Speaker 1: Let's go next to Nelson from Bethlehem.
Nelson from Bethlehem.
Bethlehem, Welcome.
Speaker 3: Hey there, David.
Great show so far this week.
Thank you.
Like usual.
Speaker 1: Appreciate that very much.
Speaker 3: I don't think anybody's touched on this yet today.
So I wanted to get your opinion.
I don't think I've seen it on your show.
Are you familiar with Daniel Ortega down there in Nicaragua and the Sandinistas?
Speaker 1: Only superficially.
I don't have deep knowledge.
Speaker 3: Yeah, they're I'm one of those groups that you hear about a lot on the news,
but never nobody ever really talks about them.
So back in September.
Daniel Ortega.
For anybody that doesn't know, he is like the one real communist leader down there trying
to bring socialism to South America again against the wishes of the United States.
In September, he outlawed public displays of Christianity, and about a month ago on
Easter, he went and rounded up a bunch of journalists and clergy members and arrested
a bunch of people attending Catholic Mass.
Now, I'm an anti theist.
I think that all religion is bad and all of it needs to be outlawed.
I just think he's being a little heavy handed with it.
I was having a discussion with some of the chat members and a lot of them are in favor.
I was just wondering, do you think that we should like when it comes to in the United
States?
Do you think that people like that it should be a little bit more heavy handed against
the Catholic Church and Christian religion or.
Speaker 1: So here's the thing.
Okay.
There's two different layers to this from the let's talk about the situation in Nicaragua
first, and then we'll talk more generally.
It seems as though it's the goal really is to actually go after political opponents of
Ortega under the guise of this anti-religion stuff.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems that to some degree they're not just randomly going.
For the most part.
It doesn't seem like they're randomly going after Catholics.
But the idea is targeting opponents of Ortega.
Is that your understanding as well?
Speaker 3: I would say 90%, that is it.
But they are also going after the normal people that are like blocking traffic with Easter
parades and stuff.
They're going after what's out when that stuff is fair.
Speaker 1: So it's an important clarification.
My view is there should be total separation of church and state.
I don't ever want to hear scripture cited by an elected official during a debate about
what the law should be, the way it's cited in the United States about abortion, about
trans issues, about LGBT issues, about I never want to hear that stuff.
I don't want to see Ten Commandments displays at a courthouse.
I want separation of church and state.
But I also want freedom of religion, which includes freedom to follow any religion or
not and not to be persecuted.
So to the extent that the Catholic Church has been involved in child abuse cover ups,
they should receive absolutely no special help whatsoever.
But to the extent that, you know, being heavy handed with just people who go to church and
worship, just because I don't do that doesn't mean that I want the government going after
them.
So I cannot in good conscience support anything like that.
Speaker 3: Okay.
Well, that's good to hear your opinion on that.
And I would like to say as another thing of clarification, it is mostly political and
a lot of it has to go down to like racial lines because a lot of the indigenous community
down there is not Catholic.
And, you know, it kind of bounces heads up against it.
But thank you for giving your opinion on that, David.
I was just curious.
And once again, my brother's soft Gentlemen is listening and the call in show you can't
call in but love you out there, softy and love you so much.
David, thank you for doing what you do.
Speaker 1: Does that mean is that like soft serve?
What does that mean?
Speaker 3: No, it's a nickname going back to when we were in high school.
It's just the thing that you did in theater class.
Soft gentlemen.
It's a long story.
Oh, boy.
Speaker 1: I hope it's appropriate for a PG audience.
Nelson, thank you very much for the call.
It is.
Okay, good.
Thank you very much for the call.
And all right, let's continue.
Let's go next to Ricardo from one of my favorite cities, I guess, in North America, Montreal.
Ricardo, welcome to the program.
What's on your mind today?
Speaker 6: Hello, David.
How are you?
Speaker 1: I'm doing well.
Speaker 6: Good to hear.
Hey, I know that before I ask any questions.
I know this is something that probably many in your audience have asked have asked you
time and time and again, But it's actually more of a comment.
But I think it would be great to see a debate between you and Ben SHAPIRO sometime.
Speaker 1: Yeah, well, I'll do it any time.
We've invited him on the program and he doesn't respond.
So he may be too big for us now, but he's welcome any time.
I'm glad to do that.
But it's he he's the one you've got to convince, not me.
Speaker 6: Mm hmm.
Yeah, of course.
Yeah.
But, yeah, I remember, uh, some years back, I think maybe about 2019.
I think I watched the.
The debate between you and Ben.
Ben SHAPIRO.
Not sure if there's any been any other debates.
I think it was in 2013, you and Ben had the debate.
But, uh, yeah, I think that was a that was a good debate.
And I think, yeah, you know, where you you kind of like unravel because arguments especially
about gun gun control and all that.
Um, but tell you the truth, I know that, um, when during the pandemic, I think the early
stage of pandemic when the whole George Floyd riots were happening, that's when I really
started like listening to you and magistrate.
And there was actually a period time when I was listening to you, both you and Ben SHAPIRO,
just to sort of get like the left perspective and the right perspective on different things.
But I do notice that over time it seems that, um, his views on things got more and more
like extreme.
You know, his views kind of got more to the right.
And then if you notice that.
Speaker 1: You know, I don't follow SHAPIRO super closely, but it does strike me that
that entire group.
SHAPIRO Former actor Michael Knowles, Candace Owens, they all seem to have become dramatically
more extreme.
And I don't know if it's that they found out that it's more profitable or interesting or
if they genuinely have become more I don't really know what the reason is for it.
You know, one of the things that I've noticed is that my political views have really not
dramatically changed over the last decade.
And there's nothing right or wrong with views changing.
If you get new information, you revise your views.
I think that that's a really great thing.
But it does strike me as odd, particularly based on their age.
You know, Dave Rubin's another one who it's just weird when at a certain age you have
such differing, such changing views because it suggests that your views as an adult were
already not super well informed if they can change so radically.
So it is kind of a weird thing.
Speaker 6: Yeah, I agree 100%.
And I know that in the past you have also talked about how Dave Rubin, probably like
when he was in his thirties and forties, he suddenly went from being liberal or on the
left to on the right.
In some ways he's even kind of like on the radical right.
Joe I think like there was a time I was actually listening, just, just out of curiosity, I
was listening to a interview he was doing with, I think it was Michael Knowles.
And, and there are some things that Dave Rubin still had views on the left.
Like on abortion, he still I think you still agree that abortion should be accessible to
all women.
And he just said that he wasn't he wasn't ready yet to abandon that, that abortion should
be accessible.
So I thought that was interesting.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
You know, the Dave Rubin thing is really perplexing to me because he's 46 years old now.
And so he had this complete political 180 at like age 38, let's call it.
That's like I mean, think think for a second, Ricardo, how crazy it would be if right now,
right at my me current at my current age, at this point of my career, I became a right
wing extremist like that would be would.
Speaker 3: You would.
Speaker 1: You even believe that or would you assume I'm doing it because I can do it
profitably?
Like is it even viable that I would completely 180 my views right now, it seems so insane.
Speaker 6: Yeah, I guess if you were to do that, theoretically that would be that would
strike me as like, all what's going on here was he did even have left wing views in the
first place.
Speaker 1: Right.
Or was I or were my views so poorly grounded in reality that I didn't even know what I
believe?
I mean, it would be very weird when I think about it that way.
Now that I'm roughly the age that he was when he did his thing.
It's really strange.
It's it's really weird to imagine.
Speaker 6: I agree.
It reminds me a bit of like how, you know, when Trump was 60 and he says, oh, yeah, I
saw a kid and and and you know what?
I, I think I'm going to be against abortion.
Yes.
Speaker 1: And honestly, I think he was like 66 at that point.
It's even it's even harder to believe.
Yep.
I think it's all very weird.
And I do think that they've moved further to the right, Ricardo.
Speaker 6: I agree.
Yeah.
And, uh, even even Jordan Peterson, i, i, i was.
It happens that I'll listen to some of these podcasts and some.
I don't really listen as much as I used to, but I think I feel like even he's become more
radical.
Like, Oh, yeah, I think he had somebody, he, he had somebody on his show and he was using
the term globalist.
I'm like, Oh, shoot.
Oh yeah, that's really crazy.
Speaker 1: You know, he's lost his mind.
It's really crazy what's going on.
And unfortunately it's been normalized to where they're seen as kind of like not that
extreme, but these are really extreme people.
Ricardo, I got to wrap, but I really appreciate you bringing this up.
Speaker 6: Yeah.
And by the way, before I go.
Just one question.
Is there any right wing people would you like to have a debate with next?
Speaker 1: Not really.
I mean, I'll talk to.
I'll talk to whoever, but I'm not, like, pining to debate them.
You know, they're pretty bad faith actors in general.
Speaker 6: Yeah, I agree.
Well, thanks for having me on.
I really appreciate it.
Speaker 1: All right.
Ricardo from Montreal, Quebec, Canada, great to see you.
Great to hear you, rather.
That's going to do it for today.
I'm sorry I couldn't speak to everyone, but we will take calls again.
Have a great weekend.
Unless you've got access to the bonus show, in which case, we'll see you in a moment.
All right.