Isabel Brown (6:09)

Do you think that men can get pregnant?

Dr. Witness (6:13)

I hesitated there because I wasn't sure where the conversation was going or what the goal was. I mean, I do take care of patients with different identities. I take care of many women. I take care of people with different identities. And so that's where I paused. I think I wasn't sure where you were going with that.

Podcast Co-host (6:30)

I wasn't sure where you were going with the question. I hesitate. I hesitate, and I pause to even answer this question Because I don't really know what the goal of the question is. I do take care of women, and I also take care of. And then she's intentionally vague here. People with different identities. So not women. Yes, women. I'm so confused. What are you trying to say about this? But I don't really know what the goal of your question is in just asking me the simple reality. Can men get pregnant? Senator hawley nails this exchange as he keeps going here.

Isabel Brown (7:05)

Well, the goal is just the truth. So can men get pregnant?

Dr. Witness (7:09)

Again, the reason I paused there is I'm not really sure what the goal of the question is.

Isabel Brown (7:14)

The goal is just to establish a biological reality. You just said a moment ago that science and evidence should control, not politics. So let's just test that proposition. Can men get pregnant?

Dr. Witness (7:25)

I take care of people with many identities, but can men get pregnant? Many women that can get pregnant. I do take care of people that don't identify as women.

Isabel Brown (7:35)

Can. Can men get pregnant?

Dr. Witness (7:37)

Again, as I'm saying, let me just.

Isabel Brown (7:39)

Let me just remind you, you testified to a moment ago, science and evidence should control, not politics.

Podcast Co-host (7:47)

Science and evidence should control, not politics is literally what this doctor had testified to the United States senate Mere moments before this exchange. Science and evidence should control the conversation, not politics. Then, when asked one of the most basic scientific questions of all time, a licensed ob GYN seemingly cannot or will not answer the question, can men get pregnant? She keeps trying to say there's, like, some ulterior motive in asking this, but really, it's just establishing reality, like, can you Be taken seriously as an expert witness of. On the subject of abortion pills, a really important women's health related conversation. No. If you can't answer the question can men get pregnant? This keeps going for several more minutes.

Isabel Brown (8:39)

So should. Can men get pregnant? You're a doctor.

Dr. Witness (8:43)

Science and evidence should guide medicine. I do.

Isabel Brown (8:46)

Science and evidence tell us that men can get pregnant. Biological men. Can they get pregnant?

Dr. Witness (8:51)

I also think. Yes. No. Questions like this are a political tool.

Isabel Brown (8:54)

No, yes. No questions are about the truth. Doctor, let's not make a mockery of this proceeding. This is about science and evidence. And I'm asking you, you know, the United States Supreme Court just heard arguments yesterday at great length on this question. This is not a hypothetical question. This is not theoretical. It affects real people in their real lives. And you're here as an expert, called by the other side as an expert and you've been telling us that you, that you follow, right? You're a doctor and you follow the science and the evidence. So I just want to know, based on the science, can men get pregnant? That's a yes or no question. It really is. I think.

Dr. Witness (9:31)

I think you're trying to reduce the complexity of a lot.

Isabel Brown (9:34)

I'm not. I'm trying to get. It's not complex. I'm trying to get to an answer. And I'm trying to test, frankly, your veracity as a medical professional and as a scientist.

Podcast Co-host (9:43)

As you should, frankly. Because if you as a licensed ob GYN cannot answer the question can men get pregnant? Then we have a problem. We have a really big problem in society. Like you are not to be taken seriously as any sort of expert witness called to any sort of hearing, but especially one circulated around Women's health. She keeps trying to say yes or no. Questions like this are a tool of politics. No, it's literally just basic biology. Basic biology. Seriously, men get pregnant.

Dr. Witness (10:18)

I think you're also conflating male with.

Isabel Brown (10:22)

No, I'm not conflating male and female. They're two different things. There's biological men and there's biological women. And I want to know, can men get pregnant?

Dr. Witness (10:32)

What you were talking about is biological.

Isabel Brown (10:34)

You're not going to answer my question.

Dr. Witness (10:35)

Biological males.

Isabel Brown (10:38)

This isn't hard. Doctor, can men get pregnant? Yes or no?

Dr. Witness (10:43)

Again, I would be more than happy to have a conversation with you that is not coming from a place of trying to be polarized and push.

Isabel Brown (10:52)

I'm not trying to be polarizing. I'm trying to ask. I think it is extraordinary that we are here and hearing about science and about women. And for the record, it's women who get pregnant, not men. We are here about the safety of women and science that shows that this abortion drug causes adverse health events in 11% of cases. That's 22 times greater than the FDA label. Another factor that is correct. And yet you won't even acknowledge the basic reality that biological men don't get pregnant. There's a difference between biological men and biological women. I don't know how we can take you seriously and your claims to be a person of science if you won't level with this on this basic issue.

Podcast Co-host (11:42)

Incredibly poignant point, actually, that's perfectly articulated by Senator Josh Hawley and why people are sharing this clip by the millions. This one tweet from our friends at Libs of TikTok has over 3 million views. But everybody is tweeting this video in the last 24 hours or so. And it matters, right? It matters because if you can't acknowledge the most basic, fundamental realities of existence, the most basic biology of all humanity that we have known for thousands upon thousands of years, how can you be taken seriously as a character witness, as an expert witness, as a physician, when we're talking about more complex biological conversations like the side effects of the abortion pill that are 11 times more dangerous than what is supposed to be allowed for commercial drug use at the FDA based on their own internal requirements for pharmaceuticals? Like, how can we have a deeper conversation about pharmaceutical safety or any other more complex biological issue if you can't answer, can men get pregnant? This has been 3 1/2 minutes of this conversation. Back and forth, back and forth, back and forth. This goes on for another minute or so. It is truly extraordinary, to borrow Senator Hawley's word there. And I just have to show you the entire thing because this is where we're at right now.

Isabel Brown (13:02)

But we were past all of this. Frankly, I can't believe we're still here talking about this.

Dr. Witness (13:08)

I am a person of science, and I'm also someone here who's here to represent the complex experiences of my patients. And I don't think polarized languages, language, or questions serve that goal. I don't think they serve the American.

Isabel Brown (13:22)

It is not polarizing to say that there is a scientific difference between men and women. And I want this to be clear. And for the record, it is not polarizing to say that women are a biological reality and should be treated and protected as such. That is not polarizing. That is truth. It is also, by the way, the United States Constitution, which offers unique protections to women in a variety of circumstances as women. And your refusal to recognize women as women and men as men is deeply corrosive to science, to public trust, and yes, to constitutional protections for women as women. And I just, I think it's extraordinary that you would sit here and advance a political agenda that has been thoroughly discredited and rejected by the American people in this forum. And I'm glad we had this exchange because it is exceptionally clarifying. It is also in many ways quite depressing.

Podcast Co-host (14:16)

Depressing indeed. And I love how he wraps this all up by saying, frankly, I thought we were just past this as a society. Like, I thought we were just done with this. And maybe naively, I did too. Certainly, I think the average American is just done with this. Like, the refusal to answer, what is a woman? Feels so 2021 to me. Like, this is immediately taking me back to Ketanji Brown Jackson's Supreme Court confirmation hearings. When did Walsh come out with what is a woman? I mean, it's been years at this point, right? This is not a new conversation. Society has moved on. We are embracing objective truth. We are embracing legitimate biology. We are willing to say the hard thing, even if it might offend some people, because we have moved on effectively as a Society. But Washington D.C. is refusing to move on. Apparently, at least half the aisle is.

Isabel Brown (15:09)

TaxAct understands you haven't memorized the tax code. That's why TaxAct has live experts to help. TaxAct can even do it for you if you prefer. It's the easiest way to know you're doing it right. Well, other than going back to college and obtaining a bachelor's degree in accounting with a minor in finance, then interning somewhere and becoming fluent in all tax forms. But that might be hard to accomplish before tax day. So maybe just stick with TaxAct Tax Act. Let's get them over with.

Podcast Co-host (15:38)

And this was so abundantly obvious this week in this city. And it just is infuriating to me as somebody living here right now with two degrees in biomedical sciences and who's pretty plugged into all of this stuff. It is infuriating to me, the disconnect of reality between where the rest of the country is at and just objective reality versus Washington D.C. i'm grateful for people like Senator Josh Hawley continuing to press on the issue here. But this is not isolated to just this hearing in the United States Senate or just this one doctor. This was the same type of language, the same refusal to answer the question, the same circumlocution talking around the issue over and over and over again that we saw, as he mentioned across the street at the Supreme Court this week in answering this question, should men belong in women's sports? It's looking really promising that the Supreme Court is going to uphold the laws in West Virginia and in Idaho. We won't know for a very long time until about June or July when SCOTUS releases all of their decisions for this particular term. But in case you missed it, huge Supreme Court cases that happened this week. Two were heard at the Supreme Court this week to try to keep men out of women's sports. And analyzing the laws that were previously passed by West Virginia and by Idaho. Our favorite what is a woman spokesperson from the past several years. Somehow, shockingly, US Supreme Court justice who never deserved the job, literal definition of a DEI hire, Justice Katanji Brown Jackson sounds so ridiculous when you play back the oral arguments happening at the court this week. Beyond parody like this is beyond insane. Listen to how a sitting Supreme Court justice tries to discuss what a woman is in our society. You have the overarching classification. You know, everybody has to be play on the team that is the same as their sex at birth. But then you have a gender identity definition that is operating within that meaning a distinction, meaning that for cisgender girls, they can play consistent with their gender identity. For transgender girls, they can't.

Isabel Brown (18:05)

So I think that, okay, you're. As to the part about your ability to pass over from boy to girl, yes, you can go from one way, but not the other. I want to be clear that BPJ is not challenging that specific classification. I think that's important to start with, but I think if anything, that's useful evidence as to the the lack of a transgender based discrimination. Because if the legislature were just sort of unsettled by the notion of transgender athletes, I think the answer would have been to then bar them from.

Podcast Co-host (18:35)

I appreciate, I appreciate that. I guess I was getting at the what I understood the Chief justice to be trying to discuss, which was this notion that this is really just about the definition of who we accept, that you can accept separate boys and girls. And we are now looking at the definition of a girl and we're saying only people who were girl assigned at birth qualify and only people who were girl assigned at birth. That's the only thing we can use to define the definition of a girl, really. I mean, call me crazy. I feel like we have 2,000 plus years of history, a lot more actually. But let's just talk about modern history, 2000 plus years of science Supporting the idea of chromosomes, of genes, of gonads, of external genitalia, of internal genitalia, of hormones, of literally 8 million different ways that we could define what a girl is beyond. Oh, yeah, some, like, random adult just, like, assigned them this at birth, just slapped a label on it, arbitrarily flipped a. Flipped a coin, rolled the dice, and said, yeah, you're a boy and you're a girl, and it's infuriating and it's annoying. But is it really that shocking that Ketanji Brown Jackson is going down this rabbit hole? No, not really. The what is a woman? Line literally sparked a massive international conversation during her Supreme Court confirmation hearings back in 2022. I believe she joined the court. Time is fake. All my time has, like, run together at this point. So it's been four years that she's been on the US Supreme Court now, almost. But what was surprising and shocking to me listening to the oral arguments of these Supreme Court cases this week, again, the disconnect between Washington and the rest of the world, between the people in charge and literally everyone else, regardless of where you fall on the political spectrum, is that Justice Amy Coney Barrett was using this exact same language. Talk about a massive disappointment. But again, holds up the microscope to just how out of touch with reality most of the people in Washington actually are. During oral arguments during the Supreme Court case this week, Justice Amy Coney Barrett repeatedly kept using this phrase, trans girls, when referring to boys who were identifying as girls. And she also kept using the word cisgender, referencing actual biological girls and women, which is extremely concerning, frankly, regardless of where you fall on the political spectrum here, if you're using the word cisgender or you're using the words trans girls to refer to boys, and that signals to me that you are completely out of touch with objective reality if you feel the need to qualify something that does not need to be qualified, like a cisgender girl, which, for the record, doesn't exist. There is no such thing as a cisgender girl. The only reason the word cisgender even exists is because it's opposite of transgender. It literally is just invented out of thin air. There is no qualifying definition of cisgender. It does not exist. It is an arbitrary label. If you feel the need to use that word, that signals to me that you are far more concerned with kowtowing to the 1%, with appeasing a problem that doesn't even really exist, with allowing lies to replace truth and fantasy to replace reality than you are with objective truth. And as a sitting Supreme Court justice analyzing constitutional law, that's a really big problem, actually. It's not like you have some arbitrary job that doesn't impact day to day life for millions, hundreds of millions of people every single day. Your job is literally one of the most important jobs in our society. That's not supposed to be influenced by the changing political nature of our conversations day to day in American society, by woke ideology, by having to bow down to the mobile, by whatever is politically convenient and expedient for you to say on any given basis, you of all people, as a sitting Supreme Court justice. Again, I don't even remotely include Katanji Brown Jackson in this conversation because we know that she's going to be this stupid. But for the rest of the people on the court, if you lack the ability to at least acknowledge biological reality, we have a really big problem. Because how, again, like a doctor delivering a baby, can we trust that you have the mental faculties and the capacity for logic to analyze any important constitutional question? It's the same underlying issue of this doctor that was grilled by Senator Josh Hawley. Whether we're answering the question do men belong in women's sports or can men get pregnant? If you all of a sudden are putting qualifiers that don't even really exist to define what a woman is based on what a man is, I don't really have the internalized trust in your logical ability to do your job appropriately, whether that job is delivering a baby or upholding the United States Constitution. And it's so telling to me how viral all of these clips are becoming this week and how people are reacting to all of this that Washington D.C. is so out of touch with everyone, with literal, objective reality, with society at large. These are 99%, 1% issues. And the 1% seems to all live inside the DMV, inside the Beltway. They go to work on Capitol Hill at the Supreme Court of the United States in the administration. Like, it's just, it's so infuriating. And I pray every day that we can leave this crap behind in 2026 and move forward. Don't bring this into the rest of 2026. Leave it behind in 2025. Because if anything, our society is just in desperate, desperate need of a return to reality. Which, interestingly, I think is why everyone is so randomly obsessed with 2016. Again, this is all over my TikTok right now that 2026 is actually 2016. And I had no idea what this meant. But I decided to do a huge deep dive and break it all down for you. Maybe it's just me, but I feel like time has become an artificial construct, as you will see. How it has been a decade since 2016 blows my mind. But even more scarily, didn't we just finish Christmas? Like we just blinked and now we're already talking about Lent? Time is fake. But listen, Lent is actually one of the most powerful seasons of the entire year. It is one of my favorite ways to reset and recenter my life on God. And our friends at Hallow are doing something incredible starting on Ash Wednesday this year in just a couple of weeks. It's crazy, I know. On February 18th they're launching something called Pray 40 the Return. Every single year, Hallow's Lent challenge brings millions of people together in prayer as we walk together toward Easter. And this year's theme, the Return, might be one of the most beautiful they've ever done yet. Because this Lent isn't about being perfect. It's about coming home. Coming home to God, coming home to truth. Coming home to who you actually are as a beloved child of God. Hallow's Lent Challenge is inspired by the parable of the Prodigal Son this year, and Hallow is breaking open the story beautifully. You meet these complex, deeply human characters and suddenly you see yourself in them. Their struggles, their longing, their brokenness. It all hits so close to home. And that's where transformation happens. The story holds up a mirror, inviting all of us to look honestly at the battle between good and evil that's happening in our own hearts and what's pulling us away from God. That is exactly what Lent is for. Preparing our hearts for the crucifixion, the death is and the resurrection of Jesus, walking with him through the desert and the cross so that we are ready for the joy that comes at Easter. If you are tired, if you're distracted, if you're feeling far from God during this season of life or you're just looking for something deeper, this is your invitation to come home this Lent Return to the Father. He has been waiting for you. You guys can get three months free at Hallow for their Pray 40 challenge launching on February 18, or any of the thousands of prayers, meditations, podcasts and more@halloween.com Isabel and pray together with us every single day this Lenten season.

Isabel Brown (27:36)

Oh, such a clutch off season. Pickup Dave I was worried we'd bring back the same team. I meant Those blackout motorized shades lines.com made it crazy affordable to replace our old blinds. Hard to install. No, it's easy. I installed these and then got some from my mom. She talked to a design consultant for free and scheduled a professional measure and installed hall of Fame son. They're the number one online retailer of custom window coverings in the world. Blinds.com is the goat. Visit blinds.com now for up to 45% off site wide plus a free professional measure. Rules and restrictions apply.

Podcast Co-host (28:06)

So the kids are all right? Apparently, because everyone is becoming obsessed with romanticizing 2016, which was objectively a great year. But my entire TikTok the last two weeks has been that 2026 is actually 2016 and you might be extremely confused by this. Like, what the heck does that even mean? You are not alone as being someone confused by all of this. Everyone seems to be asking this question. What does it mean that 2026 is 2016? This TikToker broke it down for us.

Isabel Brown (28:38)

Why is everyone using the 2016 filter on TikTok? It's 2026. I don't get it.

Podcast Co-host (28:44)

2026 is the new 2016.

Isabel Brown (28:46)

What does that mean?

Podcast Co-host (28:47)

You don't know?

Isabel Brown (28:48)

Give me a hint.

Podcast Co-host (28:49)

Search up 2016 on Tik Tok.

Isabel Brown (28:50)

Okay, 2016 filters on. Nothing's happening. Wait, December 2016 was like the pinnacle of life. Okay, then what about 2026? People in Kel are betting that the Seahawks are going to win the super bowl this year. And 10 years ago they had the most devastating loss of all time, which means that this year will be good and it will finally feel like 2016.

Podcast Co-host (29:10)

Again, which means that this year will be good and it will finally feel like 2016 again. And so I started thinking about this when I saw this video, as Everybody's explaining that 10 years ago is really now, and now is really 10 years ago, I started thinking about 2016. And I realized my soul has been longing for the perfection, the pinnacle of life that was 2016. For the last decade, at least. Me personally, 2016 was one of my favorite years in life. Okay, I was a sophomore in college, so I was just kind of navigating my adult life for the first time. The Broncos, shockingly, won the super bowl, which as a Coloradan, was a huge deal. We had been terrible for many, many years before that. We were previously longing for the era of Tim Tebow. Tebow time was an elite time as a Broncos fan. And then we won the super bowl with Peyton Manning in 2016. We had the Olympics in 2016 in Rio, which was awesome to follow. The USA team did amazing at the 2016 Olympics in Rio. Donald Trump won the presidential election in 2016 and completely broke the political wheel, to borrow a phrase from Game of Thrones. Like, I actually think our political system has just never been the same since 2016. It was a completely unprecedented time. Do you remember those debates? Gosh, those were so such elite times. Can you believe that was 10 years ago? The era of because you'd be in jail. That was 10 years ago. The nicknames of Little Marco and Lion Ted. And here we are a decade later where Little Marco is indeed President Trump's Secretary of State. Time is crazy. But also just the music and the fashion and the way we interacted with each other on a day to day basis in 2016 was so such an elite time. So I kept scrolling through TikTok and it's hilarious to me that teenagers are now romanticizing the era of 2016. Everybody's playing the chain Smokers and Justin Bieber and Drake and even BBC News decided to do a whole deep dive on this, explaining that the pinnacle of our generation's existence really was indeed 2016. Listen to this was the year of Snapchat stories.

Isabel Brown (31:30)

We cannot talk about 2016 without referencing the Dog Snapchat filter, the Flower Crown and the Snapchat Grey line. That's starting to creep up in a lot of content now.

Podcast Co-host (31:40)

Music at that time was elite. That good that we still play it now. On the main Radio 1 playlist, we had Zara Larson Zayn's debut solo single, Chainsmokers 21 Pilots, 1975. It was all going on.

Isabel Brown (31:54)

I think it's part human nature, because in any time of uncertainty, there's always this element of do you remember when. And at times where there's so much division, we can all relate to existing in 2016. There is a tendency to romanticize the past and that could be unhealthy, but most of the time people seem to be doing it in a healthy way. They're not saying, I want to go back to the past and live the way things were. They're saying, there's some elements of the past that could be useful for planning a better future.

Podcast Co-host (32:22)

It's just a simple, chilled life. And if it means bringing it into 2026, then let's do it. If it means bringing 2016 into 2026 to have a chill, simpler, happier existence, I am all for it. If you ask Chat what was so important about 2016, what all the trends of 2016 actually were, this made me so nostalgic today. ChatGPT says this about 2016. It was an era of clean, straight to the point culture Everyone was so excited about music. Drake had a new album that came out at that time. The chain smokers were singing about how we're never getting older with our rooms way back in Boulder. Boulder sucks. For the record, I'm a Fort Collins girl, but the Colorado in me is all for it. It said albums felt like full cultural moments, which I totally agree. With the return of the Biebs, we had chance the rapper Post Malone was really big. It was always emotional, super catchy. Everybody was all about music. It felt like that was more important than binge watching TV. Fashion was really interesting in 2016. Streetwear kind of became the whole thing. We were all wearing Adidas sneakers or van sneakers. Listen to this. This is what Chad says about fashion in 2016. Chokers, ripped jeans and oversized hoodies, which I feel like is everywhere right now. In 2026 it was the era of Tumblr, grunge and soft goth esthetics to be effortless, ironic and low pressure. Cool. That sounds so awesome. Like I long for a time where everything was effortless and low pressure. As for the Internet, vine was at its peak. Twitter jokes were going viral organically. Tumblr shaped humor, fashion and fandoms and meme culture was everywhere. Memes were fast, weird and less commercial. Stranger Things debuted Season 1 in 2016. Pokemon Go made all of us leave our house and led to the cringiest clip of all time of Hillary Clinton saying I want everyone to Pokemon Go to the poll. Oh, that woman was the gift that kept on giving. Celebrities according to chat, felt more raw and less PR managed. Vine stars and YouTubers started crossing into mainstream celebrity status. It was less influencer polish and more raw Messy human personality. 2016 is so remembered because it was pre pandemic. It was less driven by algorithm content content instead of actual like true human personality content. That was what 2016 was all about. Less corporate Internet, more spontaneous virality and culture felt fun first. So I dug through my 2016 pictures and realized if we could make 2026 a little bit more like 2016, the world might indeed be a better place. In the fall of 2016 I took these pictures with my friends on my college campus celebrating a Donald Trump victory of the Trump pence campaign in 2016. This is my friend Taylor and I in the heart of our college campus on the oval at Colorado State University. So fun. Bring back unapologetic conservatism on college campuses. I climbed a lot of Mountains in 2016. Here's me climbing a 14 year in Colorado Mount Democrat and being really grumpy about it. I won't bring back the aggressive side part in 2026. No thank you. The middle part is the way, obviously, but may we all climb a lot more mountains and spend more time outside in our granola girl era in 2026. My sister and I in January of 2016 were making fun of Barack Obama when he was crying on the COVID of the Wall Street Journal. More poking fun at our elected officials and politicians, please. And if this isn't the most 2016 photo I could have ever possibly found for you, it seems oversized sweaters with leggings, beanies. Eight million bracelets. Literally. I'm wearing friendship bracelets now. I have them upstairs. I just bought really expensive, ironically friendship bracelets. One says girl Mob and one says Freedom Like Charlie's T shirt. I've been wearing these obsessively and I'm wearing two bracelets right now. I never wear bracelets. May this be the year of over accessorizing. And the Polaroid camera. I think that Polaroid camera is literally in that cabinet right here in my basement. This actual camera that I was using in 2016. Nostalgia, authenticity. Just having more fun. I love that everyone is so so ingrained in this idea of resurrecting that for 2026 that life used to be a whole lot simpler. We weren't so constantly bogged down by woke culture or bowing down to the mob. We certainly could answer the question what is a woman or can a man get pregnant in 2016? But I think the kids are going to be all right. The fact that our culture is trending so heavily to take real pictures again and don't care so much what you look like. Be more effortless and cool in your face fashion. Listen to more music than watch tv. Spend more time supporting your favorite sports teams and hanging out with your friends in a more authentic setting. The resurrection of that with Gen Z coming into adulthood is so exciting to me as we kick off 2026 with a bang and I have nothing but good vibes. The most elite of vibes that we used to feel about 2016. As for the rest of this year, drop your favorite 2016 trend in the comments of today's episode and we'll do our absolute best to bring it back for 2026. And let's all just collectively agree to leave the elitist Washington D.C. woke mindset behind as we resurrect the amazing culture of 2016 for 2026. We're back tomorrow with a really fun interview from a friend of ours across the Pond to talk about the case against the sexual revolution and how the sexual revolution has negatively impacted women and women's rights all over Western culture. Cannot wait to share with you guys the story of our awesome friend Louise Perry and her beautiful book that has changed so many minds on the subject. Make sure to tune in there for your Friday episode tomorrow and have a great rest of your Thursday.

Isabel Brown (38:52)

What was it like, Melon? To be alone with God? Is that who you think I was alone with?

Podcast Co-host (39:07)

Maradin?

Isabel Brown (39:08)

I knew your father. I am yet convinced that he was not of this world. All men know of the great Taliesin. You are my father. That the gods should war for my soul.

Podcast Co-host (39:22)

Princess Garrus, savior of our people.

Isabel Brown (39:28)

I know what the bull God offered you. I was offered the same. And there is a new power at work in the world. I've seen it. A God who sacrifices what he loves for us. We are each given only one life. Singer. No. We're given another. I learned of Yezu the Christ. And I have become his follower. He's waiting on a miracle. And I think you can give him one. Trust in Ya'. Zu. He is the only hope for men like us. Fate of Britain never rests in the hands of the great light. Great light.

Podcast Co-host (40:05)

Great darkness. Such things mattered to me then.

Isabel Brown (40:09)

What matters to you now, Mistress of light? You, nephew. The sword of a high king. How many lives must be lost before you? You accept the power you were born to wield.

Podcast Co-host (40:29)

So clinging to the promises of a.

Isabel Brown (40:31)

God who has abandoned you. I cannot take up that sword again. You know what you must do. Great life.

Podcast Co-host (40:39)

Forgive me.

Isabel Brown (40:48)

The time has come to be reborn.