Point of View May 6, 2026 – Hour 2 : Pro-Life Issues

[00:00:04] Across America, live, this is Point of View, Kerby Anderson. Taking our today's list and we can get into a couple of other issues. This one's a little bit philosophical but I think it fits very well to a conversation we had years ago when we had Jonathan Haidt with us.

[00:00:31] Jonathan Haidt is of course the author of a most recent book, The Anxious Generation, but when we had him in we were actually talking about The Coddling of the American Mind. He co-authored that book with Greg Lukianoff. Greg is actually a Christian, Jonathan Haidt is not, but nevertheless it was helping us understand what was going on on college campuses because we started seeing all sorts of young people with all sorts of anxieties and things,

[00:00:58] but also in the midst of that it was predicting what we now see, the level of violence. And what they were working with at the time is that they found that many of these young individuals were being told by their professors that we're going to get into some difficult issues so this will be a trigger warning. And they were also then beginning to learn that again if you're concerned about some of these issues, well words are violence.

[00:01:26] And I think once you start down that road of recognizing that if I disagree with somebody's words, then that is reason enough to not only cancel them and actually debank them or remove them from a college campus, but then the next step is to even go after them physically, maybe even try to kill them.

[00:01:51] And in some respects that brings us to this very good piece by an individual that we've had on the program many times before, Heather McDonald. And she refers to it as the New York Times latte logic of social collapse. Okay. What she's getting at here is that there was a gathering that the New York Times put together. It's a 35 minute video. You can watch it for yourself. And the title was the rich don't play by the rules. So why should I?

[00:02:18] And it's in a sense helping you see the moral code of individuals who first of all believe that the end justifies the means. Number two, if the wealth, if people are wealthy, they did, they receive that by taking money or resources from you.

[00:02:36] And as a result, what you end up seeing is a conversation with a number of individuals, Hassan Piker, Gia Torrentino, as well as Nadia Spiegelman. And you don't need to know the names of all those, although Hassan Piker has been in the news a lot lately, in which they then have conversations about, well, didn't these people deserve it?

[00:03:00] And this gets back to the conversation we had on Monday of the way in which oftentimes the left turns a blind eye to the fact that they have a violence issue. And one of those is, well, they deserved it or there's both sides argument or whatever, or in many cases just think that it was a hoax.

[00:03:21] Well, here they had a conversation, for example, of the murder of the United Health Care CEO, Brian Thompson, in December of 2024. And there was very much of a men's justify the means kind of idea. And what is so striking to Heather McDonald was that apparently not only did the participants have no discomfort in what they were saying,

[00:03:48] but then this was still airing after the attempt by a 31-year-old individual who stormed the White House Correspondents' Dinner three days later to try to kill the president and the cabinet, and they still left the video up. And the point she's making is that you really have individuals here that on the one hand are complaining about the capitalist society,

[00:04:13] and then she begins to tell you what they're wearing in terms of how her nails were very beautiful lacquered, how in some respects she had the top-of-the-line jeans, how the boys, the young man had a long-sleeved Ralph Lauren shirt, complete with a polo pony logo. They're speaking in state-of-the-art microphones,

[00:04:39] and they're still, in one way or another, disparaging the capitalist situation in which they find themselves in. But she goes on to talk about a number of very interesting perspectives that she has, and I thought we would go through them real quickly, and I'll carry this into the next segment because there's quite a few. She says, Number one, there was just a complete ignorance of basic economics.

[00:05:07] The dominant theme, she says, of the video is that corporations are stealing from people, therefore it's quite appropriate to steal from them. You know, I've heard this years ago when there were people that were saying, I'm just going to download all of these videos, and even though I don't have the right to do so, download all these music, because, after all, they're, in a sense, stealing from us, so it's okay to steal with them.

[00:05:35] And as a result, you can then see that they argue that grocery stores steal from their workers and consumers, so it's okay to steal from them. Major corporations steal, so it's okay to steal from them. And just a complete unappreciation for the fact that it's not a zero-sum game. Your success is not based on my failure, or my success is not based on your failure. It is an expanding pie, not a fixed pie.

[00:06:04] But they don't seem to understand that. Trait number two is then play-acting at being revolutionaries. That is, if indeed we're going to actually try to rail against these corporations, they introduce the idea of micro-looting, which has become more and more of an issue if you've been around any kind of consumer goods at any time,

[00:06:29] because, in some respects, there is an attempt to not only steal things, but to break cabinets to get into those. And it's, again, one of those end-justifies-the-means kind of ideas. Number three, she says, just a complete ignorance of themselves. What is so intriguing here is that she says that in the dialogue,

[00:06:53] Whole Foods is mentioned 17 times in the Times micro-looting dialogue, and yet these are individuals that would love to shop there so they can get organic hair conditioner, even organic paper towels. I didn't even know there was such a thing. But, nevertheless, in organic avocados, which they're willing to pay for more rather than regular avocados,

[00:07:18] and you can begin to see, even just as you might get to it, just a complete lack of self-awareness of even the conversation you're having. One more before I take a break. Trait number four, self-aggrandizement masquerading as principle. Here you have the individuals that portray themselves as crusaders for economic justice, whereas really what they just want is free stuff.

[00:07:47] In the same way, she points out how college professors encamped in the campus quad portraying themselves as martyrs, just as they were having fun partying in the North Face tents and cutting the classes for which their parents were paying $60,000 or more a year. Of course, she makes a comment about the current mayor, Zoran Mamdani. But it just illustrates that as you start looking at this video, and I wouldn't necessarily recommend it,

[00:08:16] but if you read this particular article that goes on for seven pages, almost eight pages, you can see that it illustrates how this whole culture is shifting. Once I can create in my mind that corporations and businesses and even grocery stores, even mom and pops are in one way or another exploiting people, then micro-looting becomes a very significant and justifies the mean.

[00:08:46] And as we'll talk about more, even taking another person's life might be justified as well. We'll be right back. This is Viewpoints with Kerby Anderson. Let me begin with what seems like a ridiculous question. Is AI a fool? When I'm talking about AI, I mean artificial intelligence,

[00:09:14] and in particular the various AI tools being used and significantly funded. When I'm talking about a fool, I mean the biblical definition of someone who lacks moral discernment and acts recklessly. I will admit that computers are not persons, so we probably cannot be called a fool, but many of the current applications known as LLMs say and do a lot of foolish things. Here are four problems many experts in the AI field say are severe limitations of these AI tools.

[00:09:43] First, they do not live in the real world. As one critic put it, they have no intuitive understanding of gravity, friction, heat, or hunger. Second, they have no persistent memory. Yes, there are some things you can do to build into an AI tool, but most conversations start with zero. Third, these large language models have no ability to reason. They're just guessing at information. They're predicting the next token. And when they appear to reason, what they're really doing is pattern matching.

[00:10:11] Fourth, they're limited in planning. There is no inherent ability to take into account factors such as geography or time differences. Considering these limitations, we shouldn't be surprised that these AI tools get hallucinations, that is, create fake data, and are willing to make major changes that can disrupt businesses and people's lives. They remind us of people we know who are very intelligent but make foolish decisions.

[00:10:37] AI might seem smart, but it often seems to match the biblical definition of a fool. I'm Kirby Anderson, and that's my point of view. Go deeper on topics like you just heard by visiting pointofview.net. That's pointofview.net. You're listening to Point of View, your listener-supported source for truth.

[00:11:06] Back once again, let's see if we can get back to some of the things that Heather McDonald, who's been on the program many times before, talks about in terms of this video, because it is very disturbing, but it shows you sort of the mindset for why you're starting to see a justification for looting, for vandalism, for destroying property, and for even killing individuals.

[00:11:30] And she talks about trait number one, ignorance of basic economics, which I think is very obvious. It's trait number two, play acting as revolutionaries, in which they justify what they call micro-looting. When does micro-looting become excessive looting? No one really says. One of the individuals there says,

[00:11:52] I feel like we've forgotten there's a long and storied history of sabotage and engagement with property destruction. And I'm thinking, yes, and if you started destroying the property of New York Times, I got a feeling they'd have a real problem with the way in which you wanted to apply that. That would be justifiable if you had an editorial that they disagreed with.

[00:12:21] Trait number three, of course, is just real ignorance of themselves, almost just a lack of any self-evaluation. Trait number four, which we talked about a minute ago, just this whole display of hypocrisy. And then the last few. Trait number five, the inability to think in terms of principles. One of the participants makes a fleeting reference to a categorical imperative type thing,

[00:12:49] which is highfalutin philosophy for the idea that some things might be right and wrong. They believe in absolute ethics. You know, like biblical ethics or just even moral absolutes, because we want to dismiss all of those ideas. Trait number six, phony empathy. Because at this point here, then, the idea is, as well, I'm stealing on behalf of the downtrodden.

[00:13:16] And so, as a result, walking out of Whole Foods with an Ikea bag of whatever and giving it to people, you know, sheltering underneath scaffolding or something like that is justifiable instead of paying for it in doing so. And so, she talks about this whole idea of phony empathy. And then trait number six, actually, it's trait number seven. She misnumbered it here. Substituting the abstract for the tangible, the metaphorical for the literal.

[00:13:46] Because they start talking about systemic forms of violence and the extraction of surplus labor value. In other words, the companies weren't paying a market wage. And that number begins to get higher and higher every single day, according to the way in which that's ratcheted up by some of the leftist rhetoric. But then, of course, they get into this whole idea that hate speech is violence.

[00:14:12] And since hate speech is violence, what you need to do is assault the people engaged in hate speech. And if you go back to Charlie Kirk, there was a student petition there at Utah Valley University, which had the same kind of argument that when speakers with a record of targeting marginalized groups are given a microphone, this isn't dialogue, it's harm.

[00:14:38] First of all, of course, Heather McDonald points out Charlie Kirk did not target or hate marginalized groups. He engaged in a conversation about that. But, again, you then have them return back to the assassination of Brian Thompson, that individual who was the CEO of UnitedHealthcare. And Piker says, well, this is a fascinating story for me. Not tragic story, not disturbing story, but a fascinating one,

[00:15:08] which just, I think, shows you the cold, almost calculus that is being promoted oftentimes by the left. And if you wanted to get a feel for how that plays out, I do commend to you this very good piece, this very good analysis by Heather McDonald, which is with the Manhattan Institute. And I would encourage you to go to our article that we've posted there on the website, pointofview.net.

[00:15:37] Just before we wind down, let me just, again, summarize some of the things that Victor Davis Hanson points out. And that is, whatever the aftermath of the war in the Middle East is going to bring, the situation is no doubt going to be much better than many people understand. I mentioned just a minute ago that for many of us, remember when we were in long lines to just get gasoline

[00:16:04] because OPEC was able to actually prevent individuals from being able to get energy supplies because they actually threatened the industrialized world with oil shortages and sky-high prices. All of a sudden now, you're seeing the United Arab Emirates at a time when you have high oil prices leaving the cartel.

[00:16:30] And very soon afterwards, I think there are going to be many other countries in the Middle East leaving the cartel as well. There's a good reason for that is, many of these Arab nations are actually encouraging right now the United States to continue bombing a Middle Eastern nation, Iran. Why? Because they have, in many cases, received as much bombing from Iran

[00:16:58] as Israel has. And they came to recognize Israel may be more of our friend. The United States might be more of a friend than one of those countries that was part of OPEC. And that has been rather significant. The Gulf states were hit six times with as many Iranian rockets and drones as Israel. So they paid a heavy price.

[00:17:25] And again, you can think that maybe Iran's calculus at the time was, we want these other nations to join with us to fight Israel and the United States. So we'll have them actually be damaged. And that will make them angry enough to join with us to fight against Israel and the United States. But instead, what they saw was, that's not necessarily our friend.

[00:17:54] And a more realistic mindset in the Gulf states now is to recognize that Israel alone has the combat aircraft, the expertise, and the experience to strike Iran and deter it from attacking some of the modern Arab governments, which have received so many Iranian rockets and drones over the last couple of months. The other issue is, well, what about oil supplies?

[00:18:23] Victor Davis Hanson points out that although Russia still has sanctioned oil, a lot of Russian oil has shown up on the market. When United Arab Emirates has decided to get their oil out there as well, and of course just the oil the United States has produced, as well as what it's cleared with Venezuela, the loss of Iran's one and a half to two million barrels is probably not going to be as significant as many people would have thought.

[00:18:52] He goes on to say also that some of the things that have happened are going to affect not only the Middle East but other countries. For example, they ask, will a destitute Iran be able to replace its half-century-long, half-trillion-dollar investment in its military-industrial complex, which is now in ruins? Probably not. Will Russia now be able to work with Iran,

[00:19:19] because Russia has now been effectively cut off from the Middle East with its client Iran in shambles? And of course, Moscow, that is Russia, is now trapped in a four-year quagmire in Ukraine, with dead and wounded approaching two million, an economy on the brink of depression. Meanwhile, what about China itself? Under American pressure in Panama,

[00:19:46] having lost most of its influence in oil-rich Venezuela, China may still eye Taiwan, as always, but now might be disturbed by the high-tech American naval and aerial prowess. And then, of course, he says one of the greatest losers might be Europe, because with the temporary closing of the Strait of Hormuz,

[00:20:09] oil-dependent European Union has recognized how their radical green agenda is rather unsustainable, and the continent actually is beginning to find out how desperately it needs safe and reliable and affordable fossil fuels. And so, as he points out, Europeans may still despise Trump, but they still may need the United States military to protect them from Russia,

[00:20:37] any potential anti-Western nuclear power with ballistic missiles and regional destabilizers that is taking place. So, European nations could have kept quiet about allowing U.S. to use their airspace and basing under NATO privileges, but they were not, and we see what we see today. I think NATO will probably still survive, but it won't quite be the same. And so, in some respects,

[00:21:05] the argument is the global ripples from the Iranian war may actually be very positive, not just in the Middle East, but in many of the other countries which we see as enemies of the United States. If you'd like to read it, as always, great analysis by Victor Davis Hanson. It's one of the articles on our website, and we'll be back right after this.

[00:21:29] Where does moral truth come from? According to 58% of Americans, individuals determine moral truth. A quarter of Generation Z says society determines moral truth, and morality can even change over time. Only 42% of Americans believe that truth comes from God. I don't know about you, but I find these numbers extremely troubling.

[00:21:57] It really is a crisis of truth, and that crisis has consequences. Look at society. Evil is called good. Good called evil. People with biblical beliefs are called bigots, or worse, they're canceled. But there is hope. The Bible promises the truth will set us free, and that's why Point of View is relentless in our commitment to the ultimate source of moral truth, God's Word. At Point of View, we know that God's truth is eternal,

[00:22:25] and if we stand together, we can help more Americans apply His truth in their daily life. Help Americans find truth again by giving at pointofview.net, or call 1-800-347-5151. That's pointofview.net, and 800-347-5151. Point of View will continue after this.

[00:23:01] You are listening to Point of View. The opinions expressed on Point of View do not necessarily reflect the views of the management or staff of this station. And now, here again, is Kirby Anderson. Back once again as we've been advertising, we are privileged to talk with today former Senator Rick Santorum. Let me just mention that he, for the few of you that are in the Dallas area, and I know we broadcast across the country,

[00:23:30] so most of you would not be able to attend, but if you are in the Dallas area, he will actually be speaking with Council for Life at a breakfast on May 18th at the Dallas Country Club, and it's going to be a great opportunity for those of us that will be there. I'm part of the advisory board of the Council for Life, but I wanted the rest of you across the country to get a chance to hear from him, since he's been on the program with us before and such a champion on the pro-life issues.

[00:23:57] An individual that probably first came into the national stage when he had this incredible upset in which he defeated a 14-year Democratic incumbent. That would be in the 18th Congressional District. And we've posted a piece from Live Action News where he reminds us, and I had forgotten about this, that when he won that night, the Associated Press didn't know who he was, so they called the Republican National Congressional Committee, and they said, we don't know who he is either. So it's kind of a fun story,

[00:24:27] which we'll get into in just a minute. But an individual that then decided later to run and became the youngest senator ever elected from Pennsylvania, probably best known for a number of things, including the partial birth abortion ban, Welfare Reform Act, and much more. Of course, his book, Blue Collar Conservative, Recommitting to an America That Works. A lot of great resources. And so we have information about Senator Rick Santorum on our website at pointofview.net. Senator, welcome back to Point of View.

[00:24:56] Well, thank you, Kirby. It's great to be back with you, and I look forward to seeing you in a couple of weeks. First of all, let's tell that funny story. I recognize that some of our listeners were not of age when back in 1990 you said, hey, you know, I think I might run against this individual. And, you know, Doug Walgreen was, of course, very entrenched. And I'd forgotten the story, but it's a great story because you ran, you won.

[00:25:25] And so then, of course, Associated Press said, okay, and Wall Street Journal and all those, and okay, who is this guy? And so they call up the Republican National Congressional Committee and they go, we don't have his name either. So tell the rest of the story. Yeah, well, that's the story. The story is that the morning after the election, the Wall Street Journal, you said on there, it was a print edition. Obviously, there wasn't a web edition. A print edition on the left-hand side, they had these little blurbs. At the bottom was a blurb saying,

[00:25:53] last night, you know, Doug Walgreen, as you mentioned, who was a 14-year incumbent, lost in the 18th District of Pennsylvania. The AP announced that he lost, but the AP didn't say who won. And so he said, so we decided we would call the Republican Congressional Committee, which is the campaign committee for the House Republicans, and we called them and said, can you give us the name of the person who won? And they didn't know my name. So I was very much a,

[00:26:23] they never supported me. I went there at Washington once to see if I could get some support from them, and I met with an intern. They wouldn't even, they wouldn't even let me meet with anybody who was on the staff. So I was a long shot, and that probably gives some discredit to long shots. But I think it's a great illustration for our listeners. There are some people listening right now that might say, well, is it possible to win? Yes. A grassroots campaign, working,

[00:26:53] knocking on doors, all the old-fashioned ways in which we did it. Now with the new social media. And then you turn right around and say, you know what? This is going well. I'm going to be running as a senator, which again was an uphill battle. And yet I think it illustrates again that your success, first running in the House of Representatives and then for a seat in the Senate, just really, I think it should be an encouragement really to others that may want to be involved in public service like you were.

[00:27:23] Well, I appreciate that, Kirby. I'll add even a little twist to that. I got elected in 1990. And as your listeners well know, in 92 and in 2002 and in 2012 and in 2022, that's when redistricting happens. At least that's when it used to happen. Now it happens all the time. But it happened every 10 years. And so in Pennsylvania, we went from, I think, 21 congressmen down to 20. We sent one down to Texas,

[00:27:51] which we seem to do every 10 years. You guys keep growing congressmen, we keep losing them. Well, when that happened in 92, they eliminated my district. They chopped it up into three different districts. I remember that. They put me in with a 20, even a longer term incumbent. Long story short, I ended up winning that race, even though the district was a 70% Democratic district. I still won. And then I decided to run for the Senate. So no good deed goes unpunished. You know,

[00:28:20] you win a big upset and you upset the apple cart, which I did. You know, the powers that be come out against you and we beat them anyway. So that's a good news story. Well, we brought you on because we want to talk about pro-life issues, certainly. And even in the interview, there was the idea that some people had of, well, I'll vote pro-life, but I'm not going to be on the front lines. But I told the story of when there was a really significant issue about Parthel Bush abortion.

[00:28:51] We had earlier talked about how interesting enough representative Brandon Gill was engaged in what we might call a masterclass in exposing abortion euphemism when he was asking questions from Jessica Waters about which abortion procedure do you prefer? Saline injection, suction, whatever. I have to tell you, Kirby, I watched that. And I got to tell you, it's been so long since someone in the house or Senate, you know,

[00:29:19] went out there and challenged the abortion industry. I mean, I, I did that on a regular basis, but everyone seems to be intimidated. And I don't know, Brandon, I've met him, but I don't know him. I'll tell you what, I'm a big fan. I just, I just love, I just love the fact that he had the courage because one, you know, now he's got a, you know, he's, he's got a bullseye on his back. He is, he does. And these days, that's not a good thing. And by the way, he is the son-in-law of Donesta Sousa. Of course, that's how I've known him. But I talked about the fact that I,

[00:29:49] and you remember this only so well, the back and forth between you and Senator Barbara Boxer about this partial birth abortion issue. Because again, you did the same thing years ago in which you force people to see, first of all, the diagram of what that actually engaged in. And then you were asking her, you know, how much of the head can be a, before you would say that that was immoral. And it's the kind of, if you will,

[00:30:17] argumentation and discussion that we need to engage in because people want to cover it with all sorts of euphemisms, don't they? Absolutely. And, and again, that's why I was so proud to see what he did and the courage he took. There is no defense to abortion. I mean, I, I know that people say, well, you know, it's, it's inconvenient for me, or I, you know, I'm not ready for it. Well, then you should have thought about that before you decided to, you know, before you did things that could get you pregnant. And people say, well, there's rape and incest.

[00:30:47] That's less than 1% of all abortions. So let's just, let's just set that aside for a moment. Let's talk about the 99% of abortions that occur because people engage in sexual activity and get pregnant. And, and it's, it's the whole idea that in our society, we've detached, you know, freedom from responsibility. And yes, you are free to do a lot of different things, but they also have the responsibility that if, that if something happens as a result of that free act, that activity, responsibility for it. And, and we want that.

[00:31:16] We want freedom without responsibility. And, and that's, that's, that's not real freedom. That's, that's a, that's, that is chaos in the end. And, and, and in this case, it's not chaos. It's, it's the death of another child, another human being who's innocent in this whole process. So, um, we need to, need to talk more real about what's really going on here. And, you know, there's plenty of ways for people not to, not to get pregnant. Uh, and, and, and, but when they do,

[00:31:45] they should step up and take responsibility. And I know it's hard, but you know what? Uh, life is hard. And there, there are a lot of challenges you have in your life and it shouldn't be, the excuses shouldn't be, I will take someone's life. So my life is better. Let me just mention real quickly, as we go to a break and we'll come back and continue our conversation, we have a link to Patriot voices. And that is a way in which you can find out a little bit more about, uh, some of the things that, uh,

[00:32:12] former Senator Rick Santorum has been involved with. And I thought we'd also, when we come back, spend just a little bit of time talking about your children, because of course you lost one, uh, prematurely. But then of course, everybody loves to talk about Bella, uh, who has a trisomy 18. And, uh, the information that we posted there said she's 17. Now I found out she's 18 years of age. Well, she'll, she'll be 18 next week. Yeah. So here we go. We are going to update that in just a minute. And,

[00:32:42] uh, that again is an illustration because some of you might say, well, if you have a so-called problem pregnancy, or you have one where you're being told that this is, uh, going to be a very difficult situation for you. There are chances of living or limb limited. You want to hear this story, of course, from Rick Santorum, who has really stood strong on the pro-life issues for so long. And as we pointed out just a few minutes ago,

[00:33:09] we do lament the fact that some of these very strong platforms, the Republican party used to have on pro-life issues have been watered down. So we'll come back and spend a little bit of time talking with a former Senator Rick Santorum. Again, for those of you in the Dallas area, you might want to turn out for the breakfast, May 18th. But for all of you, I want you to have a chance to hear from an individual that we've always had such great respect for. So we'll take a break and we'll come back and spend a little bit more time

[00:33:36] talking about this pro-life issue from a man that has had to live it and certainly can speak to that issue. All that coming up right after this. You're listening to point of view,

[00:34:03] your listener supported source for true back. Once again, we're talking with the former Senator Rick Santorum. We have a link to patriotvoices.com. This was founded by Rick and Karen Santorum many years ago. And if you would like to know more about him, maybe have him come and speak as he's doing for many of us, that would be an opportunity. Also, even though we're talking about the pro-life issues, I know, Rick, you are certainly addressing many other issues,

[00:34:31] but I thought one of the things I might do for just a minute is talk about your kids. And that is, first of all, of course, as I mentioned, just in passing, you lost your son, Gabriel, and your wife wrote this very powerful book, Letters to Gabriel, the true story of Gabriel, Michael Santorum. And first of all, I know that book has been helpful for parents who find themselves in a difficult situation where a sonographer says, I don't think your child's going to live,

[00:34:59] or this child is destined for a difficult life. This is a real encouragement. So that's one story. But the one that I think is even more powerful is the story of Bella, who has trisomy 18, in which you were told that these are individuals that are not going to live very long. The line is incompatible with life. And yet, as we pointed out next week, she's going to be 18 years of age. And yet there was, if I remember right,

[00:35:29] wasn't there a pediatrician that was giving her morphine, trying to kill her? Give us that story, if you might. Yeah. So my daughter, Bella, was born, like I said, 18 years ago. And when we didn't know, we knew that there was something wrong. There's, you know, we don't do prenatal testing. You know, we'll accept whatever God gives us and, and, and, and love that baby as long as, as we can. And, and, and so when she was, she was later in pregnancy,

[00:35:59] she had some issues. You could see there were some, yeah, that would be her to, because she wasn't growing in the womb. And so we, and we delivered her and we knew she had some issues. We didn't know what they were. We did some, we did the genetic tests that you do. And after birth and the doctor came back and said, your, your, your daughter has trisomy 18 and she's going to die. And, and that she's, you know,

[00:36:29] we're going to send you home on hospice care. And meanwhile, my daughter's in the NICU and she's doing fine. Now, I mean, we know that, you know, she's got, she'll have some issues, but, you know, we said, okay, you know, what, you know, what can we do? And, and they said, really, there's nothing you can do and there's nothing we can do. And, and I said, well, okay. And so in 10 days we took her home and the only, we, we said she has some, she was born premature. So as you know, any about premature kids,

[00:36:58] lung issues are always the issue. And so, and they said that she had, she would have bad lungs for some reason. That's one of the things that, that these kids have. And we said, okay, can you bring us, can you give us a prescription for oxygen just in case she needs oxygen? And the doctor looked at my wife and said, you have to learn to let go. And we said, well, wait a minute. We're just asking for oxygen. I mean, we're not asking for any extraordinary treatment here. And, and he said, no,

[00:37:28] you have to understand. And my wife, mama bear came out and within two minutes we had a prescription for oxygen. And we, and we sent her home and they gave us one other prescription. And we went to the, you know, a week or so later, we went to our well baby visit with our pediatrician. And we, she said, he asked if there was any prescriptions that she went home with. And we showed her the, him the prescription for morphine and his head sort of rocked back. And I said, what's that? He said,

[00:37:58] so why did they give you this? She said, well, because they said that she would probably get a cold and she would die from it and she would struggle. And so this is to help calm her down. So she doesn't die in pain. And we, and he looked at, he said, well, this, this isn't to calm her down. This is a lethal dose for her. Wow. So we decided at that point, we canceled hospice. We got, we, you know, we went and got a good team of doctors who believed in her.

[00:38:27] And we, we did what you would do with any child, which is you fight for your children. I mean, there's so many hero stories out there about parents who, who have a child with a, with, with a disease or with, you know, or getting an accident or whatever. And, and this parents just go through walls to fight for their children. And our, our feeling was that you should feel that way about the child, whether they're born or unborn, they're your child. That's right. And you, and you, and you fight for them. You, you love them. And, you know,

[00:38:57] this was a gift from God. You have an eternal soul. That soul may not live long on this earth, but it lives for eternity where it matters. And, and so you've got it. You've got a real obligation to, to, to embrace this eternal soul for what, however, no, none of us live that long. We're all gone, you know, and like this, like a snap in the, in the course of history. It, we shouldn't measure life by the, you know,

[00:39:26] by what that person can do. It's by the fact that they're, you created this eternal soul. I tell, I, I counsel, do some marriage prep and things like that. And I always tell people, I said, you know, a hundred years from now, no one's going to remember your name. No one's going to know you. No one's going to know you existed. I said, but there's only one thing you'll ever do in your life that, that lasts forever. And that is cooperate with God to create a, that is your legacy. That is what matters. And,

[00:39:55] and the most important thing you can do. I learned this through my son, Gabriel and, and losing him was the most, the greatest piece of advice I got from a, from a great pastor who told me, he said, your principal role as a father is to shepherd your children to heaven. And, and I said, and he said, you know, you got one there already. He said, you know, well done. And so it's, it's, you have to think of it.

[00:40:19] We tend to think too much in this material world of things of the present and not things that matter, which are the eternal thing. So well said. Well, again, just before we run out of time, I do want to encourage people to find out a little bit more. We live in this post Dobbs world, and I think there is more opportunity than ever for those of us that are pro-life. And I want to encourage people that if they'd like to know more about what you are involved with, we have a link to patriotvoices.com.

[00:40:48] There's a place that you can learn about the various stands on everything from economics to national security to, of course, the pro-life issues we're talking about. Let me encourage many of you that if you've appreciated even this short conversation we've had with him today, you might want to consider having him come and speak to your group because we need the pro-life message like never before. And one of the great champions for the pro-life message has been Senator Rick Santorum. So we appreciate you giving us some time today here on Point of View,

[00:41:18] and look forward to the opportunity on May 18th. It is always a pleasure. I know I've done your show in the past. It's always a pleasure. I always really enjoy doing your show, and God bless you, and keep it up. Well, again, please pray for Rick Santorum and his wife, and a group of individuals that are involved in all these activities. That is going to be, I think, a great opportunity for you to maybe learn and maybe just re-educate a whole generation of young people about the pro-life movement.

[00:41:45] Let me again mention the fact that we do have this booklet on the Declaration and Constitution. As you go to the website to find some of this information about Rick Santorum or Paul Kinger, you can also click on that banner there, and I think you're going to find that to be extremely helpful so that you can order it. You might even want to get extra copies there.

[00:42:05] And then tomorrow we have Marcy Gurley talking about, I love this book, 250 great things about America. No, we probably won't cover all 250. If we get to 50, we'll be lucky. And then before we end, we also have a good comment from Bill Federer about prayer. Of course, he's best known for the, of course, National Day of Prayer, President's and Prayer book, and all sorts of things.

[00:42:33] So let me encourage you tomorrow to go to an event that might be taking place in your community for a day of prayer. If there's not an event, that doesn't keep you from praying for America. And, of course, we'll have some great information about that here on the website, pointofview.net. Hope you appreciated all the conversation. Looking forward to a great reminder of how great America can be and will continue to be if we want to be involved.

[00:43:00] As always, I want to thank Megan for help engineering the program. Steve, thank you for producing the program. Look forward to seeing you tomorrow as we celebrate America 250 right here on Point of View. Have you ever met a child you knew would do great things? They displayed remarkable imagination, understanding, and a zest for learning.

[00:43:25] Now imagine someone takes that child, and instead of fostering their potential with a real education, they feed them nothing but lies. You know, that scenario isn't so far from reality. From a young age, Americans are fed a consistent stream of distorted facts, from the secular indoctrination they receive in many public schools, to the biases presented as fact in many colleges and universities,

[00:43:49] to the barrage of misinformation from the mainstream media and the lack of moral grounding in our society. It's not that Americans aren't capable of understanding the truth. It's that they aren't exposed to it enough. You can expose more Americans to the truth when you give to Point of View, where listeners receive facts, perspective, and biblical truth they don't get from society. As long as we have truth, we have hope.

[00:44:16] Give today at pointofview.net or call 1-800-347-5151. Pointofview.net and 1-800-347-5151. Point of View is produced by Point of View Ministries.