the Judiciary)

“Dr. Robinson, I noticed in your written testimony you said that you use she/her pronouns. You’re a medical doctor – what is a woman?” Bishop asked Robinson, an OBGYN and board member with Physicians for Reproductive Health.

“I think it’s important that we educate people like you about why we’re doing the things that we do,” Robinson responded. “And so the reason that I use she and her pronouns is because I understand that there are people who become pregnant that may not identify that way. And I think it is discriminatory to speak to people or to call them in such a way as they desire not to be called.”

“Are you going to answer my question? Can you answer the question, what’s a woman?” Bishop asked.

Donna Howard and Aimee Arrambide speaks at Making Virtual Storytelling and Activism Personal during the 2022 SXSW Conference and Festivals at Austin Convention Center on March 14, 2022 in Austin, Texas.

Donna Howard and Aimee Arrambide speaks at Making Virtual Storytelling and Activism Personal during the 2022 SXSW Conference and Festivals at Austin Convention Center on March 14, 2022 in Austin, Texas. (Photo by Hubert Vestil/Getty Images for SXSW)

“I’m a woman, and I will ask you which pronouns do you use?” Robinson replied. “If you tell me that you use she and her pronouns … I’m going to respect you for how you want me to address you.”

“So you gave me an example of a woman, you say that you are a woman, can you tell me otherwise what a woman is?” Bishop asked.

“Yes, I’m telling you, I’m a woman,” Robinson responded.

“Is that as comprehensive a definition as you can give me?” Bishop asked.

“That’s as comprehensive a definition as I will give you today,” Robinson said. “Because I think that it’s important that we focus on what we’re here for, and it’s to talk about access to abortion.”

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

“So you’re not interested in answering the question that I asked unless it’s part of a message you want to deliver…” Bishop fired back.

Wednesday’s hearing, titled, “Revoking your Rights,” addressed the threat to abortion rights after the leaked Supreme Court draft opinion signaled the high court is poised to soon strike down Roe v. Wade.
John MacArthur explains God’s Wrath on unrighteousness from Romans Chapt…

First is what Romans says:

Romans 1:18-32

New American Standard Bible (NASB)

Unbelief and Its Consequences

18 For (A)the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who (B)suppress the truth [a]in unrighteousness, 19 because (C)that which is known about God is evident [b]within them; for God made it evident to them. 20 For (D)since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, (E)being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. 21 For even though they knew God, they did not [c]honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became (F)futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 (G)Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and (H)exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and [d]crawling creatures.

24 Therefore (I)God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be (J)dishonored among them. 25 For they exchanged the truth of God for [e]a (K)lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, (L)who is blessed [f]forever. Amen.

26 For this reason (M)God gave them over to (N)degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is [g]unnatural, 27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, (O)men with men committing [h]indecent acts and receiving in [i]their own persons the due penalty of their error.

28 And just as they did not see fit [j]to acknowledge God any longer, (P)God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper, 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are (Q)gossips, 30 slanderers, [k](R)haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, (S)disobedient to parents, 31 without understanding, untrustworthy, (T)unloving, unmerciful; 32 and although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of (U)death, they not only do the same, but also (V)give hearty approval to those who practice them.

Here is what John MacArthur had to say:

Now, all of a sudden, not only is this characteristic of our nation, but we now promote it. One of the parties, the Democratic Party, has now made Romans 1, the sins of Romans 1, their agenda. What God condemns, they affirm. What God punishes, they exalt. Shocking, really. The Democratic Party has become the anti-God party, the sin-promoting party. By the way, there are seventy-two million registered Democrats in this country who have identified themselves with that party and maybe they need to rethink that identification.

I know from last week’s message that there was some response from people who said, “Why are you getting political?”

Romans 1 is not politics. The Bible is not politics. This has nothing to do with politics. This has to do with speaking the Word of God through the culture in which we live. It has nothing to do with politics. It’s not about personalities; it’s about iniquity and judgment. And why do we say this? Because this must be recognized for what it is–sin, serious sin, damning sin, destructive sin.

WHAT HAS THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY REJECTED? THE ANSWER IS THE GOD WHO HAS REVEALED HIM SELF THROUGH THE BOOK OF NATURE AND THE BOOK OF SCRIPTURE!

God Is There And He Is Not Silent
Psalm 19
Intro. 1) Francis Schaeffer lived from 1912-1984. He was one of the Christian
intellectual giants of the 20th century. He taught us that you could be a Christian and not abandon the mind. One of the books he wrote was entitled He Is There And He Is Not Silent. In that work he makes a crucial and thought provoking statement, “The infinite- personal God is there, but also he is not silent; that changes the whole world…He is there and is not a silent, nor far-off God.” (Works of F.S., Vol 1, 276).
2) God is there and He is not silent. In fact He has revealed Himself to us in 2 books: the book of nature and the book of Scripture. Francis Bacon, a 15th century scientist who is credited by many with developing the scientific method said it this way: “There are 2 books laid before us to study, to prevent us from falling into error: first the volume to the Scriptures, which reveal the will of God; then the volume of the creation, which expresses His power.”
3) Psalm 19 addresses both of God’s books, the book of nature in vs 1-6 and the book of Scripture in vs. 7-14. Described as a wisdom Psalm, its beauty, poetry and splendor led C.S. Lewis to say, “I take this to be the greatest poem in the Psalter and one of the greatest lyrics in the world” (Reflections on the Psalms, 63).
Trans. God is there and He is not silent. How should we hear and listen to the God who talks?
I. Listen To God Speak Through Nature 19:1-6
God has revealed himself to ever rational human on the earth in two ways: 1) nature and 2) conscience. We call this natural or general revelation. In vs. 1-6 David addresses the wonder of nature and creation.

Whatever Happened To The Human Race? | Episode 5 | Truth and History

Related posts:

John MacArthur on Romans 1 and the Democratic Party

First is what Romans says: Romans 1:18-32 New American Standard Bible (NASB) Unbelief and Its Consequences 18 For (A)the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who (B)suppress the truth [a]in unrighteousness, 19 because (C)that which is known about God is evident [b]within them; for God made it evident to […]

Abortion and the Campaign for Immorality (Selected Scriptures) John MacArthur

Abortion and the Campaign for Immorality (Selected Scriptures) John MacArthur Published on Sep 30, 2012 by JohnMacArthurGTY http://www.gty.org/resources/sermons/90-448 What a privilege and joy it is to worship the Lord here at Grace Church. Patricia and I miss it when we’re not here. There’s no place like this. Our hearts are full to overflowing to be […]

John MacArthur: Fulfilled prophecy in the Bible? (Ezekiel 26-28 and the story of Tyre, video clips)

Prophecy–The Biblical Prophesy About Tyre.mp4 Uploaded by TruthIsLife7 on Dec 5, 2010 A short summary of the prophecy about Tyre and it’s precise fulfillment. Go to this link and watch the whole series for the amazing fulfillment from secular sources. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qvt4mDZUefo ________________ John MacArthur on the amazing fulfilled prophecy on Tyre and how it was fulfilled […]

Did God kill someone that I knew? What does I John 5:14-17 mean?

1 John 5:14-17 New American Standard Bible (NASB) 14 This is (A)the confidence which we have [a]before Him, that, (B)if we ask anything according to His will, He hears us. 15 And if we know that He hears us in whatever we ask, (C)we know that we have the requests which we have asked from […]

Senator Tommy Tuberville is vowing to hold the military promotions until the Defense Department RESCINDS its Feb. 16 policy providing three weeks of paid leave and reimbursement of travel expenses for military personnel and dependents who are seeking an abortion. An estimate from Rand Corp. predicts the number of abortions would skyrocket from 20 to more than 4,000 each year

Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., and other House conservatives showed their support for Sen. Tommy Tuberville, R-Ala., during a Wednesday debate over the Pentagon’s abortion policy. The group, pictured at a March 28 press conference, included, from left, Reps. Andy Biggs, R-Ariz.; Eli Crane, R-Ariz.; Matt Rosendale, R-Mont.; and Bob Good, R-Va. (Photo: Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

FIRST ON THE DAILY SIGNAL—A group of House conservatives made their way across the U.S. Capitol on Wednesday night for a rare appearance on the Senate floor. They were there to show solidarity with Sen. Tommy Tuberville, the Alabama Republican crusading against the Pentagon’s woke leadership.

At least 10 conservatives were on hand to witness Tuberville’s objection to nearly 200 promotions for military generals and flag officers. Democrats have repeatedly tried to approve the military appointments as a group only to be stymied by Tuberville each time.

Tuberville is vowing to hold the military promotions until the Defense Departmentrescinds its Feb. 16 policy providing three weeks of paid leave and reimbursement of travel expenses for military personnel and dependents who are seeking an abortion. An estimate from Rand Corp. predicts the number of abortions would skyrocket from 20 to more than 4,000 each year.

“It was important for House members to show Sen. Tuberville how many millions of Americans are standing with him,” Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., told The Daily Signal. “I know it’s tough in the Senate when the uniparty just wants to make everything go smoothly, but sometimes that dynamic violates the values of our fellow Americans. And what we see right now from the woke Department of Defense is a radical departure from the norm.”

>>> Alabama Senator Blasts Lloyd Austin: ‘Most Political Secretary of Defense We’ve Ever Seen’

Gaetz was among the House conservatives whom Tuberville thanked from Senate floor Wednesday night. Others included Reps. Andy Biggs, R-Ariz.; Lauren Boebert, R-Colo.; Eli Crane, R-Ariz.; Bob Good, R-Va.; Paul Gosar, R-Ariz.; Mike Johnson, R-La.; Ralph Norman, R-S.C.; Matt Rosendale, R-Mont.; and Chip Roy, R-Texas.

They include some of the House GOP’s most outspoken conservatives during the speaker fightin January, when they secured significant rules changes.

https://youtu.be/G6VUemKfOV0

The Daily Signal is the first to report who was there Wednesday and why these Republicans decided to stand with Tuberville when others in his own party refuse to do so.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., is the highest-ranking Republican to publicly break with Tuberville.

“No, I don’t support putting a hold on military nominations,” McConnell told reporters when asked Wednesday. “I don’t support that.”

McConnell’s position is more closely aligned with the views of Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and Senate Democrats, who have repeatedly argued that Tuberville’s action is unprecedented and allegedly harming the military.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., went a step further Thursday, ratcheting up his rhetoric against Tuberville.

“I urge Sen. Tuberville to think about the destructive spectacle he is creating in the Senate. His actions are dangerous,” Schumer said.

>>> ‘I Will Stay Here Until Hell Freezes Over’: Senator Pushes Pentagon to Reverse Abortion Policy

Against this backdrop—which Gaetz calls the “uniparty”—the House conservatives promised to support Tuberville.

“President Biden’s use of DOD funds to pay for and promote abortion violates federal law,” Biggs told The Daily Signal. “But who is surprised, given the Biden administration’s propensity to ignore, violate, and re-write laws they disagree with? Americans deserve brave leaders like Sen. Tuberville who will fight back, even in the face of bullying and deceit from the opposition. I’m grateful he’s using the leverage he has to hold Biden accountable.”

Democrats could circumvent Tuberville’s hold by voting on each nominee individually. Doing so, however, would be a laborious process for senators who would rather approve the promotions as a group.

The monthslong standoff shows no sign of ending, particularly with more Republicans standing with Tuberville—even if his party leader isn’t one of them.

“I went over to the Senate to support my friend Sen. Tuberville because I absolutely agree with him,” Norman told The Daily Signal. “The DOD’s new policy of providing paid leave and travel reimbursements for service members to get abortions is absurd. For the federal government and unelected officials to force the taxpayers to provide their hard-earned dollars for travel for abortion expenses is a sad time for our country. It is unacceptable.

“Just like how the 43 senators, including Sen. Tuberville, are supporting me and my House GOP colleagues on our debt ceiling plan, I will support him on this.”

>>> Republicans Rally to Senator’s Defense for Holding Pentagon Promotions Over Abortion Policy

Previously, Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, spoke on the floor in support of Tuberville. Wednesday’s debate brought another ally, Sen. Roger Marshall, R-Kan., to his side.

“The policy is immoral, taking Department of Defense abortions from less than 20 per year to over 4,000 abortions annually,” Marshall said. “It’s beyond me why the White House wants to pick this fight. The policy is illegal. It forces taxpayers to subsidize abortion in violation of federal law.”

Two other GOP senators—Ted Budd of North Carolina and Deb Fischer of Nebraska—have told reporters they support holding the military promotions.

Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, introduced legislation in March to terminate the Pentagon’s policy. Thirty-six of her Republican colleagues signed on as co-sponsors. McConnell is not among them.

Gaetz told The Daily Signal he’ll continue to fight the woke Defense Department and urged Tuberville to stand strong.

“There is an arrogance at the Department of Defense right now about what they can do without authorization,” Gaetz said. “There was never a vote in the House, or the Senate for that matter, on the funds that are now being used by DOD to facilitate abortions. I understand that people have different views on abortion, but we’ve all been able to agree that the taxpayers shouldn’t be funding it, paying for it, and facilitating it. Sen. Tuberville is right to stand up instead of getting rolled over.”

In another post today you can read the letter John MacArthur wrote to Gavin Newsom.

John MacArthur Drops Scorching Open Letter to California Governor Gavin …

Los Angeles pastor John MacArthur publicly rebukes Gavin Newsom for ‘diabolical’ policies, invoking Jesus

Pastor John MacArthur warned Newsom his ‘soul lies in grave, eternal peril’ after having ‘twisted’ the words of Jesus

John F. MacArthur Jr..JPG

A prominent Christian pastor in Los Angeles issued an open letter Thursday that rebuked Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom for his recent multi-state billboard campaign that promoted abortion by quoting Jesus.
Pastor John MacArthur, 83, who serves as senior pastor of Grace Community Church in Los Angeles, also accused the governor of exhibiting a worldview whose “diabolical effects” have effectively trashed the state, leading to “epidemics of crime, homelessness, sexual perversions (like homosexuality and transgenderism), and other malignant expressions of human misery that stem directly from corrupt public policy.”

Newsom was met with outrage earlier this month from Christians who took offense when his gubernatorial campaign erected billboards in states where abortion is outlawed or restricted, urging women in such states to come to California to abort their babies.

Some versions of the billboards advertised California’s easily obtainable abortions by quoting Mark 12:31, where Jesus says, “Love your neighbor as yourself. There is no greater commandment than these.” Some members of the clergy and other Christians excoriated Newsom for including Jesus in his pro-abortion billboards, deeming them “disgusting,” “satanic,” and “one of the [worst] distortions of a Bible passage I’ve ever seen.”

CHRISTIANS SLAM NEWSOM FOR ‘DISGUSTING’ PRO-ABORTION BILLBOARDS QUOTING JESUS: ‘SATANIC’

Pastor John MacArthur preaches at Grace Community Church in Los Angeles, California.

Pastor John MacArthur preaches at Grace Community Church in Los Angeles, California. (John MacArthur)

“In mid-September, you revealed to the entire nation how thoroughly rebellious against God you are when you sponsored billboards across America promoting the slaughter of children, whom He creates in the womb,” MacArthur wrote.

“You further compounded the wickedness of that murderous campaign with a reprehensible act of gross blasphemy, quoting the very words of Jesus from Mark 12:31 as if you could somehow twist His meaning and arrogate His name in favor of butchering unborn infants,” the pastor continued.

THOUSANDS OF CHURCHES RAISE ALARM ABOUT SCOPE OF NEW CANADIAN ‘CONVERSION THERAPY’ BAN

“Furthermore, you chose words from the lips of Jesuswithout admitting that in the same moment He gave the greatest commandment: ‘You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength.’ You cannot love God as He commands while aiding in the murder of His image-bearers,” MacArthur said.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom speaks during a news conference after meeting with students at James Denman Middle School on Oct. 1, 2021, in San Francisco, California.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom speaks during a news conference after meeting with students at James Denman Middle School on Oct. 1, 2021, in San Francisco, California. (Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)

MacArthur went on to express concern that Newsom’s “soul lies in grave, eternal peril” for having “twisted” the words of the Bible, and that he will someday be called to give an account before God for his actions as governor.

CANADIAN CLERGY REBUKE TRUDEAU FOR INVOKING EMERGENCIES ACT, OTHER ‘TYRANNICAL ACTIONS’

“Our church, and countless Christians nationwide, are praying for your full repentance. Please respond to the gospel, forsake the path of wickedness you have pursued all your life, turn to Christ, ask for forgiveness, and use your office to advance the cause of righteousness (as is your duty) instead of undermining it (as has been your pattern),” MacArthur admonished.

Newsom’s campaign did not respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment by time of publication.

Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom removes his mask before speaking during a press conference at the Native American Health Center in Oakland, California, on Dec. 22, 2021.

Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom removes his mask before speaking during a press conference at the Native American Health Center in Oakland, California, on Dec. 22, 2021. (Jane Tyska/Digital First Media/East Bay Times via Getty Images)

MacArthur and his church made headlines in 2021 when they won an $800,000 settlement after tussling with state and county authorities for continuing to congregate in defiance of the government’s COVID-19 protocols restricting houses of worship.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Citing Jesus and the Bible as the ultimate authority over his congregation, MacArthur wrote in a lengthy blog post in July 2020 that “we cannot and will not acquiesce to a government-imposed moratorium on our weekly congregational worship or other regular corporate gatherings. Compliance would be disobedience to our Lord’s clear commands.”

—————

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER LGBTQ+ SCHISM

—-

Francis Schaeffer.jpg

Francis Schaeffer later in this blog post discusses what the unbelievers in Romans 1 were rejecting, but first John MacArthur discusses what the unbelievers in the Democratic Party today are affirming and how these same activities were condemned 2000 years ago in Romans 1.

Christians Cannot And MUST Not Vote Democrat – John MacArthur

A Democrat witness testifying before the HouseJudiciary Committee on abortion rights Thursday declared that men can get pregnant and have abortions. This reminds of Romans chapter 1 and also John MacArthur’s commentary on the 2022 Agenda of the Democratic Party:

25 For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator…26 For this reason (M)GOD GAVE THEM OVER  to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.28 And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, GOD GAVE THEM OVER to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper, 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are…inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31 without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, unmerciful; 32 but also give hearty approval to those who practice them.

Here is what John MacArthur had to say:

Now, all of a sudden, not only is this characteristic of our nation, but we now promote it. One of the parties, the Democratic Party, has now made Romans 1, the sins of Romans 1, their agenda. What God condemns, they affirm.

I know from last week’s message that there was some response from people who said, “Why are you getting political?”

Romans 1 is not politics. This has to do with speaking the Word of God through the culture in which we live….it’s about iniquity and judgment. And why do we say this? Because this must be recognized for what it is–sin, serious sin, damning sin, destructive sin.

Dem witness tells House committee men can get pregnant, have abortions

‘I believe that everyone can identify for themselves,’ Aimee Arrambide tells House Judiciary Committee

Aimee Arrambide, the executive director of the abortion rights nonprofit Avow Texas, was asked by Rep. Dan Bishop, R-N.C., to define what “a woman is,” to which she responded, “I believe that everyone can identify for themselves.”
“Do you believe that men can become pregnant and have abortions?” Bishop asked.

“Yes,” Arrambide replied.

The remarks from Arrambide followed a tense exchange between Bishop and Dr. Yashica Robinson, another Democrat witness, after he similarly asked her to define “woman.”

Aimee Arrambide testifies before the House Judiciary Committee on May 11, 2020.  (YouTube screenshot)

Aimee Arrambide testifies before the House Judiciary Committee on May 11, 2020.  (YouTube screenshot) (Screenshot/ House Committee on the Judiciary)

“Dr. Robinson, I noticed in your written testimony you said that you use she/her pronouns. You’re a medical doctor – what is a woman?” Bishop asked Robinson, an OBGYN and board member with Physicians for Reproductive Health.

“I think it’s important that we educate people like you about why we’re doing the things that we do,” Robinson responded. “And so the reason that I use she and her pronouns is because I understand that there are people who become pregnant that may not identify that way. And I think it is discriminatory to speak to people or to call them in such a way as they desire not to be called.”

“Are you going to answer my question? Can you answer the question, what’s a woman?” Bishop asked.

Donna Howard and Aimee Arrambide speaks at Making Virtual Storytelling and Activism Personal during the 2022 SXSW Conference and Festivals at Austin Convention Center on March 14, 2022 in Austin, Texas.

Donna Howard and Aimee Arrambide speaks at Making Virtual Storytelling and Activism Personal during the 2022 SXSW Conference and Festivals at Austin Convention Center on March 14, 2022 in Austin, Texas. (Photo by Hubert Vestil/Getty Images for SXSW)

“I’m a woman, and I will ask you which pronouns do you use?” Robinson replied. “If you tell me that you use she and her pronouns … I’m going to respect you for how you want me to address you.”

“So you gave me an example of a woman, you say that you are a woman, can you tell me otherwise what a woman is?” Bishop asked.

“Yes, I’m telling you, I’m a woman,” Robinson responded.

“Is that as comprehensive a definition as you can give me?” Bishop asked.

“That’s as comprehensive a definition as I will give you today,” Robinson said. “Because I think that it’s important that we focus on what we’re here for, and it’s to talk about access to abortion.”

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

“So you’re not interested in answering the question that I asked unless it’s part of a message you want to deliver…” Bishop fired back.

Wednesday’s hearing, titled, “Revoking your Rights,” addressed the threat to abortion rights after the leaked Supreme Court draft opinion signaled the high court is poised to soon strike down Roe v. Wade.
John MacArthur explains God’s Wrath on unrighteousness from Romans Chapt…

First is what Romans says:

Romans 1:18-32

New American Standard Bible (NASB)

Unbelief and Its Consequences

18 For (A)the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who (B)suppress the truth [a]in unrighteousness, 19 because (C)that which is known about God is evident [b]within them; for God made it evident to them. 20 For (D)since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, (E)being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. 21 For even though they knew God, they did not [c]honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became (F)futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 (G)Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and (H)exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and [d]crawling creatures.

24 Therefore (I)God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be (J)dishonored among them. 25 For they exchanged the truth of God for [e]a (K)lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, (L)who is blessed [f]forever. Amen.

26 For this reason (M)God gave them over to (N)degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is [g]unnatural, 27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, (O)men with men committing [h]indecent acts and receiving in [i]their own persons the due penalty of their error.

28 And just as they did not see fit [j]to acknowledge God any longer, (P)God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper, 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are (Q)gossips, 30 slanderers, [k](R)haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, (S)disobedient to parents, 31 without understanding, untrustworthy, (T)unloving, unmerciful; 32 and although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of (U)death, they not only do the same, but also (V)give hearty approval to those who practice them.

Here is what John MacArthur had to say:

Now, all of a sudden, not only is this characteristic of our nation, but we now promote it. One of the parties, the Democratic Party, has now made Romans 1, the sins of Romans 1, their agenda. What God condemns, they affirm. What God punishes, they exalt. Shocking, really. The Democratic Party has become the anti-God party, the sin-promoting party. By the way, there are seventy-two million registered Democrats in this country who have identified themselves with that party and maybe they need to rethink that identification.

I know from last week’s message that there was some response from people who said, “Why are you getting political?”

Romans 1 is not politics. The Bible is not politics. This has nothing to do with politics. This has to do with speaking the Word of God through the culture in which we live. It has nothing to do with politics. It’s not about personalities; it’s about iniquity and judgment. And why do we say this? Because this must be recognized for what it is–sin, serious sin, damning sin, destructive sin.

WHAT HAS THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY REJECTED? THE ANSWER IS THE GOD WHO HAS REVEALED HIM SELF THROUGH THE BOOK OF NATURE AND THE BOOK OF SCRIPTURE!

God Is There And He Is Not Silent
Psalm 19
Intro. 1) Francis Schaeffer lived from 1912-1984. He was one of the Christian
intellectual giants of the 20th century. He taught us that you could be a Christian and not abandon the mind. One of the books he wrote was entitled He Is There And He Is Not Silent. In that work he makes a crucial and thought provoking statement, “The infinite- personal God is there, but also he is not silent; that changes the whole world…He is there and is not a silent, nor far-off God.” (Works of F.S., Vol 1, 276).
2) God is there and He is not silent. In fact He has revealed Himself to us in 2 books: the book of nature and the book of Scripture. Francis Bacon, a 15th century scientist who is credited by many with developing the scientific method said it this way: “There are 2 books laid before us to study, to prevent us from falling into error: first the volume to the Scriptures, which reveal the will of God; then the volume of the creation, which expresses His power.”
3) Psalm 19 addresses both of God’s books, the book of nature in vs 1-6 and the book of Scripture in vs. 7-14. Described as a wisdom Psalm, its beauty, poetry and splendor led C.S. Lewis to say, “I take this to be the greatest poem in the Psalter and one of the greatest lyrics in the world” (Reflections on the Psalms, 63).
Trans. God is there and He is not silent. How should we hear and listen to the God who talks?
I. Listen To God Speak Through Nature 19:1-6
God has revealed himself to ever rational human on the earth in two ways: 1) nature and 2) conscience. We call this natural or general revelation. In vs. 1-6 David addresses the wonder of nature and creation.

Whatever Happened To The Human Race? | Episode 5 | Truth and History

Related posts:

John MacArthur on Romans 1 and the Democratic Party

First is what Romans says: Romans 1:18-32 New American Standard Bible (NASB) Unbelief and Its Consequences 18 For (A)the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who (B)suppress the truth [a]in unrighteousness, 19 because (C)that which is known about God is evident [b]within them; for God made it evident to […]

Abortion and the Campaign for Immorality (Selected Scriptures) John MacArthur

Abortion and the Campaign for Immorality (Selected Scriptures) John MacArthur Published on Sep 30, 2012 by JohnMacArthurGTY http://www.gty.org/resources/sermons/90-448 What a privilege and joy it is to worship the Lord here at Grace Church. Patricia and I miss it when we’re not here. There’s no place like this. Our hearts are full to overflowing to be […]

John MacArthur: Fulfilled prophecy in the Bible? (Ezekiel 26-28 and the story of Tyre, video clips)

Prophecy–The Biblical Prophesy About Tyre.mp4 Uploaded by TruthIsLife7 on Dec 5, 2010 A short summary of the prophecy about Tyre and it’s precise fulfillment. Go to this link and watch the whole series for the amazing fulfillment from secular sources. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qvt4mDZUefo ________________ John MacArthur on the amazing fulfilled prophecy on Tyre and how it was fulfilled […]

Did God kill someone that I knew? What does I John 5:14-17 mean?

1 John 5:14-17 New American Standard Bible (NASB) 14 This is (A)the confidence which we have [a]before Him, that, (B)if we ask anything according to His will, He hears us. 15 And if we know that He hears us in whatever we ask, (C)we know that we have the requests which we have asked from […]

MUSIC MONDAY Beatles last song FREE AS A BIRD

_________________

The Beatles – Free As A Bird

Published on Apr 5, 2016

The Beatles Now Streaming. Listen to the Come Together Playlist here: http://smarturl.it/BeatlesCT
Download Anthology: http://smarturl.it/AnthologyBeatles
Buy Anthology: http://smarturl.it/AnthologyPhys

The Beatles Anthology project was a huge undertaking and to complement the historical and archival material that was made available both on CD and on video, the band recorded two new tracks. Released in December 1995, ‘Free As A Bird’ was the first of the new songs. Instead of recording a completely new composition together, Paul, George and Ringo created a track based on John’s 1977 demo, recorded at his and Yoko’s home in the Dakota in New York City.

Jeff Lynne, a good friend of George Harrison’s and a fellow member of the Travelling Wilburys, was drafted in to help with production. The ‘Free As A Bird’ video had it’s first public outing on America’s ABC TV on Sunday November 19th 1995, and the track was subsequently aired on BBC Radio 1 the day after – the day before Anthology came out. The single release followed two weeks later and made No.2 on the UK charts, while in the US ‘Free As A Bird’ enjoyed an 11-week run on the best-seller list, peaking at No.5.

Joe Pytka, a talented American filmmaker who had made several music videos with Michael Jackson, directed the beautiful video. The visual concept was a ‘bird’s-eye-view’ of countless Beatles songs.

Free as a Bird

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article is about the Beatles song. For the album by Supertramp, see Free as a Bird (album). For the Lynyrd Skynyrd song, see Free Bird. For the concept in Germanic law, see Vogelfrei.
“Free as a Bird”
Beatles-singles-freeasabird.jpg
Single by The Beatles
from the album Anthology 1
B-side Christmas Time (Is Here Again)
Released 4 December 1995 (UK)
12 December 1995 (US)
Format 7″, CD
Recorded
  • c. 1977
  • February–March 1994
Studio
Genre Rock
Length 4:26
Label Apple Records 58497
Writer(s) Original composition by Lennon; The Beatles version by Lennon, McCartney, Harrison and Starkey[1]
Producer(s) Jeff Lynne, John Lennon, Paul McCartney, George Harrison, Ringo Starr
The Beatles singles chronology
Baby It’s You
(1995)
Free as a Bird
(1995)
Real Love
(1996)
Music video
“Free as a Bird” on YouTube
Music sample
MENU
0:00

Free as a Bird” is a song originally composed and recorded in 1977 as a home demo by John Lennon. In 1995, a studio version of the recording, incorporating contributions from Paul McCartney, George Harrison and Ringo Starr, was released as a single by The Beatles. It was released 25 years after the break-up of the band and 15 years after the death of Lennon.

The single was released as part of the promotion for The Beatles Anthology video documentary and the band’s Anthology 1 compilation album. For the Anthology project, McCartney asked Lennon’s widow Yoko Ono for unreleased material by Lennon to which the three remaining ex-Beatles could contribute. “Free as a Bird” was one of two such songs (along with “Real Love“) for which McCartney, Harrison, and Starr contributed additional instrumentation, vocals, and arrangements. Jeff Lynne of Electric Light Orchestra, who had worked with Harrison on Harrison’s album Cloud Nine and as part of the Traveling Wilburys, was asked to co-produce the record.

The music video for “Free as a Bird” was produced by Vincent Joliet and directed by Joe Pytka; from the point of view of a bird in flight, it depicts many references to Beatles songs, such as “Strawberry Fields Forever,” “Penny Lane“, “Paperback Writer“, “A Day in the Life“, “Eleanor Rigby“, “Revolution“, and “Helter Skelter“. “Free as a Bird” won the 1997 Grammy Award for Best Pop Performance by a Duo or Group with Vocal and was the Beatles’ 34th Top 10 single in the United States. The song secured the group at least one Top 40 hit in four different decades (1960s, 1970s, 1980s and 1990s).

Origins[edit]

The Dakota building, where Lennon lived and composed, and where he recorded a demo of the song on cassette

McCartney, Harrison and Starr originally intended to record some incidental background music, as a trio, for the Anthology project, but later realised, according to Starr, that they wanted to record “new music”.[2] According to Harrison, they had always agreed that if one of them was not in the band, the others would never replace them and, “… go out as the Beatles”, and that the “only other person that could be in it was John.”[3]

McCartney then asked Ono if she had any unreleased recordings by Lennon, so she sent him cassette tapes of four songs.[4] “Free as a Bird” was recorded by Lennon in 1977,[5] in his and Ono’s Dakota building apartment in New York City, but was not complete. Lennon introduced the song on the cassette by imitating a New York accent and saying, “Free—as a boid” (bird).[6][7][8] The other songs were “Grow Old With Me“, “Real Love“, and “Now and Then“.[9] Ono says that it was Harrison and former Beatles road manager Neil Aspinall who initially asked her about the concept of adding vocals and instrumentation to Lennon’s demo tapes. Ono stated: “People have said it was all agreed when Paul came over to New York to induct John into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, but it was all settled before then. I just used that occasion to hand over the tapes personally to Paul.”[10]

McCartney went to Ono’s home after the induction ceremony at the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame to listen to, and receive, the Lennon demo tapes; he recalls the meeting with Ono:

She was there with Sean … and she played us a couple of tracks. There were two newies on mono cassettes which he did at home … [s]o I checked it out with Sean, because I didn’t want him to have a problem with it. He said, “Well, it’ll be weird hearing a dead guy on lead vocal. But give it a try.” I said to them both, “If it doesn’t work out, you can veto it.” When I told George and Ringo I’d agreed to that they were going, “What? What if we love it?” It didn’t come to that, luckily. I said to Yoko, “Don’t impose too many conditions on us, it’s really difficult to do this, spiritually. We don’t know, we may hate each other after two hours in the studio and just walk out. So don’t put any conditions, it’s tough enough.”[11]

During an interview for the Anthology project, McCartney revealed that he was surprised to learn that Lennon’s demos of “Grow Old With Me” and “Real Love” had already been released and were well known by Lennon fans.[6][12] Starr admitted that when he first listened to the recording he found it very emotional.[13]

Recording[edit]

George Martin, who had produced most of the Beatles’ 1960s recordings, turned down an invitation to produce “Free as a Bird” due to hearing problems (though he subsequently managed to produce and direct the Anthology series). Harrison, in turn, suggested Lynne as producer (co-producer of his 1987 album, Cloud Nine) and work commenced at McCartney’s studio in February 1994.[14] Geoff Emerick and Jon Jacobs were chosen to engineer the new tracks.

The original 1977 tape of Lennon singing the song was recorded on a mono cassette, with vocals and piano on the same track.[15] They were impossible to separate, so Lynne had to produce the track with voice and piano together, but commented that it was good for the integrity of the project, as Lennon was not only singing occasional lines, but also playing on the song.[16]

Although Lennon had died in 1980, Starr said that the three remaining Beatles agreed they would pretend that Lennon had “gone for lunch”, or had gone for a “cup of tea”.[17] The remaining Beatles recorded a track around Lennon’s basic song idea, but which had gaps they had to fill in musically.[18] Some chords were changed, and the arrangement was expanded to include breaks for McCartney and Harrison to sing extra lines. Harrison played slide guitar in the solo.[19]

The Beatles’ overdubs and production were recorded between February and March 1994 in Sussex, England, at McCartney’s home studio.[20] It ends with a slight coda including a strummed ukulele by Harrison (an instrument he was known to have played often) and the voice of John Lennon played backwards.[21] The message, when played in reverse, is “Turned out nice again”, which was the catchphrase of George Formby.[8] The final result sounds like “made by John Lennon”, which, according to McCartney, was unintentional and was only discovered after the surviving Beatles reviewed the final mix.[22] When Starr heard McCartney and Harrison singing the harmonies, and later the finished song, he said that it sounded just like them [the Beatles]. He explained his comment by saying that he looked at the project as “an outsider”.[23] Lynne fully expected the finished track to sound like the Beatles, as that was his premise for the project, but Harrison added: “It’s gonna sound like them if it is them… It sounds like them now.”[24]

McCartney, Harrison and Starr all agreed that the recording process was more pleasurable than when they later recorded “Real Love” (the second song chosen for release); as it was almost finished, they had very little input, and felt like sidemen for Lennon.[25]

Music video[edit]

The music video for “Free as a Bird” was produced by Vincent Joliet and directed by Joe Pytka and depicts, from the point of view of a bird in flight, many references to Beatles songs, such as “Penny Lane”, “Paperback Writer”, “A Day in the Life”, “Eleanor Rigby”, “Helter Skelter”, “Piggies”, “The Continuing Story of Bungalow Bill”, “Strawberry Fields Forever”, “Doctor Robert”, and “The Fool on The Hill”. Between 80 and 100 allusions to the Beatles’ story, music and lyrics in the video have been estimated.[26] Although the bird can be heard at the beginning of the video, it is never seen. Neil Aspinall (Apple Records executive at the time) said that this was because no-one could agree on what kind of bird it should be.[27] Pytka had to send his ideas to McCartney, Harrison and Starr, as well as Ono, to make sure they all agreed before he could proceed with the filming of the video. Derek Taylor (ex-Apple Records executive) sent a two-page letter to Pytka confirming that he could proceed, and personally encouraged and supported Pytka’s ideas.[28] The video was filmed in as many authentic locations as possible: Penny Lane was made by Pytka’s art department to look as it was in the 1950s, and other locations filmed were The Liver Building, and Liverpool Docks (as a reference to Lennon’s father Alfred Lennon).[29]

Although Pytka fixed the ideas on a storyboard, he abandoned it as soon as filming began, and followed ideas based on what angles and perspectives the steadycam camera produced. One instance was the filming of the car crash, which Pytka filmed for hours from above, but realised that a steadycam shot on the ground was a much better idea.[30] Archive footage was used by imposing it on scenes shot by Pytka, who utilised a greenscreen stage to digitally blend it into the finished film, such as Paul’s Old English Sheepdog in the graveyard, and the elephant in the ballroom procession scene.[31] The elephant was put in last, as Aspinall phoned Pytka and said that Starr liked the scene, but insisted an elephant be put in it, which Pytka later did, as he had already put a sitar in at the request of Harrison.[32] Apart from the steadycam shots, Pytka used a Russian-made Akil-crane for sweeping overhead shots, such as the Abbey Road zebra crossing shot at the end, as well as a remote-controlled toy helicopter with a camera added to it for intricate aerial shots.[33] To make it more interesting, two Blue Meanies make cameos.

Harrison played the ukulele in the studio for the song, and asked to appear as the ukulele player seen only from behind at the very end of the video. Pytka resisted this, as he felt it would be wrong for any contemporary members of the Beatles to appear on screen. Pytka later stated that it was “heartbreaking” that Harrison had not played the role, particularly after Harrison’s death in 2001 and upon discovering that the ukulele was not a sample of an old song as Pytka had assumed.[34] The video won the Grammy Award for Best Short Form Music Video in 1997.[8]

On 6 November 2015, Apple Records released a new deluxe version of the 1 album in different editions and variations (known as 1+). Most of the tracks on 1 have been remixed from the original multi-track masters by Giles Martin. Giles Martin, with Jeff Lynne also remixed “Free as a Bird” to accompany the music video for the DVD and Blu-ray releases. The remix of “Free as a Bird” cleans up Lennon’s vocal further, and uses a different take of Harrison’s vocal phrase, replacing the lyric “whatever happened to the life that we once knew” with “whatever happened to love that we once knew”. Towards the end of the track, this version also contains a clip of Lennon stating the phrase “turned out nice again” played forward – which was played backwards in the original mix of the song. McCartney’s lead vocal, buried in the original mix to serve as a double track for Lennon’s own vocal, can now be heard more prominently in the second verse.

Chart performance[edit]

“Free as a Bird” was premiered on BBC Radio 1 in the early hours of 20 November 1995.[35] It was released as a single in the UK on 4 December 1995, two weeks after its appearance on the Anthology 1 album. The single sold 120,000 copies in its first week, entering the UK Singles Chart at No. 2. It remained on the chart for eight weeks.[36] In the US, the song reached No. 6 on the Billboard Hot 100, becoming The Beatles’ 34th Top 10 single in America.[7][37] It was the group’s first Top 10 song in the U.S. in nineteen and a half years, the longest span for the group between Top 10 hits since first charting in America in 1964.

Critical reception[edit]

“Free as a Bird” marked the first time a single containing new material had been released under the Beatles’ name since “The Long and Winding Road” in the United States in 1970.[6][7] The promotional video was broadcast during episode one of The Beatles Anthology that aired on ITV in the UK and ABC in the US.[38][39]

“Free as a Bird” was greeted with mixed reviews. Its release was criticised by Caroline Sullivan in The Guardian as a publicity gimmick, exploiting the Beatles brand, and owing less to the Beatles than to Lynne.[40] Andy Gill in The Independent called the song “disappointingly low-key. … George’s guitar weeps gently enough when required, but the overall effect is of a dirge.”[41] Ian MacDonald, writer of Revolution in the Head, declared it to be a “dreary song” that stood no comparison with the Beatles’ sixties music.[14]Chris Carter, now the host of Breakfast with the Beatles, commented: “I would value any song (especially if it was great) performed by John, Paul, George and Ringo, no matter how (or when) it was recorded.”[42] “Free as a Bird” later won the 1997 Grammy Award for Best Pop Performance by a Duo or Group with Vocal.[7]

Personnel[edit]

According to Ian MacDonald:[43]

Track listings[edit]

All songs written by John Lennon, Paul McCartney, George Harrison and Ringo Starr, except where noted.

  • 7″ UK: R6422 / USA: NR-58497
  1. “Free as a Bird” – 2:42
  2. Christmas Time (Is Here Again)” – 3:02
  • CD UK: CDR6422 / USA: CDP 58497
  1. “Free as a Bird” – 4:26
  2. I Saw Her Standing There” (Lennon–McCartney) – 2:51
    • Recorded 11 February 1963 at EMI Studios, London
    • Produced by George Martin
    • This version (take 9) was recorded after the version released on the album Please Please Me (take 1). The introductory count-in from take 9 was edited onto the start of take 1 for the album.
  3. This Boy” (Lennon–McCartney) – 3:17
    • Recorded 17 October 1963 at EMI Studios, London
    • Produced by George Martin
    • Two incomplete versions (takes 12 and 13), which both break down into laughter.
  4. “Christmas Time (Is Here Again)” – 3:02

Charts and certifications[edit]

Charts[edit]

Chart (1995–96) Peak
position
Australia (ARIA)[44] 6
Austria (Ö3 Austria Top 40)[45] 32
Belgium (Ultratop 50 Flanders)[46] 11
Belgium (Ultratop 50 Wallonia)[47] 12
Finland (Suomen virallinen lista)[48] 7
France (SNEP)[49] 23
Germany (Official German Charts)[50] 37
Ireland (IRMA)[51] 5
Netherlands (Single Top 100)[52] 9
New Zealand (Recorded Music NZ)[53] 26
Norway (VG-lista)[54] 14
Sweden (Sverigetopplistan)[55] 3
Switzerland (Schweizer Hitparade)[56] 25
UK Singles (Official Charts Company)[57] 2
US Billboard Hot 100[58] 6

Certifications[edit]

Region Certification Certified units/Sales
United States (RIAA)[59] Gold 500,000^
United Kingdom (BPI)[60] Silver 200,000^
*sales figures based on certification alone
^shipments figures based on certification alone

References[edit]

External links[edit]

Free as a Bird
Free as a bird
It’s the next best thing to be
Free as a bird
La, la, la, la
Home and dry
Like a homing bird I fly
As a bird on wings
Whatever happened to the life that we once knew
Can we really live without each other?
Where did we lose the touch
That seemed to mean so much
It always made me feel so
Free as a bird
It’s the next best thing to be
Free as a bird
La, la, la, la
Home and dry
Like a homing bird I fly
As a bird on wings
Whatever happened to
The life that we once knew?
Always made me feel so free
Free as a bird
It’s the next best thing to be
Free as a bird
Free as a bird
Free as a bird
Ooh, ooh, ooh

____

Related posts:

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 63 THE BEATLES (Part O , BECAUSE THE BEATLES LOVED HUMOR IT IS FITTING THAT 6 COMEDIANS MADE IT ON THE COVER OF “SGT. PEPPER’S”!) (Feature on artist H.C. Westermann )

__________________ A Funny Press Interview of The Beatles in The US (1964) Funny Pictures of The Beatles Published on Oct 23, 2012 funny moments i took from the beatles movie; A Hard Days Night ___________________ Scene from Help! The Beatles Funny Clips and Outtakes (Part 1) The Beatles * Wildcat* (funny) Uploaded on Mar 20, […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 62 THE BEATLES (Part N The last 4 people alive from cover of Stg. Pepper’s and the reason Bob Dylan was put on the cover!) (Feature on artist Larry Bell)

_____________________ Great article on Dylan and Sergeant Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band Cover: A famous album by the fab four – The Beatles – is “Sergeant peppers lonely hearts club band“. The album itself is one of the must influential albums of all time. New recording techniques and experiments with different styles of music made this […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 61 THE BEATLES (Part M, Why was Karl Marx on the cover of Stg. Pepper’s?) (Feature on artist George Petty)

__________________________ Beatles 1966 Last interview 69 THE BEATLES TWO OF US As a university student, Karl Marx (1818-1883) joined a movement known as the Young Hegelians, who strongly criticized the political and cultural establishments of the day. He became a journalist, and the radical nature of his writings would eventually get him expelled by the […]

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 60 THE BEATLES (Part L, Why was Aleister Crowley on the cover of Stg. Pepper’s?) (Feature on artist Jann Haworth )

____________ Aleister Crowley on cover of Stg. Pepper’s: _______________ I have dedicated several posts to this series on the Beatles and I don’t know when this series will end because Francis Schaeffer spent a lot of time listening to the Beatles and talking and writing about them and their impact on the culture of the 1960’s. […]

_______

Paul Stanley of KISS: “There ARE individuals who as adults may decide reassignment is their needed choice but turning this into a game or parents normalizing it as some sort of natural alternative or believing that because a little boy likes to play dress up in his sister’s clothes or a girl in her brother’s, we should lead them steps further down a path that’s far from the innocence of what they are doing,” he continued.

——

After Life 2 – Man identifies as an 8 year old girl

Spelling Bee Contestant Asks The Definition of “Woman”

Kiss, Twisted Sister Rock Stars Slam ‘Rash’ Push to Trans Children

Two prominent rock stars are voicing their opposition to the activist push to normalize and transition children who say they identify as transgender.

“There is a BIG difference between teaching acceptance and normalizing and even encouraging participation in a lifestyle that confuses young children into questioning their sexual identification as though some sort of game and then parents in some cases allow it,” Paul Stanley, lead singer and co-founder of the band Kiss, said in a statement posted on Twitter.

“There ARE individuals who as adults may decide reassignment is their needed choice but turning this into a game or parents normalizing it as some sort of natural alternative or believing that because a little boy likes to play dress up in his sister’s clothes or a girl in her brother’s, we should lead them steps further down a path that’s far from the innocence of what they are doing,” he continued.

Stanley emphasized that some adults are “mistakenly” confusing “teaching acceptance with normalizing and encouraging a situation that has been a struggle for those truly affected and have turned it into a sad and dangerous fad.”

Stanley’s remarks quickly sparked criticism on Twitter as proponents of transitioning childrenaccused him of making an “extremely bad take.” But rock star Dee Snider was quick to support him.

“You know what? there was a time where I ‘felt pretty’ too,” tweeted Snider, the lead singer and songwriter of the heavy metal band Twisted Sister. “Glad my parents didn’t jump to any rash conclusions!”

“Well said,” he added of Stanley’s statement.

Paul Stanley of Kiss performs at Arena di Verona on July 11, 2022, in Verona, Italy. (Photo: Francesco Prandoni/Getty Images)

It’s unclear whether the rock stars had discussed the push to normalize trans-identifying kidsprivately. But advocates, who want children to grow up before they make life-altering decisions, believe the denouncements may open the door for more public dissent.

Media outlets were quick to portray Stanley and Snider in a negative light. “KISS and Twisted Sister Rock Legends Go Full-on Transphobic,” claimed The Advocate. “Kiss’ Paul Stanley Has ‘Thoughts’ About Parents Who Support Kids’ Gender Identities,” said Rolling Stone. Billboard accused Stanley of forwarding “anti-trans talking points when it comes to minors.”

Activist LGBTQ groups, lawmakers, and President Joe Biden’s administration have insisted that “gender-affirming care” is crucial to the well-being of youth who say they identify as transgender. These activists use the phrase “gender-affirming care” to mask the grisly realities of transitioning—hormones, puberty blockers, and surgeries to remove or “create” breasts, remove or “create” a penis, facial feminization, and more.

But as activists push this rhetoric, more and more detransitioners are coming forward and condemning the school systems, therapists, activists, and surgeons who permanently altered their lives. These individuals, and others who speak out against the ideological movement, face intense criticism and hatred from online activists, who insist that trans-identifying individuals must be affirmed.

In 2021 alone, about 42,000 children and teens across the U.S. received a gender dysphoria diagnosis, according to data compiled by Komodo for Reuters. That is almost double the number of gender dysphoria diagnoses from 2020 (24,847). Between 2017 and 2021, that analysis found that at least 121,882 children between the ages of 6 and 17 were diagnosed with gender dysphoria.

Those numbers arguably undercount the children who have undergone experimental interventions because they don’t include treatment that wasn’t covered by insurance and they don’t include patients who were not diagnosed with gender dysphoria.

Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the url or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.

NBC’s Chuck Todd ridiculed for saying ‘gender is a spectrum

Todd made the comment during a spirited interview on Sunday with GOP presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy, who has argued for limitations on gender affirming treatments for those under the age of 18.

“Below the age of 18, I think it’s perfectly legitimate to say that we won’t allow genital mutilation or chemical castration through puberty blockers,” Ramaswamy, the biopharmaceutical mogul and author, told Todd during the interview on Sunday.

“You’re calling it that, but how do you know it’s that?” Todd pressed Ramaswamy.

“Again, how do you know? Are you confident that you know that gender is as binary as you’re describing it? Are you confident?”

“I am,” Ramaswamy replied.

“That there isn’t a spectrum?” Todd asked.

Chuck Todd on "Meet the Press"
Chuck Todd, moderator of NBC’s “Meet the Press,” said on Sunday that “gender is a spectrum.”
NBC News

Ramaswamy answered: “I am.”

“Do you know this as a scientist?” Todd asked.

“Well, there’s two X chromosomes if you’re a woman, and an X and a Y that means you’re a man…,” Ramaswamy said.

The two men talk over each other before Todd says: “There is a lot of scientific research that says gender is a spectrum.”

“Chuck, I respectfully disagree,” Ramaswamy said.

The GOP candidate said gender dysphoria — which is characterized by the American Psychiatric Association as “clinically significant distress or impairment related to gender incongruence” — “has been characterized as a mental health disorder and I don’t think it’s compassionate to affirm that.”

<img class=”i-amphtml-intrinsic-sizer” role=”presentation” src=”data:;base64,” alt=”” aria-hidden=”true” />GOP presidential hopeful Vivek Ramaswamy on "Meet the Press"
Todd made the remark during an interview with GOP presidential hopeful Vivek Ramaswamy.
NBC News

“I think that’s cruelty,” Ramaswamy said.

“When a kid is crying out for help … you’ve got to ask the question of what else is going wrong at home,” the GOP hopeful said.

“What else is going wrong at school, let’s be compassionate and get to the heart of that rather than playing this game as though we’re actually changing our medical understanding for the last hundred years.”

Todd conceded that “the last thing [parents] want to do is consider something like [gender affirming treatments]” for their children.

<img class=”i-amphtml-intrinsic-sizer” role=”presentation” src=”data:;base64,” alt=”” aria-hidden=”true” />GOP presidential hopeful Vivek Ramaswamy on NBC's "Meet the Press" with Chuck Todd.
“Are you confident that you know that gender is as binary as you’re describing it?” Todd asked Ramaswamy.
NBC News

“But if that is what they think could help their child pursue happiness or not to kill themselves … why take away that option?” Todd asked.

“Again, why shouldn’t it be up to the parent?”

Ramaswamy replied that “we’ve created a culture that teaches parents that they’re being bigoted or that they’re bad people if they don’t actually take those steps.”

“Gender dysphoria for the rare few people who’ve suffered it, is a condition of suffering,” he added.

“My question is why on Earth are we going out of our way to create even more of it?”

<img class=”i-amphtml-intrinsic-sizer” role=”presentation” src=”data:;base64,” alt=”” aria-hidden=”true” />GOP presidential hopeful Vivek Ramaswamy
Ramaswamy has urged a ban on gender affirming treatments for people under the age of 18.
NBC News

Todd’s comments sparked reaction on Twitter.

“Didn’t you know? Cable news pundits became the best TV scientists and physicians during COVID. The government talking points made them experts,” one Twitter user wrote.

Another Twitter user commented: “There is literally no real science suggesting there are more than 2 sex chromosomes.”

“This is very simple to resolve. Show us what the non-male and non-female chromosomes look like on these ‘gender spectrums’,” a Twitter user wrote.

Others on Twitter supported Todd’s assertion, citing a 2018 article by Scientific American which claimed that biologists “now think there is a larger spectrum than just binary female and male.”

What do you think? Post a comment.

Republicans have sought to curtail the availability of gender transitioning methods to youngsters while LGBTQ activists said the limitations could place children’s mental health in danger.

Bud Light, the iconic beer brand which is the property of Anheuser-Busch, came under fire for its decision to hire Dylan Mulvaney, a social media influencer who garnered a following of millions who watched as she transitioned from a male to a female during the COVID-19 pandemic, as a pitchwoman.

The Post has sought comment from NBC News.

These 3 Women Tried Transgenderism, and Then Stopped

Jennifer Lahl’s documentary “The Detransition Diaries,” released Monday, tracks the stories of three female detransitioners, including Helena Kerschner. (Photo: The Center for Bioethics and Culture Network)

A documentary, released Monday, unveils the stories of three women who previously identified as transgender in a futile attempt to escape depression and suicidal thoughts.

Jennifer Lahl, a former pediatric nurse and current president of The Center for Bioethics and Culture Network, produced her most recent documentary, “The Detransition Diaries,” after a series of films highlighting bioethical issues.

Her film tracks the stories of Helena Kerschner, Grace Lidinsky-Smith, and Cat Cattinson, three women who believed their mental and emotional trauma would be solved by transitioning to the opposite sex. Each woman underwent hormone treatment and one had her breasts removed as well.

“We are following the news and the studies, and the evidence that shows this uptick in rapid-onset gender dysphoria [is something] young girls are particularly prone to,” Lahl told The Daily Signal in a phone call. Gender dysphoria refers to the condition of persistently and painfully identifying as the gender opposite one’s biological sex. “Young girls are getting sucked into this.”

Rapid-onset gender dysphoria is a recent phenomenon in which children and adolescents are suddenly, and without prior indication, identifying as the opposite sex.

Lahl found that her previous documentary “Trans Mission: What’s the Rush to Reassign Gender?” struck a chord with a broad audience. Firsthand accounts of men and women who “believed they were born in the wrong body” and thought gender transition “was the solution to all their problems” resonated with thousands of people, Lahl explained.

“As documentary filmmakers, we made the editorial decision that we are going to focus on women, realizing that this applies to men too,” she remarked on her most recent film.

“The Detransition Diaries” cover. (Photo: The Center for Bioethics and Culture Network)

Helena Kerschner, one of the detransitioners featured in Lahl’s film, says she struggled with depression, isolation, self-harm, an eating disorder, and suicidal thoughts as an early teen. She was introduced to the transgender belief system through Tumblr culture at 13.

Tumblr’s message was: “If you don’t like your body, that’s a sign you’re trans,” she notes.

After she came out as transgender, teachers and adults who never noticed her struggles before suddenly “bent over backward” to accommodate her new-found identity.

She did everything to make herself appear masculine. Eventually, Kerschner was prescribed testosterone at 18 after a single consultation at Planned Parenthood.

After a few weeks, she noticed how irritable she had become. “I couldn’t control myself,” Kerschner recalls in the documentary. When she got angry, she felt she needed to hurt someone—so she hurt herself. She eventually resorted to the emergency room, where staff directed her to the psych unit. Doctors diagnosed her with borderline personality disorder and psychosis, and sent her home with prescriptions for four different medications. She wound up in the hospital a few weeks later.

“My life became a total disaster,” she says. “I wasn’t functioning, I couldn’t hold a job, I wasn’t going to school—I felt like a monster.”

Seventeen months later, she stopped taking testosterone. Her negative symptoms vanished. During this time, not a single medical professional suggested that her hormone treatment was causing these symptoms, she remarks in the film.

Grace Lidinsky-Smith, another detransitioner featured in the film, noted that she felt a rush of energy when she first started testosterone treatment. Though she had some underlying anxiety, she told herself this was “internalized transphobia,” she says to the filmmakers.

Grace Lidinsky-Smith in “The Detransition Diaries.” (Photo: The Center for Bioethics and Culture Network)

Cat Cattinson describes a similar euphoric feeling when she first went on testosterone.  It was “one of the better antidepressants I had taken,” she recalls.

Cat Cattinson in “The Detransition Diaries.” (Photo: The Center for Bioethics and Culture Network)

Lidinsky-Smith, unlike the other two women, went forward with a double mastectomy. Looking back, she believed she would feel better “because she’d be in a body that fit her better.” After her breasts were removed, she recalls, she looked down at the gashes on her chest. “I had the most awful feeling.”

She found others online also had an “intense, suicidal despair after surgery … and then got over it and felt better.” But the experience planted a seed of doubt, she explains. She found a testimony of another person who had transitioned from female to male. As the person described, a desire for “a small amount of masculinization” led to full-out body dysphoria.

At that point, Lidinsky-Smith stopped testosterone and slowly reversed course, eventually growing comfortable enough to use her birth name. “It became important to just accept myself as myself,” she explains.

Kershner and Cattinson described similar breaking points. Kershner realized: “This is not what I thought it would be,” adding that she believed “once I’m a boy, my confidence is gonna come out.” Instead, as she describes, she became dysfunctional.

As Cattinson explains, three months into her testosterone treatment, she found a dramatic drop in her voice. “Nothing was coming out except air and squeaks,” she describes. She stopped going to social events and performing live.

Like the other women, she found an online community of detransitioners and doctors who revealed the hidden underbelly of the trans movement.

She began questioning the basis of transgender ideology: the “idea that we should define a woman based on what’s in a person’s head,” as she describes it. Does “what you believe in your head … really trump the biological reality of being an adult female?” she wondered.

As the documentary concludes, Lidinsky-Smith notes that she is worried about those who continue to get sucked into gender transition treatment, when they can find the answer to their problems elsewhere.

All three women interviewed suffered from suicidal ideation and depression. Each believed that changing her name, pronouns, appearance, and hormones would solve her problems, yet each found her emotional state dramatically worsened as a result.

“I think the fallout will be severe,” Lidinsky-Smith notes. Remarking on the growing community of detransitioners, she adds, “Our voices can no longer be denied.”

Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the url or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.

The Woke Zone Trilogy

John Stossel takes up for Babylon Bee and notes “Even a few left-leaning comedians like Ricky Gervais and Dave Chappelle are mocking the intolerant left!”

Late night hosts like Stephen Colbert, seen speaking during the Montclair Film Festival on Oct. 23, passionately defend leftists to the point of lecturing, rather than providing comedic relief. (Photo: Manny Carabel/Getty Images)

A woman tells the cop who stopped her in a carpool lane she’s allowed to drive there because her pronouns are “they” and “them.”

That’s from a video by a conservative Christian satire site called the Babylon Bee. Their humor gets millions of views.

“Christian conservatives used to … be very dour and self-serious,” says Bee editor-in-chief Kyle Mann in my new video.

Today, he says, it’s the left who are self-serious. “They’re the ones that have trouble laughing at themselves.”

For example, late night hosts like Jimmy Kimmel and Stephen Colbert passionately defend COVID-19 vaccines.

“It is a lecture,” complains Mann.

“The left used to be anti-establishment,” adds Bee actress Chandler Juliet. Now, she says, ‘They’ve become the blob. … We’re super happy to be leading the comedic conversation on the right.”

One Babylon Bee video, “The Woke Zone,” makes fun of the way the media ignored violence and arson during the George Floyd protests.

“Do you ever feel gratitude to the left that they give you so much material?” I ask.

“We have to write things that are funnier than things they’re actually doing,” Mann responds. “That makes our job very difficult.”

One Bee sketch portrays its writers struggling to find new material.

“John Kerry warns that the war in Ukraine might distract from climate change!” suggests one.

Can’t do it, explains another. “It actually happened.” Yes, Kerry really did say that.

“Cosmo magazine features a morbidly obese woman on the cover as the picture of health” and, “Math professor says ‘two plus two equals four’ is racist!” are among other ideas that can’t be used as jokes.

“A math professor really said two plus two equals four is racist?” I ask.

It’s “a colonialist, white supremacist idea,” explains Mann.

Today the Bee reaches more people than The Onion. The establishment doesn’t like that, so some people actually sic so-called fact checkers on the Bee.

One article fact-checked by Snopes was titled, “Bernie Sanders Vows To Round Up Remaining ISIS Members, Allow Them To Vote.”

“Does Snopes not understand that you’re making jokes?” I ask.

“I think that they know what our intention is,” answers Juliet. “They just don’t like us.”

Recently, Twitter banned the Bee. Their offense was tweeting an article that named Assistant Secretary of Health Rachel Levine “Babylon Bee’s Man of the Year.”

Levine is a transgender woman. Calling her the man of the year is a joke I wouldn’t make. But it doesn’t need to be censored.

Twitter says they’ll allow the Bee back on the platform only if they delete the tweet. Mann says he won’t.

“Twitter has the capability to just delete the tweet themselves. They want us to bend the knee and be the ones to click, ‘Yes, we acknowledge hateful conduct.’ We’re not going to do that.”

Today, a lot of comedians attract sizable audiences by mocking the left. Some I found funny are JP Sears, Ryan Long and FreedomToons.

The culture is changing.

The highest rating late-night comic these days is often not Colbert, Kimmel or Fallon, but Greg Gutfeld of Fox.

Even a few left-leaning comedians like Ricky Gervais and Dave Chappelle are mocking the intolerant left.

“I talk about AIDS, famine, cancer, the Holocaust, rape, pedophilia … the one thing you mustn’t joke about is identity politics,” says Gervais in his recent Netflix special.

Professional media critics trashed him for that. But the special was hugely popular with the public.

The Rotten Tomatoes ratings are revealing. Critics gave Gervais’ special a 29% rating, calling it “terribly unfunny” and “a detestable combination of smug and obtuse.”

Viewers gave it a 92% rating.

The same is true of Chapelle’s latest special, “The Closer.” Critics give it just 40%. The audience gives it 95%.

Clearly, many people are tired of smug, condescending humor.

I’m glad the Babylon Bee, and others, give us an alternative.

COPYRIGHT 2022 BY JFS PRODUCTIONS INC.

The Daily Signal publishes a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Heritage Foundation.

Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the url or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.

After Life 2 – Man identifies as an 8 year old girl

—-

After Life on Netflix

——

Before I get into the fine article by Brendan O’Neill which I present in its entirety, I wanted to quote Francis Schaeffer who spent his life examining the humanism that now Ricky Gervais embraces!

All humans have moral motions and that is why Ricky Gervais knows it is wrong to let biological men use ladies’ bathrooms!!!!!!

Francis Schaffer in his book THE GOD WHO IS THERE addresses these same issues:

“[in Christianity] there is a sufficient basis for morals. Nobody has ever discovered a way of having real “morals” without a moral absolute. If there is no moral absolute, we are left with hedonism (doing what I like) or some form of the social contract theory (what is best for society as a a hole is right). However, neither of these alternative corresponds to the moral motions that men have. Talk to people long enough and deeply enough, and you will find that they consider some things are really right and something are really wrong. Without absolutes, morals as morals cease to exist, and humanistic mean starting from himself is unable to find the absolute he needs. But because the God of the Bible is there, real morals exist. Within this framework I can say one action is right and another wrong, without talking nonsense.” 117

Francis Schaeffer in the film WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE HUMAN RACE?

Francis and Edith Schaeffer

Brendan O’Neill

Ricky Gervais is guilty of blasphemy

He has mocked identity politics – the god of our times

I have long thought that if Life of Brian came out today, it wouldn’t be Christians kicking up a fuss about it — it would be trans activists.

When Monty Python’s classic tale of a man mistaken for a Messiah came to cinemas in 1979, people of faith weren’t happy. They saw it as taking the mick out of Christ and they aired their displeasure noisily. Nuns in New York picketed cinemas. In Ireland the film was banned for eight years.

In 2022 I reckon it would be a very different story. It wouldn’t be Monty Python’s ribbing of the gospels that would outrage the chattering classes — it would be their mockery of trans people.

Life of Brian was way ahead of time. It was Terf before Terf was even a thing. There is a brilliantly observed scene in which Stan of the People’s Front of Judea — or is it the Judean People’s Front? — says he wants to become Loretta.

‘I want to be a woman. From now on, I want you all to call me Loretta’, says Stan, played by Eric Idle. When the others push back and say he can’t just become a woman, he says: ‘It’s my right as a man.’ Which was remarkably perspicacious.

‘I want to have babies’, says Stan / Loretta. ‘You can’t have babies! You haven’t got a womb!’, barks John Cleese’s Reg. Transphobic or what? To calm things down, Francis (Michael Palin) says they should accept Stan’s desire to be Loretta as being ‘symbolic of our struggle against oppression’. ‘Symbolic of his struggle against reality…’ Reg mutters.

——

Imagine if a film or TV show did something like that today. Showed an aspiring ‘trans woman’ being mocked for not having the right body parts to be a woman. Showed a man who wants to be a woman being told — for laughs, remember — that the only thing he’s struggling against is reality.

The cancel-culture mob would kick into action. There’d be a Change.org petition, maybe even a physical protest outside the offices of the production company or streaming service that was foolish enough to broadcast such trans-poking humour. ‘Jokes kill!’, we would be told, day and night.

Hell, JK Rowling can’t even very politely say ‘men aren’t women’ without being subjected to weeks of hatred and violent threats — so heaven help the film company that tried to air a Stan / Loretta skit in these febrile times.

This week, my theory about Life of Brianin 2022 was kind of proven right. For we had the pretty extraordinary sight of Ricky Gervais getting a very free ride for his God-mocking while being dragged into the Twitter stocks for his gags about trans issues.

In his new Netflix special SuperNature, Gervais vents his atheistic spleen. The Christian God is cruel and perverted, he says. Those Christian fundamentalists who believe Aids is the Almighty’s way of punishing gay sex clearly believe in a God who’s up in heaven thinking, ‘I’m sick of all this bumming’. And so just as God once said ‘Let there be light’, according to Gervais in the 1980s He said, ‘Let there be Aids’. What a rotter.

This isn’t the first time Gervais has made fun of God and those who believe in him. He’s famously an atheist. He talks about it all the time. (Rather too much, in my view.) But God-bashing is fine these days. Cool, even. Christians tend to take it in their stride. Believers have mostly kept their counsel following Gervais’s latest mockery of their wicked, ridiculous God.

The same cannot be said of trans activists and their allies. Not even remotely. They have responded with fury to Gervais’s blasphemy against the new god of genderfluidity.

He’s been called all the usual names. Transphobe, Terf, bigot. His crime? Choosing not to adhere to the ideology of transgenderism, daring to dissent from that pseudo-religious mantra we are all now pressured into saying: ‘Trans women are women.’

What’s funny about this spittle-flecked response to Gervais’s trans jokes is that he was really only saying what trans activists themselves have said. He had a bit on ‘old-fashioned women’ — ‘you know, the ones with wombs’ — complaining about born males using their bathrooms. ‘What if he rapes me?’, these women say. To which Gervais, playing the trans activist, responds: ‘What if she rapes you, you… Terf whore.’

Cutting, yes. But also incredibly accurate. Some police forces and courts do indeed refer to rapists as ‘she’ and ‘her’, if that’s how they identify. And, as feminists have pointed out, this results in rape victims being pressured to refer to their rapist with female pronouns. As for the language, anyone who has spent more than five minutes online in recent years will know that that kind of thing is said to gender-critical women all the time.

Like all great blasphemous comics, Gervais is merely shining a light on things that really are said, and things which really do happen, and inviting us, his audience, to laugh and say: ‘Yeah, that is kind of ridiculous.’ Much as Monty Python did with the Bible, in fact.

But, say Gervais’s humourless critics, while the likes of Monty Python were punching up — against God, no less — Gervais is punching down, against vulnerable, marginalised trans people. I don’t buy this at all. Gervais has made it clear that he fully supports rights for trans people. His issue is with the excesses of trans activism and the authoritarianism of identity politics more broadly.

‘I talk about Aids, famine, cancer, the Holocaust, rape, paedophilia’, he says in SuperNature. ‘But no, the one thing you mustn’t joke about is identity politics.’

Absolutely. And that’s because identitarianism is the god of our times. It’s the new religion of the elites, their means of controlling and reprimanding the masses. Ridiculing identity politics is to the 21st century what questioning the authority of God was to the 15th. The woke rage against Gervais really does echo earlier outbursts of intolerant religious fury against anyone who dared to dissent from the Word of God.

A.F. Branco for Jan 12, 2022

—-

Dennett wearing a button-up shirt and a jacket

I was referred this subject by a tweet by Daniel Dennett which referenced a fine article by Robyn E. Blumner in defense of her boss at the RICHARD DAWKINS FOUNDATION and you can read my response at this link.
Richard Dawkins Cooper Union Shankbone.jpg

Ricky Gervais is a secular humanist just like his good friend Richard Dawkins and it is the humanists who have bought into this trans-identity politics and as a result the AMERICAN HUMANIST ASSOCIATION has stripped Dawkins of his 1996 HUMANIST OF THE YEAR award.

As an evangelical I have had the opportunity to correspond with more more secular humanists that have signed the Humanist Manifestos than any other evangelical alive (at least that has been one of my goals since reading Francis Schaeffer’s books and watching his films since 1979).

Not everyone I have corresponded with is a secular humanist but  many are the top scientists and atheist thinkers of today and hold this same secular views. Many of these scholars have taken the time to respond back to me in the last 20 years and some of the names  included are  Ernest Mayr (1904-2005), George Wald (1906-1997), Carl Sagan (1934-1996),  Robert Shapiro (1935-2011), Nicolaas Bloembergen (1920-),  Brian Charlesworth (1945-),  Francisco J. Ayala (1934-) Elliott Sober (1948-), Kevin Padian (1951-), Matt Cartmill (1943-) , Milton Fingerman (1928-), John J. Shea (1969-), , Michael A. Crawford (1938-), (Paul Kurtz (1925-2012), Sol Gordon (1923-2008), Albert Ellis (1913-2007), Barbara Marie Tabler (1915-1996), Renate Vambery (1916-2005), Archie J. Bahm (1907-1996), Aron S “Gil” Martin ( 1910-1997), Matthew I. Spetter (1921-2012), H. J. Eysenck (1916-1997), Robert L. Erdmann (1929-2006), Mary Morain (1911-1999), Lloyd Morain (1917-2010),  Warren Allen Smith (1921-), Bette Chambers (1930-),  Gordon Stein (1941-1996) , Milton Friedman (1912-2006), John Hospers (1918-2011), and Michael Martin (1932-), Harry Kroto (1939-), Marty E. Martin (1928-), Richard Rubenstein (1924-), James Terry McCollum (1936-), Edward O. WIlson (1929-), Lewis Wolpert (1929), Gerald Holton(1922-), Martin Rees (1942-), Alan Macfarlane (1941-),  Roald Hoffmann (1937-), Herbert Kroemer (1928-), Thomas H. Jukes(1906-1999) and  Ray T. Cragun (1976-). 

Let me make a few points about Ricky personally and then a few about this comedy routine by the secular humanist Ricky Gervais.

Notice below in AFTER LIFE how he suspects Anne of being a Christian when she tells him “We are not just here for us. We are here for others,“

After Life Ricky GervaisRicky Gervais and Penelope Wilton in ‘After Life’ (CREDIT: Netflix)

(Above) Tony (played by Ricky) and Anne on the bench at the graveyard where their spouses are buried.

In the fourth episode of season 1 of AFTER LIFE is the following discussion between Anne and Tony:

Tony: My brother-in-law wants me to try dating again.
Anne: Oh excellent! You need some tips.
Tony: why would I need some tips?

Anne: I imagine you are awful with women…Well all men are awful with women but grumpy selfish ones are the worst.

Tony: Let me take notes. This is dynamite.

Tony: I would just be honest. Tell them my situation and tell them what I am going through. Be honest up front.
Anne: So it is all about you then?

Tony: I can’t win can I? I don’t want to date again. I don’t want to live without Lisa.

Anne: But is not just about you is it? That is what I am saying. What if a nice date made her feel good? That might feel nice right? We are just here for us. We are here for others.

Tony: I don’t do the whole God thing I am afraid.

Anne: Neither do I. It is a load of rubbish. All we got is each other. We have to help each other struggle until we die then we are done. No point in felling sorry for ourselves and making everyone else unhappy too. Might as [kill] yourself if you feel that bad.
Tony: Are you sure you want to work for the Samaritans?

Christ came to this world and his followers have changed this world for the better more than any other group that ever existed. When Anne makes the assertions, “But is not just about you is it? That is what I am saying. What if a nice date made her feel good? That might feel nice right? We are not just here for us. We are here for others,” Tony assumes she is a Christian.

If you found yourself in a dark alley late at night, with a group of rough-looking, burly young men walking swiftly toward you, would you feel better knowing they were coming from a Bible study?

If we are only cosmic accidents, how can there be any meaning in our lives? If this is true, which it is in an atheistic world view, our lives are for nothing. It would not matter in the slightest bit if I ever existed. This is why the atheist, if honest and consistent, must face death with despair. Their life is for nothing. Once they are gone, they are gone forever.

I highly recommend Ricky Gervais series AFTER LIFE which is running on NETFLIX because it reminds me of King Solomon trying to find meaning in life UNDER THE SUN without God in the picture!!!

God put Solomon’s story in Ecclesiastes in the Bible with the sole purpose of telling people like Ricky that without God in the picture you  will find out the emptiness one feels when possessions are trying to fill the void that God can only fill.

Then in the last chapter of Ecclesiastes Solomon returns to looking above the sun and he says that obeying the Lord is the proper way to live your life. The  answer to find meaning in life is found in putting your faith and trust in Jesus Christ. The Bible is true from cover to cover and can be trusted. If you need more evidence then go to You Tube and watch the short video:

NOW TO RICKY’S COMEDY:

Brendan O’Neill noted above:

‘I want to have babies’, says Stan / Loretta. ‘You can’t have babies! You haven’t got a womb!’, barks John Cleese’s Reg. Transphobic or what? To calm things down, Francis (Michael Palin) says they should accept Stan’s desire to be Loretta as being ‘symbolic of our struggle against oppression’. ‘Symbolic of his struggle against reality…’ Reg mutters….

He’s been called all the usual names. Transphobe, Terf, bigot. His crime? Choosing not to adhere to the ideology of transgenderism, daring to dissent from that pseudo-religious mantra we are all now pressured into saying: ‘Trans women are women.’

What’s funny about this spittle-flecked response to Gervais’s trans jokes is that he was really only saying what trans activists themselves have said. He had a bit on ‘old-fashioned women’ — ‘you know, the ones with wombs’ — complaining about born males using their bathrooms. ‘What if he rapes me?’, these women say. To which Gervais, playing the trans activist, responds: ‘What if she rapes you, you… Terf whore.’

Ricky  is trying to use common sense (through sarcasm) on people that “GOD GAVE…OVER to depraved [minds]. Romans 1 states:

26 For this reason (M)GOD GAVE THEM OVER  to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural…

28 And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, GOD GAVE THEM OVER to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper, 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are…inventors of evil,

—-

Francis Schaeffer.jpg

Francis Schaeffer later in this blog post discusses what the unbelievers in Romans 1 were rejecting, but first John MacArthur discusses what the unbelievers in the Democratic Party today are affirming and how these same activities were condemned 2000 years ago in Romans 1.

Christians Cannot And MUST Not Vote Democrat – John MacArthur

A Democrat witness testifying before the HouseJudiciary Committee on abortion rights Thursday declared that men can get pregnant and have abortions. This reminds of Romans chapter 1 and also John MacArthur’s commentary on the 2022 Agenda of the Democratic Party:

25 For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator…26 For this reason (M)GOD GAVE THEM OVER  to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.28 And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, GOD GAVE THEM OVER to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper, 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are…inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31 without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, unmerciful; 32 but also give hearty approval to those who practice them.

Here is what John MacArthur had to say:

Now, all of a sudden, not only is this characteristic of our nation, but we now promote it. One of the parties, the Democratic Party, has now made Romans 1, the sins of Romans 1, their agenda. What God condemns, they affirm.

I know from last week’s message that there was some response from people who said, “Why are you getting political?”

Romans 1 is not politics. This has to do with speaking the Word of God through the culture in which we live….it’s about iniquity and judgment. And why do we say this? Because this must be recognized for what it is–sin, serious sin, damning sin, destructive sin.

Dem witness tells House committee men can get pregnant, have abortions

‘I believe that everyone can identify for themselves,’ Aimee Arrambide tells House Judiciary Committee

Aimee Arrambide, the executive director of the abortion rights nonprofit Avow Texas, was asked by Rep. Dan Bishop, R-N.C., to define what “a woman is,” to which she responded, “I believe that everyone can identify for themselves.”
“Do you believe that men can become pregnant and have abortions?” Bishop asked.

“Yes,” Arrambide replied.

The remarks from Arrambide followed a tense exchange between Bishop and Dr. Yashica Robinson, another Democrat witness, after he similarly asked her to define “woman.”

Aimee Arrambide testifies before the House Judiciary Committee on May 11, 2020.  (YouTube screenshot)

Aimee Arrambide testifies before the House Judiciary Committee on May 11, 2020.  (YouTube screenshot) (Screenshot/ House Committee on the Judiciary)

“Dr. Robinson, I noticed in your written testimony you said that you use she/her pronouns. You’re a medical doctor – what is a woman?” Bishop asked Robinson, an OBGYN and board member with Physicians for Reproductive Health.

“I think it’s important that we educate people like you about why we’re doing the things that we do,” Robinson responded. “And so the reason that I use she and her pronouns is because I understand that there are people who become pregnant that may not identify that way. And I think it is discriminatory to speak to people or to call them in such a way as they desire not to be called.”

“Are you going to answer my question? Can you answer the question, what’s a woman?” Bishop asked.

Donna Howard and Aimee Arrambide speaks at Making Virtual Storytelling and Activism Personal during the 2022 SXSW Conference and Festivals at Austin Convention Center on March 14, 2022 in Austin, Texas.

Donna Howard and Aimee Arrambide speaks at Making Virtual Storytelling and Activism Personal during the 2022 SXSW Conference and Festivals at Austin Convention Center on March 14, 2022 in Austin, Texas. (Photo by Hubert Vestil/Getty Images for SXSW)

“I’m a woman, and I will ask you which pronouns do you use?” Robinson replied. “If you tell me that you use she and her pronouns … I’m going to respect you for how you want me to address you.”

“So you gave me an example of a woman, you say that you are a woman, can you tell me otherwise what a woman is?” Bishop asked.

“Yes, I’m telling you, I’m a woman,” Robinson responded.

“Is that as comprehensive a definition as you can give me?” Bishop asked.

“That’s as comprehensive a definition as I will give you today,” Robinson said. “Because I think that it’s important that we focus on what we’re here for, and it’s to talk about access to abortion.”

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

“So you’re not interested in answering the question that I asked unless it’s part of a message you want to deliver…” Bishop fired back.

Wednesday’s hearing, titled, “Revoking your Rights,” addressed the threat to abortion rights after the leaked Supreme Court draft opinion signaled the high court is poised to soon strike down Roe v. Wade.
John MacArthur explains God’s Wrath on unrighteousness from Romans Chapt…

First is what Romans says:

Romans 1:18-32

New American Standard Bible (NASB)

Unbelief and Its Consequences

18 For (A)the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who (B)suppress the truth [a]in unrighteousness, 19 because (C)that which is known about God is evident [b]within them; for God made it evident to them. 20 For (D)since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, (E)being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. 21 For even though they knew God, they did not [c]honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became (F)futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 (G)Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and (H)exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and [d]crawling creatures.

24 Therefore (I)God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be (J)dishonored among them. 25 For they exchanged the truth of God for [e]a (K)lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, (L)who is blessed [f]forever. Amen.

26 For this reason (M)God gave them over to (N)degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is [g]unnatural, 27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, (O)men with men committing [h]indecent acts and receiving in [i]their own persons the due penalty of their error.

28 And just as they did not see fit [j]to acknowledge God any longer, (P)God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper, 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are (Q)gossips, 30 slanderers, [k](R)haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, (S)disobedient to parents, 31 without understanding, untrustworthy, (T)unloving, unmerciful; 32 and although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of (U)death, they not only do the same, but also (V)give hearty approval to those who practice them.

Here is what John MacArthur had to say:

Now, all of a sudden, not only is this characteristic of our nation, but we now promote it. One of the parties, the Democratic Party, has now made Romans 1, the sins of Romans 1, their agenda. What God condemns, they affirm. What God punishes, they exalt. Shocking, really. The Democratic Party has become the anti-God party, the sin-promoting party. By the way, there are seventy-two million registered Democrats in this country who have identified themselves with that party and maybe they need to rethink that identification.

I know from last week’s message that there was some response from people who said, “Why are you getting political?”

Romans 1 is not politics. The Bible is not politics. This has nothing to do with politics. This has to do with speaking the Word of God through the culture in which we live. It has nothing to do with politics. It’s not about personalities; it’s about iniquity and judgment. And why do we say this? Because this must be recognized for what it is–sin, serious sin, damning sin, destructive sin.

WHAT HAS THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY REJECTED? THE ANSWER IS THE GOD WHO HAS REVEALED HIM SELF THROUGH THE BOOK OF NATURE AND THE BOOK OF SCRIPTURE!

God Is There And He Is Not Silent
Psalm 19
Intro. 1) Francis Schaeffer lived from 1912-1984. He was one of the Christian
intellectual giants of the 20th century. He taught us that you could be a Christian and not abandon the mind. One of the books he wrote was entitled He Is There And He Is Not Silent. In that work he makes a crucial and thought provoking statement, “The infinite- personal God is there, but also he is not silent; that changes the whole world…He is there and is not a silent, nor far-off God.” (Works of F.S., Vol 1, 276).
2) God is there and He is not silent. In fact He has revealed Himself to us in 2 books: the book of nature and the book of Scripture. Francis Bacon, a 15th century scientist who is credited by many with developing the scientific method said it this way: “There are 2 books laid before us to study, to prevent us from falling into error: first the volume to the Scriptures, which reveal the will of God; then the volume of the creation, which expresses His power.”
3) Psalm 19 addresses both of God’s books, the book of nature in vs 1-6 and the book of Scripture in vs. 7-14. Described as a wisdom Psalm, its beauty, poetry and splendor led C.S. Lewis to say, “I take this to be the greatest poem in the Psalter and one of the greatest lyrics in the world” (Reflections on the Psalms, 63).
Trans. God is there and He is not silent. How should we hear and listen to the God who talks?
I. Listen To God Speak Through Nature 19:1-6
God has revealed himself to ever rational human on the earth in two ways: 1) nature and 2) conscience. We call this natural or general revelation. In vs. 1-6 David addresses the wonder of nature and creation.

Whatever Happened To The Human Race? | Episode 5 | Truth and History

Related posts:

John MacArthur on Romans 1 and the Democratic Party

First is what Romans says: Romans 1:18-32 New American Standard Bible (NASB) Unbelief and Its Consequences 18 For (A)the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who (B)suppress the truth [a]in unrighteousness, 19 because (C)that which is known about God is evident [b]within them; for God made it evident to […]

Abortion and the Campaign for Immorality (Selected Scriptures) John MacArthur

Abortion and the Campaign for Immorality (Selected Scriptures) John MacArthur Published on Sep 30, 2012 by JohnMacArthurGTY http://www.gty.org/resources/sermons/90-448 What a privilege and joy it is to worship the Lord here at Grace Church. Patricia and I miss it when we’re not here. There’s no place like this. Our hearts are full to overflowing to be […]

John MacArthur: Fulfilled prophecy in the Bible? (Ezekiel 26-28 and the story of Tyre, video clips)

Prophecy–The Biblical Prophesy About Tyre.mp4 Uploaded by TruthIsLife7 on Dec 5, 2010 A short summary of the prophecy about Tyre and it’s precise fulfillment. Go to this link and watch the whole series for the amazing fulfillment from secular sources. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qvt4mDZUefo ________________ John MacArthur on the amazing fulfilled prophecy on Tyre and how it was fulfilled […]

Did God kill someone that I knew? What does I John 5:14-17 mean?

1 John 5:14-17 New American Standard Bible (NASB) 14 This is (A)the confidence which we have [a]before Him, that, (B)if we ask anything according to His will, He hears us. 15 And if we know that He hears us in whatever we ask, (C)we know that we have the requests which we have asked from […]

NBC’s Chuck Todd ridiculed for saying ‘gender is a spectrum’(PLUS After Life 2 – Man identifies as an 8 year old girl PLUS Spelling Bee Contestant Asks The Definition of “Woman”)

————-——

After Life 2 – Man identifies as an 8 year old girl

Spelling Bee Contestant Asks The Definition of “Woman”

NBC’s Chuck Todd ridiculed for saying ‘gender is a spectrum

Todd made the comment during a spirited interview on Sunday with GOP presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy, who has argued for limitations on gender affirming treatments for those under the age of 18.

“Below the age of 18, I think it’s perfectly legitimate to say that we won’t allow genital mutilation or chemical castration through puberty blockers,” Ramaswamy, the biopharmaceutical mogul and author, told Todd during the interview on Sunday.

“You’re calling it that, but how do you know it’s that?” Todd pressed Ramaswamy.

“Again, how do you know? Are you confident that you know that gender is as binary as you’re describing it? Are you confident?”

“I am,” Ramaswamy replied.

“That there isn’t a spectrum?” Todd asked.

Chuck Todd on "Meet the Press"
Chuck Todd, moderator of NBC’s “Meet the Press,” said on Sunday that “gender is a spectrum.”
NBC News

Ramaswamy answered: “I am.”

“Do you know this as a scientist?” Todd asked.

“Well, there’s two X chromosomes if you’re a woman, and an X and a Y that means you’re a man…,” Ramaswamy said.

The two men talk over each other before Todd says: “There is a lot of scientific research that says gender is a spectrum.”

“Chuck, I respectfully disagree,” Ramaswamy said.

The GOP candidate said gender dysphoria — which is characterized by the American Psychiatric Association as “clinically significant distress or impairment related to gender incongruence” — “has been characterized as a mental health disorder and I don’t think it’s compassionate to affirm that.”

<img class=”i-amphtml-intrinsic-sizer” role=”presentation” src=”data:;base64,” alt=”” aria-hidden=”true” />GOP presidential hopeful Vivek Ramaswamy on "Meet the Press"
Todd made the remark during an interview with GOP presidential hopeful Vivek Ramaswamy.
NBC News

“I think that’s cruelty,” Ramaswamy said.

“When a kid is crying out for help … you’ve got to ask the question of what else is going wrong at home,” the GOP hopeful said.

“What else is going wrong at school, let’s be compassionate and get to the heart of that rather than playing this game as though we’re actually changing our medical understanding for the last hundred years.”

Todd conceded that “the last thing [parents] want to do is consider something like [gender affirming treatments]” for their children.

<img class=”i-amphtml-intrinsic-sizer” role=”presentation” src=”data:;base64,” alt=”” aria-hidden=”true” />GOP presidential hopeful Vivek Ramaswamy on NBC's "Meet the Press" with Chuck Todd.
“Are you confident that you know that gender is as binary as you’re describing it?” Todd asked Ramaswamy.
NBC News

“But if that is what they think could help their child pursue happiness or not to kill themselves … why take away that option?” Todd asked.

“Again, why shouldn’t it be up to the parent?”

Ramaswamy replied that “we’ve created a culture that teaches parents that they’re being bigoted or that they’re bad people if they don’t actually take those steps.”

“Gender dysphoria for the rare few people who’ve suffered it, is a condition of suffering,” he added.

“My question is why on Earth are we going out of our way to create even more of it?”

<img class=”i-amphtml-intrinsic-sizer” role=”presentation” src=”data:;base64,” alt=”” aria-hidden=”true” />GOP presidential hopeful Vivek Ramaswamy
Ramaswamy has urged a ban on gender affirming treatments for people under the age of 18.
NBC News

Todd’s comments sparked reaction on Twitter.

“Didn’t you know? Cable news pundits became the best TV scientists and physicians during COVID. The government talking points made them experts,” one Twitter user wrote.

Another Twitter user commented: “There is literally no real science suggesting there are more than 2 sex chromosomes.”

“This is very simple to resolve. Show us what the non-male and non-female chromosomes look like on these ‘gender spectrums’,” a Twitter user wrote.

Others on Twitter supported Todd’s assertion, citing a 2018 article by Scientific American which claimed that biologists “now think there is a larger spectrum than just binary female and male.”

What do you think? Post a comment.

Republicans have sought to curtail the availability of gender transitioning methods to youngsters while LGBTQ activists said the limitations could place children’s mental health in danger.

Bud Light, the iconic beer brand which is the property of Anheuser-Busch, came under fire for its decision to hire Dylan Mulvaney, a social media influencer who garnered a following of millions who watched as she transitioned from a male to a female during the COVID-19 pandemic, as a pitchwoman.

The Post has sought comment from NBC News.

These 3 Women Tried Transgenderism, and Then Stopped

Jennifer Lahl’s documentary “The Detransition Diaries,” released Monday, tracks the stories of three female detransitioners, including Helena Kerschner. (Photo: The Center for Bioethics and Culture Network)

A documentary, released Monday, unveils the stories of three women who previously identified as transgender in a futile attempt to escape depression and suicidal thoughts.

Jennifer Lahl, a former pediatric nurse and current president of The Center for Bioethics and Culture Network, produced her most recent documentary, “The Detransition Diaries,” after a series of films highlighting bioethical issues.

Her film tracks the stories of Helena Kerschner, Grace Lidinsky-Smith, and Cat Cattinson, three women who believed their mental and emotional trauma would be solved by transitioning to the opposite sex. Each woman underwent hormone treatment and one had her breasts removed as well.

“We are following the news and the studies, and the evidence that shows this uptick in rapid-onset gender dysphoria [is something] young girls are particularly prone to,” Lahl told The Daily Signal in a phone call. Gender dysphoria refers to the condition of persistently and painfully identifying as the gender opposite one’s biological sex. “Young girls are getting sucked into this.”

Rapid-onset gender dysphoria is a recent phenomenon in which children and adolescents are suddenly, and without prior indication, identifying as the opposite sex.

Lahl found that her previous documentary “Trans Mission: What’s the Rush to Reassign Gender?” struck a chord with a broad audience. Firsthand accounts of men and women who “believed they were born in the wrong body” and thought gender transition “was the solution to all their problems” resonated with thousands of people, Lahl explained.

“As documentary filmmakers, we made the editorial decision that we are going to focus on women, realizing that this applies to men too,” she remarked on her most recent film.

“The Detransition Diaries” cover. (Photo: The Center for Bioethics and Culture Network)

Helena Kerschner, one of the detransitioners featured in Lahl’s film, says she struggled with depression, isolation, self-harm, an eating disorder, and suicidal thoughts as an early teen. She was introduced to the transgender belief system through Tumblr culture at 13.

Tumblr’s message was: “If you don’t like your body, that’s a sign you’re trans,” she notes.

After she came out as transgender, teachers and adults who never noticed her struggles before suddenly “bent over backward” to accommodate her new-found identity.

She did everything to make herself appear masculine. Eventually, Kerschner was prescribed testosterone at 18 after a single consultation at Planned Parenthood.

After a few weeks, she noticed how irritable she had become. “I couldn’t control myself,” Kerschner recalls in the documentary. When she got angry, she felt she needed to hurt someone—so she hurt herself. She eventually resorted to the emergency room, where staff directed her to the psych unit. Doctors diagnosed her with borderline personality disorder and psychosis, and sent her home with prescriptions for four different medications. She wound up in the hospital a few weeks later.

“My life became a total disaster,” she says. “I wasn’t functioning, I couldn’t hold a job, I wasn’t going to school—I felt like a monster.”

Seventeen months later, she stopped taking testosterone. Her negative symptoms vanished. During this time, not a single medical professional suggested that her hormone treatment was causing these symptoms, she remarks in the film.

Grace Lidinsky-Smith, another detransitioner featured in the film, noted that she felt a rush of energy when she first started testosterone treatment. Though she had some underlying anxiety, she told herself this was “internalized transphobia,” she says to the filmmakers.

Grace Lidinsky-Smith in “The Detransition Diaries.” (Photo: The Center for Bioethics and Culture Network)

Cat Cattinson describes a similar euphoric feeling when she first went on testosterone.  It was “one of the better antidepressants I had taken,” she recalls.

Cat Cattinson in “The Detransition Diaries.” (Photo: The Center for Bioethics and Culture Network)

Lidinsky-Smith, unlike the other two women, went forward with a double mastectomy. Looking back, she believed she would feel better “because she’d be in a body that fit her better.” After her breasts were removed, she recalls, she looked down at the gashes on her chest. “I had the most awful feeling.”

She found others online also had an “intense, suicidal despair after surgery … and then got over it and felt better.” But the experience planted a seed of doubt, she explains. She found a testimony of another person who had transitioned from female to male. As the person described, a desire for “a small amount of masculinization” led to full-out body dysphoria.

At that point, Lidinsky-Smith stopped testosterone and slowly reversed course, eventually growing comfortable enough to use her birth name. “It became important to just accept myself as myself,” she explains.

Kershner and Cattinson described similar breaking points. Kershner realized: “This is not what I thought it would be,” adding that she believed “once I’m a boy, my confidence is gonna come out.” Instead, as she describes, she became dysfunctional.

As Cattinson explains, three months into her testosterone treatment, she found a dramatic drop in her voice. “Nothing was coming out except air and squeaks,” she describes. She stopped going to social events and performing live.

Like the other women, she found an online community of detransitioners and doctors who revealed the hidden underbelly of the trans movement.

She began questioning the basis of transgender ideology: the “idea that we should define a woman based on what’s in a person’s head,” as she describes it. Does “what you believe in your head … really trump the biological reality of being an adult female?” she wondered.

As the documentary concludes, Lidinsky-Smith notes that she is worried about those who continue to get sucked into gender transition treatment, when they can find the answer to their problems elsewhere.

All three women interviewed suffered from suicidal ideation and depression. Each believed that changing her name, pronouns, appearance, and hormones would solve her problems, yet each found her emotional state dramatically worsened as a result.

“I think the fallout will be severe,” Lidinsky-Smith notes. Remarking on the growing community of detransitioners, she adds, “Our voices can no longer be denied.”

Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the url or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.

The Woke Zone Trilogy

John Stossel takes up for Babylon Bee and notes “Even a few left-leaning comedians like Ricky Gervais and Dave Chappelle are mocking the intolerant left!”

Late night hosts like Stephen Colbert, seen speaking during the Montclair Film Festival on Oct. 23, passionately defend leftists to the point of lecturing, rather than providing comedic relief. (Photo: Manny Carabel/Getty Images)

A woman tells the cop who stopped her in a carpool lane she’s allowed to drive there because her pronouns are “they” and “them.”

That’s from a video by a conservative Christian satire site called the Babylon Bee. Their humor gets millions of views.

“Christian conservatives used to … be very dour and self-serious,” says Bee editor-in-chief Kyle Mann in my new video.

Today, he says, it’s the left who are self-serious. “They’re the ones that have trouble laughing at themselves.”

For example, late night hosts like Jimmy Kimmel and Stephen Colbert passionately defend COVID-19 vaccines.

“It is a lecture,” complains Mann.

“The left used to be anti-establishment,” adds Bee actress Chandler Juliet. Now, she says, ‘They’ve become the blob. … We’re super happy to be leading the comedic conversation on the right.”

One Babylon Bee video, “The Woke Zone,” makes fun of the way the media ignored violence and arson during the George Floyd protests.

“Do you ever feel gratitude to the left that they give you so much material?” I ask.

“We have to write things that are funnier than things they’re actually doing,” Mann responds. “That makes our job very difficult.”

One Bee sketch portrays its writers struggling to find new material.

“John Kerry warns that the war in Ukraine might distract from climate change!” suggests one.

Can’t do it, explains another. “It actually happened.” Yes, Kerry really did say that.

“Cosmo magazine features a morbidly obese woman on the cover as the picture of health” and, “Math professor says ‘two plus two equals four’ is racist!” are among other ideas that can’t be used as jokes.

“A math professor really said two plus two equals four is racist?” I ask.

It’s “a colonialist, white supremacist idea,” explains Mann.

Today the Bee reaches more people than The Onion. The establishment doesn’t like that, so some people actually sic so-called fact checkers on the Bee.

One article fact-checked by Snopes was titled, “Bernie Sanders Vows To Round Up Remaining ISIS Members, Allow Them To Vote.”

“Does Snopes not understand that you’re making jokes?” I ask.

“I think that they know what our intention is,” answers Juliet. “They just don’t like us.”

Recently, Twitter banned the Bee. Their offense was tweeting an article that named Assistant Secretary of Health Rachel Levine “Babylon Bee’s Man of the Year.”

Levine is a transgender woman. Calling her the man of the year is a joke I wouldn’t make. But it doesn’t need to be censored.

Twitter says they’ll allow the Bee back on the platform only if they delete the tweet. Mann says he won’t.

“Twitter has the capability to just delete the tweet themselves. They want us to bend the knee and be the ones to click, ‘Yes, we acknowledge hateful conduct.’ We’re not going to do that.”

Today, a lot of comedians attract sizable audiences by mocking the left. Some I found funny are JP Sears, Ryan Long and FreedomToons.

The culture is changing.

The highest rating late-night comic these days is often not Colbert, Kimmel or Fallon, but Greg Gutfeld of Fox.

Even a few left-leaning comedians like Ricky Gervais and Dave Chappelle are mocking the intolerant left.

“I talk about AIDS, famine, cancer, the Holocaust, rape, pedophilia … the one thing you mustn’t joke about is identity politics,” says Gervais in his recent Netflix special.

Professional media critics trashed him for that. But the special was hugely popular with the public.

The Rotten Tomatoes ratings are revealing. Critics gave Gervais’ special a 29% rating, calling it “terribly unfunny” and “a detestable combination of smug and obtuse.”

Viewers gave it a 92% rating.

The same is true of Chapelle’s latest special, “The Closer.” Critics give it just 40%. The audience gives it 95%.

Clearly, many people are tired of smug, condescending humor.

I’m glad the Babylon Bee, and others, give us an alternative.

COPYRIGHT 2022 BY JFS PRODUCTIONS INC.

The Daily Signal publishes a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Heritage Foundation.

Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the url or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.

After Life 2 – Man identifies as an 8 year old girl

—-

After Life on Netflix

——

Before I get into the fine article by Brendan O’Neill which I present in its entirety, I wanted to quote Francis Schaeffer who spent his life examining the humanism that now Ricky Gervais embraces!

All humans have moral motions and that is why Ricky Gervais knows it is wrong to let biological men use ladies’ bathrooms!!!!!!

Francis Schaffer in his book THE GOD WHO IS THERE addresses these same issues:

“[in Christianity] there is a sufficient basis for morals. Nobody has ever discovered a way of having real “morals” without a moral absolute. If there is no moral absolute, we are left with hedonism (doing what I like) or some form of the social contract theory (what is best for society as a a hole is right). However, neither of these alternative corresponds to the moral motions that men have. Talk to people long enough and deeply enough, and you will find that they consider some things are really right and something are really wrong. Without absolutes, morals as morals cease to exist, and humanistic mean starting from himself is unable to find the absolute he needs. But because the God of the Bible is there, real morals exist. Within this framework I can say one action is right and another wrong, without talking nonsense.” 117

Francis Schaeffer in the film WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE HUMAN RACE?

Francis and Edith Schaeffer

Brendan O’Neill

Ricky Gervais is guilty of blasphemy

He has mocked identity politics – the god of our times

I have long thought that if Life of Brian came out today, it wouldn’t be Christians kicking up a fuss about it — it would be trans activists.

When Monty Python’s classic tale of a man mistaken for a Messiah came to cinemas in 1979, people of faith weren’t happy. They saw it as taking the mick out of Christ and they aired their displeasure noisily. Nuns in New York picketed cinemas. In Ireland the film was banned for eight years.

In 2022 I reckon it would be a very different story. It wouldn’t be Monty Python’s ribbing of the gospels that would outrage the chattering classes — it would be their mockery of trans people.

Life of Brian was way ahead of time. It was Terf before Terf was even a thing. There is a brilliantly observed scene in which Stan of the People’s Front of Judea — or is it the Judean People’s Front? — says he wants to become Loretta.

‘I want to be a woman. From now on, I want you all to call me Loretta’, says Stan, played by Eric Idle. When the others push back and say he can’t just become a woman, he says: ‘It’s my right as a man.’ Which was remarkably perspicacious.

‘I want to have babies’, says Stan / Loretta. ‘You can’t have babies! You haven’t got a womb!’, barks John Cleese’s Reg. Transphobic or what? To calm things down, Francis (Michael Palin) says they should accept Stan’s desire to be Loretta as being ‘symbolic of our struggle against oppression’. ‘Symbolic of his struggle against reality…’ Reg mutters.

——

Imagine if a film or TV show did something like that today. Showed an aspiring ‘trans woman’ being mocked for not having the right body parts to be a woman. Showed a man who wants to be a woman being told — for laughs, remember — that the only thing he’s struggling against is reality.

The cancel-culture mob would kick into action. There’d be a Change.org petition, maybe even a physical protest outside the offices of the production company or streaming service that was foolish enough to broadcast such trans-poking humour. ‘Jokes kill!’, we would be told, day and night.

Hell, JK Rowling can’t even very politely say ‘men aren’t women’ without being subjected to weeks of hatred and violent threats — so heaven help the film company that tried to air a Stan / Loretta skit in these febrile times.

This week, my theory about Life of Brianin 2022 was kind of proven right. For we had the pretty extraordinary sight of Ricky Gervais getting a very free ride for his God-mocking while being dragged into the Twitter stocks for his gags about trans issues.

In his new Netflix special SuperNature, Gervais vents his atheistic spleen. The Christian God is cruel and perverted, he says. Those Christian fundamentalists who believe Aids is the Almighty’s way of punishing gay sex clearly believe in a God who’s up in heaven thinking, ‘I’m sick of all this bumming’. And so just as God once said ‘Let there be light’, according to Gervais in the 1980s He said, ‘Let there be Aids’. What a rotter.

This isn’t the first time Gervais has made fun of God and those who believe in him. He’s famously an atheist. He talks about it all the time. (Rather too much, in my view.) But God-bashing is fine these days. Cool, even. Christians tend to take it in their stride. Believers have mostly kept their counsel following Gervais’s latest mockery of their wicked, ridiculous God.

The same cannot be said of trans activists and their allies. Not even remotely. They have responded with fury to Gervais’s blasphemy against the new god of genderfluidity.

He’s been called all the usual names. Transphobe, Terf, bigot. His crime? Choosing not to adhere to the ideology of transgenderism, daring to dissent from that pseudo-religious mantra we are all now pressured into saying: ‘Trans women are women.’

What’s funny about this spittle-flecked response to Gervais’s trans jokes is that he was really only saying what trans activists themselves have said. He had a bit on ‘old-fashioned women’ — ‘you know, the ones with wombs’ — complaining about born males using their bathrooms. ‘What if he rapes me?’, these women say. To which Gervais, playing the trans activist, responds: ‘What if she rapes you, you… Terf whore.’

Cutting, yes. But also incredibly accurate. Some police forces and courts do indeed refer to rapists as ‘she’ and ‘her’, if that’s how they identify. And, as feminists have pointed out, this results in rape victims being pressured to refer to their rapist with female pronouns. As for the language, anyone who has spent more than five minutes online in recent years will know that that kind of thing is said to gender-critical women all the time.

Like all great blasphemous comics, Gervais is merely shining a light on things that really are said, and things which really do happen, and inviting us, his audience, to laugh and say: ‘Yeah, that is kind of ridiculous.’ Much as Monty Python did with the Bible, in fact.

But, say Gervais’s humourless critics, while the likes of Monty Python were punching up — against God, no less — Gervais is punching down, against vulnerable, marginalised trans people. I don’t buy this at all. Gervais has made it clear that he fully supports rights for trans people. His issue is with the excesses of trans activism and the authoritarianism of identity politics more broadly.

‘I talk about Aids, famine, cancer, the Holocaust, rape, paedophilia’, he says in SuperNature. ‘But no, the one thing you mustn’t joke about is identity politics.’

Absolutely. And that’s because identitarianism is the god of our times. It’s the new religion of the elites, their means of controlling and reprimanding the masses. Ridiculing identity politics is to the 21st century what questioning the authority of God was to the 15th. The woke rage against Gervais really does echo earlier outbursts of intolerant religious fury against anyone who dared to dissent from the Word of God.

A.F. Branco for Jan 12, 2022

—-

Dennett wearing a button-up shirt and a jacket

I was referred this subject by a tweet by Daniel Dennett which referenced a fine article by Robyn E. Blumner in defense of her boss at the RICHARD DAWKINS FOUNDATION and you can read my response at this link.
Richard Dawkins Cooper Union Shankbone.jpg

Ricky Gervais is a secular humanist just like his good friend Richard Dawkins and it is the humanists who have bought into this trans-identity politics and as a result the AMERICAN HUMANIST ASSOCIATION has stripped Dawkins of his 1996 HUMANIST OF THE YEAR award.

As an evangelical I have had the opportunity to correspond with more more secular humanists that have signed the Humanist Manifestos than any other evangelical alive (at least that has been one of my goals since reading Francis Schaeffer’s books and watching his films since 1979).

Not everyone I have corresponded with is a secular humanist but  many are the top scientists and atheist thinkers of today and hold this same secular views. Many of these scholars have taken the time to respond back to me in the last 20 years and some of the names  included are  Ernest Mayr (1904-2005), George Wald (1906-1997), Carl Sagan (1934-1996),  Robert Shapiro (1935-2011), Nicolaas Bloembergen (1920-),  Brian Charlesworth (1945-),  Francisco J. Ayala (1934-) Elliott Sober (1948-), Kevin Padian (1951-), Matt Cartmill (1943-) , Milton Fingerman (1928-), John J. Shea (1969-), , Michael A. Crawford (1938-), (Paul Kurtz (1925-2012), Sol Gordon (1923-2008), Albert Ellis (1913-2007), Barbara Marie Tabler (1915-1996), Renate Vambery (1916-2005), Archie J. Bahm (1907-1996), Aron S “Gil” Martin ( 1910-1997), Matthew I. Spetter (1921-2012), H. J. Eysenck (1916-1997), Robert L. Erdmann (1929-2006), Mary Morain (1911-1999), Lloyd Morain (1917-2010),  Warren Allen Smith (1921-), Bette Chambers (1930-),  Gordon Stein (1941-1996) , Milton Friedman (1912-2006), John Hospers (1918-2011), and Michael Martin (1932-), Harry Kroto (1939-), Marty E. Martin (1928-), Richard Rubenstein (1924-), James Terry McCollum (1936-), Edward O. WIlson (1929-), Lewis Wolpert (1929), Gerald Holton(1922-), Martin Rees (1942-), Alan Macfarlane (1941-),  Roald Hoffmann (1937-), Herbert Kroemer (1928-), Thomas H. Jukes(1906-1999) and  Ray T. Cragun (1976-). 

Let me make a few points about Ricky personally and then a few about this comedy routine by the secular humanist Ricky Gervais.

Notice below in AFTER LIFE how he suspects Anne of being a Christian when she tells him “We are not just here for us. We are here for others,“

After Life Ricky GervaisRicky Gervais and Penelope Wilton in ‘After Life’ (CREDIT: Netflix)

(Above) Tony (played by Ricky) and Anne on the bench at the graveyard where their spouses are buried.

In the fourth episode of season 1 of AFTER LIFE is the following discussion between Anne and Tony:

Tony: My brother-in-law wants me to try dating again.
Anne: Oh excellent! You need some tips.
Tony: why would I need some tips?

Anne: I imagine you are awful with women…Well all men are awful with women but grumpy selfish ones are the worst.

Tony: Let me take notes. This is dynamite.

Tony: I would just be honest. Tell them my situation and tell them what I am going through. Be honest up front.
Anne: So it is all about you then?

Tony: I can’t win can I? I don’t want to date again. I don’t want to live without Lisa.

Anne: But is not just about you is it? That is what I am saying. What if a nice date made her feel good? That might feel nice right? We are just here for us. We are here for others.

Tony: I don’t do the whole God thing I am afraid.

Anne: Neither do I. It is a load of rubbish. All we got is each other. We have to help each other struggle until we die then we are done. No point in felling sorry for ourselves and making everyone else unhappy too. Might as [kill] yourself if you feel that bad.
Tony: Are you sure you want to work for the Samaritans?

Christ came to this world and his followers have changed this world for the better more than any other group that ever existed. When Anne makes the assertions, “But is not just about you is it? That is what I am saying. What if a nice date made her feel good? That might feel nice right? We are not just here for us. We are here for others,” Tony assumes she is a Christian.

If you found yourself in a dark alley late at night, with a group of rough-looking, burly young men walking swiftly toward you, would you feel better knowing they were coming from a Bible study?

If we are only cosmic accidents, how can there be any meaning in our lives? If this is true, which it is in an atheistic world view, our lives are for nothing. It would not matter in the slightest bit if I ever existed. This is why the atheist, if honest and consistent, must face death with despair. Their life is for nothing. Once they are gone, they are gone forever.

I highly recommend Ricky Gervais series AFTER LIFE which is running on NETFLIX because it reminds me of King Solomon trying to find meaning in life UNDER THE SUN without God in the picture!!!

God put Solomon’s story in Ecclesiastes in the Bible with the sole purpose of telling people like Ricky that without God in the picture you  will find out the emptiness one feels when possessions are trying to fill the void that God can only fill.

Then in the last chapter of Ecclesiastes Solomon returns to looking above the sun and he says that obeying the Lord is the proper way to live your life. The  answer to find meaning in life is found in putting your faith and trust in Jesus Christ. The Bible is true from cover to cover and can be trusted. If you need more evidence then go to You Tube and watch the short video:

NOW TO RICKY’S COMEDY:

Brendan O’Neill noted above:

‘I want to have babies’, says Stan / Loretta. ‘You can’t have babies! You haven’t got a womb!’, barks John Cleese’s Reg. Transphobic or what? To calm things down, Francis (Michael Palin) says they should accept Stan’s desire to be Loretta as being ‘symbolic of our struggle against oppression’. ‘Symbolic of his struggle against reality…’ Reg mutters….

He’s been called all the usual names. Transphobe, Terf, bigot. His crime? Choosing not to adhere to the ideology of transgenderism, daring to dissent from that pseudo-religious mantra we are all now pressured into saying: ‘Trans women are women.’

What’s funny about this spittle-flecked response to Gervais’s trans jokes is that he was really only saying what trans activists themselves have said. He had a bit on ‘old-fashioned women’ — ‘you know, the ones with wombs’ — complaining about born males using their bathrooms. ‘What if he rapes me?’, these women say. To which Gervais, playing the trans activist, responds: ‘What if she rapes you, you… Terf whore.’

Ricky  is trying to use common sense (through sarcasm) on people that “GOD GAVE…OVER to depraved [minds]. Romans 1 states:

26 For this reason (M)GOD GAVE THEM OVER  to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural…

28 And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, GOD GAVE THEM OVER to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper, 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are…inventors of evil,

—-

Francis Schaeffer.jpg

Francis Schaeffer later in this blog post discusses what the unbelievers in Romans 1 were rejecting, but first John MacArthur discusses what the unbelievers in the Democratic Party today are affirming and how these same activities were condemned 2000 years ago in Romans 1.

Christians Cannot And MUST Not Vote Democrat – John MacArthur

A Democrat witness testifying before the HouseJudiciary Committee on abortion rights Thursday declared that men can get pregnant and have abortions. This reminds of Romans chapter 1 and also John MacArthur’s commentary on the 2022 Agenda of the Democratic Party:

25 For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator…26 For this reason (M)GOD GAVE THEM OVER  to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.28 And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, GOD GAVE THEM OVER to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper, 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are…inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31 without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, unmerciful; 32 but also give hearty approval to those who practice them.

Here is what John MacArthur had to say:

Now, all of a sudden, not only is this characteristic of our nation, but we now promote it. One of the parties, the Democratic Party, has now made Romans 1, the sins of Romans 1, their agenda. What God condemns, they affirm.

I know from last week’s message that there was some response from people who said, “Why are you getting political?”

Romans 1 is not politics. This has to do with speaking the Word of God through the culture in which we live….it’s about iniquity and judgment. And why do we say this? Because this must be recognized for what it is–sin, serious sin, damning sin, destructive sin.

Dem witness tells House committee men can get pregnant, have abortions

‘I believe that everyone can identify for themselves,’ Aimee Arrambide tells House Judiciary Committee

Aimee Arrambide, the executive director of the abortion rights nonprofit Avow Texas, was asked by Rep. Dan Bishop, R-N.C., to define what “a woman is,” to which she responded, “I believe that everyone can identify for themselves.”
“Do you believe that men can become pregnant and have abortions?” Bishop asked.

“Yes,” Arrambide replied.

The remarks from Arrambide followed a tense exchange between Bishop and Dr. Yashica Robinson, another Democrat witness, after he similarly asked her to define “woman.”

Aimee Arrambide testifies before the House Judiciary Committee on May 11, 2020.  (YouTube screenshot)

Aimee Arrambide testifies before the House Judiciary Committee on May 11, 2020.  (YouTube screenshot) (Screenshot/ House Committee on the Judiciary)

“Dr. Robinson, I noticed in your written testimony you said that you use she/her pronouns. You’re a medical doctor – what is a woman?” Bishop asked Robinson, an OBGYN and board member with Physicians for Reproductive Health.

“I think it’s important that we educate people like you about why we’re doing the things that we do,” Robinson responded. “And so the reason that I use she and her pronouns is because I understand that there are people who become pregnant that may not identify that way. And I think it is discriminatory to speak to people or to call them in such a way as they desire not to be called.”

“Are you going to answer my question? Can you answer the question, what’s a woman?” Bishop asked.

Donna Howard and Aimee Arrambide speaks at Making Virtual Storytelling and Activism Personal during the 2022 SXSW Conference and Festivals at Austin Convention Center on March 14, 2022 in Austin, Texas.

Donna Howard and Aimee Arrambide speaks at Making Virtual Storytelling and Activism Personal during the 2022 SXSW Conference and Festivals at Austin Convention Center on March 14, 2022 in Austin, Texas. (Photo by Hubert Vestil/Getty Images for SXSW)

“I’m a woman, and I will ask you which pronouns do you use?” Robinson replied. “If you tell me that you use she and her pronouns … I’m going to respect you for how you want me to address you.”

“So you gave me an example of a woman, you say that you are a woman, can you tell me otherwise what a woman is?” Bishop asked.

“Yes, I’m telling you, I’m a woman,” Robinson responded.

“Is that as comprehensive a definition as you can give me?” Bishop asked.

“That’s as comprehensive a definition as I will give you today,” Robinson said. “Because I think that it’s important that we focus on what we’re here for, and it’s to talk about access to abortion.”

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

“So you’re not interested in answering the question that I asked unless it’s part of a message you want to deliver…” Bishop fired back.

Wednesday’s hearing, titled, “Revoking your Rights,” addressed the threat to abortion rights after the leaked Supreme Court draft opinion signaled the high court is poised to soon strike down Roe v. Wade.
John MacArthur explains God’s Wrath on unrighteousness from Romans Chapt…

First is what Romans says:

Romans 1:18-32

New American Standard Bible (NASB)

Unbelief and Its Consequences

18 For (A)the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who (B)suppress the truth [a]in unrighteousness, 19 because (C)that which is known about God is evident [b]within them; for God made it evident to them. 20 For (D)since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, (E)being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. 21 For even though they knew God, they did not [c]honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became (F)futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 (G)Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and (H)exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and [d]crawling creatures.

24 Therefore (I)God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be (J)dishonored among them. 25 For they exchanged the truth of God for [e]a (K)lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, (L)who is blessed [f]forever. Amen.

26 For this reason (M)God gave them over to (N)degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is [g]unnatural, 27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, (O)men with men committing [h]indecent acts and receiving in [i]their own persons the due penalty of their error.

28 And just as they did not see fit [j]to acknowledge God any longer, (P)God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper, 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are (Q)gossips, 30 slanderers, [k](R)haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, (S)disobedient to parents, 31 without understanding, untrustworthy, (T)unloving, unmerciful; 32 and although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of (U)death, they not only do the same, but also (V)give hearty approval to those who practice them.

Here is what John MacArthur had to say:

Now, all of a sudden, not only is this characteristic of our nation, but we now promote it. One of the parties, the Democratic Party, has now made Romans 1, the sins of Romans 1, their agenda. What God condemns, they affirm. What God punishes, they exalt. Shocking, really. The Democratic Party has become the anti-God party, the sin-promoting party. By the way, there are seventy-two million registered Democrats in this country who have identified themselves with that party and maybe they need to rethink that identification.

I know from last week’s message that there was some response from people who said, “Why are you getting political?”

Romans 1 is not politics. The Bible is not politics. This has nothing to do with politics. This has to do with speaking the Word of God through the culture in which we live. It has nothing to do with politics. It’s not about personalities; it’s about iniquity and judgment. And why do we say this? Because this must be recognized for what it is–sin, serious sin, damning sin, destructive sin.

WHAT HAS THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY REJECTED? THE ANSWER IS THE GOD WHO HAS REVEALED HIM SELF THROUGH THE BOOK OF NATURE AND THE BOOK OF SCRIPTURE!

God Is There And He Is Not Silent
Psalm 19
Intro. 1) Francis Schaeffer lived from 1912-1984. He was one of the Christian
intellectual giants of the 20th century. He taught us that you could be a Christian and not abandon the mind. One of the books he wrote was entitled He Is There And He Is Not Silent. In that work he makes a crucial and thought provoking statement, “The infinite- personal God is there, but also he is not silent; that changes the whole world…He is there and is not a silent, nor far-off God.” (Works of F.S., Vol 1, 276).
2) God is there and He is not silent. In fact He has revealed Himself to us in 2 books: the book of nature and the book of Scripture. Francis Bacon, a 15th century scientist who is credited by many with developing the scientific method said it this way: “There are 2 books laid before us to study, to prevent us from falling into error: first the volume to the Scriptures, which reveal the will of God; then the volume of the creation, which expresses His power.”
3) Psalm 19 addresses both of God’s books, the book of nature in vs 1-6 and the book of Scripture in vs. 7-14. Described as a wisdom Psalm, its beauty, poetry and splendor led C.S. Lewis to say, “I take this to be the greatest poem in the Psalter and one of the greatest lyrics in the world” (Reflections on the Psalms, 63).
Trans. God is there and He is not silent. How should we hear and listen to the God who talks?
I. Listen To God Speak Through Nature 19:1-6
God has revealed himself to ever rational human on the earth in two ways: 1) nature and 2) conscience. We call this natural or general revelation. In vs. 1-6 David addresses the wonder of nature and creation.

Whatever Happened To The Human Race? | Episode 5 | Truth and History

Related posts:

John MacArthur on Romans 1 and the Democratic Party

First is what Romans says: Romans 1:18-32 New American Standard Bible (NASB) Unbelief and Its Consequences 18 For (A)the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who (B)suppress the truth [a]in unrighteousness, 19 because (C)that which is known about God is evident [b]within them; for God made it evident to […]

Abortion and the Campaign for Immorality (Selected Scriptures) John MacArthur

Abortion and the Campaign for Immorality (Selected Scriptures) John MacArthur Published on Sep 30, 2012 by JohnMacArthurGTY http://www.gty.org/resources/sermons/90-448 What a privilege and joy it is to worship the Lord here at Grace Church. Patricia and I miss it when we’re not here. There’s no place like this. Our hearts are full to overflowing to be […]

John MacArthur: Fulfilled prophecy in the Bible? (Ezekiel 26-28 and the story of Tyre, video clips)

Prophecy–The Biblical Prophesy About Tyre.mp4 Uploaded by TruthIsLife7 on Dec 5, 2010 A short summary of the prophecy about Tyre and it’s precise fulfillment. Go to this link and watch the whole series for the amazing fulfillment from secular sources. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qvt4mDZUefo ________________ John MacArthur on the amazing fulfilled prophecy on Tyre and how it was fulfilled […]

Did God kill someone that I knew? What does I John 5:14-17 mean?

1 John 5:14-17 New American Standard Bible (NASB) 14 This is (A)the confidence which we have [a]before Him, that, (B)if we ask anything according to His will, He hears us. 15 And if we know that He hears us in whatever we ask, (C)we know that we have the requests which we have asked from […]