Would You Be Catholic or Protestant? | YES or NO: Ben Shapiro

Summary

Podcast Summary: "Would You Be Catholic or Protestant? | YES or NO: Ben Shapiro"

The Michael Knowles Show | The Daily Wire | August 30, 2025
Guest: Ben Shapiro

---

Main Theme

In this spirited and irreverent episode, Michael Knowles and Ben Shapiro play “Yes or No,” a rapid-fire card game prompting candid discussions about religion, American political identity, conspiracy theories, technology, and culture. The central focus is a cheeky but thoughtful exploration of whether, if Ben ever became Christian, he would lean Catholic or Protestant—offering wide-ranging commentary along the way. The episode is notable for its playful tone, sharp intellectual banter, and willingness to wade into cultural and moral controversies.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Game Format and Banter

• Mechanics: Each round, one host privately answers a Yes/No question, the other guesses, and points are awarded for matching answers, all while enjoying some drinks (with humorous debate about martinis, whiskey, and kosherness).
• Atmosphere: The tone is informal—Michael jokes, “No matter what, I’ll probably drink,” (01:42)—but underpinned by earnest intellectual exchange.

---

2. Religion and Rituals

• Politics & Faith:
  • Question on whether a Catholic candidate would have to "kiss the wall" (Western Wall in Jerusalem) if running for U.S. President highlights intersecting religious and political performances in America (03:31-05:36).
  • Ben: “I don’t have to. If you’re Jewish, no one has to kiss the wall. It’s not even a Jewish thing.” (04:24)
  • Michael: Suggests kissing the wall is more about appealing to Evangelicals than to Jews (04:43).
  • Ben: Explains the American ritual is “more playing to [Evangelical Protestants] than…Jews” (05:36).
• Dual Loyalty:
  • Discusses whether Michael has “dual loyalty to the Vatican.” Ben: “You have sole loyalty to the Vatican.” (07:42)
  • Layered identities are unpacked: religious, national, familial (09:14-09:37).
  • Ben: “Every Christian in America…would say Christian first [before American] … The fact that’s somehow become radically controversial is because people make gigantic category errors.” (09:44)

---

3. Catholicism vs Protestantism

• The Central Question:
  • “If you were Christian, would you lean Catholic or Protestant?” (18:15+)
  • Ben acknowledges he’d lean Catholic: “Catholicism is more similar to Judaism than Protestantism, yes, by far.” (19:29)
  • Ben argues Catholicism’s hierarchy, ritual, and emphasis on works feels familiar to a devout Jew, drawing parallels to discussions he’s had with both Catholics and Protestants.
  • Notable moment:
    • Michael: “If you converted, you would not just convert ’cause you got sick of doing the wrapping … you would do it because you’d be convinced that the most Jewish thing to be would be Christian.” (21:04)
    • Ben: “That’s a totally fair argument … If I were to convert because I was actively attracted by the story of Jesus and His divinity, then I would probably end up Catholic.” (21:18)
  • Ben’s rationale is nuanced: his turn to Christianity would be a matter of theological conviction, not ease or ritual avoidance (21:31-21:41).
  • Michael jokes about Protestantism: “If you become Episcopalian, that’s just twice the liturgy, half the guilt of the Catholics.” (23:32)

---

4. Conspiracy Theory Skepticism

• Moon Landing vs. Macron Rumor:

  • “Is it more likely that the moon landing was faked than Brigitte Macron has a penis?” (24:04)
  • Both agree the moon landing happened; questioning such is a kind of “rip on America” (29:43).
  • Ben: “I’m deeply annoyed by virtually all conspiracy theories because they assume a level of competence that is not in evidence.” (27:23)
  • Both hosts reflect that involvement in politics decreases belief in large-scale conspiracies; people are too “human, stupid, and venal” (28:30).
  • Ben warns conspiracies sap agency and breed national cynicism (29:19-29:43): “America kicks ass. We did put a man on the moon … please stop trying to [deny it].”

• Epstein Case Discussion:

  • Both hosts are skeptical that the “full story” of Epstein’s death is public but hesitate to fully subscribe to grand conspiracy narratives (32:34-40:00).
  • Ben: “If people are actually articulating that theory, they should have the balls to just say it out loud … I haven’t seen the evidence to suggest the people I’m talking about are lying.” (35:48-36:43)
  • Michael: “I think the government has contradicted itself many times on this … But because I’m not a libertarian … governments don’t have to be radically transparent.” (37:54)

---

5. Contemporary Culture, Morality, and Technology

• Social Media vs. Drugs:

  • Should TikTok be banned to “save more lives than banning fentanyl”?
  • Ben: TikTok ban could have tangible effect, since fentanyl already banned; TikTok’s spiritual/informational harm is broader (16:06-18:14).

• Media, Body Image & Sex Appeal:

  • Discusses the Sydney Sweeney jeans ad and “return to normalcy” amid an androgynous, “creepy” new cultural standard (41:03-43:51).
  • Ben: “It is now right wing coded for a beautiful woman to be on your tv, in a sexy way.” (42:28)

• AI Porn vs. Real Porn:

  • Final rapid-fire round question (57:03):
    • Ben: “AI generated porn involves the sinfulness and evil of the person who is typing in the prompt but does not involve a second party who is prostituting herself. And real porn involves multiple parties being horrific in a myriad of ways…” (57:27)
    • Both acknowledge the gravity and new complications of AI-generated pornography, pondering its future societal impact (59:29-60:27).

---

6. Philosophy of Identity and Civic Order

• Nation vs. Religion vs. Pluralism:
  • Both engage in a historical and philosophical excursus on Westphalia, Augsburg, pluralism, and what kind of system best preserves national and religious identity (10:33-11:52).
  • Michael: “I don’t think the king has the right to declare religious truth … most kings can barely articulate political truths.” (11:29)
  • Ben connects these issues to why the U.S. ultimately separates church and state at the federal level.

---

7. Parenting, Death, and Life’s Big Questions

• Ben’s story: How to answer children’s questions about whether dogs go to heaven—“Once you have kids, you are left with two possible answers to a child. One is to lie, and the other is to also lie.” (45:19-45:49)
• Discussion on how to talk about death to children stemming from personal family stories (46:00-47:41).

---

8. American Presidency; Trump’s Legacy

• If Constitution Allowed: Would They Support a Third Trump Term?
  • Ben: “Trump is holding back a flood tide of bad stuff… he is a populist by appeal, but a pragmatist by nature.” (53:41)
  • Michael: “We have a term limit. It’s called the ballot box. … I like the idea of more continuity.” (55:29)
  • Both agree, in principle and as a matter of practical politics, a third Trump term could be justified if permitted (53:05-56:17).

---

Notable Quotes & Timestamps

• Ben Shapiro [04:24]: “If you’re Jewish, no one has to kiss the wall. It’s not even like a Jewish thing… People do if they want to, but it’s not a commandment.”
• Michael Knowles [09:44]: “Every Christian in America… would say Christian first. They’d always say Christian. Because of course that’s the answer.”
• Ben Shapiro [19:29]: “Catholicism is more similar to Judaism than Protestantism, yes, by far.”
• Michael Knowles [21:04]: “You would do it because you’d be convinced that the most Jewish thing to be would be Christian.”
• Ben Shapiro [27:23]: “I’m deeply annoyed by virtually all conspiracy theories because they assume a level of competence that is not in evidence.”
• Ben Shapiro [29:43]: “America kicks ass. We did put a man on the moon. We beat the Soviets there. We took down their entire empire. Like, we are awesome.”
• Ben Shapiro [53:41]: “Trump is holding back a flood tide of bad stuff… he is a populist by appeal but a pragmatist by nature.”
• Michael Knowles [55:29]: “We have a term limit. It’s called the ballot box. And I think the way the government is set up… is to be a mixed regime… I like the idea of more continuity.”

---

Timestamps for Important Segments

• Episode Begins, Light Banter & Drinks: 01:15–03:14
• On Politicians & Western Wall Rituals: 03:31–05:36
• Dual Loyalty Discussion: 07:16–11:52
• On Catholic vs. Protestant (main focus): 18:15–23:54
• Moon Landing & Distrust of Conspiracies: 24:04–31:16
• Epstein Discussion: 32:08–40:27
• Sydney Sweeney and Body Image in Media: 41:03–43:51
• On Dogs Going to Heaven / Talking Death: 45:06–47:41
• Third Trump Term—Philosophical and Political Analysis: 53:05–56:17
• AI Porn vs. Real Porn / Morality & Technology: 57:08–61:10

---

Memorable Moments

• Banter over Jewish and Catholic rituals, parental stories, drinks, and mockery of product ads.
• The quick-witted reasoning in the game’s “rapid-fire” round, including playful jabs about being “shroud-pilled,” having dual loyalty, and philosophical hair-splitting over spiritual questions.
• Ben’s explanation to his kids on pet mortality: “I went with, don’t worry, we’ll come up with medicines and the dog will be 150 years old.” (45:49)
• Michael’s summation of politics: “I thought it was all a grand conspiracy, then realized—these are just humans.” (28:40–29:11)
• The recurring refrain that aligning with Catholicism is “the most Jewish way to be Christian.”

---

Tone and Language

True to The Michael Knowles Show style:

• Conversational, irreverent, but intellectually robust.
• Quick sarcasm, with both self-deprecation and earnest theological and political analysis.
• Frequent historical references and inside jokes that reward audience familiarity.

---

Overall:
This episode features a dynamic and thought-provoking exchange between Knowles and Shapiro, offering both lighthearted entertainment and real insight into questions of religious identity, modern politics, media culture, and personal belief systems. It’s as much a masterclass in playful debate among friends as it is in navigating America’s rhetorical minefields.

Transcript

[A]

This episode is brought to you by Lifelock. When you visit the doctor, you probably hand over your insurance, your ID and contact details. It's just one of the many places that has your personal info and if any of them accidentally expose it, you could be at risk for identity theft. Lifelock monitors millions of data points a second. If you become a victim, they'll fix it, guaranteed or your money back. Save up to 40% your first [e-mail] podcast terms apply. If you know your party's Extension, press or say 1. To leave a message in our company mailbox, press or say 2. Spoiler alert. It will be full representative. Would you speak to your mother in that tone? Speak to a real human being.

[B]

You shouldn't need to shout into the void to get your health insurance questions answered. Pacific Source Health plans. This.

[A]

This is a real person.

[B]

How can I help you? Human service not automated phone trees. Pacific Source health plans packages by Expedia. You were made to occasionally take the hard route to the top of the Eiffel Tower. We were made to easily bundle your trip Expedia. Made to travel flight Inclusive packages are atoll protected.

[A]

Would you lean Catholic over Protestant? Very, very good question.

[B]

Very spicy.

[A]

I actually know the answer. I don't know if you know the answer to this, but I do know.

[B]

The answer to this. I would be shocked if had any other answer.

[A]

It's an obvious answer.

[B]

I know you think it's an obvious answer.

[A]

Welcome to yes or no, the bibulous battle to discover who knows whom better. My guest today is Ben Shapiro. How do we play? I'll ask Ben a yes or no question. He will select his answer away from my prying eyes. Then I'll guess how he answered. If I guess correctly, I get a point. If I guess incorrectly, I lose a point. No matter what, I'll probably drink. Then it's Ben's turn. Neither of us has seen the questions beforehand. Whoever has the most points at the end wins. The stakes could be higher, you know. The stakes for America are also high, which is why you need to get Ben's new book, Lions and the True Story of America, pre order it right now. Ben, thank you for coming to my show in your soundstage.

[B]

I mean, this is magical.

[A]

It's pretty cool, huh?

[B]

It is pretty awesome.

[A]

Since the last time you were on, we've kind of raised the rent a little bit.

[B]

Yeah, you definitely have. So we're spending even more money. I didn't think it was possible.

[A]

Now we have moving lights. Pretty cool. Now I have to ask what Are you drinking?

[B]

I don't know, whatever. They gave me this.

[A]

Cause there was a debate.

[B]

Apple juice, apparently.

[A]

I'll let people in on it. It's a little early. It's the morning.

[B]

Yes.

[A]

And so I said I'll have a martini, dry, little dirty blue cheese, olives. Breakfast of champions. But apparently I think they gave you a non alcoholic drink.

[B]

Did they? I don't know.

[A]

Or is it the whiskey? I told them to give you the whiskey.

[B]

That's whiskey, Is it?

[A]

Yeah. All right. There we go.

[B]

All right.

[A]

I'm glad to hear that.

[B]

It's kosher. It's kosher.

[A]

Do you know the rules?

[B]

I think so.

[A]

I don't.

[B]

Okay.

[A]

But I'll go first.

[B]

Okay.

[A]

If I were running for President of the United States, would I need to kiss the wall? Do I have to? Wow, that's a very realistic.

[B]

The AI has gotten good.

[A]

Professor Jacob, your co religionist, made this up on AI the other day and showed it. This is not my first time seeing this picture, but the question is a serious one. Both parties. People go to the wall in Jerusalem.

[B]

Yes.

[A]

If I were running, would I need to kiss the wall? I have to. You have to get.

[B]

I'm gonna answer and then I think you have to guess what I was saying.

[A]

Yes. Okay.

[B]

Okay. Ready? Okay.

[A]

What does Ben think that you would have to do?

[B]

Yes.

[A]

I can see Shapiro esque arguments for both answers here. You would say no. No, I would not have to.

[B]

Yes, you would not have to.

[A]

Because I'm Catholic.

[B]

Right.

[A]

If I were even, by the way.

[B]

I don't have to. If you're Jewish, no one has to kiss the wall. It's ridiculous. It's not even like a Jewish thing.

[A]

I was trying to explain this to.

[B]

Someone like people do if they want to. But it's not like a commandment to go. It's not even a commandment to visit the wall. And certainly for non Jewish, like I've said this to Ted Cruz, all these people, they'll come to synagogues, I'll put on yarmulke. And I'm like, why? You're not Jewish? I don't care.

[A]

I think he would have to kiss the wall or not. I think for evangelical Protestants or Baptists, I think it plays very well to kiss the wall. Cause it largely came out of evangelical movements in the 20th century. Whereas for Catholics, that's not like a traditional thing to do. You go to the Holy Sepulcher, you go to all these different places. But I tried to explain this to someone. I was like. Because people Say that you kiss the wall basically because the Jews force you to. I was like, the reason American politicians have started kissing that wall or praying at the wall or whatever. I think. I don't know, maybe you tell me if I'm. If Saad has any other view. It seems to me the reason is because evangelical Protestants have played a huge role in American politics in both parties, especially in the Republican Party. And they tend to be into that religious ritual. And so I think they're actually. I think it's more playing to them than it is playing to Jews.

[B]

Well, I mean, I think that's certainly true. I also think that it has to do with, I would assume, biblical solidarity, meaning, like Jesus. Clearly. I mean, this is the temple that Jesus was talking about. And so it's not that Jesus was a big fan of the temple, but it is the idea that Jesus was actually, well, he was an observant Jew. I mean, like, it does talk in the New Testament about Jesus, you know, being a Jew and doing Jewish things and such. And so like that whole, whole area, These are areas where Jesus legitimately walked. Yeah, right. You can walk up. I believe in September they're going to open up the pilgrimage road that goes down from the Silan Pool all the way up to the temple and to the Western Wall area. And like, you can see the stones where Jesus walked. You can see where he was standing and yelling at people about the money lenders in the temple and all this kind of stuff. So I think as sort of a. This is connected. These. This is like an area that Jesus was. I think that's probably why evangelicals are doing that sort of thing. But from a Jewish perspective, as you know, we've known each other a long time. I don't care. Politicians come to shul and again, they'll put on the keep. I'm like, why? You're not Jewish.

[A]

It's fine. You can wear a Yankee hat.

[B]

Exactly.

[A]

For me, what? I would prefer Schreimel.

[B]

Well, I mean, that's pretty slick, right? I mean, if you're gonna go like the old school polish garb from 1750, the Polish nobility, that's where it came from, then you should totally do that.

[A]

I'm too cheap for them though, apparently. I've heard they're very expensive.

[B]

But for all the anti Semites in the audience, actually, what we mandated is that you wear like fully the side lock. And also you have to have a radio near the Western Wall to shut it all down.

[A]

You do. That's actually where they tell you all Right. He's coming. He can be president now. He can. Okay, you're up.

[B]

Okay.

[A]

No clear answer.

[B]

Okay. Do you, Michael moles have dual loyalty to the Vatican?

[A]

Hmm. I'm warning you. So you don't think that I'm cheating? This answer goes down about, like three levels.

[B]

I know. I actually think I know what the answer is going to be here.

[A]

Okay.

[B]

Okay, Go ahead. Okay.

[A]

Correct. Why?

[B]

Because you have sole loyalty to the Vatican.

[A]

That's like the second level of it. So I would say, if not for an unfortunate event in history. Well, a few unfortunate events that concluded with the Lateran Treaty, but one of them was this event that began with this awful man, Garibaldi, who stole a lot of land from the Church and from the Pope and all these problems. In the 19th into the 20th century, there could be real territory. Now, I'm still, you know, I'm still an American. None of my family, they all came from either North Africa, also known as Sicily, or from England and Ireland. But if the Vatican had, you know, the Papal Zouaves with that great uniform and a sword and whatever, and I could go, I don't know, like slay Saracens or Lombards or something, we're cool. I'm in. But the reason I would say, no, I don't have dual loyalty is because the loyalty to the Vatican as presently constituted, which is about half a square mile of a space, and to the United States are loyalties of a different kind. So one is a national loyalty, one is a spiritual loyalty. Just like my loyalty to the Yankees is of a different kind than my loyalty to. Well, I have no loyalty to Ben Davies, but to someone on my producing team. That is the reason why. But if they reconstituted.

[B]

Wow.

[A]

The Vatican's army. No, no. I don't know. I don't know that they.

[B]

Honestly, when I said that, I was kind of half joking, but not totally because. And the reason I'm saying that is because of what you're saying, which is we have a very dumbed down conversation about the nature of identity.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

And the truth is that everybody has layers of identity, Right? So, like, for me, on a personal level, I have an identity as a Jew, meaning, like, that's my religious adherence. And then I have an identity as a father and a husband, and then I have an identity as an American. And the idea is that these do not conflict. I can be a good American and also be a good Jew and also be a good dad. And hopefully all three of those things not only don't conflict, but actually Buttress one another.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

And so me saying that you have, like, sole loyalty, that's like. That's like saying if you ask literally any Christian in America, are you a Christian first or are you an American first?

[A]

They'd always say Christian.

[B]

They would say Christian. Because of course that's the answer. Of course that's the answer. And the fact that that's somehow become, like, radically controversial in some way is because people make gigantic category errors about this particular question.

[A]

Yeah, yeah, of course.

[B]

So I'm not insulted by that at all, or I don't find it troublesome. It's bizarre to even think that way. But I think it's become kind of a trope that's designed to create conflicts where none ought.

[A]

It's not usually directed at my religious group.

[B]

Well, it was.

[A]

It was in the 19th century.

[B]

A huge percentage of our politics from about 1830 to probably 1960 was about this. Right. I mean, this was a major issue in the JFK campaign in 1960.

[A]

Schlesinger said that anti Catholicism was the deepest prejudice in America. Not that I always quote Schlesinger, but that was a reality.

[B]

It was a real thing. I mean, watch Gangs of New York, right? I mean, like, this is a real thing.

[A]

Yeah, yeah, yeah. But it is funny because this is kind of what pluralism is, you know, which pluralism can be taken to too great an extreme. But it's like, obviously there are differences, different identity, identity, layers of identity. But this is. You know, whenever we talk, the Westphalian system has to come up at some point. Obviously.

[B]

Of course.

[A]

I mean, we're going up. Augsburg has to come up.

[B]

We're like seven minutes in.

[A]

Yes, yes. But this is one of the problems. This is one of the many problems with the modern system of nation states. Is it? Oh, it just complicates everything. Even the very notion of Cuyus regio eius religio, you know, whose reign, his religion. It just. It makes. Am I a nationalist? Like, kind of. I also think empire is fine. I also think it's not like nation matters, but it's not the be all and end all of my identity.

[B]

Right. And it matters in one context and not in another.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

Right.

[A]

Like, I don't think the king has the right to declare religious truth. I don't think that's real. That was a consequence of the end of the religious wars. But, like, I don't know, most kings can barely articulate political truths.

[B]

And this actually is the fundamental basis of the United States Constitution in many anyways, which is that the king does not have the power to declare religious truth. Now, there were many states that had instituted religions, but not at the federal level. Right?

[A]

So, yeah, anyway, yeah, that's pretty okay. Hold on one second. Go to balanceofnature.com use promo code knowles. We all know we should be eating more fruits and vegetables, but want you to be honest with me. You are not getting nearly enough variety. That is where balance of nature comes in. Because what you put in your body matters. Their whole health System gives you 47 different whole food ingredients. 16 fruits, 15 vegetables, 12 aromatic spices and 4 fibers. We're talking real ingredients like wild blueberries, kale, turmeric and psyllium husk. When was the last time you just sat down and gorged yourself on some psyllium husk? It's probably been a while. No artificial additives, no sugar added. Just nature doing its job. What I love about balance of nature is the convenience. I can be on the road. You take the fruits and veggies capsules with water, chew them, open them up, mix them into powder in your smoothies, your yogurt, sprinkle them on your oatmeal, fiber and spice blend mixes great into drinks too. These supplements are vegan kosher certified, including gluten free. They're terrific. They will help you become a gigachad like myself and Mr. Davies. Go to balanceofnature.com use promo code knowles knlas for 35% off your first order as a preferred customer. Plus get a free bottle of fiber and Spice as balanceofnature.com promo code knowles.

[B]

You went deep on that one.

[A]

That was good. I know that was. Mr. Davies is thrilled. Cause at this rate, this episode will only be seven hours long. That'll be great. Okay. Did you have, did you have a pleasant experience on Surrounded? There are also like, I can think of like five different ways that you.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

I think you would say it was pleasant enough. Yes, that's right.

[B]

Pleasant enough is a good description. I mean, it was rather variable. Being screamed at for like seven solid minutes by a trans person was. Was not the most pleasant thing I've experienced. It was. It was definitely. And at a certain point I was like, okay, I'm just going to sit here and this person's going to yell at me. And I was amused by the fact that nobody would raise the red flag when the person was like, it was the most boring thing in the world. And they're all like so intimidated by the idea that this person's identity is sacrosanct. I Must not raise the red flag under any.

[A]

So that's true. Wow. That gives them an advantage even in the game of surrounded.

[B]

Yes.

[A]

It's like, well, I can't. Silence.

[B]

I can't tell this trans person to sit down and shut up, even though she's saying nothing but. Yeah. And so that was kind of unpleasant, but overall I thought it was pleasant. And afterward, a bunch of the people who had been arguing with me kind of came up and wanted to snap selfies and were kind of fans. And so that you were on it, what was your experience?

[A]

I quite enjoyed it. I don't know. It wasn't a day at the beach, you know, it wasn't like walking around the Parthenon or something. But it was pleasant in as much as there were some moments where I felt like I was actually talking to someone. Yes. There weren't many of them, but there were a few moments.

[B]

This is right.

[A]

You know, the funniest thing about that show and this I did find delightful. There was one kid on there. He was the kid at the top who was. He was actually raised a traditionalist Catholic. He's kind of fallen away for now, but he'll come back. But he very left wing and all this stuff. Very pro lgbt. But I was sitting there and he was starting to ask good questions. He was starting to go from angles of the natural law. And he was kind. He was a little clumsy about it, but he was starting to get into a decent conversation. So of course they voted him off immediately.

[B]

Exactly.

[A]

Enough of this. We just need some giant maniac to yell at you.

[B]

Yeah, exactly.

[A]

So, yeah, I enjoyed it. The funny thing with that show, though, is I get a kick out of that environment. Some people have not done well on that show and you did well on the show. But I've noticed, without naming names, some people have had a tough time. Because you can win for two hours of that show. If the show is two hours and two minutes long, you can win two hours of it. If you flub for two seconds.

[B]

It's very high pressure. It's very high pressure.

[A]

You'll lose. You look crazy, you look terrible.

[B]

Because it all gets clipped. It's all about the clips that come out from the thing, for sure. And that is very. It's not as though the arguments that are being made are stellar most of the time. Most of them are pretty terrible. But you're right. But that's now kind of the name of the game on the Internet. And so if you do any sort of long form thing, the chances that if you screw up for 30 seconds, that ends up as, like, the featured thing on Twitter. That's very, very high.

[A]

That's high stakes.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

All right, you're up.

[B]

All right, here we go. H. Would banning TikTok save more lives than banning fentanyl? Oh, wow.

[A]

Okay.

[B]

Okay.

[A]

I would be tempted to, because it.

[B]

Depends how trolley you were being that day.

[A]

No, it's sort of like you could. Do you mean save their body? Do you mean save their soul?

[B]

Right. That's kind of where I was thinking you were going to go.

[A]

And I do think that. That TikTok is more rot for your soul for a larger number of people than fentanyl.

[B]

But fentanyl is going 100,000 people a year.

[A]

Yeah, yeah, It's a lot of people. But TikTok is poisoning more people at a spiritual level and just an intellectual.

[B]

Level by the tens of millions.

[A]

Yes, yes. The difference is if we ban TikTok, they would just go to Instagram reels, or they would just go to Twitter reels, or they would just. And maybe that's not quite as poisonous as TikTok is, but it's. It does rot your.

[B]

So, okay, fine. So I actually disagree with this, and I'll tell you why I disagree with this. Because if you. If you. So first of all, fentanyl is already banned.

[A]

Yes. Right.

[B]

I mean, it's not. It's not. It's not as though you can, like, just go down your local corner store and pick up fentanyls. They banned fentanyl already. And so banning fentanyl would not save additional lives at this point because it's already banned. Banning TikTok, actually, there's a delta. So TikTok's algorithm is tremendously good. Like, very, very good at featuring virality and maximizing for virality. And it's run by the Chinese Communist government.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

And so even if you were to say that, you know, it'll. People are going to game the system, they'll go to X or they'll go to Instagram. First of all, Instagram does have better controls and they're not run by the Chinese government. And 2x is kind of a shit show at this point. So.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

You know, like, it's just kind of a lot of everything all over. And you see people are gaming the system there for sure. There's a lot of bots, there's a lot of foreign governments that are messing around on X. I wrote a whole.

[A]

Book about how conservatives need to get on the bandwagon of restricting speech in A proper and civilized way, and it completely went out the window. You were a prophet. I was a prophet ahead of my time. I know. So you. Right. And that's an interesting way to read the question, which is, banning TikTok would save more lives than banning fentanyl, you say? Well, if it saves one additional life.

[B]

Right, exactly.

[A]

There's no doubt. Okay, all right, that's fair. That's fair. With the hire of Isabel Brown, it seems that you may be Christian. Curious. If so, would you lean Catholic over Protestant? Ooh. Very, very good question. Spicy.

[B]

It's very spicy.

[A]

I know. I actually know the answer. I don't know if you know the answer to this, but I do know.

[B]

The answer to this. I would be shocked if you had any other answer.

[A]

But, no, there are some people. Well, I'm not going to give away mine. I'll just let you answer first. It's an obvious answer.

[B]

I know you think it's an obvious answer.

[A]

Um, Okay, I understand all of the problems for the obvious, but yes, Catholic, So no. Give me a. Give me a break. That is Coke.

[B]

That is Coke.

[A]

That is total.

[B]

Okay, I'll tell you why. Okay, so in order for me to become a Christian, the central pitch of Christianity to me would be getting rid of all of the rituals. Right? I mean, that's like the central pitch, right?

[A]

You're saying you'd want to mix it up. You gotta.

[B]

Yeah, man. I mean, like. Like, if, Like, I do more ritual than you, right. I'm like, as Jewish as it's possible to be almost.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

And. And what that means is that if the. I've said this before, Catholicism is more similar to Judaism than Protestantism. Yes, by far. There's no question. Because Catholicism, as I've said to Bishop Aaron, backfilled all of the ritual by basically saying, faith. Faith will save you, not works. But also it turns out that if you think that that is, like, a practical way of governing, it turns out that you need hierarchy and actual works.

[A]

And let's give some credence to James here, who says you are justified not by faith alone. You are justified by works not by faith alone. And so Paul also compliments that by writing a lot about faith. But there's a lot of stuff you do. There's a lot of.

[B]

Do you. 100%. So it turns out that the actual practical life of a Catholic is much more similar to the practical life of a Jew than Protestantism. So the. So I guess the question is, on what basis? So first of all, let's just acknowledge the obvious. Whichever Christian converts me gets a million heaven points. And we all understand this, right? Like, this is. And honestly, I'm very flattered by all the people who want to convert me and care enough about my soul that they wish me to be saved.

[A]

I was really.

[B]

That's very nice of you.

[A]

I was at the Napa.

[B]

I'm not insulted by it at all. I don't find it a problem.

[A]

I was at the Napa conference. It was. I don't know if this is Tails at a school or whatever. It's a big Catholic conference. And I was, anyway, speaking into a room, and some people were saying, like, hey, some of our favorite guys. You, Charlie, Kirk, you know, Protestants, you know, how close are they? Whatever. I said, well, look, it would be tough for Ben. It would be tough for Ben for a number of reasons. It's like. But I am. That's such a fake answer. Cause, like, the thing is, if you converted, you would not just convert. Cause you got sick of doing the wrapping.

[B]

Wrapping stone. Yeah.

[A]

You wouldn't do it because you got sick of Shabbat, which is. Shabbat's actually a very nice ritual to do. It's not. Cause you would have gotten sick of friends.

[B]

Right?

[A]

It's not. You would do it because you would be convinced that the most Jewish thing to be would be Christian.

[B]

Right.

[A]

And if you were.

[B]

Okay, that's. That's a totally fair. That's a totally fair argument. Honestly. It's a totally fair argument. And so that's what I was going to say is if you believe that I was going to convert because I was actively attracted by the story of Jesus and his divinity.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

Then I would probably end up Catholic.

[A]

You have.

[B]

If I. If I.

[A]

Give me that point. I want that point.

[B]

Okay. If, however, I were to convert because I just got sick of the Jewishness of it.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

I'd go Protestant. Because honestly, like, you guys do a lot of stuff, and it's a lot. It's a lot. But you are. Right. Listen, both the Pope and I wear Kippas. You can see the picture of us. His Kipa's bigger than mine. Right.

[A]

That picture was so wholesome. It was this sweet. You're giving. You're meeting the Pope. You're like, you know Forrest Gump or something.

[B]

Yeah, exactly.

[A]

And you're like. You're standing there meeting the Pope, and then you hand him a. It was a signed.

[B]

I mean, I'm a White Sox fan, so I had in my Collection A signed 2005 World Series baseball. And I said to him, you, Holiness, you're Catholic, I'm Jewish. But the one miracle we can both agree on is the 2005 White Sox winning the World Series. And he laughed. He thought it was funny. It was funny. I presented it to him and he goes, is it for me? I was like, well, yeah. I mean, I'm not bringing it here just to show it to you. It's not showing to you.

[A]

Check out Mike.

[B]

Look what I had.

[A]

Someone said to me, michael, how is it that your Jewish colleague gets to meet the Pope before?

[B]

Yeah, that definitely.

[A]

I said, well, they have. Look, the Pope and I have a lot in common. You do? I said, but the Pope and Ben have a very, very deep connection.

[B]

The Weissach's connection is carried by few. It's a burden carried by few.

[A]

It is a true suffering experience. Maybe sanctifying, I don't know. Yeah, that's pretty good. Now, okay, my final point. Look, you're gonna take the point for me.

[B]

It's fine.

[A]

But my final point on this is. Okay, I get it. One day you say, look, I've had enough of the rituals. I want it. You're telling me Ben Shapiro is going to. Just in order to get out of the rituals, you're going to go show up to the big auditorium with the smoke machines and the electric guitars. I'm going to see Ben Shapiro in that audience.

[B]

I mean, I wasn't aware that that's all Protestantism. Well, nobody that's a particular type of Protestantism.

[A]

If you become Episcopalian, that's just twice the liturgy, half the guilt of the Catholics. So now you're kind of right back where you were.

[B]

I'm not. I mean, Episcopalian's a whole different thing.

[A]

I wonder if that bishopress from the National Prayer Service would love to meet you. I don't know if she's. She hasn't answered my calls. Okay, you're up. I need to drink. Okay, fine. Davey's in my ear. I have to drink. Okay, fine.

[B]

Yeah. The good news is when you lose, you drink. So that's nice.

[A]

When I win, I was already drinking what I wanted.

[B]

Yeah, that's true. Okay.

[A]

All right. It's almost. It's five o' clock in India.

[B]

You're gonna like this one. You ready? Is it more likely that the moon landing was faked than that Brigitte Macron has a penis?

[A]

Okay, come on, come on. Who am I not offend? Read the question again.

[B]

Okay. Is it more likely that the moon landing was faked than that Brigitte Macron has A penis.

[A]

I don't know my answer to this.

[B]

Okay, he got it.

[A]

Yeah, he got it.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

We went to the moon.

[B]

We definitely went to the moon.

[A]

That's gonna give me 100%.

[B]

Went to the moon.

[A]

We went to the moon, right?

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

And the thing is, it's not, as I said on the show. I think there in the political fight over the gender of the first lady of France, there are all sorts of legal and political maneuvers that could turn lawsuits out in any direction. All sorts of things that are not necessarily reliant on biology. But we live in a time when transgenderism is accepted. We live in a time when people think transgenderism, some people think it's normal. We live in a time when people go to the doctors to get chopped up, and usually they don't really look that convincing, but whatever. So I cannot be convinced that the Soviet Union would have let us get away with lying about the moon. That's my biggest problem with all the moon stuff. Why, if it were all fake, and it were so obviously fake that anyone in this dorm room can figure it out, why would the Soviet Union let us get away with it?

[B]

I mean, that's a great question. Also, questions would be like, we went back there multiple times and then golfed.

[A]

Right.

[B]

Also, we developed like, actual inventions based on things like travel to space that ended with the landing on the moon.

[A]

Space, yes. But they would say, yeah, we've been to low Earth.

[B]

So here is my thing. Obviously both of these things are untrue. We did land on the moon, and Brigitte Macron does not have a penis.

[A]

However, what about Carla Bruni?

[B]

But you are right that actually the basis of the dismissal of a case in France about this was not whether or not Brigitte Macron had a penis. It was that the court said, you cannot show that there are damages from claiming that Brigitte Macron has a penis. Meaning, like, you can't even say that's an insult in France, So no damages. Therefore attend to the case. It got dismissed on that basis. And so you're right that the widespread acceptance of the silliness means that anything is at least slightly possible.

[A]

I would go even further, like, yes, cuz you say, how are there damages? That's a good thing.

[B]

If anything, you should be happy, tolerant. Yeah, exactly.

[A]

But the other thing is on actual malice, you know, you have to prove actual malice, which means either you knew you were lying, you knew it wasn't true, but you said it anyway, or you had a reckless disregard for the truth. To me, again, I'm not a lawyer, but when you're talking about the transgender issue, everyone tells us it's totally normal. It's existed forever. It's a reasonable assumption to make that someone could be transgender. And if you're asking me who has the reckless disregard for the truth here, it's the pro transgender activists. It's not the people of all the.

[B]

People in the world. Yes, that's true. But. Yeah, I mean, the moon landing happened. As you know, I'm deeply annoyed by virtually all conspiracy theories because they assume a level of competence that is not in evidence.

[A]

Yeah, Yeah.

[B]

I think it.

[A]

Are there any you buy into?

[B]

I mean, I sort of buy into the Justin Trudeau is Fidel Castro's kid.

[A]

Do you?

[B]

Yeah, I mean, like. I'm joking.

[A]

It depends on the picture you look at.

[B]

Right.

[A]

Cause some. He's a dead ringer.

[B]

Right, Exactly.

[A]

And the mom was, like, buddies with Castro.

[B]

Yeah. And was traveling in that area at the time.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

And was kind of known for, you know, knocking boots. But. Yeah, but. But in general. But that. That kind of conspiracy theory is more plausible to me because it does not actually. It involves a personal relationship, not an actual gigantic conspiracy. Yeah. That can accomplish something. Right, Exactly. So if you're talking about, like a conspiracy between two people, that's a lot more plausible to me than. Every single person at NASA was complicit in the shooting on a stay on stage. And everybody in pr, everybody at the Pentagon, everybody in the White House, all the media, they were all complicit in this gigantic. Have you seen how any of these institutions work? They're filled with humans, and humans are stupid and venal and bad at things. And I'm astonished that it would take more brain power to come up with the conspiracy about a moon landing than it would brain power to actually put a man on the moon.

[A]

Yeah. I noticed something. I was totally opposed to all conspiracy theories. And then I got into some of them. I at least enjoy entertaining them. It's kind of an intellectual exercise.

[B]

And.

[A]

And they're kind of fun to go down. And then I got into them a little bit, and then I came out of them a little bit more. And the determining factor from stage two to stage three was when I was not in politics, I thought, whatever. Everything the government tells me is true. And I got a little bit into politics. I thought, it's all a grand conspiracy. And then I got pretty into politics, where I am spending a lot of time in the halls of power and seeing with the players, and I realize they are human. Beings.

[B]

Yeah, it's veep. It's not cars.

[A]

It's definitely much. It's 99% Veep. And then 1% people thinking they're in hell.

[B]

I think that's exactly right. I think it's exactly right. The other thing that I think the reason I went from mildly amused by it to annoyed is that I do think that a lot of these theories are enervating and actually are driving negativity about the country. I don't think that the moon landing stuff is just like, oh, it's fun to speculate about whether it's moon landing. Who cares whether there was really a moon? It was more like, America was never awesome. America wouldn't have been capable of that. You know? And it's kind of a rip on America, which I. Which I think sucks.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

Like, America kicks ass. We did put a man on the moon. We beat the Soviets there. We took down their entire empire. Like, we are awesome. And can you please stop trying to. And I feel like every conspiracy theory. Not actual conspiracies where there's actual evidence of people in a room doing Anthony Fauci and Jay Bhattacharya or something like that.

[A]

There are false flag attacks. That's real.

[B]

Yes.

[A]

There are actual, like, government operatives like Fauci who, like, conspire to cover up crimes. And do they. Or cover up at least incompetence. Russiagate. That does happen.

[B]

Yes. And then there's evidence of it, and then we can tell there's evidence of it. But so many of the, like, real conspiracy theories are really about just kind of, in the end, running down the country and also making you believe that you have no control over your own life, which is really my bugaboo. Yeah, I hate that. I really hate it. Like, to me, the fundamental basis of Judaism and Christianity is if your life is screwed up, there's like, a 95% shot that it was probably you.

[A]

Yes. Yeah.

[B]

Right. Like that. Terrible things happen to people. People have health problems. You know, a brick falls from the sky. Like, things happen, but most people's problems most of the time are at least partially caused by them.

[A]

On a long enough time scale.

[B]

Yes. And this is. And this is a very biblical principle. Yeah, Right. The. The Old Testament, which I'm much more familiar with than the New. The Old Testament is very big on the idea that, like, you screwed up and then you got walloped.

[A]

Yeah, right.

[B]

It's not like the gods were randomly fighting in the sky and then you just kind of like, got. Got knocked over. Like this is you violated the rules and then you got walloped. And so that's in one sense scary. But on the other hand, it's actually quite empowering because it means that many things in your life are in your control.

[A]

You see this in the New Testament, though, when you know the parable of the man is in hell, and he says, oh, no, I want to go back and warn my loved ones, you know, that you can go to hell and everything. And he says, no. Why? You had all the prophets. You had all. I told you so many times, like you. You think one more. No, no, but me one more time. I'm gonna go try to. That's not gonna do it, man. You know, and this is the thing.

[B]

About these people in their basements doing the conspiracy. Is your life better because you're doing this? Like, really, this is the thing. Is your life better because you're sitting in a basement theorizing about a shadowy cabal is running your life?

[A]

It would be. If they could uncover. If the premise were true, if they could uncover the truth, if they could act upon the truth, then if it's.

[B]

For.

[A]

In principle, it would be. But does that happen?

[B]

Right. It's never.

[A]

Do any of those things happen? No, no, no, they don't.

[B]

Your turn.

[A]

I think I'm up. This question will follow a short video prompt. Speaking of.

[B]

Wow.

[A]

Wow, this is good writing. Because they knew that we'd be talking about that. And then now that you've seen more evidence. Wow, man, this is good, right? I never complimented.

[B]

Wow.

[A]

Now that you've seen more evidence, are you at least skeptical that Jeffrey Epstein killed himself? Oh, my God. You just have the evidence. We play it again. Wow.

[B]

Okay.

[A]

Are you Now, I thought Mr. Facts don't care about your feelings. I know you're asking me not to believe my life.

[B]

Okay. Ready?

[A]

Yeah. You are wrongly going to say no. No. You said yes. Ah, man.

[B]

Yes. Because it was. Because it's a. It's a logical conundrum. I don't believe that's it. That's a terrible piece of evidence. But I've also set up a. I've also set up a paradigm wherein if I see additional evidence of a thing, I have to then change my opinion. So, you know, I think the premise of your question is that we're pretend that's actual evidence and not AI of Hillary Clinton.

[A]

It's better than the video they released, that's for sure.

[B]

By the way. I mean, that takes some, like, serious strength on her part. Right? Like, does Hillary have that sort of you know, grip strength that she could really like go after Jeffrey Epstein that night.

[A]

The adrenochrome, that's what does. I pronounce that correctly. The CBS report. Did you see the CBS report on Epstein, which see the one that came out like a week or two ago? And it kind of just goes down the list of, okay, we've examined this video evidence and yet it's not raw footage. The metadata show it's a screen grab. Also, there's like a cursor in the footage and it's missing a minute, but it might actually be closer to three minutes. And it goes through even beyond the video. But within the video it's important because it shows actually there was another person kind of on camera who they said was carrying linens, but he's probably in an orange jumpsuit. And actually you can't see the entrance to Jeffrey Epstein's cell. And actually you can't. And actually, actually, actually, actually. Then it goes through all of the confusions. I don't want to say contradictions, but contradictions in the government's reporting on this. I'm not saying he didn't kill himself necessarily. I'm not saying he is the greatest super spy that's ever lived in the whole history of the world. There is no way we're getting the straight story, don't you think?

[B]

I mean, it depends on how you're defining the straight story.

[A]

Why would they say they're releasing the raw video, say the device is reset at Midnight like it's 1993 now certain.

[B]

Government agencies do, because they literally, until we, they literally were storing all government documents in a cave.

[A]

Right, right. No, I get government agencies sometimes are like that. But you had, according to cbs, at least so grand Schultz, they said high government source in intel says that's not what's going on. The FBI has the full footage without the skip, without the frame reset, without. Come on, it's like, come on, man. One or two anomalies. I say whatever, that's the government. It's like, you know, a dozen anomalies.

[B]

So again, I said this to Megyn Kelly and she got pissed at me. But the reality is that I'm talking to people whose names people would know.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

In the government who looked at all this stuff. So you have to now posit that they are in on it, that they are involved in the COVID up. And knowing the people that I'm talking about, I do not believe that they are in on the COVID up. I don't think President Trump is in on a Gigantic cover. I certainly think that the most extreme version of this case, which is that Jeffrey Epstein was a Hassad agent who's running child sex trafficking on behalf of.

[A]

Israel with kompromat on Trump, with compromise.

[B]

On Trump, and then Trump is covering it up. Like, I think, first of all, if people are actually articulating that theory, they should have the balls to just say it out loud.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

See how President Trump takes it from them.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

I notice they like to kind of flirt around the edges of it, but they don't. They won't actually say the thing. But, you know, Dershowitz said that he thinks that Epstein killed himself, but that he was probably aided in the killing of himself. That I find plausible.

[A]

Yeah, right.

[B]

Because you did have. Somebody was removed from his cell. He had a cellmate. The cellmate was gone.

[A]

He went out. He appare. According to the CBS report, he went out, he made a phone call, an unsupervised phone call, like hours before he.

[B]

I mean, I could certainly see a world where Epstein was bribing guards and you can see why he would kill himself. He was about to spend the rest of his life in prison for raping children, which, as it turns out, is a really, really bad way to spend the rest of your life. So, you know, could there be. Again, if there were. Is every question I have answered. No. I have to make a judgment now as to who I think is lying.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

And I haven't seen the evidence to suggest that the people I'm talking about are lying. And if they are lying, I want to know why they're lying and what your theory of the case is.

[A]

I'll tell you what.

[B]

I'll give you my opinion as to why they're lying. Okay.

[A]

Cuz my view, as is often the case, is probably the least popular view, but it's certainly correct, which is, I don't think the government's being forthright. I think the government has contradicted itself many times on this. I think even just looking at the video, the video was told on itself in a way. You know, just the reset and the time and the framing and everything, the interpretation of what the video showed, whatever. But because I'm not a libertarian and because I'm not like one of these, you know, I'm. I think politics is a complicated, nuanced system of alliances and longstanding operations that go on for many presidential administrations. The Epstein thing long predates Trump, and we know, we've known now since 2018, though Radar Online reported it as breaking news, like three days ago that the FBI had a deal with Epstein at least by 2007, at least by the time of his sweetheart deal that he got in Florida. That had been reported by Daily Beast through Alex Acosta. Reportedly when he was at the.

[B]

It was FOIA in it. Yeah.

[A]

And they say it was FOIA'd now, but this was reported in 2018 that the FBI was getting information. We have memos from the FBI. It was getting information from Epstein.

[B]

Well, as part of his plea deal, which again is incredibly common. So. Yes, by the way, I should mention here that what the document says is that as part of the plea deal, which means that it was supposed to close the case, essentially he was going to provide information. But that does not mean in an ongoing relationship.

[A]

That's true. It could have been.

[B]

It could have been like for that case. I just want to be clear about the legal. I mean, that is the legal of it. Now, maybe he was. Yes, but there's been no evidence of that. And again, I think that.

[A]

But if the government. Look, if the FBI wasn't totally forthright about its relationship with Epstein even around the plea deal. But I guess my argument is governments don't have to be. Governments are not meant to be radically transparent. Governments do sometimes cover up intel they're getting from people. They do cover up certain clandestine operations. They do. I think what the American people want on the Epstein thing is they want to know that justice is being done in some way.

[B]

So I think that's true for some. I think what some people really, really want is for there to be a giant ring of pedophile rich people who control the world.

[A]

Yes, that's.

[B]

And anything short of that is going to be insufficient to quell the uprest.

[A]

Right? Yeah, no, that's true.

[B]

It's like if a bunch of these people who are pushing this. Got what you said, which is, okay, you know, here are the names of three low level randos who Jeffrey Epstein, Traffic Girls do. And that's it. And we're prosecuting them. Right.

[A]

They would not be satisfied.

[B]

No one would be satisfied, certainly, because what they actually want is for there to be this thing that happened. Because it's a nice thing to believe. Again, it goes back to the whole, like, there's a secret cabal running your life. Again, if you provide me evidence that the secret cabal is running, then you're now in the position of having to argue that Donald Trump and Cash Patel and Dan Bolgino and Pam Bondi are all involved in the secret cabal or covering up for the secret cabal. And the people who, again, are opposing the strongest version of this theory do not have the balls to just say it out loud. They're constantly playing around the edges.

[A]

Yeah. It's funny. This is where, as more of a traditionalist, I just say, like, if they're not releasing everything for whatever reason, I think I elect them for their judgment. I like them for their judgment.

[B]

You and I are making kind of similar arguments here. Meaning, like, I don't know. I don't know what's in the files. You don't know what's in the files, but you know who's in the files. Cash, Dan, Pam, presumably Trump, presumably jd.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

Like, right, they're all meeting on it this week, so. Yeah.

[A]

Yeah, that's true.

[B]

They're all meeting on it a couple weeks ago.

[A]

Yeah. Yeah, it is. But I'm still pretty firmly team. Nothing ever happens. The number of things that happen in history that, like, happen happen that, like, happen. Yeah, it's like four.

[B]

I. I agree.

[A]

Maybe five.

[B]

I agree. Okay. I think I'm reading you a question. Yes. Here you go. We have a message from Lizzo.

[A]

My jeans. Oh, come on.

[B]

Are stolen. Wow. Okay. Wow. Was the Sydney Sweeney version better?

[A]

You have to guess my answer.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

Did I enjoy it?

[B]

I don't know. I kind of enjoyed that.

[A]

It's both body shaming and racist, wasn't it? Yeah. Yeah. I can. Look, I could make a little joke or something, but let's be clear.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

The Sydney Sweeney jeans ad. I said the whole time, two cheers for Sydney Sweeney jeans. Because it's not. I don't think, like, women bearing a lot of their bodies and, like, inciting lusts is, like, the.

[B]

I don't think it's, like, the best thing.

[A]

The best thing, but a return from whatever we're at. Androgynous, creepy, 2020-90s moderate liberalism is an improvement. And she's very beautiful and she's normal.

[B]

This is a very good take. So I said this on the show that I'm old enough to remember when conservatives went nuts over Paris Hilton grinding on a car for Carl's Jr. Commercial in, like, 2005. Right. That was, like, a big thing on the. Right. I remember.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

And we were all like, what is this? She's only famous for doing pornography. Like, and here she is grinding on a car to sell burgers.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

Like, what the hell? Like, this is gross. And so I'm still from that school, which is. It is not good for. But. But we live in a time in which they have gone so far crazy.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

That it is now right wing coded for a beautiful woman to be on your tv.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

In a sexy way.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

And so, like, as a. I've said this before about politics is one of the very weird things about politics is that it's sort of like that optical illusion where you take one a color and you put it against blue and then you put it against yellow and it looks like two separate colors, but it's the same color.

[A]

Yes. Right.

[B]

So if I go on. If I go on Bill Maher show and I say a thing, I look like a rabid right winger. But if I go on a show with you, then I look like a moderate.

[A]

Yeah, right.

[B]

Like this. Like it's the exact same thing, word for word. So I feel like that about this particular genes ad. You put this jeans ad on TV in 2005 and we're all like, man, the kind of pornification of American society just continues to pace. It's not great. And then you put it next to, by the way, men or women. And this could have been Dylan Mulvaney. Yes.

[A]

And it would have been. It would have been.

[B]

If it were three years ago, it would have been 100%.

[A]

Chad Warad was crazy.

[B]

100%.

[A]

Yes. I mean, I had this thought, which is my reaction to the Sydney Sweeney Adam, if is that's a good ad, I'm fairly disciplined. But if I looked at the ad too long, my reaction might be, oh, that's a nice ad. I'll watch it again. But my reaction to the creepy, androgynous weirdo sex ad is actually nausea. It's actually a cause. In one, it's appealing to the prurient interest in a way that is natural.

[B]

Yes.

[A]

Okay. In the other, it's appealing to the prurian interest in a way that is entirely contrary to nature and everything we know about reality. I guess the former is better.

[B]

Right? Exactly right. I'm with you.

[A]

Okay, I'm up. But you know what? You know what's gonna happen? Before I read this question, Ben, I'm gonna tell you that the yes or no game has sparked more honest conversation. It's sparked a few heated debates. It's done more for public discourse and private discourse in America than just about any other card game. And now the Daily Wire's best selling party game is getting bigger. Judge the stances of your friends, family and colleagues on the most unifying topics in American life with the politics, philosophy and religion expansion pack. Which one? Where is it? Where is that? There we go. Look at that beautiful pack. Over 110 Bold new cards only available dailywire.com shop you will tackle questions like, do dogs go to heaven? They don't. Should TikTok be banned? Is gender ideology more dangerous than Islam? I actually don't have a quick answer to that. It's a perfect game. For anyone who loves spicy conversations and unapologetic truth. Go to dailywire.com shop dailywire.com shop S H O P. Yes or no? Because the family game night wasn't heated enough. Ben, do you know what time it is?

[B]

I don't.

[A]

It's time for the rapid fire round. Slow fire. It was the slower fire round.

[B]

I have to say, on the dogs going to heaven thing.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

That is an unanswerable question. Once you have kids. We have a dog. And I have four kids. Eleven. Nine, five and two. And I was asked this question.

[A]

Yes. And you know the answer.

[B]

Of course I know the answer. And. And so you are left with two possible answers to a child. One is to lie, and the other is to also lie. It is to either say, yes, the dog goes to heaven.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

Or two, the dog never dies. Right. So. Right. I actually felt the second was less blasphemous.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

I went with, don't worry, we'll come up with medicines and the dog will be 150 years old.

[A]

Wow. You didn't even do, like, well, maybe the dog. We'll send the dog to. To a farm.

[B]

No, I didn't. In an ash box.

[A]

You're not gonna send him a glue factory?

[B]

No.

[A]

I guess that's horses.

[B]

I mean, my son did say this the other day. He, for some reason, was just in a dark mood. He turns to me, he's like, I'm very sad the dog is gonna die. And I was like, yeah, the dog's really young. I mean, the dog's like two and a half years old. Probably live to be 15 or whatever.

[A]

That's the most Shapiro. Like, you're a Shapiro kid. You're just like, well, in 11 years, this is what's gonna happen. I need to prepare.

[B]

He's still kind of saying, listen, you know, we can. We can talk about this, but let's be real. In a billion years, the sun's gonna explode and eat the earth. So we can just put off this conversation for another day.

[A]

I love this idea. Like, you think the dog's gonna die? Wait till you hear what's gonna happen to us someday.

[B]

Exactly. We'll all be dead by then. He asked me about that one time he's like, is it true the sun's gonna eat there? I was like, yeah, we'll all be dead by then.

[A]

Who cares? Yeah, we'll all be whatever. I know, I know. I was just talking about this with Elisa last night. She was saying, how do we tell the kids about. They're reading fairy tales and they're talk. So and so died. So and so almost died. And they're starting to wonder about death. It's like, what do we tell them? Yeah, we're gonna tell them brutal realities, which includes some hope. But it's gonna be, by the way.

[B]

I mean, death kind of naturally comes up in a biblical worldview pretty much all the time.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

I mean, like, it's within the first few chapters of the Bible. Like, you're there.

[A]

I was. We were in it. We were walking around a church in Italy. And so I was like. The tour guide said, there's the skull over there of Saint. I don't remember what saint, but, you know, it's very controversial, the veneration of relics. It's not controversial to me, but it's very controversial. And I don't know if you want to see the. And then my 2 year old, just like, I want to see the skull. Show me the skull. There you go, buddy.

[B]

My son, we were in Italy, went to one of these. It was actually Malta. We went to one of these catacombs, and they had unburied some of the. There's like a skull and some bones there. And my son was like, I can't believe. And so later he turns to me and said, you know, Dad, I never thought that I was actually going to see that face to head.

[A]

I was looking right at him face.

[B]

To face to head.

[A]

It was very funny. Now, Ben, do you know how to play this round?

[B]

I don't.

[A]

I don't either, but they put it in my teleprompter. Three rounds, 30 seconds. No time to outthink each other.

[B]

Okay, fine.

[A]

That's. That's shorthand for shut up. Yeah. Okay, you're up. No, I'm up. I'm up. Okay, ready? Rapid fire. Even though they're crafted in the likeness of pagan idols, our labooboos. Labooboos. Labubus or Lababus, like a succubus. Incubus are lababoos. Totally fine. You're gonna say yes, you sicko. Oh, no. You said no. I thought you had one on your set.

[B]

I mean, my producers put it there, but I don't approve of. My producers are like, my Children. I don't approve what they do.

[A]

Yeah, no, that's fair. Yeah. No, Nothing named after and looking like a demon gets to go on set. That's crazy. Do you believe the remains of giants can be found? You're gonna say no.

[B]

All right. Yeah. Because again, it gets into definitions. Are we talking about, like, a giant back in biblical days, which means, like, some of the people around the office.

[A]

Yeah, he's like 5 foot 8. Given the overwhelming scientific evidence for the miraculous image on the Shroud of Turin, have you been shroud pilled? I know the answer. But there's a good episode if you're a doubter of a show called Michael and that you can watch about this. Are you shroud pilled? You are for now, so far going to say no, correct?

[B]

I'll watch your episode.

[A]

Okay. The episode is good. And this is weird. It's with a Protestant. Whoa. I thought the Catholics were the Shroud people.

[B]

Whoa. Don't you automatically go to hell, bring a Protestant.

[A]

I. Johnston. He was amazing. And actually another guy came in with the Sudarium of Oviedo. It's very good. And I was actually very glad because I said to Davies, I said, I thought only Catholics believed in the Shroud. He was, what are you talking about? I've believed in the Shroud my whole life. And anyway, you should watch it. You should watch it.

[B]

I know nothing about the Shroud of Turkey, so I will definitely watch it.

[A]

Watch it and then we'll see.

[B]

Okay.

[A]

And then do you go to the auditorium with the smoke filled thing? And then we get to that second question.

[B]

Okay, here we go. Per words written, are your books more successful than mine?

[A]

Okay, hold on. Buy wherever by word. Yeah, for sure. Now, the thing is, if it had been copies sold total, then 100,000 books for sure. Okay. All right, I'll take that. But you contributed to that book.

[B]

I'll never get a word.

[A]

I won't get that book.

[B]

It was the most important word, the.

[A]

First word you said.

[B]

And then I got you an agent for that book, and you got a second advance on that book.

[A]

Well, for the rights.

[B]

Yeah, for the rights to your blank book.

[A]

Yeah, of course.

[B]

Unbelievable. Does standing and sitting methodically during Mass count as physical exercise for you?

[A]

Yeah, it does. Well, he forgot kneeling because he's a Protestant. He doesn't know about that. But it does also because I got my kids jumping on me the whole time. So that's like. Actually, that's like all the little muscles in there. All right.

[B]

Are you surprised You've lasted as Long as you have at this company.

[A]

Are you surprised? I'll give a. Okay. I'll give an answer. You got it wrong. Give me those points. It's not a lack of self confidence.

[B]

Yes.

[A]

I'm not surprised that I have lasted in any organization. I could have at least been the pizza boy or something. I didn't when the company was starting up. It's not that. I just. These things don't last. These things don't last.

[B]

Oh, you mean like the pomp itself? Yeah, yeah, they're fair.

[A]

And I thought. And so I was like, oh, whatever. That'd be a fun thing to help out on for like six months or a year, whatever that was, like, at this point, 47 years ago.

[B]

Yeah, exactly. How long have we been here? 10 years in real time. But, like, the planet's in interstellar. It's actually like 70 years in politics time.

[A]

That. It's amazing. Okay, now, Ben, it's time for the final round. The prompt will be read. We will both lock in our answers, then move our glasses to yes or no to see if we can read each other's minds. This round is worth double points. It could change everything. The score right now, Ben, this is unfortunate. I actually didn't think it was this bad. It's a one to three.

[B]

Oh, wow. Okay.

[A]

You're winning. Okay. So the way you do it. But I'm gonna put my glass here. This. Hold on. I'm gonna move these cards because all the books and all the merch that were hawking shamelessly is taken in. So I read the prompt. Then we each lock in how we would answer for ourselves.

[B]

Yes.

[A]

Then we move the other guy's glass to how we think the other guy would answer.

[B]

Okay.

[A]

If it were allowed by the Constitution, would you support a third Trump presidency in principle or in practice? I'm over complicating it. If it were allowed by the Constitution, would you support a.

[B]

If there had not been that amendment, if there. Would you be in favor of him running again? Okay, it's my own answer here. Okay. Okay.

[A]

Correct.

[B]

Wrong. Wrong.

[A]

I mean, good answer, but. Okay, so why? Why? Why? Yes.

[B]

So I actually think that, shockingly, Donald Trump is now the most rational person maybe in American politics. Like, truthfully, like, I actually think that, as you know, I'm a pessimist by nature.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

I think that we're at the end of something. And I think that Trump is holding back a flood tide of bad stuff.

[A]

Oh, interesting, right?

[B]

I think that Trump is a populist by appeal, but a pragmatist by nature.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

And so he's not ideologically a populist in the sense that he's just going to continue running that car directly into the ditch if the populism doesn't work. I could see a world where you get somebody very ideological after Trump on the right, either in a very populist direction, which I would oppose, or in a very anti populist direction, which would, you know, provide some political problems. Trump is a shockingly pragmatic figure.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

Who's able to unite many, many things in what he is doing. And I don't agree with everything he's doing. I've opposed his tariff wars, for example. I don't think they're a good idea. You know, I've criticized some of the way, like firing the BLS head. Like, I think there's stuff he does that I don't particularly love. But what I've said about him is that he's heterodox, but responsive. And so he will do a thing that he'll break a long established precedent. And at least half the time that's very good. Yeah, at least half the time that's really good. He's done this on foreign policy a lot and I've loved it. He's done it some on domestic policy, and I've really loved it as well. Right. Going after dei, for example, which was like an untouchable thing, breaking the trans momentum, like all that. And so the question of a third term or not for him is because I don't know who picks up the mantle of sort of pragmatism in a popular way after Trump on the right. And I think what comes after him on the left is gonna be egregiously awful.

[A]

Well, you know, I have. I came to the same answer. I have totally different reasoning. My reasoning is more in principle. I know this is unpopular in some quarters. I'm with Ronald Reagan. I hate the 22nd amendment.

[B]

I'm anti term limits as well, actually.

[A]

Yes, we have a term limit. It's called the ballot box.

[B]

Yes, I agree.

[A]

And I think the way the government is set up fairly consciously, actually, by our framers is to be a mixed regime where you have a monarchical element, an aristocratic element and a democratic element that kind of balance each other out. And FDR took that obviously to an extreme. That's how you get the 22nd Amendment. But so I like the idea of more continuity, of the executive kind of flexing itself so we're not just governed by judges or whatever. And I think Trump has Done a very, very good job. I'm a little more hopeful about the future of the Republican.

[B]

You're friendlier, sort of the populist, kind of without question.

[A]

And I do see an uptick in traditionalism in a good kind of. Populism's kind of a term of injury, but I think it's some good version of it.

[B]

It's more a tactic than a philosophy, to be fair.

[A]

Yes. And I think there are a lot of people in the administration who are great. Obviously, probably the heir apparent is the vice president. I'd be thrilled with that. Rubio is getting a lot of play right now as Secretary of state, and he has like 100 other jobs. But I think even there are other people who could run for president in the admin. In Congress. So it could go wrong. But I think there's good stuff. But I. I was waiting when Trump was reelected for a full Charles II moment. He shows up to Capitol Hill. Joint session. Gentlemen, go home. You are not needed here. We will govern our. But we still have that 22nd Amendment.

[B]

That's true.

[A]

That's life. Okay, you're up.

[B]

Morally speaking, is AI generated porn worse than real porn?

[A]

Hmm. Hmm. This is not. I don't have a confident answer on this. You're gonna say no. And I'll barely say no know, I'll barely say yeah.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

Why?

[B]

Because AI generated porn involves the sinfulness and evil of the person who is typing in the prompt but does not involve a second party who is prostituting herself. And real porn involves multiple parties being horrific in a myriad of. Of of ways that empty sacks of its meaning, content, joy.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

And yeah. So, I mean, it's A.I. first of all, I assume A.I. generated porn will mostly be just men using Grok imagine to fulfill their most perverse fantasies, but exactly their most perverse. So I think that you're thinking there's a limiting principle here for the ladies on OnlyFans, and I think you are wrong. So I think that if you pay with ladies on OnlyFans enough, they will do whatever is the most perverse, but.

[A]

They'Re at least limited by reality constraints of reality.

[B]

Are you not being raped by an alien?

[A]

Yeah. This is the issue for me. Is it? I might even change my answer. There are these medieval arguments which I'm sure you've seen, which are that, you know, like, masturbation is worse than rape or something, or that sodomy is worse than rape or something. And people are so shocked by that because they say, well, one's consensual One's not consensual. The reasoning behind those arguments is that they're both terrible, but one is contrary to nature, whereas one is not contrary to nature. And so that's an argument for another time. Leave it to the scholastics. But you can see this play out in the AI thing. What are people gonna use AI porn for that they can't get on OnlyFans or any of these other things? They're gonna go undress their classmates. You see these reports about this all the time. They're gonna go make porn of people they know. They're going to create porn of things that cannot exist in reality, that are so gonna melt their brains. There was an article just the other day in Wired magazine, a guy who got addicted to AI porn. And it was creating these creatures that are like, barely recognizably human. And so you say, well, is that more evil to so contradict reality, even if it doesn't involve immediately harming another person?

[B]

I mean, this is a good argument. I like this argument. I think that's a good argument. I think that you can make the case that. What was the wording of the question?

[A]

It's always poor.

[B]

Is it worse?

[A]

Except for that one time.

[B]

Is it. It. Is it worse? I mean, if we wanted to, like, really quibble.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

You could make the case that in the immediate ramifications, real porn is worse. In the societal ramifications, AI porn is worse.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

You could make that argument.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

Although I do think that removing the incentive structure whereby women get naked for money. Yeah. Which is what a porn will do is going to be a good thing. A lot of these young women who right now think that their. Their pathway to fame and fortune is by essentially being online prostitutes.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

The business goes away. Steals their jobs.

[A]

And the crazy thing about it, maybe.

[B]

The thing they can actually offer to people in real life would be like, marriage.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

Like actual. Like real physical sexual activity with another human being involved in a deeper relationship.

[A]

Like all the best parts of what you are simulating on OnlyFans. You can do that in a way that will be edifying and lead you to happiness.

[B]

Right.

[A]

And flourishing.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

Yeah. Maybe we're.

[B]

Such sexism. I don't know.

[A]

It's awful. It's terrible. Yeah. It's just one last point on the OnlyFans thing. They do it because they think they're gonna make millions of dollars. Cause one of them ever made millions of dollars. It's like every Faustian bargain. You trade something valuable for something that's not that valuable. And you don't even get the thing that's not that valuable. That's the craziest part.

[B]

I mean, even the ones who make a lot of money have destroyed themselves.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

Destroyed themselves.

[A]

They usually lose the money, too.

[B]

Is the other thing that too.

[A]

But they destroy. Yeah. It's like there is no.

[B]

There's no life behind Bonnie Blue's eyes.

[A]

Yeah, it's horrible.

[B]

That lady is dead inside. Dead inside. And you can see. It's like. It's kind of horrifying.

[A]

Do not turn yourself into a human lublalus. What is that thing called?

[B]

Labubu.

[A]

Labuboo. Don't turn yourself into.

[B]

I love that you turn it into a Latin term.

[A]

Yes. Final score. That's a. Are you kidding me? Seven to one.

[B]

Wow. I got wrecked.

[A]

I got wrecked. That might be the. Is that the worst one ever? No, because at least I didn't go negative. I didn't go into the negative numbers. Right now. You need to go pre order. Mr. Ben Shapiro's new book, Lions and the True Story of America. See you next time on yes or no. These are questions that take cultures thousands of years to answer. During Answer the Call, I take questions from people just like you about their problems, opportunities, challenges, or when they simply need advice. How do I balance all of this? Grief, responsibility? How do you repair this kind of damage? My daughter, Michaela guides the conversations as we hopefully help people navigate their lives. Everyone has their own destiny. Everyone.