Get episodes early and ad-free at www.Patreon.com/AlexOC

@entp_adventures

2 ай бұрын

Alex fiddna single handedly bridge the intellectual divide between the atheist left and the DW

@joshuataylor3550

2 ай бұрын

He has to have more misplaced smugness than any other human that's ever existed.

@Steven_DunbarSL

2 ай бұрын

Would love to listen a continuation of the conversation Alex! Part 2!

@sonofgandalf403

2 ай бұрын

@@joshuataylor3550 You sound a little bit gay

@nobodynowhere7163

2 ай бұрын

The Constitution actually says “ they are endowed by THEIR Creator” not “OUR Creator”. Big difference.

I hear this all the time... "Based on the principles of Christianity." What *_exactly_* does that even mean? Ask ten Christians, and you'll get ten different answers.

@mugiwara7347

2 ай бұрын

I once had eleven answers 😂

@Arphemius

2 ай бұрын

Exactly. Christianity, like all religion, has no values or principles other than "obey and spread the mindvirus to someone else if you can". If they have to butcher 10000 pagans they will, if they have to pretend to be meek and subservient they will, if they have to pretend to be progressive and modern they will. They don't have any actual principles.

@sammael8472

2 ай бұрын

Ask ten different Christians twice and you'll get twenty different answers.

@Chris_Sheridan

2 ай бұрын

@@sammael8472 .. what is the question?

@theeightoclock

2 ай бұрын

It means no to shellfish and no gay

How many times will Michael find a way to mention the liberals in this debate about Christianity…

@unduloid

2 ай бұрын

Not to mention that the vast majority of liberals are Christian.

@kevinpalmer9942

2 ай бұрын

He dismisses many of the founding fathers with a wave of the hand and a “he’s very liberal”. Lol

@janefkrbtt

2 ай бұрын

​@@kevinpalmer9942 Knowles would've been a turncoat American. the founders would've been "too liberal" for him.

@masterlee9822

2 ай бұрын

Children no longer have to play the parent once their free of their control but many continue while other don't bother causing their parents to hate them from afar or adept to this stranger child that they no longer know. What child wants to socialize with a parent in earshot. Parents are a foe that must be conned until the jail door is unlocked and freedom is achieved.

@severed6s

2 ай бұрын

more times than he calls Alex a limey

I'm so impressed with the arc of your career. Changing your channel name was a wise move.

@ihatemondays33

Ай бұрын

What was his name before? I'm a new viewer.

@themapisallocean

Ай бұрын

@@ihatemondays33cosmic skeptic

@ihatemondays33

Ай бұрын

@@themapisallocean thanks

@lillypotter6722

Ай бұрын

@@ihatemondays33 I still type up his old KZread name 😂 I’ve been a viewer for years 😂

@Catstew

Ай бұрын

His handle is still cosmicskeptic

100% need a part two

A nation of Christians, not a Christian nation. This is such an important distinction that many wishful thinkers don't seem to appreciate.

@mrsnakesmrnot8499

2 ай бұрын

It is a nation of Christians, Jews, atheists, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Scientologists, etc. - not to mention that there are a thousand denominations of Christianity, which is evidence that there are at least that many ways to interpret the vague, poorly written, and contradictory holy book.

@timeck1689

2 ай бұрын

Or a Christian nation and secular state with Christian influence

@doyoufeel...thatyoulackcri6760

2 ай бұрын

According to atheist religion which rejects free will and therefore commands atheists to embrace their animal desires instead of fighting them, How can it be evil when a grown up adult pdf file atheist bones kids? He has no free will. All he can do, is to follow his animal desires, he has no choice. In fact he is innocent and there's nothing to be ashamed about.

@dynmicpara

2 ай бұрын

How many actual John 3:16 pardoned Christians?

@iakze

2 ай бұрын

If this is a distinction -and an important one- why isn't it obvious what you mean?

I think it's significant not only that they left the Christian god out of the Constitution, but also that it is written in the Declaration of Independence as "...by their creator..." rather than "by God" or "by the creator". It personalizes the belief system rather than institutionalizing it.

@winklethrall2636

2 ай бұрын

I found it interesting to know that the phrase "their creator" wasn't even in the earlier drafts.

@Mswordx23

2 ай бұрын

And then notice how at 6:48 Knowles changes the text to say "our Creator" whether unintentionally or intentionally. Either way, giving another impression of the text that isn't there.

@pnut3844able

2 ай бұрын

No, the words "their creator" should have been left out too. Not everyone believes in a creator.

@loganjackson675

2 ай бұрын

That would be a great point if the word “God” itself wasn’t used in like 46/50 of the State Constitutions. And the other 4 all reference “the creator” or “the Supreme Being.” Pretty sure part of Knowles’ point is that a room of deists, Christians, and atheists can’t fully control how their created system can shift, and for 200 years the American creation shifted to what was decidedly Christian in culture and, to a lesser extent, law.

@jffrysith4365

2 ай бұрын

​@@pnut3844able that's true, but at the time a significant amount of people did. Atheism is rather new, only really growing around the 1800s whereas the treaty of independence was signed in 1776, so it still makes sense that it says creator because it was kinda taken for granted. As we learn more, we realise that a lot of the things we thought were mystical where really explainable with an understanding of the world, which stopped us from requiring a god to understand the world. It may be true that America should remove the 'their creator' now, but it's hard to change those things after they happen.

Great conversation. Definitely up for a part 2

Thank you so much for all your time and effort and I can’t tell you how much I appreciate these kinds of conversations.

Freedom of. No establishment. It's in the Bill of Rights. Americans are primarily Christian. But our government is a secular government, period. And rightfully so. Freedom of religion is fantastic. So is the establishment clause.

@edwardburroughs1489

2 ай бұрын

Exactly it's such a simple thing to understand. I think the USA is a secular nation of Christians and Britain is a Christian nation of secularists.

@Joaopereira-dh3dw

2 ай бұрын

That's not what maga and mike johnson wants to hear

@ralphietwoshoes

2 ай бұрын

But can you really divorce the moral/ethical systems of the people who both created and operate the government? Would we apply the same standards to other organizations, such as Chick-Fil-A?

@below_average7233

2 ай бұрын

⁠@@ralphietwoshoesLabelling it a “Christian nation” holds political implications that go far deeper than government officials simply holding moral assumptions that are supposedly Christian. You wouldn’t call secular humanitarian NGOs Christian just because they promote general welfare.

@edwardburroughs1489

2 ай бұрын

I think Christianity has been secularized in the West, for want of a better way to put it.@@below_average7233

Benjamin Franklin - ‘Lighthouses are more useful than churches.’.

@Ghatius

2 ай бұрын

Cant a church be a lighthouse?

@johnpetry5321

2 ай бұрын

Only once with sufficient fuel ​@@Ghatius

@frank_calvert

2 ай бұрын

i wonder of there are any combined lighthouse churches...

@macdonald2k

2 ай бұрын

"Were I a Roman Catholic, perhaps I should on this occasion vow to build a chapel to some saint, but as I am not, if I were to vow at all, it should be to build a light-house."

@MrLcowles

2 ай бұрын

Shithouses are far more useful than churches.

Definitely need a part two.

Nice back-and-forth in this one, Alex!

One thing about Michael Knowles is his studio looks comfy as fuckkkkkk

@theintelligentmilkjug944

2 ай бұрын

It did look pretty nice.

@crabb9966

2 ай бұрын

Don't swear

@plumberman19

2 ай бұрын

I'll second that objective truth 😂

@GaganSingh-nx2yv

2 ай бұрын

FucKKK

@BobPemberton-wb5sb

2 ай бұрын

The Christian Right spare no expence pushing their propaganda.

Michael Knowles unintentionally making Seneca Lucius's point: _“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.”_

@Yestherewego

2 ай бұрын

For me what is more scary these days is that atheistic world views believe they are inherently free of ideology and dogma. We're more likely to sleepwalk in to catastrophe that way than we are through religion these days.

@utubepunk

2 ай бұрын

@@villefere6968 Oh no! My sides! 😂 I wonder if there's a political leader who came into power by appealing to the authoritarian nature & persecution complex found in Christianity? Hmmm. You're wrong. If a politician can pander & appeal to Christians to get their votes despite having a life time record of being unChrist-like, then exploiting those Christians to gain power was a VERY useful maneuver. Come on.

@tecategpt1959

2 ай бұрын

@@villefere6968read Nietzsche. The masters of a society will assimilate in slave morality as a means of greater control. Point to the celebrities for instance, who participate in charities and are well loved by the people as they further go up in wealth and power. Look at any major corporation who try really hard to appeal to the people by changing their logos into a rainbow once a year to stay relevant and attract a greater audience, and it happens on the other side to. By every metric this quote is correct

@jeremyn4397

2 ай бұрын

@@tecategpt1959 I was thinking of Nietzsche too when he was trying to argue that christians are harder to control than non-believers xD

@decegrease

2 ай бұрын

​@@villefere6968 christianity neither teaches individual rights and justice or provides a strong moral framework

Good civil conversation. Love to see it.

@goldie481

Ай бұрын

So good to be civil with people who want us dead. Where would we be as a society otherwise 🙄

fascinating debate, can't wait read some more on this .

This is why youtubers have long overpassed tv reporters: you let your guest, whether you agree with him or not, speak until finishing an idea. Watching tv shows in which reporters constantly interrupt their guests is quite sad and shows how better your content is, Alex. Cheers!

@adamcosper3308

2 ай бұрын

Michael Knowles doesn't deserve respect.

@thoughtsuponatime847

2 ай бұрын

Depends on the guest. Some people just like running their mouths.

@markhantla7915

2 ай бұрын

@@adamcosper3308 I did get frustrated that Michael often wouldn't let Alex flesh out his points. As soon as Michael sniffed out an argument, he'd pounce on it rather than letting it be made more thoroughly. At one point Alex even suggesting having multiple possible rebuttals but never even got to flesh them out.

@PennyDreadful2024

Ай бұрын

To be fair, they are different formats. KZread videos have limits on length and also no market pressures. TV segments tend to be mch briefer so you have to cover a lot of ground quickly. There are pressures and incentives that are not in a youtube video. Also the stakes are way higher for everyone involved in a TV spot. Granted, I do think that people also cut each other off on TV to be aggressive or to "score points".

@CrankyPants05

Ай бұрын

​@@adamcosper3308 why? Should we not give basic respect to those we disagree with while having a civil conversation?

I was so amused by Michael having several cameras set up and a crew changing angles for him 😂

@mjsdc8072

2 ай бұрын

The more right wing , the more kitsch that surrounds the set.

@lorenzsabbaer7725

2 ай бұрын

well, its called professionel... dont get me wrong, im an atheist, but i see no problem there!

@Christopher-tayso

2 ай бұрын

@@mjsdc8072the more right wing you are, the more billionaire funders you have.

@erenjaeger1738

2 ай бұрын

I mean atleast it isn't a Webcam man >:(

@Danboy0001

2 ай бұрын

​@@Christopher-taysoKnowles/Daily Wire dont have billionaire funders. On the other hand, major left wing outlets (Young Turks, anyone?) most definitely are... :)

Interesting conversation. You have a way if bringing out the best in the people that you speak to.

Hey Alex! This is probably the 3rd video i've seen of yours in direct dialogue to popular conservative/religious thinkers and I wanted to say I appreciate your approach and grace afforded in these conversations

@VVeremoose

Ай бұрын

to be clear, Mike is a political thinker. Not a religious one. By his own admission.

@zenithzeitgeist7489

Ай бұрын

Mike is a theocrat like many Republicans, but Mike & his cronies like Ben Shapiro pretend they're not theocrats.

@yelsu3358

Ай бұрын

​@@VVeremoose whatever he is, he's an idiot

@PhysicsGuy1000

Ай бұрын

@@VVeremooseReligion is the basis behind his entire worldview.

@VVeremoose

Ай бұрын

@@PhysicsGuy1000 So? Politics is applied Theology like Biology is applied Chemistry. You may not realize it, but your political views are informed by your theological views. But just like a biologist can be a biologist without having to be a chemist first, a political scientist can be a political scientist without being a theologian first.

Knowles using Adams as an example for how we are founded on Christian ideals is odd since he literally wrote in the treaty of Tripoli, " United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion". EDIT-- You brought this point up. Good on you!

@Dan16673

2 ай бұрын

But but Muslims lol

@evanr5871

2 ай бұрын

He didn’t write this. The treaty was originally written in Arabic, and Adam’s didn’t speak arabic. He did sign the document and confirmed that everything written in the treaty was true, but it’s misleading to quote him.

@chach1288

2 ай бұрын

Which god is the one who is giving “Rights”? The founding fathers created a society that follows god. Which god? Seems obvious it is the Judeo-Christian god?

@serjarmen

2 ай бұрын

@@chach1288it's not mentioned which one and for a reason. They could've just establish Christianity as the official religion, they didn't

@Wowzer123

2 ай бұрын

👍 Personal correspondence between Jefferson and ADAMS: "I almost shudder at the thought of alluding to the most fatal example of the abuses of grief which the history of mankind has preserved -- the Cross. Consider what calamities that engine of grief has produced!" -- John Adams, letter to Thomas Jefferson "It is too late in the day for men of sincerity to pretend they believe in the Platonic mysticism that three are one and one is three, and yet, that the one is not three, and the three not one.... But this constitutes the craft, the power, and profits of the priests. Sweep away their gossamer fabrics of fictitious religion, and they would catch no more flies." -- Thomas Jefferson, letter to John Adams (August 22, 1813), Works, Vol. IV, p. 205 "Indeed, Mr. Jefferson, what could be invented to debase the ancient Christianism which Greeks, Romans, Hebrews and Christian factions, above all the Catholics, have not fraudulently imposed upon the public? Miracles after miracles have rolled down in torrents. -- John Adams, letter to Thomas Jefferson, December 3, 1813 "The Christian priesthood, finding the doctrines of Christ leveled to every understanding, and too plain to need explanation, saw, in the mysticism of Plato, materials with which they might build up an artificial system which might, from it’s indistinctness, admit everlasting controversy, give employment for their order, and introduce it to profit, power and pre-eminence." -- Thomas Jefferson, letter to John Adams, July 5, 1814, Lester Cappon, ed, The Adams-Jefferson Letters (1959) p. 433

Man once surrendering his reason, has no remaining guard against absurdities the most monstrous, and like a ship without rudder, is the sport of every wind. With such persons, gullibility, which they call faith, takes the helm from the hand of reason, and the mind becomes a wreck. Thomas Jefferson

@user-zx4ds8mt9b

2 ай бұрын

What an astute dude

@simplybaker.

2 ай бұрын

I'll give you almost verbatim what Knowles response to that would be: "NUH UH, that's just the silly writing of a liberal" or essentially "Yeah maybe I'm using anecdotes to prove my point, but YOU CANNOT use anecdotes to prove your point. You must adhere to a higher standard of proof than me because I am implicitly correct."

@masterlee9822

2 ай бұрын

man is full of deception, lies and games believing their smarter then everybody else only to deceive themselves in the end. but woe to the destruction unleashed.

@scottm4975

2 ай бұрын

What do you think faith means in this quote?

@sammyismuff

2 ай бұрын

First the Declaration of Independence, then this? The revolutionaries really had a great man in Thomas Jefferson. The Conservatives have Michael Knowles lol

Michael does a good job of putting a nicely polished veneer on the insane idea that the establishment clause actually doesn’t mean what we’ve always understood it to mean.

@rock4ever302

Ай бұрын

He’s not saying it’s different than what we’ve always understood it to mean. The text is clear. He’s arguing as to why it was instituted in the first place, which is important when debating founding principles.

@WTFBUTWHY

Ай бұрын

He always has to “explain” what we somehow all misunderstand

@domenicgalata1470

5 күн бұрын

He filmed himself taking the Political Compass Test a few years back and it shows Knowles for the true ghoul he is. He has a veneer of coming off as having intellectual integrity, but that is absolutely not the case.

@ryancroy

3 күн бұрын

​@@domenicgalata1470 You take that 2d political compass test seriously?

I remember back when you were just starting. Great to see how much you've grown.

I'm so glad to see your channel grow!

O'Connor just gets bigger and bigger Jesus Christ

@dr.tonielffaucet5988

2 ай бұрын

Hope he teams up with us

@CSRL8

2 ай бұрын

I hope Alex gets Jesus Christ on the podcast next

@JohnnySplendid

2 ай бұрын

Maybe he can get a fracking billionaire to buy him a media outlet?

@toonyandfriends1915

2 ай бұрын

nah this is sus bro pause on that

@dr.tonielffaucet5988

2 ай бұрын

@@CSRL8 I Am Here to Help.

You are a better man than I, Alex O'Connor. I can imagine this convo continuing in the cigar bar where the air would literally grow toxic smoke and self-regard.. Smugness as a cologne.

Evangelical Christian American Conservative here. Came here to say I just say I appreciate your dialogues so much. You handle yourself with such tactful grace and it is a breath of fresh air to hear these conversations you have. Thank you for your candor and respectfulness you have with those you disagree with. I would love to see a discussion between you and Gavin Ortlund in the future.

@seanjones2456

20 күн бұрын

So you are admitting to believing bullshit?

@dylansaurusrex21

20 күн бұрын

@@seanjones2456 Congratulations! Your results are in. 5/5 angst. 7/5 immaturity. 8/5 need for validation.

I never expected these two to meet, this is gonna be great

@amu7379

2 ай бұрын

They met before to talk about TLM.

@Johnny.bar99

2 ай бұрын

we shouldn't be surprised. Michael kwoles is desperate for relevance lol

@jjmah7

2 ай бұрын

Nah, so far it sucks. I’m getting close to a half hour in and Alex is letting him get away with so much bullshit idk how much longer I can stand it

@donalddude7568

2 ай бұрын

​@@Johnny.bar99he is more famous than Alex

@Johnny.bar99

2 ай бұрын

@@donalddude7568 my point still stands lol.

Alex, I doubt you read all these comments, but I think you would love this history professor Heather Cox, Richardson's book, "Democracy, Awakening" she goes over all these nuances, without ideological undertones, greatly supporting all of your points, yet at the same time, giving the Christians, their credit as well.

Great conversation. I’ve actually seen this area as one I’m not as educated in as I’d like/need to be so this was very informative and educational for me.

The short clip with Ben and I am subscribed to your channel.

For anyone outside the states, the blasphemy laws (local or state) aren't enforced and thus go unchallenged on court, and there is t much upside for legislators to nullify laws that haven't been enforced in their lifetime.

@Garrett1240

2 ай бұрын

Thanks for stating that. Far too many non-Americans don't seem to recognize this.

@IndigoVagrant

2 ай бұрын

It's easily for people to not understand American jurisprudence. American jurisprudence means a lot of these old laws are unenforceable and have been unenforceable for a long time. @@Garrett1240

@TheBenevolentDictatorship

2 ай бұрын

Blue Laws are enforced, and I can speak from experience having lived in Boston

@4x4r974

2 ай бұрын

that was not the point. they were not debating 2024. they were talking about how such laws end up in the books in the first place ..

@SA-pi3zm

2 ай бұрын

This comments an absolute lie, They were enforced on state levels many of times throughout the later half of the 20th century. Nulfying them removes the ability of monster who want to enforce them, that is without a doubt a benefit

I am so ready for this ❤

@Coffeeisnecessarynowpepper

2 ай бұрын

I am ñot. I need ice cream

@damarcuscolfer1485

2 ай бұрын

@@Coffeeisnecessarynowpepper Quick! To the freezer!

@Coffeeisnecessarynowpepper

2 ай бұрын

@@damarcuscolfer1485 I have a bowl of new cinnamon swirl ice cream

@JuanGarcia-mo6vy

2 ай бұрын

@@Coffeeisnecessarynowpeppergive up, it’s too long for you

@damarcuscolfer1485

2 ай бұрын

@@Coffeeisnecessarynowpepper Sounds delicious! I just had a Pie and Chips :)

nice job Alex ✨️

it's nice to see a civil conversation

Not seeing a lot of engagement with Knowles' comments in this comment section. Did he really not say anything of substance in almost 90 mins? As far as I can tell, he believes that because the first few generations of immigrants to the future United States were for the most part Christian, that means the nation is Christian. Does he think we should promote Christianity with laws? I don't think he outright states his stance on this keystone issue that is the driver of much of the current discourse. He also uses states rights to talk around the restrictions of the federal government passing religious laws. We are not talking about New Mexico's Christian history, we are asking if the United States was founded with the intent to be a Christian Nation.

@dohpam1ne

2 ай бұрын

I think that is really the crux of the issue. Knowles didn't clearly define what he meant by a "Christian nation", and he argues his point based mostly by saying that a lot of early Americans were Christian and/or framed their ideas within a Christian worldview. But this isn't what most people are talking about when they ask whether the US is a Christian nation; the important question is whether its actual legal and governmental structure does (or should) preferentially support Christianity.

@samiamrg7

Ай бұрын

Right wing talki g heads like Knowles always back off their most extreme statements and beliefs when confronted in a debate because first of all, they’re cowards, but second of all, they would lose all plausible deniablility of being a respectable conservative and not a wacko who gets the Nick Fuentes treatment (ie ostracized from open fascism).

@Nick-Nasti

Ай бұрын

This is BS. It’s irrelevant who the first European immigrants were. By the time the US revolted, it was a mixture of many, many beliefs. That’s what the Constitution reflects. What happened before is meaningless and Knowles knows it.

@michaelbonet9062

Ай бұрын

I’d wager he didn’t explicitly say that current US laws should favor a Christian worldview, because that is the subtext of what he is saying. He wants the audience to draw the conclusion that because America may have been colonized by Christian peoples who brought with them their Christian culture, we are a de facto Christian nation, and the current push to legislate based on specific Christian ideas is a natural conclusion of that. All of these colonials came from explicitly Christian countries, so it’s not a surprise that they’d bring their familiar culture with them. And atheism was culturally frowned upon if not illegal in many of those places, so the likelihood that we’d have a lot of atheists populating the colonies is historically unrealistic.

@g_4784

Ай бұрын

This is a bastardization of Knowles' position; a Christian nation is not merely one with Christian founders and immigrants, but also one where its governmental and legal systems derive from fundamental principles of natural human rights only present (at least up until that point in history) in the Judeo-Christian ethical framework. The fact that many of the founders held vastly differing views on religion is irrelevant. The fact that less Americans today than ever before identify as Christian is also irrelevant to this definition. Perhaps Knowles should have been more specific here, but if you watch other religion debates with him, he clarifies these points. An atheist would have a difficult time justifying the existence of natural human rights (except by appealing to the categorical imperative) in the same way that a Christian or a Jew would be able to.

I can't imagine any American being able to speak so eloquently and knowledgeably about the history of the U.K. as Alex does about the U.S.

@ginismoja2459

2 ай бұрын

Americans, in general, aren't the brightest ones.

@Nomercy4UXD

2 ай бұрын

One step at a time. Lets first get them to learn the history of U.S.

@51elephantchang

2 ай бұрын

@@Nomercy4UXD Great point!

@pmbcdirector1489

2 ай бұрын

You would be surprised - if you looked.

@spiralsausage

2 ай бұрын

The sad reality is that this is rare on both sides, the way historical education is treated in both of our cultures.

As a Christian, I gotta say, Alex is definitely my favourite athiest, he seems like the kind of guy I could sit down with, have a drink and talk for ages...albeit get absolutely schooled by his superior knowledge to me. Awesome interview guys!

This was amazing!

This was really good. Thanks Alex.

Cool too see Alex becoming a real celebrity after finding him as some awkward teenager with a camera with like 50 followers. Now he's climbing the publicity ranks to Ben Shapiro and Michael Knowles and Richard Dawkins and co and it's super cool to see

@spoenk7448

2 ай бұрын

Shapiro and Knowles are clowns, especially compared to Dawkins.

@entp_adventures

2 ай бұрын

@@spoenk7448 I 80% agree but I love seeing Alex bridge the intellectual divide between the daily wire and the atheist left

@gertstronkhorst2343

2 ай бұрын

Yes, amazing to see him become so famous!

@bluebird5173

2 ай бұрын

He's been doing it for years now. Remember his debate with Douglass Murray in 2019?

@gertstronkhorst2343

2 ай бұрын

@@bluebird5173It is a really solid revenue model.

I really love how friendly this conversation was

Superb conversation

Very good chat!

Absolutely wonderful content. Very insightful. I'm a history student at an American university and this idea that we pick "arbitrary dates" to study the beginning of American history is so true

@courtneybrown6204

2 ай бұрын

Well they don't want to be held accountable for things like slavery or murderous religious hysteria during the founding so they have to start in 1776.

These two are so good together in a debate. Very entertaining!

You two have such amazing chemistry. Both very snarky sarcastic witty men. I would love to see a podcast.

It’s interesting that Michael cites the star spangled banner’s other verse to demonstrate his claim. If he were consistent, he would also claim that the verse about slaves and slave owners demonstrates that we’re a racist nation. Perhaps the fact that these two verses are expressly not a part of the national anthem points to the fact that we’re neither?

@Milimeteypetey

2 ай бұрын

I totally forgot about that verse. Great point.

@gabrielethier2046

2 ай бұрын

So to be clear, you don't think the Us was Christian or racist?

@nah7014

2 ай бұрын

@@gabrielethier2046 notice the present tense in both the video and my comment

@voxsvoxs4261

2 ай бұрын

not really? Slavery is itself, racist elements can be interpreted ontop sure, though you could to the same extent say that America is an anti-mercantile nation because in the same verse it repudiates hirelings.

@Fly_Slo

2 ай бұрын

I mean I have a little bit of a quibble with that these things were created at times at the detest of some but everyone agreed with the fact that Christianity was important in America's founding at least, that is not to deny America has become more secular in some things, even more Christian in others, last 30 years pretty secular, but I'd add it's a pendulum it will swing back in the Christian direction. Although most if not all states had slavery, which would be a good point, but I would also argue that those verses about slavery aren't Christian beliefs, which is why later in we repealed slavery or emancipated the slaves. Ironically you can argue the country wasn't founded on Christianity because of this because you can say well the decisions weren't guided by Christian beliefs or in fact racist ones which isn't compatible with the Christian faith, but I'd argue the Christian beliefs revised these things. There are also prejudices developed by mere practicality by the rulers in control, this happened in very vividly Christian nations such as old Russia. There's also a debate on whether that verse talks about American slaves or British troops as some sort of metaphor so depending on the writing and based off how it's worded I'm inclined to believe it's about the British since during that time there was high tension towards the British, it was literally written during the war of 1812 after all. If it was really about African slaves then why 70 years after slavery was eradicated would they adopt it as the national anthem it just wouldn't make any sense.

I love the way Alex doesn’t shy away from any contentious points that he might have!

@jamrollz

Ай бұрын

Usually in these debates it's the religious that dodge every question

Amazing discussion! It's nice to see people with different views be calm and nice to each other. We NEED a part 2!

@tylerparker1567

Ай бұрын

I found Michael Knowles being “strategically civil”, definitely had some disingenuous digs and condescending remarks throughout the discussion. The “Limey” thing was super annoying after the 3rd time.

@maisboyfriend

Ай бұрын

⁠@@tylerparker1567civility is by its nature ‘strategic’. You know how easy it would be otherwise to just berate or even outright physically assault? It’s almost impossible to get the civility displayed in the video on something like Twitter cause people usually would rather be dumb and lazy. It’s easier.

@Johnnysmithy24

Ай бұрын

@@tylerparker1567 Personally every time I’ve seen Michael debate someone of different views he’s very been very civil and friendly. Even tho he is quite arrogant when he’s on his own

@goldie481

Ай бұрын

The obsession with civility is so funny here. Why does it matter at all if Michael's only goals is to strip every minority imaginable of their rights?

Excellent conversation about the founding of the American nation and those involved! I look forward to a future talk regarding the claims of the Bishop of Rome over the rest of those espousing general Protestant Christendom. I pray that your future talk may be enlightened and the ultimate truth claims of the Bishop of Rome as the head of Christendom will be fairly investigated versus those of the secular materialists. Such a wonderful conversation between two individuals well versed in the history both of the founding of America and the authority of Biblical interpretation! I look forward to future discussion between the two of you! God bless!

“Under god” and “in god we trust” were added much later being 1954 and 1955 respectively

@misterkittyandfriends1441

Ай бұрын

In God is Our Trust and Great God Our King are both from 19th century music. Not to mention the Battle Hymn of the Republic.

@StealthKey

Ай бұрын

Knowles already addressed this in the video.

I enjoyed this. Please do part two.

@bootskanchelsis3337

2 ай бұрын

no thanks, Knowles is not an honest interlocutor at all.

PART 2!!!!

I’m honestly impressed that Michael made it so many minutes without beginning the subtle ad hominem against Alex and the British. Almost ten minutes, great job! Also conveniently ignoring that British colonies were composed of (shocker) mostly Brits before a new country was founded.

@supremeleadersmeagol6345

Ай бұрын

“Ad hominem” my friend, has the concept of a joke ever graced your ears?

I don't get what he's after bringing up states establishing religion prior to the Civil War. States also inhibited free speech before the Civil War, and it's not because there wasn't a Constitutional right to free speech, but because states were not bound by constitutional rights (other than their state constitutions) until the Civil War amendments were interpreted to apply federal constitutional rights to people against their state governments. This is taught to every American law student in their first year. (I'm leaving this comment having only watched half of the video so far, so I apologize if this is addressed later).

@Nick-Nasti

Ай бұрын

He’s trying to deflect and distract. His argument either supports a secular US or is indifferent. States having state religions does not prohibit a national religion unless they conflict. In that case, Knowles is supporting a non-religious US.

@CrankyPants05

Ай бұрын

He doesn't directly address that but it's addressed enough with the fact that he said he was talking about the inception of the country as the basis for it being a Christian nation, and therefore those amendments and interpretations don't mean anything to his argument.

The Olympian level mental gymnastics these people perform, in order to arrive at anything other than a perfectly secular basis(I mean, its seriously black and oxidized parchment) for the establishment of the USA, is simply AWE inspiring.😯

@pnut3844able

2 ай бұрын

Exactly. Often times Knowles didn't even answer the question. He rambled and wound up somewhere else entirely.

@utubepunk

2 ай бұрын

Rght wing grift-o-sphere conservatives always lie to support their mythical view of US history. It's one devoid of acknowledging any facts that makes the US look bad.

@ScienceHelpUs

2 ай бұрын

What do you mean "these people"?

@pnut3844able

2 ай бұрын

@@ScienceHelpUs theists

@plumberman19

2 ай бұрын

@@ScienceHelpUs ANYONE that interprets the constitution in such a manor that construes it's purpose of establishing a government with a framework that is even loosely inspired by religion.

How kind of this guy to make Alex's case for him... how thoughtful.

Part 2! Part 2!

Sorry, but the pledge didn't ADD under God until the 50's, the 1950's.

@bootskanchelsis3337

2 ай бұрын

the money BS too

@S.D.323

2 ай бұрын

yeah and it was only because we were dealing with the atheist communists in the soviet union Im pretty sure in god we trust was added to the money around then too

@sansai81

2 ай бұрын

Also the anthem was based on a poem from a non-founder, and the anthem wasn't made the anthem until 1931. I am not sure what this guy is on about.

@TheBenevolentDictatorship

2 ай бұрын

Knowles says exactly that, that it was added around the Cold War period but was derived from early 19th century

@sansai81

2 ай бұрын

@@TheBenevolentDictatorship indeed, I had commented before that part, which is why I added the comment about the anthem not even being official until 1931.

The first question was - "what are you talking about specifically?" Knowles - "i keep everything ambiguous and vague and mix match concepts on purpose so I seem more right. Also buy my cigars."

@michaelduguay7698

2 ай бұрын

also "this confuses a lot of liberals"

@michaelduguay7698

2 ай бұрын

Have you ever thought about buying a non-woke razor?

@pnut3844able

2 ай бұрын

Exactly. They can't give a straight answer

@french1956

2 ай бұрын

It's all part of the grift

@ShiniGuraiJoker

2 ай бұрын

I'm glad other people see this about him.

Definitely do a part 2 this was very nice to watch

Thank you Alex for hosting such a wonderful episode! And thanks to both participants for treating one another respectfully and doing their research. This was enjoyable.

It's quite impressive that a British man is able to know and debate American history at this level. It's even more impressive that an American knows American history 😂

@HarryNicNicholas

2 ай бұрын

americans are notoriously ignorant of most subjects, they can tell you where the nearest mcdonalds is, but not where cuba is, they can tell you they have freedom of speech, but they have no idea what amendment gave them that right, nor what it even says. they even think they are a christian nation when they aren't. they are shocked when you tell them satan has the same rights as god.

@wet-read

2 ай бұрын

I showed three of my coworkers a picture of Thaddeus Stevens. None of them knew who it was, and all assumed it must have been Lincoln.

Knowles doesn’t know WTF he’s talking about. “No religious doctrine shall be established by law. Elbridge Gerry, Annals of Congress 1:729-731 “We do not admit the authority of the church with respect to its pretended infallibility, its manufactured miracles, its setting itself up to forgive sins. It was by propagating that belief and supporting it with fire that she kept up her temporal power.”
Thomas Paine “It is contrary to the principles of reason and justice that any should be compelled to contribute to the maintenance of a church with which their consciences will not permit them to join, and from which they can derive no benefit; for remedy whereof, and that equal liberty as well religious as civil, may be universally extended to all the good people of this commonwealth.” George Mason, Virginia Declaration of Rights, 1776 “Knowledge and liberty are so prevalent in this country, that I do not believe that the United States would ever be disposed to establish one religious sect, and lay all others under legal disabilities. But as we know not what may take place hereafter, and any such test would be exceedingly injurious to the rights of free citizens, I cannot think it altogether superfluous to have added a clause, which secures us from the possibility of such oppression.” Oliver Wolcott, Connecticut Ratifying Convention, 9 January 1788 “If I could conceive that the general government might ever be so administered as to render the liberty of conscience insecure, I beg you will be persuaded, that no one would be more zealous than myself to establish effectual barriers against the horrors of spiritual tyranny, and every species of religious persecution.”
George Washington, letter to the United Baptist Chamber of Virginia, May 1789 “God has appointed two kinds of government in the world, which are distinct in their nature, and ought never to be confounded together; one of which is called civil, the other ecclesiastical government.”
Isaac Backus - An Appeal to the Public for Religious Liberty, 1773 “The American states have gone far in assisting the progress of truth; but they have stopped short of perfection. They ought to have given every honest citizen an equal right to enjoy his religion and an equal title to all civil emoluments, without obliging him to tell his religion. Every interference of the civil power in regulating opinion, is an impious attempt to take the business of the Deity out of his own hands; and every preference given to any religious denomination, is so far slavery and bigotry.”
Noah Webster calling for no religious tests to serve in public office, Sketches of American Policy, 1785 “Congress has no power to make any religious establishments.”
Roger Sherman, Congress, August 19, 1789 A general toleration of Religion appears to me the best means of peopling our country. The free exercise of religion hath stocked the Northern part of the continent with inhabitants; and altho Europe hath in great measure adopted a more moderate policy, yet the profession of Protestantism is extremely inconvenient in many places there. A Calvinist, a Lutheran, or Quaker, who hath felt these inconveniences in Europe, sails not to Virginia, where they are felt perhaps in a (greater degree).”
Patrick Henry, observing that immigrants flock to places where there is no established religion, Religious Tolerance, 1766 “I never liked the Hierarchy of the Church, an equality in the teaching of Religion, and a dependence on the people, are republican sentiments but if the Clergy combine, they will have their influence on Government”
Rufus King, Rufus King: American Federalist, pp. 56-57 “When a religion is good, I conceive it will support itself; and when it does not support itself, and God does not take care to support it so that its professors are obligated to call for help of the civil power, it’s a sign, I apprehend, of its being a bad one.” Benjamin Franklin - letter to Richard Price, October 9, 1780 “The Pennsylvania legislature, who, on a proposition to make the belief in God a necessary qualification for office, rejected it by a great majority, although assuredly there was not a single atheist in their body. I had no idea, however, that in Pennsylvania, the cradle of toleration and freedom of religion, it [fanaticism] could have arisen to the height you describe. The blasphemy of the five points of Calvin, and the impossibility of defending them, render their advocates impatient of reasoning, irritable, and prone to denunciation.” Thomas Jefferson “Where the preamble declares, that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed by inserting "Jesus Christ," so that it would read "A departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion;" the insertion was rejected by the great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mohammedan, the Hindoo and Infidel of every denomination.” Thomas Jefferson Autobiography (1821), in reference to the Virginia Act for Religious Freedom.

@whitesoxMLB

2 ай бұрын

And do you expect you could find at least 13 positive comments about religion among hundreds of statesmen over a period of 50 years? Sure these are all evidence, but a handful of sentences is also not decisive evidence.

@Wowzer123

2 ай бұрын

@@whitesoxMLB While it’s true that it is reasonable to distrust the public statements of politicians, personal correspondence is more trustworthy, wouldn’t you agree? "I almost shudder at the thought of alluding to the most fatal example of the abuses of grief which the history of mankind has preserved -- the Cross. Consider what calamities that engine of grief has produced!" -- John Adams, letter to Thomas Jefferson "It is too late in the day for men of sincerity to pretend they believe in the Platonic mysticism that three are one and one is three, and yet, that the one is not three, and the three not one.... But this constitutes the craft, the power, and profits of the priests. Sweep away their gossamer fabrics of fictitious religion, and they would catch no more flies." -- Thomas Jefferson, letter to John Adams (August 22, 1813), Works, Vol. IV, p. 205 "Indeed, Mr. Jefferson, what could be invented to debase the ancient Christianism which Greeks, Romans, Hebrews and Christian factions, above all the Catholics, have not fraudulently imposed upon the public? Miracles after miracles have rolled down in torrents. -- John Adams, letter to Thomas Jefferson, December 3, 1813 "The Christian priesthood, finding the doctrines of Christ leveled to every understanding, and too plain to need explanation, saw, in the mysticism of Plato, materials with which they might build up an artificial system which might, from it’s indistinctness, admit everlasting controversy, give employment for their order, and introduce it to profit, power and pre-eminence." -- Thomas Jefferson, letter to John Adams, July 5, 1814, Lester Cappon, ed, The Adams-Jefferson Letters (1959) p. 433

@IFYOUWANTITGOGETIT

2 ай бұрын

@@whitesoxMLB "Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by rulers as useful." SENECA

@IsomerSoma

2 ай бұрын

@@whitesoxMLB These arent just some random comments. The legalism of the US is with some expeptions (like blasphemy) explicitely secular. Moreover at its time it was more secular by far than any other state doctrine in the european cultural sphere. The exceptions within it or the lack of putting it to practise for some time cant discredit this fact. The idea that america was founded as a christian nation is incoherrent. Yes, most americans were christians since ever. If you want to state that do it instead of making a much stronger claim than just that. An important part afterall of american culture that is already present in the american founding documents is that personal belief/ opinion is seperated from the state (a value american conservatives at least pretend to share). This is THE core idea not just in terms of religion. This very core idea totally blows up the argument "most americans christian -> america is a christian nation". America has strong individualism and liberalism at its core that contradicts your point of view.

@whitesoxMLB

2 ай бұрын

@@IsomerSoma " The exceptions within it or the lack of putting it to practise for some time cant discredit this fact." Yeah, anything is a fact if you stipulate that we should ignore every case where it doesn't hold. Dogs have 2 legs, except when they don't.

It’s interesting that Michael Knowles decides to arbitrarily set the start of the United States at 1620 with the landing of the Mayflower, rather than with the establishment of the Jamestown colony which was founded more than a dozen years earlier. Jamestown is the first permanent English settlement in North America. The Jamestown colony was backed by the Virginia Company as an economic enterprise rather than an effort to escape religious persecution or to spread Christianity.

@Nick-Nasti

Ай бұрын

He didn’t do it arbitrarily, he does it conveniently to support an obscure view.

@sumoman485

Ай бұрын

He clearly stated in that part that some people say American history starts at 1776, some say 1787, others say 1620 and you can even go back further than that.

“As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion..." - John Adams

idk why anyone would debate someone from the Daily Weirdo about anything lol, Michael Knowles is an extension of a brand not a person with his own ideas

@GeneGrey337

2 ай бұрын

Why your comment isn’t pinned. I well never understand. Well said.

@mkwke215

2 ай бұрын

I think these ideas are worth debating because America being a Christian nation is a pretty mainstream conservative talking point in the US.

@below_average7233

2 ай бұрын

If Alex really wants to branch out into conversations with people who deal primarily in the political sphere, then he has to correspondingly branch out of his religious philosophy bubble. It’s very difficult to show how insane these people are purely through religious discussion, right now he’s essentially just giving people a gateway into Knowles and his circle of fascists.

@IndigoVagrant

2 ай бұрын

The vast majority of Americans know it isn't already. We are just endlessly arguing with people who are stuck on an apologist/fundamentalist talking points loop. @@mkwke215

@TheBenevolentDictatorship

2 ай бұрын

What an absolutely idiotic thing to say. Could you possibly be any more ignorant. Try watching a DW Backstage and seeing how little they all agree upon. Saying Knowles doesn’t hold his own ideas is recklessly idiotic.

I really don't think Alex is biased or uninformed about America just because he is British. I would accuse Micheal of poisoning the well with all that stuff.

@pnut3844able

2 ай бұрын

That's what most people from the two parties do. Divide and conquer, a learned behavior from their "leaders."

@montrealronin

2 ай бұрын

Used the pejorative "Limey" quite a few times, too. Right-wing billionaire money sure can't buy class.

@BlackOxymoron

2 ай бұрын

Americans tend to do that, they think the rest of the world does not understand them or their history, yet they feel they know better when it comes to foreign matters.

@CrankyPants05

Ай бұрын

I don't think Michael thinks that either lol. The only times I remember him bringing up Alex being British was during lighthearted jabs or jokes

@CrankyPants05

Ай бұрын

​@@montrealronin have you heard of a joke before?

I used to be a hardcore atheist up until my late 20’s/early 30’s. When I was a teenager my bibles were The God Delusion, End of Faith, and God is Not Great. I wanted to marry Dawkins. But there was always something missing. I had an amazing career, found a great spouse, and had a fantastic kid. I still had depression and anxiety. I went to therapy, which helped to an extent, but it seemed like it would be a lifelong process. I tried various medications. I tried spiritualism and eastern religions. Until finally I turned to Christianity, which is frankly a measure of how desperate I was because I loathed it and believed it to be the root of all evil. But I approached it in good faith and with an open mind. Now, all that static in my mind is just gone. I still have peaks and valleys, but they’re nowhere near as extreme. Most of the time I’m calm, and the things that used to upset me make me smile. My social anxiety is gone. I talk to strangers and (inexplicably) enjoy it. I don’t wake feeling like the world is bearing down on me, but rather that I’m being lifted up. No therapy, no anti-depressants, just good old fashioned Jesus. Seeing the new generation of atheists is fascinating. I still enjoy listening to them and having my logic challenged, but I can’t imagine turning back to being atheist again. I hope you all find peace in whichever faith you choose to hold.

@Ghost-qk1kt

Күн бұрын

That’s because you found out that the teachings of Jesus ❤ are SOOO different to those of the world we live in, Christian or not. When He tells us to avoid the world, He’s talking about EVERY cliche, group, or limiting belief 😂😂. I’m so glad you found peace my friend!

what microphone does Michael use?

Great conversation Alex!!

32:00 ish. The Star Spangled Banner didn’t enter official use until 1889, and didn’t become the National Anthem until all the way in 1931. E Pluribus Unum, Latin for “Out of Many, One”, has a much stronger claim to the title of national motto.

@concernedcommenter8258

2 ай бұрын

None of what he said contradicts that.

@concernedcommenter8258

2 ай бұрын

Except maybe the claim that the first motto has more claim to the title but thats an opinionated claim.

@jakebrooks3415

2 ай бұрын

We need to get that mcarthyist propaganda off our currency and return to the true and original motto

@1brianm7

2 ай бұрын

@@concernedcommenter8258 he was responding to Alex saying how "In God we Trust" is a very recent edition to the American mythos, and part of his evidence was that it was in "The Star Spangled Banner", the national anthem. When you hear that you wouldn't think, unless you had prior knowledge like myself, that it dates back 20 odd years before it was added, you would think closer to 200 odd years.

Overall an excellent exchange of ideas. Well done to both interlocutors.

Nice and civil. Well done.

I just can't imagine ever making the argument: "All human conflict is theological" right after saying "I wish we could get back to more sense".

@michaelspeyrer1264

2 ай бұрын

Well of course you do. Because you aren’t very smart.

@ryanthomas924

2 ай бұрын

I guess youre implying that theology doesn't make sense? you need to try thinking just a little longer before you comment

@deathsride1818

2 ай бұрын

@@ryanthomas924 Right back at ya. I am implying that "Getting back to more sense" and then saying "More sense is the cause of all human conflict" is clearly idiotic.

@reliantncc1864

2 ай бұрын

This is because you are very, very stupid. If you can't see the sense in theology, it's your failing.

When Michael said "I don't always neatly separate these two things" I couldn't help but think to myself "No Michael, with your track record you probably only neatly separate them when it's convenient to you"

@davidschrauwen1536

2 ай бұрын

I dont get it why poeple still listen to him his ideal world would be misrable

@doyoufeel...thatyoulackcri6760

2 ай бұрын

@@davidschrauwen1536 miserable like... the atheist regime of mao? How many did mao slaughter, you know?

@NicholasFJB

2 ай бұрын

@@doyoufeel...thatyoulackcri6760exactly lol! Atheistic states have already been tried, and have ended up beyond terribly!

@SaurianSavior

2 ай бұрын

@@doyoufeel...thatyoulackcri6760How did you end up here? I find it hard to believe any viewer of Alex would use this silly argument. I guess we should ask how many nukes the Christian nation of the US threw?

@Sensei_gojo

2 ай бұрын

​@@doyoufeel...thatyoulackcri6760this is such a dumb argument, how would killing millions be intrinsic to secular societies. the rest of the western world is significantly more secular (with exceptions) than America both culturally and governmentally. so why havn't they pulled the shit Mao pulled?

I think this discussion would have immensely benefitted from defining what it means to be a Christian nation. Is it about the beliefs of the founders, the leaders, or the majority of Americans? What defines what it means to be Christian (the practices, how people identify, or how people act outside of church)? Is "Christian nation" more of a legal status for the government, social status of its people, or some amalgamation of both?

@pmcginness

2 ай бұрын

Yes! This. This. This.

It seems to me that Alex was a little unprepared for this debate. He didn't seem to have a counter for Knowles' claims of states having established churches. I think Knowles is wrong on the subject of Catholic consistency on the immorality of slavery but I have to do some more research on that. Good discussion. I have more respect for Knowles' knowledge now than I did before. EDIT: the Papal Bull Romanus Pontifex specifically says to reduce the [Saracens, pagans and enemies of Christ] "to perpetual slavery". That doesn't sound consistent with what Knowles claimed.

@No0utlet

Ай бұрын

I agree that Alex appeared unprepared for the debate about Christianity's connection to slavery. He fell back on his position that slaveowners of early America would have cited Scripture to justify slavery which he also used in the debate with Shapiro. After a little bit of Wikipedia research, it appears that Knowles was able to exaggerate the extent to which Pope Eugene IV advocated against slavery. It seems that he's not alone in this claim: Joel Panzer also cites the Sicut Dudum as condemning slavery. However it seems that the bull only prohibited slavery of people that have converted or are in the process of converting to Christianity. This seems to me an important caveat that neither Panzer nor Knowles acknowledge. Furthermore it seems that Pope Eugene issued another bull called "Illius qui se pro divini" which served as full indulgence (remission of all sins) to anyone that fought in the "crusade" along the West coast of Africa. From Wikipedia about Pope Eugene IV: Richard Raiswell interprets the bulls of Eugene as helping in some way the development of thought which perceived the enslavement of Africans by the Portuguese and later Europeans "as dealing a blow for Christendom".

The first Amendment is in direct conflict with the first commandment. This is a secular nation with the majority being of several sects of Christian.

@MrGgabber

2 ай бұрын

No, it's not. The commandments are to God's followers. It doesn't say "you will force people to worship me"

@leithcrowther6086

2 ай бұрын

@@MrGgabberTechnically true. The things God commands to do to non-followers are WAY worse.

@lil_tari

2 ай бұрын

Like what?​@@leithcrowther6086

@mikeekim242

2 ай бұрын

@@MrGgabber Yes it is.. No other gods before me means you don't have freedom of religion. Look at the header.

@MrGgabber

2 ай бұрын

@mikeekim242 No, that's not what it means. God gave man free will, with that comes freedom of religion. That's why there is no mention of religious prosecution.

What a great conversation... I had no idea that Alex had such a deep historical knowledge of the founding fathers and American history in general. I can understand Michael Knowles being very knowledgeable about the history of his own country but I am very impressed by Alex's knowledge of a country not of his own. It would be like Knowles talking to Alex about the British Parliamentary system of the 1800's. In fact, the more and more I watch Alex I find my self surprised on his sheer breadth of knowledge in different subjects, not just theology or philosophy where his academic expertise lie in, but quantum physics, American History, Law, etc. I suppose philosophy has something to say about each of those areas, so I shouldn't be THAT surprised that a public thinker on Alex's level would have a knowledge pool on a wide variety of subjects. Still.... Very impressed.

@mkhosono1741

2 ай бұрын

You are so easily impressed.

@michaeladair6557

2 ай бұрын

@@mkhosono1741 Not really. I consider myself pretty well versed in a wide variety of subjects, including American History, but I'm perfectly fine admitting that I didn't know anything about some obscure 18th century American treaty with Muslim pirates called the Treaty of Tripoli or the secular ramifications behind it. That's impressive to me that a British citizen with an academic background in Theology/Philosophy would have that kind of detailed knowledge of American History.

@BobPemberton-wb5sb

2 ай бұрын

I guarentee that Alex has at least a 50 point higher IQ than you.

@EricusXIV

2 ай бұрын

​@@michaeladair6557 I'm a history teacher and I agree 👍🏼

@gertstronkhorst2343

2 ай бұрын

The thing about Europeans is, we get an education where these things are taught.

I appreciate when you interview Daily Wire hosts because their camera crew gives all the footage plus shot changes so it looks classy

I understand the debate for academic reasons but i dont understand when people use "we were founded as a Christian nation" in an argument for what we should do now. So what if we were founded as such? Why does the agreement between multiple individuals at that time bind us?

Two things I am very thankful for as a brit is the separation of church and state and the NHS

@Tomyum19

2 ай бұрын

The separation of church and state was to protect the church from the state. Not the other way around. And the NHS is garbage.

@thomaspickin9376

2 ай бұрын

We don't have a separation of Church and state in the UK... Even though our country acts more secular than the US often.

@Tomyum19

2 ай бұрын

@@thomaspickin9376 In what conceivable way? Your leader is literally the head of the Church?

@IndigoVagrant

2 ай бұрын

The Monarch is not the leader of the country. It's a figurehead, a PR person basically.@@Tomyum19

@fishyc150

2 ай бұрын

Fair doos, we have (unfortunately) no separation of church and state.

Nope, it's not, no religion has preeminence therefore it's a secular state. That's why it's a WALL of separation, not a wall with a hole or a wall with a door.

@kdaviper

2 ай бұрын

Like a hole... For glory

@Joaopereira-dh3dw

2 ай бұрын

Is a separation that they don't respect because it doesn't fit the narrative for them

@masterlee9822

2 ай бұрын

Children no longer have to play the parent once their free of their control but many continue while other don't bother causing their parents to hate them from afar or adept to this stranger child that they no longer know.

@jeremyinvictus

2 ай бұрын

@@Joaopereira-dh3dw Because that's not in the constitution at all.

@IndigoVagrant

2 ай бұрын

holy hole@@kdaviper

That was a civil and quality exchange of viewpoints.

This was a good discussion

Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law. Thomas Jefferson

@acaydia2982

2 ай бұрын

You’re delusional. People raised in a Christian environment and culture will be de facto Christian whether they want to admit it or not.

@archbishoprichardforceginn9338

2 ай бұрын

Holey Eternal Omnipresent Greetingz

@neozes

2 ай бұрын

Then where did the ideas of how to live in harmony come from ? Its embedded in our genes? We got it from our mothers milk? What about those who were fed formula? Did you notice, that brutal and harmful cultures(from our pov) have their rules also written into the law?

@archbishoprichardforceginn9338

2 ай бұрын

@neozes Only Life noeze itself

@Devoted_Catholic777

2 ай бұрын

It was 😁 people kicked others out of the colony for not being Christian they then banned non Christians from office blasphemy laws are in place before and after the establishment of the states the list goes on.

Constitutional Law/Political Science student here! It is obvious that, legally speaking, the United States was founded to be run by a secular government. While I disagree with Knowles's position on everything, one thing I will give him brownie points for, though, is that our government is not 100% democratic! The story of the United States has been the story of further democratization. My issue with claiming that personal journals and letters shouldn't be considered is that SUPREME COURT justices and legal scholars consider those perspectives while making legal decisions. I haven't finished the video, but just typing my thoughts.

@iankellymorris

2 ай бұрын

Yeah I don't like this whole, “We're a republic not a democracy,” thing. Because we've been a hybrid system from the beginning, and becoming more democratic over time is like America's one redeeming quality.

@ahall9839

2 ай бұрын

Yeah but you're a liberal in a decayed university system and you don't sell cigars called Mayflower

@hatoffnickel

2 ай бұрын

It's not entirely obvious. The establishment clause and its historical context was written to keep the state out of the church and does not textually preclude the church from entering the state.

@Billsbob

2 ай бұрын

So come back when you’ve finished and try again

@dcannek

2 ай бұрын

I, too, would be interested to hear more rebuttals when you finish the video.

I wish this debate/conversation had started with definitions of what is meant by secular and what is meant by Christian. I think the lack of these definitions being established left the conversation with too much vagueness about the topic at hand. I like that both Alex and Michael were both cordial in their conversation with each other.

Thanks Alex, you slayed.

I love that Alex engages every guest on their topic of expertise, is not the same arguments against God over and over

@ChristyAbbey

2 ай бұрын

Though, tbf, Knowles is slightly more known for advocating genocide against my community, so treating him like a regular interlocutor strikes me as a bit weird.

@kobezoldyck7177

2 ай бұрын

@@ChristyAbbey you’re allowed to feel like that, but in my life I’ve realized having conversations is the best way to approach these people. They tend to embarrass themselves with their own words

@tobihalo2

2 ай бұрын

He never advocated for genocide against anyone. Your rhetoric is not only dangerous but also completely insensitive. I have holocaust survivors in my family, how dare you equate what Knowles has said with atrocities like the holocaust and other genocides. Shameful@@ChristyAbbey

@Rave.-

2 ай бұрын

@@tobihalo2 *hands you /s* here, you dropped this.

@MsMiDC

2 ай бұрын

@@tobihalo2This is very much a ''playing the Nazi card''. Trans people are literally going through a genocide *right now* and especially in America. At this point it ticks multiple boxes on the 10 stages of genocide. What happened to the people in the Holocaust is horrible, but that doesn't mean that the genocide on trans people is not happening. And you can bet your ass that Knowles is a huge proponent of this genocide. Passing laws and bills that endorses and allows for the discrimination, the ''us vs. them'', dehuminazation, and persecution of trans people for just being trans, are simply acts of genocide.

Id start off with, "Micheal what is the very first sentence of the Constitution say?"

@jackgray2217

2 ай бұрын

Like the preamble or article one? Cuz it's not the first amendment

@jan_Kilan

2 ай бұрын

“We the people in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, ensure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.” How the heck did you get THAT out of a statement of intention with about as much flavor as paper

@xHal1

2 ай бұрын

​@jan_Kilan I cannot ever read this without hearing Schoolhouse Rock. 😂

@GiovanniAdami

2 ай бұрын

You mean the Constitution that was based on John Adam's Massachusetts Constitution and not Thomas Jefferson/Madison's Virginian constitution that led to 2 dictators and were thus rejected by Congress? You mean that one? John Adams was in the select Committee with Madison and Madison even agreed to John Adams' MA constitution being the frame. Source: Gordon S. Wood's book Friends Divided: Jefferson and Adams Chapter 6.

@kevinpulliam3661

2 ай бұрын

@@GiovanniAdaminext you’re going to be talking about Gordon Wood

Excellent job Connor and Mike!

This conversation reminds me of the following somewhat intriguing analysis by... Arendt, Hannah (1990): „Novus Ordo Saeclorum“. In: Ibid.: On Revolution. London: Penguin Books. 179-194. I only say "somewhat intriguing" because there's a factual error in that she claims that all US state constitutions refer to some "future state of rewards and punishments" - which doesn't seem to be the case. I checked two different constitutions myself and asked chat gpt about possible others. And she concludes by saying that one has to be religious to have a conscience - which I strongly disagree with.

While I don’t generally agree with treating paid political operatives as honest intellectual interlocutors, Alex’s approach could potentially appeal to daily wire viewers more than if he were overly dismissive and combative.

@tennicksalvarez9079

2 ай бұрын

True maybe

@netspirit79

2 ай бұрын

what makes Knowles a "political operative", educate us?

@Vhlathanosh

2 ай бұрын

@@netspirit79 f*ck off! Dishonest people like you are annoying.

@asimhussain8716

2 ай бұрын

@@netspirit79 he's on the right and makes money on his commentary, therefore untrustworthy according to this big brained audience who think they're far smarter than they actually are simply because they listen to someone way smarter than them. Like a random consuming a five course meal then suddenly believing they know anything about cooking lol.

@juancsmix

2 ай бұрын

Knowles is an obvious grifter. He and his kind continuously get things wrong, many times purposely , to keep their audience entertained with the most insane rhetoric @@asimhussain8716

The "Nature's God" in the Declaration was negotiated to include the Natural Philosophers who believed in nature instead of a god.

I love these conversations they are always so fruitful