data steve miles berg says americans are right to worry about the mental health of their elected leader. first, let me just say, god bless joe biden. hughes, 81 after the election in november. he'll be $82.00. i mean, you know, and we've all, if you're lucky enough to have relatives that lived that long, we've seen it in relatives. we've seen since those people slow down. people slow down differently. donald trump is 78, just turn 78. he's the almost a complete antithesis of joe biden, but you can't not biding for who and what he is. look, i think anybody who watched the video could honestly say that he froze. but this is something he does all of the time. he looks like he's out of it. he looks like he's staring. so did he actually freeze? what was it just being 81 year old joe biden and acting the way he acts almost all the time when we see him on a stage when we see him on a platform, especially when he's finished. he has to be led away. he has to be told where to go

. we have to be directed. so i think it's open for debate whether or not he froze. i don't think it matters if we actually froze. it's what the optics are. however, however, it is legitimate, i believe, to question joe biden does it, is he really capable of not only serving as president now, but for 4 more years? i would say that most people in this country and the polls show it most people in this country are extremely concerned with his age and his cognitive ability or lack thereof. and it's a, it's a big consideration going forward to stay with our to international f. next, the 360 do with study now, who's by the the,

the, well they have the supreme court overturn griswold. so they can prevent american women from contraception. they may say we wouldn't do that because of president, why would anyone believe it? or chuck schumer raises question. americans are often asking lately, why would anyone believe republicans anymore? yeah. when it comes to reproductive rights for public and say they are doing exactly what they have always campaign to do on sky. now here's an on this edition of $360.00 view. we're going to look at the latest on the battle for reproductive rights in america contraception. and if this is creating a very lucky path for republicans on the campaign trail, let's get started. the

supreme court over turning roe vs wade and june of 2022 has a lead democrats to victory in election since no democrats have decided this topic is their best chance for continued success in 2024. but fearing the attention subsiding on the subject have introduced another aspect into the argument, the right to contraception and in vitro fertilization. now senate majority leader, chuck schumer, democrat from new york, is planning to potentially force for publicans to take tough boats on the issues. bono ball republicans will have to face their constituents from far right to independent single issue voters and cannot avoid the controversial topic. the hey vocal minority of the party feel both i v as in birth control are in the same

category as abortion, and should be outlawed. now try and prevent any damage to the g o. p. lead senate republicans are going on a talk show circuit tour all to try and change the narrative as a matter of law. or there should be a choice that is available for parents because it is profoundly pro family eat enables at the ivy f enables i, i have a lot of friends, i'm sure you to that it is how they are parents and they love with their children. they want to raise their children, they want to be incredible moms and dads, etc, ted cruz, etc. katie, brett introduced legislation to prevent states from blocking access to ivy services . and when asked about those who feel the fertilized eggs not use during ivy of treatment or form of abortion, the texas senator had this to say. i think that's a moral decision. any person can make enough. that's a decision they can make with, according to their faith and, and, and according to their understanding of god's teaching. now,

where it joined cruise in his interview, arguing members of the democratic party are fear mongering that republicans wished to ban ivy on. the left is fear mongering, saying that we are not going to protect ivy f i v f as protected and senator cruz and i are going to make sure it continues to be protective. it is pro life, it's proof family, it's per woman. and i believe it was a party of families. this new legislation comes after alabama's top court ruled, frozen embryos are legally children. and the destruction of these embryos constitute a crime under the states wrongful death of a minor law. now the abortion of reproduction takes center stage. it seems women are increasingly becoming more or less cleaning. well, men are becoming more conservative. the whole reason contraception is such a hot topic is because the hook of culture and getting married later in life is becoming a societal norm. another times of chaperones in waiting for marriage seemed to

actually be long gone. but it's just actually beneficial. or is there something to be said about taking responsibility for the people you decide to sleep with? having prepared or sex actually increases the odds of getting a divorce by 400 percent. and using contraception before or during marriage increases the odds of getting a divorce. i have to to 100 percent and there's a lot to impact. so let's bring in our panel health professional and do dessie k robinson. woodrow johnson, who is the ceo of revere strategies and timothy gordon, who is the host of the pod cast rules for retrograde. thank you so much for joining me on this lots to unpack on it. so let's just say i want to start with the abortion issue because democrats feel this is a topic which can garner them support and engagement. so even republicans can't really blame them for trying to make it a repeating headline. however,

how spell it is. do you think the republican party on this side of issues of ivy, i think, contraception it seems as though they are very split and you know, take cruise. who is, i don't know if he's the modem of, of morality for a party. but, you know, he just said that idea should be a matter of, you know, a family's moral compass, and that is what literally people in people who have any conscious around choice. how does it say about the full spectrum of reproductive rights? reproductive rights encompasses everything. someone's decisions to have a baby, someone's decision not to bring a baby to term. and so all of that is a decision that happens with within a family and for a woman $481.00 she or, or she for that matter because they have

a choice of whether they want to engage in families. they have to make those decisions for themselves, and that is not what is over whelming. we spoken about within the republican party there consistently trying to control women's bodies. this is a part of the freedom control is bodies. and along with that comes to the level of she, you know, even in the, your lead in talking about her own. sure. it's imply that there is some level of i'm assuming that is going on. people are running wild and needing to have abortions to, to vision, so of the she of them having freedom to have sex with some of the issues. but isn't that what sexual freedom is? so just say is the ability to run around and have sex with wherever you choose and not facing the consequences for a no, it's about not facing any consequences. and everyone has the consequences for the,

for the decisions that they make. but the, the talking points and the republic give sort of framework is that people should be shamed and punished for having sex. and they should go ahead and have these because that's what they deserve. if they decide to have sex and that doesn't do anything, but she, when they blame women and bring children into the world who are going to be left in the world where republicans over the last 2 years has been i have a formula, we had a formula shortage, these are the same, the same party who's like, why do we have to pay for other people's shoulders at lunch? they never want to engage in any of the social programs that ameliorate the lives of people want to have children. i never hear any talking points or any defense. oh,

really reading the lives of people who have children. i never hear the less. i mean, excuse me, the right. talking about you can pay. i never heard the right talking about universal health care. i never heard the right talking about family leave, and i, darcy, i never did the right talking about the who the maternal numbers of black, maternal health. okay. well i haven't changed me. well, no, i'm talking about that now. i agree with that now i would bring woodrow into this because as we're all the time or the republicans, democrats are saying that decision from dogs versus jackson threatens the right to birth control. however, the case just included that the constitution does not confer a right to abortion. and the authority to regulate abortion is returned to the people in their elected representatives. so on the opposite side of there are democrats gas fighting this issue for election purposes, the sky. yeah, 100 percent or gas letting us. i mean, no, no, thank 0, the guest. i mean there's just,

everything's the same just isn't correct. i haven't seen a republican say any other things you say, you just played a clip of a bunch of the leaders in our party. not, you know, literally saying the opposite of what she's saying. so i, i mean, you know, other than the, the side notes in the end, but which we can unpack if you want to. but if there's, is, this is absolutely just fear mongering from, from the democrats. well, that's the thing, tennessee i've gotta ask you, cuz i can see your facial expressions during this conversation. if you don't necessarily agree, do you agree with our public is are handling this conversation and should be more joining? and i mean right now is just ted cruz and katie brit that are talking about legislation to protect. if you have to count or democrats go after them. what should be the conversation that's being had it was we all know republican service hopelessly long housed and we shouldn't listen to them. but i want to address the 2 fundamental principles that western civilization was predicated on. number one, people should be shamed and punished for having sex outside of marriage because the

family is the single cell of society and you can't have society without shame and punishment for having sex outside of marriage. number 2, i thought this country began to resemble a foundational principle around the civil war. that's what we're told by the historians that people should be shamed and punished for murdering other people. now i don't really care what ted cruz thinks about i v f because he's a long house to republican. but i v f does in every case stand for multiple murders, a little human beings. and by the way, so does contraception we. we found out that almost all contraception always has the possibility of acting as an a board of fits in. so if we believe in these 2 foundational principles of western civilization, i don't really care what some cocked republicans say about it. what a true christian believes about this is that sex outside of marriage,

kills society, and killing humans, kills humans. and those are the 2 foundational principles of all western society. so i'd like to hear the response to that, or do we still believe killing humans is wrong in this country? dessie desi. a. well, we can have a conversation about what is considered a human when you have a lot of those of cell inside of oh, you know person is still be in this country. yes, it is wrong. i'm the person that would be or like a person on the train floss or i'm talking about human beings biologically. and philosophically you've got 46 chromosomes of human beings. i'm asking, do you think murder and humans is wrong? i'm not talking about persons. i'm. i'm murdered a human that are really people who are alive is murder.

yes, that is person. great. at a time the view and i do not agree on so we can continue personally begins at like 40 years old. do you believe that a 2 year old can be murder? sorry, i'm not going to come back. no, i get what you're doing really, but i, i think does, he has the point. in fact, it's one person believes that likes to get the conception initial and the other person believes at some point dessie. i imagine you believe once the baby takes its 1st breath. sometimes there are at some point during the that 9 month period. that's still the debate that happens at the same time. you know, i wanna bring this back to how we started this. i'm going to bring you in on this one, woodrow because that's a politic the political ization is what i want to focus on is because we can have the philosophical, we can have the religious, we can have that debate. we're trying to focus on the politics of this because i think both sides are using this towards their own advantage as to the disadvantage of the, of the people involved. so wardrobe, does this take the wind of democrats sell it for public and do decide to take more

of an aggressive stance or do they risk to disengaging the more conservative wing by agreeing with democrats regarding the need for contraception either yes, i don't think it's a matter of republicans agreeing with contraceptive or not, it's just this is where the why is and they are, i mean simply this is just the email. i mean, like, you know, and i might personally agree with uh, with, with my friend here, but i, that's just not where the lights and it's just completely out of last deal. and ironically, i left you under that side of it. well, you know, i do want to, i talked about this or does it because contraception access to birth control has found a way into the national defense authorization act of all things. we talked about women to reproductive rights and never thought that i would see it actually put into the national defense authorization act in the form of an amendment that expands access to contraception for women in uniform saying that it's important for military readiness. do you see this as an act of desperation to the birth control,

to be ready for battery? think they're trying to make this a little bit more complicated than what should be? well, it doesn't need to be complicated to extend the rights of people to a gauge and have birth control available to them so that they can make the decisions that die the trajectory the life it is simple. now i want to get into the weeds about it, the complex, but i mean, the reality is 90 percent of women have use birth control at some point in their life. and so it is a form of health care. and so we want people to be military and ready to, to be ready for anything school work. we have to give them the choice and the ability to make the decisions that's, that's the trajectory there why at birth control is included in that it is included in the conversation of the complete our reproductive rights that i have all of that

. but i would wonder if that argument would go against that, but that was the argument that would be why women should even be allowed to be in combat. those to be on the front lines. and they'll try because of the fact that they have those reproductive, those reproductive capabilities. don't you think this kind of brings that into question if, if, why are we bringing sex into it? shouldn't they all be counted equal regardless? well, it's a, it's a medical condition. it would be no different by the male or female being on the front lines together. why are they having sex? if they're there to fight a war? how does that military preparedness not having sex with joe there? well, i mean it, there, that's the thing. this is about being military prepared for a war prepared men and women together having that's how babies are made. so why is this? why are we paying for birth control, the part of our military defense spending? why are we not actually spinning it to defend our country? why we keep, why wouldn't we allow a womans, i have an opportunity to use birth control. if it is one to keep from there was the

rewrite, i don't understand why we would, it wouldn't extend that right to kill society. well, i thought we all functioned on the premise that what kills society and enter rates us weakens us and emboldens our foes is bad and not to be outlawed. well, particularly at the state level, which holds the 10th amended police powers. and by the way, all the states held the 10th amendment police powers until 1965 in this country. griswold versus connecticut, which is it to radically federal overreach. but, but, and so i'm not even saying to regulate this at the national level. i'm just saying to go back to what this country always stood for, which is the principal, then under the police power of the 10th amendment. most states don't want unless they're run by elite global lists that are really trying to kill nations and borders and stay and all those things. we shouldn't stand up for things that innovate and destroy society, and those things which innovate and destroy the family also enter bait and destroy

the society. and guess what? a bunch of young people running around without pants on impregnating one another and then slaughtering their babies is bad for society. it turns out that i just got the newspaper. it says that, okay, what shot? well, did it say that, that's the premise also dismantled the borders in which every, every republican says that we're supposed to be fiercely to say, well, that way, we're not engaging in war 2, right? before we take a break, i want to talk about the economy because we're going to go into it more in depth. because when it comes the economy and contraception, there is a redford wilton strategy survey found more than 50 percent of generation z millennials. so they're putting off children because the cost of living is so expensive. economy as in right, the number one issue for voters is false with society setting too high of a standard for the current generation by eliminating all of their options. woodrow

what's your question? i am ready for it. why? because it is a car. we setting the standards to lie with our economy being so bad. people are wanting to we're not wanting. we're not wanting to have kids. yeah, i mean a 100 percent and honestly, i think this is all part of the strategy. they don't want americans to have more kids. they want to more legal to come to, to our country. they want to make our economy as terrible as possible because they don't want americans to succeed. is that simple? well, that's the woodrow timothy gordon. i want you to stay right there because we're gonna take a quick break. and when we come back, we are going to discuss about how the, the, or should the political views, but not for the effects. this legislation is having us decide in the future. say to what we back the

the the welcome back to 360 view. i'm your has got to know he's now across united states. the

catholic church is undergoing an immense shift or even the beginnings of a full split generations of catholics who embrace the modernization of the 19 sixty's by the vatican are increasingly giving away to religious conservative. now while others, including this current president of the united states, are embracing a much more progressive form of the religious madeline hayes. a student at benedictine college takes the church's rules, very serious from people pre marital sex to confession. and she's seriously considering becoming or not. and she has a 3 female students, also considering the same location. there are a lot of things that are like non negotiable to a lot of us who are faithful catholics. and so we don't believe as a church will ever say that like contraception is acceptable. however, i don't think catholics in the past would have ever expect the pontiff,

during his 11 years tenure as head of the church to suggest even atheist could go to have it and saying that he did not judge homosexuals as well as taking a softer stance on abortion and remarriage. this debate is not just happening in the catholic church as several denominations within the protestant church are either in the midst of the debate or splitting over the same issues. and therefore, the foundation of our religious communities are starting to fracture what effect is that having on society? well, i'm gonna bring back in our panels. i. c. k. robson, health professional and do a leader jobs to ceo of revere, strategies and timothy cordon. host of rules for retrograde past podcast, timothy i'm gonna start with you. how much of a debate do you believe is happening within the catholic church on this issue? and is this kind of divisiveness over an issue new to the catholic church and

it's relatively new. as of the late 19 sixty's, the vatican, the 2nd vatican council ran from 1962 to 1965. and what you had there was a loot of renegade pilots who were still a minority, but who had skimmed to make certain things happen that that happened that have been dogmatically blocked for nearly 2000 years at that point. and they used the weaponized ambiguity to put these certain sex topics on the table. and in the 1970s following the council, you had a couple of liberal popes, notably the 6 who was expected to undo the teachings on contraception. the teachings long held from the decay on word against contraception, the time of the apostles. and he shocked everyone when he released whom on a v today and said no, i can't do it even if i were as liberal as everyone expects. i'm holding the line

so in the roman catholic faith it's, it's the one world view. i don't think we should talk about religion. we should talk about the single world you single christianity in the world. where upon the principle of non contradiction is regarded so highly that the, i don't know what you want to call it. the dialectical materialism of gaming is on the idea that history moves in steps incrementally and all options will eventually be on the table is singly outlined. so we just believe a jose and it always league way. so in that sense, scotty, there's not really any dialogue to be had no, put francis has very left ease amana vatike into, in every conceivable sense. right. and he wants it to be a debate, but it's not. okay, well i want to bring in woodrow real quick of this to your point. americans criticized other countries who use legislation to control families trying to come to mind. is this not a little hypocritical for dc to have this much influence or try to have this much

influence over family planning? i don't think it's after critical because i reject the problem. so the question scotty, i don't think that, and even though you know, being tennessee probably go to the same cx churchman, probably, i think, i, i don't think that this get, this kind of stuff is happening in washington. it is not happening. well, i mean if you're talking about birth control, you're talking about ivy asked if you're talking about all those sorts of things as d. c, getting involved in it. dusty, i've got to come to you in our last few minutes. so we have together. i have to ask, so just, you know, devil's advocate or not, is it fair to hold our children to the same standards of the past and suppressed? what is a natural desire today society? considering all the pop culture pressure for intimacy before marriage and expect our children to be out of the same standards that existed in the 1950s. well, i'm just a little bit of the beginning of your question, but what i would say is, i think that we have all we and we probably will continue to have

a really difficult time measuring and separating and machine. and so for reading again, religion as the, i think it's a, it's a continued to be. but what we have to make sure that we're doing is preparing people to live. and education is what does that. and so people should have the choice that they should have informed choices to do what we want to do with their bodies. we are a much healthier society when people are not solely led by the tree when they are also led by informed choices in education as to what to do with their body. and then we don't get other people's rights to be able to do that. well, i'm going to give i, i can see real quick. i got 20 seconds left to attend with that you want to respond . yeah, this country was predicated on the principle of the states having established sex

of christianity. 8 of the 13 have that until the federal tyrants on the bench outlaw that in 1947. because like i said, the 2 foundational principles people shouldn't be having sex outside of marriage or killing each other is literally what both christie, entity and christendom are predicated upon. so we define health in opposite ways. desi, well thank you to our play. now we're gonna ended on that one on that side of our thank you. we can choose conversation we just might in a later. so thank you. jessica k, robinson, health professional and do love woodrow johnston. see of, of your strategies and timothy gordon. host rules for retrograde pod cast. you know, the 3rd chapter of ecclesiastes says there was a time for everything and a season for every activity under the habits, including a time to be born. however, if we were to update the well known verse, i think there would be an added disclaimer. the only thing there is not a time for is a politician getting involved. maybe that's because politicians are towards the

known for trying to gain control of a situation. rather than let nature take its course, this is kind of how i personally feel in regards to contraceptives, an ivy. yes. it's not a politician's job. the legislative science has been able to create a solution for problems which are not jeopardize the integrity of another fundamental rule of the bible. as we have put this generation into a precarious position. and republicans need to be careful when they start legislating both the preventative, as well as the problem. this also allows the democrats to merge the 2 issues as one which will, which makes for a very powerful weapon against the republicans and will be used as a valid us citizen, your 360 view of the news affecting you. thanks for watching the

the flooding or putting signs of treaty on a comprehensive, strategic partnership with north korea prior to his 1st visit to the country since 2000 our correspond that has arrived in john yang ahead of the russian president to keep you updated on all the latest, the, the military staff director general warrens about western countries. a waning influence in central and west africa. but frustration goes away the but.