September 22, 2025 • 54 mins
Tonight on The Brian Crombie Hour, Brian interviews Beth Sturdevant about Charlie Kirk and a “firestorm” of vocal and aggressive comments her posts about him generated on her social media. She posted about Charlie Kirk and his reputation on social media and was surprised at friends that Un-friended her and the many positive but also many negative responses she received. She has historically been “progressive” but then she came out in support of Charlie Kirk. She wonders about our openness to different points of view.
Beth is a spiritual healer and master Reiki practitioner who, through navigating the adversities of her own life’s journey, and healing her inner warrior spirit, has found authentic purpose and joy in her life again, and made it her mission to help others do the same. Brian closes with his own thoughts on Charlie Kirk, his assassination, his positions and how he believes they need debate/discussion and to consider moderate positions.
Beth is a spiritual healer and master Reiki practitioner who, through navigating the adversities of her own life’s journey, and healing her inner warrior spirit, has found authentic purpose and joy in her life again, and made it her mission to help others do the same. Brian closes with his own thoughts on Charlie Kirk, his assassination, his positions and how he believes they need debate/discussion and to consider moderate positions.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
The views expressed in the following program are those of
the participants and do not necessarily reflect the views of
Saga nine sixty am or its management.
Speaker 2 (00:18):
Good evening, everyone, and welcome to the Bran Crombie Radio Wire.
So the assassination of Charlie Kirk has really created a
huge storm of comments on social media and probably you know,
around dinner tables and coffee pots and water coolers and
different coffee shops, et cetera, on both sides, if not,
(00:39):
frankly more than both sides of the issues. And an
individual who I've had the pleasure of interviewing a couple
times before, best urd of It from Ottawa, who is
a coach and and does a lot of things to
try to talk to people about, you know, finding their
inner inner self and their courageous in herself, has written
a couple of posts that are really quite interesting, has
(01:00):
created numerous different comments in response to her comments on
Facebook and social media about talking about this issue and
talking about this issue on both sides, and so I
thought it'd be really interesting to chat with Beth about
why she made this post and what some of the
responses have been and why she wanted to get involved
(01:21):
in something that some people think is political, some people
think is religious, some people think is racist, some people
think is you know, sort.
Speaker 3 (01:28):
Of obvious, Beth, why did you get involved in this
whole process?
Speaker 4 (01:31):
I honestly buy. And there's just a feeling that it
needs to happen. For myself, I have remained you know,
pretty quiet and my views. I read and see a
lot of people's opinions, and you know, in my practice
as a healer, I hold space for all perspectives, all opinions,
(01:54):
all walks of life, and that's fundamentally what I believe
everyone should do. However, this situation feels different in that
the conversation often tends to be one sided, or at
least there's more suppression. And I myself have not felt
(02:18):
comfortable or courageous enough in speaking up and speaking out
because of the the attacks and the labels and all
of the misunderstandings that happened oftentimes on social media, because
I mean, how can we really go into dialogue in
actual conversation on social media? And you know, people extract
(02:41):
things and misinterpret things, and their emotions are extremely high,
and so they might read what you say and filter
it through their emotions and then interpret it in a
different way. So it's a very volatile place, the World
Wide Web, and so I have been very cautious, but
it just doesn't feel right to be silent anymore.
Speaker 3 (03:02):
And so I want to, if I could, apologize for interrupting.
Speaker 2 (03:08):
But I want to quote, if I could, from your post,
because I think it puts what you're saying an interesting
perspective and people will get a good sense of what
you said, why you said it, and and some of
what I'm going to ask you about next, which is
what some of the reactions were.
Speaker 3 (03:22):
Quote.
Speaker 2 (03:23):
No good comes from talking about these things online, someone
recently said to me. And while fundamentally I agree with them,
and that social media is not a space for calm,
open minded, respectful discussions, in fact, it often does the
opposite and creating a false sense of security and our
abilities to fan the flames of discourse from the safety
of our screens. I do feel like it can be
(03:44):
an opportunity to help us gather information, listen objectively to
others opinions, and explore our thoughts in our own way.
So what you're saying is that sometimes it's certainly not
a place for calm, open minded respectful discussions, but you
want that opportunity to express your point of view and
see what people say.
Speaker 3 (04:04):
Is that the case?
Speaker 4 (04:06):
Yes? For me, what I enjoy is listening to what
the whys and hows of what people think. I use
that information to then kind of go into my own
spaces and into my own time and integrate that information
so that I can make my own opinions and you know,
formulate my own thoughts. But you know, in this in
(04:27):
this time and age where everything's so reactive and immediate,
we don't have a chance to really process our feelings
and our thoughts, and so we're very reactive, and social
media is an outlet for that reactivity. And so I think,
you know, being able to share your thoughts should be
(04:48):
welcomed without feeling like you're you're going to be attacked
or demonized for it. And interesting, excuse me, interestingly enough, Brian, I,
over the months and years, you know, read posts from
friends of things that I don't agree with, and you know,
(05:09):
thoughts and opinions and attacks on people political or socially
or whatever, and I never say anything, I never think
negatively about them. I really kind of listen to them
objectively and just allow them to have that space to
express themselves without imposing my thoughts in you know, smearing
(05:30):
what they're saying. But interestingly enough, I don't get that
same respect. So when I post for the first time
last night about something controversial like this, I mean the
the amount of friends that have unfriended me, the amount
of accusations I have, the amount of all of that
stuff usually from and I hate sides. I don't believe
(05:51):
in sides, one particular side of this equation. It's quite disappointing,
I have to say, because why why should I be
giving space and compassion and understanding for others if I
cannot receive the same in return?
Speaker 3 (06:09):
Why did people unfriend you?
Speaker 5 (06:12):
Because?
Speaker 4 (06:13):
Well, because now I'm the enemy, because now they assume
that my views are because now they assume I am
a right wing Republican, that I agree with everything. Charlie
says that now I'm a presser, now I'm racist. I mean,
you know, the list goes on. I mean, who knows why.
But now I've become a threat. And I used to
think like that back in the day. I was raised
(06:36):
in a very liberal arts family, and you know, you
start to kind of look at other people who don't
believe the same things that you do as threats, and
it just changes your perspective and you're just weary of them.
And so now I've become that for other people, and
(06:57):
so rather than questioning or trying to understand or reaching
out to me and having a conversation, it's just easier
to silence me.
Speaker 2 (07:08):
So it's interesting that you know, you've got on your
comments all points of view, And it's interesting that you know,
as I read through them, some people very critical of
of of the individual and and others very supportive. And
so you know, maybe they've the friend being unfriended you
(07:30):
after the fact. But there's lots of people that have
made those comments and uh, and have quoted other people
and have posted videos and uh and given you source material,
et cetera.
Speaker 3 (07:40):
So you did get some respectful replies.
Speaker 4 (07:46):
Absolutely, I did, Yeah, which is wonderful. I really was
welcoming in that post last night that I that I shared.
I was really looking for, you know, objective, I guess,
evidence of sorts that would help me to better understand
their perspectives as to why they feel Charlie Kirk is
a Nazi, why they're calling him a fascist, why they
(08:07):
think he's a racist. You know, all these things that
I myself haven't heard when I've listened to him speak,
and I have listened to him in many debates. I'm curious.
I want to know maybe there's things that I haven't
heard or perspectives that I haven't seen. And I appreciate.
You know, a lot of people have actually reached out
to me outside of social media to thank me for
(08:31):
having the courage to speak up to bring a voice
to this and also sharing my sentiments of fear in
doing so.
Speaker 2 (08:40):
So yeah, so what do you think about the people
that took a different point of view?
Speaker 5 (08:46):
And you know you said?
Speaker 2 (08:47):
One person said, I think watching the ended version of
the Cambridge debate is probably better than one in Kirk's channel.
This was not a thoughtful person seeking out conversation on
the issues of the day. He is a zealot that
is constantly talking over the people that he has debating
in rapid fire manner, et cetera, et cetera. How do
you feel about you know, this person gave you a
post that was extremely long and detailed in response to
(09:08):
your comments.
Speaker 4 (09:10):
I actually didn't see that that comment because there's so
many and you don't. Facebook doesn't always tell you in
so many comments. My response to that is, I mean,
maybe in one debate he's like that or a few,
but there's also there's also many other debates or conversations
he's had where other people speak over him and shout
at him, and he's extremely calm and gives them the
(09:33):
space and actually tells other people who are shouting and
trying to interrupt the conversation to give them space and
allow them to talk. So I mean, yeah, maybe he's
done that a couple of times. I don't know. But
should I judge somebody or judge you on your worst day,
in your worst moments in life and say that's who
you are forever. No, but I should at least be
open to listening and seeing different perspectives in different know
(10:01):
situations that might show you otherwise.
Speaker 2 (10:03):
Yeah, he someone else said the opposite. Every time I've
ever heard him speak or debate, he brought up fact, stats, data, literature, verbatim, scripture.
He generally spoke to everyone with kindness and open mind
and a courage to talk about difficult topics to talk about,
especially with people that had strong opinions. So you know,
it is interesting to me as I read through your
(10:24):
post and the comments that you got, you got what
you actually wanted, which was that sort of respectful debate
and different points of view from different people. Now, maybe
the people that that defriend unfriended you were more nasty
and those comments are gone, but you got both sides
(10:44):
of the both sides of the issue presented to you
on your comments, and I thought it was interesting reading through.
So you really do have friends, it would appear across
the political spectrum.
Speaker 4 (10:55):
Absolutely I do. And that's the kind of person I am.
Like I said, I'm extremely open minded. I I I
hold the space of love basically, and I don't judge
people for their thoughts, whether I agree with them or not.
I really appreciate understanding how things come into how people,
(11:19):
you know, form their beliefs, and oftentimes we don't even
understand why we believe what we believe. So talking about
them and talking through them and having this, you know,
the safe space to explore our thoughts really allows us
to sometimes kind of bring air to our differences and
(11:39):
help us see with clearer eyes. And that's what you know. Obviously,
I'm started to do that on Facebook with my post
which is wonderful, because I do not have patience for
people who are vicious and attack others, even people I'm
(12:00):
opposed to ethically. But yeah, so I think it was good.
And it is a scary place to be in, for sure,
but it feels right to be to be going down
this path and at least talking openly.
Speaker 2 (12:18):
I I agree with you, and I encourage you and
encourage others to have these conversations because I think it
is a very difficult situation that that, particularly the United
States is, but I think in Canada as well, because
we've become so polarized and living in echo chambers of
only people that believe what we believe and think the
(12:39):
way we think.
Speaker 5 (12:41):
And and I think that as lots of.
Speaker 2 (12:42):
People have talked about, these algorithms and social media tend
to give us posts that are are are self fulfilling
our current belief system and and accentuating it and and
and adding to it, rather than necessarily the opposite point
of view. And so I think the posts like yours
are helpful where you're actually asking for information. And I
(13:04):
did find it interesting reading through some of the comments
that we're really expressing very different points of view and
opposite points of view, but doing so in respectful is
I think the right word. But it's also just a
sort of a factual representation of what that person believes
in them and what they got out of listening to
(13:26):
the individual. And then you quote Bill Maher and you
say what he said is too many people think that
to prove you wrong is to eliminate you all together.
Speaker 5 (13:36):
And I think that is part of the problem today
is that too many of us.
Speaker 2 (13:41):
Are so wedded to our beliefs that we almost have
to destroy the other person, the other side of you,
rather than just sort of.
Speaker 5 (13:52):
Listen to it.
Speaker 2 (13:53):
We don't have to agree to it, but listening to
it is beneficial.
Speaker 6 (13:58):
It's true.
Speaker 4 (13:58):
Absolutely. I said to somebody, I said, you don't need
to mourn or agree with Charlie Kirk or even anybody
that you have opposing views with, but you do need
to hold space and show grace to the people who do.
That's the problem is that we lose all humanity in
(14:19):
our ability to expect or accept or should say that
other people don't think and believe what we do. And
that's okay. Where it becomes a problem is when we
take our beliefs and now we impose it onto others.
And that's difficult because we live in a very complex
society where we all share space and we all have
(14:40):
to you know, live together. And it's not a simple
black and white situation. But you know, if I say
I believe this, and now you know, Brian, now you
need to believe that, and you don't believe it, well,
therefore I'm going to impose that on you, and I'm
going to take away your rights and I'm going to
like that's where really starts become extremely problem problematic, And
(15:02):
I don't really know what the answer is, to be honest.
Speaker 2 (15:05):
Well, I think it is a posts like yours that
are welcoming of different points of view and encouraging people
to have a discussion. So let's take a break for
some messages and then I'm going to ask you a
couple of questions and see how you respond and see
if we can have a respectful debate discussion about some
of these issues. Stay with us, everyone back in two
(15:25):
minutes with the best start of it from Ottawa, who
is a coach and a healer. That really is all
about openness and and being authentic and finding your inner
confidence and your inner warrior.
Speaker 5 (15:39):
I think is what you've called some of.
Speaker 2 (15:41):
Your your the courses that you that you provide and
and I think you've described yourself as being progressive in
a lot of things historically and now influenced by Charlie
cook Kirk and some of his statements. And so it'll
be an interesting discussion. Stay with us, everyone back in two.
Speaker 7 (15:58):
Minutes stream us live at SAGA nine sixty am dot C.
Speaker 6 (16:07):
A Welcome back everyone to the Brian Cromby Radio R.
I've got Beth Sturt of It with us today.
Speaker 3 (16:22):
And Beth has made a couple of posts.
Speaker 2 (16:23):
In the last couple of days about the assassination of Charlie
Kirk and wondering about his policies and why some people
are so positive toward.
Speaker 6 (16:31):
Charlie Kirk and why other people are so negative to
Charlie Kirk.
Speaker 2 (16:35):
And I think you know, off the bat, I should
say that, you know, I think that you know, violence
of any kind, but particularly assassination murder, is completely inappropriate.
Speaker 4 (16:46):
Uh.
Speaker 2 (16:47):
And so I think that, you know, I think hopefully
everyone can agree to that. You know, you you talked
about mourning. I think that some people have called, uh,
the sort of the situation right that you should clearly
feel empathy for the victim's family, for the death of
anyone that's contributing to public discourse and their community in
(17:09):
every any way that they think is appropriate. At the
same time, you don't have to celebrate them if you
disagree with them. And so that there is a difference
between mourning or showing appropriate human empathy versus celebrating uh
and what what someone might say.
Speaker 5 (17:25):
So let's talk about some of the issues.
Speaker 2 (17:29):
A lot of the issues that that that that Charlie
Kirk talked about were in regards to the role of
females and uh. And he had what some people would
describe as a fairly traditional role view of the role
of females and that uh that you know, females should
obey their husband as his sort of he quotes Scripture
(17:50):
in that regard and uh.
Speaker 5 (17:52):
And and and and.
Speaker 2 (17:53):
Be more subservient and uh and and rear children, raised children.
Speaker 5 (18:00):
What do you think of that?
Speaker 4 (18:03):
Well, I mean, I understand given the fact that he
was such a devout Christian where his perspective comes from.
I mean, that makes sense why he would feel and
believe those things. As a sing I mean, I've been
a single mother for eighteen years, I've raised my two
boys on my own, and I have to say it
wasn't my choice. I was kind of thrown into that situation,
(18:24):
and being the independent and strong woman that I am,
I put my all into that and I did the
best I could with what I had. That being said,
I would not have chosen that life. And I do
not think that children should be raised in single parent households.
(18:44):
I do kind of seeing the way that society is
well children will say the way that children are becoming
more violent and we're dependent upon so you know, their
device is and there's a a lack of you know,
real solid parenting and commitment. I will say there's a
(19:05):
lack of commitment and dedication to family. That part of
me kind of I'll say, agrees with him. And I
know people are going to twist that, But what I
mean in that is that I really think it's important
to have that solid family foundation with a male role
model and a female role model that could be, you know,
(19:27):
in whatever context that could be. You know, I personally
believe that what we need is to come together as
a community right have it. Living in these separate homes
and these separate lives is not healthy for anybody, especially
our children. But you know, until we come back to
that system where we're all living in a community, in
(19:47):
a communal setting, where we start helping each other and
help raise their children, I think having some type of
a solid family. I mean, I personally would never want
lots of children. I am not subservient to anybody, but
I understand and I kind of agree that having somebody
at home taking care of the family, whether that's a man,
(20:10):
if that's what he actually wants, or a woman, I
think it would be healthy for our children and for
our families, and for society down the road. Yeah.
Speaker 2 (20:21):
So, you know, one side of the issue is that
he has a biblical attitude, a traditional values attitude, and
more historic attitude toward you know, the more traditional role
of females. Another point of view would be that he's racist.
Speaker 5 (20:38):
Not racist.
Speaker 2 (20:39):
I apologize that he's misogynistic and believes in sort of
male superiority. When does one become okay and the other
become inappropriate in your mind?
Speaker 4 (20:53):
Honestly, I can't really speak to his views on women
because I haven't really heard him speak other than his
views on having a wife and having lots of children
and continuing to to you know, have large families and
a wife that stays at home or puts at least
her family ahead of her career.
Speaker 3 (21:14):
Message.
Speaker 4 (21:14):
I don't really like titles, and I don't like the
title misogyny. I feel like that's it's a slippery slope.
I really do not agree with ident like titles and
labels and things like that. But you know, honestly, if
that's what he believes and his wife's okay with it,
and what harm does it do, and his children are
(21:36):
happy and they're happy, I don't really see a problem
with that, so long as they're not enforcing it on everybody.
Speaker 2 (21:42):
Well, I guess that's the issue is that, you know,
some people think he was trying to enforce it with
some of his policies on everyone. But it's interesting that,
you know, traditional values can be very positive to some people,
and other people can take a look at that same
And you know, I've interviewed people and you and I've
talked about this before. Some people think that women's liberation
may have taken things too far, and people that wanted
(22:03):
to to be feminine and feel feminine.
Speaker 5 (22:06):
And and and and have a.
Speaker 2 (22:08):
Life raising children felt that they were ostracized from society
and weren't allowed to have that kind of uh of
an opportunity, and and and and we're sad that that
opportunity was looked down upon. Uh uh they perceived by society,
and then other people think, no, you know, equality of opportunity, equality,
women's rights, equal uh uh, equal pay for equal value,
(22:31):
the Me Too movement, the sexual revolution, all that kind
of stuff was incredibly positive. Uh and uh and and
was way past the time that we should have achieved
all those things.
Speaker 5 (22:41):
So it's interesting.
Speaker 3 (22:42):
Okay, let's talk about another issue.
Speaker 2 (22:45):
He Chardie Kirk, from understand equated abortion with murder. And
again he uh he quoted Scripture in that regard. And
and you know that's certainly his attitude toward his own
family and his own people, but he wanted to enforce
that belief on the rest of society.
Speaker 3 (23:04):
Is that right or wrong?
Speaker 4 (23:09):
Well, I don't Again, I don't think you should have
forced it on anybody. However, Yeah, I mean, I do
not agree with his views on abortion, but I really
appreciate hearing them. I really appreciate hearing why he feels
what he does, and he makes some valid points. I
mean again, because he's such a Christian man. Of course
he's opposed to abortion, and in their views, you're killing
(23:33):
life your you know, life is at begins at conception,
So yeah, it's murder in my belief system. In the
shamanism that I've been trained in, the spirit doesn't enter
into the into the embryo until thirty days after conception,
So there's a little bit of wigger room in there, obviously.
But I've also heard him compare Charlie Kirk compare abortion
(23:56):
to at least the number of abortions per to the
number of deaths and the Holocaust, and people tend to
obviously because that's a very sensitive subject and tragic, tragic
period in human history. And he's not comparing it. He's
not saying it's it's worse than the Holocaust. He's just
(24:17):
saying the numbers are worse as far as the deaths,
according to the fact that in his views and biblical
understanding of abortion, you're killing wives. And so I can
understand his perspective, while I don't agree with it, because
I do feel like there is there are some circumstances
where sometimes abortions are warranted. It's a very hot debate
(24:41):
for sure, and something that I don't think people are
really going to ever agree on.
Speaker 2 (24:47):
I hope you're wrong. I hope that people will agree
on it eventually. And so I do think that you're
right that talking about it is critically important because I
think that some people, you know, how of one point
of view, and we'll only listen to that one point
of view, and other people have an extreme other point
of view, and we'll only you know, listen to that
extreme point of view. And you know, the best example
(25:09):
that I've heard is that, uh, the vast majority of
of right wing people in the United States that that
say that they that they are anti abortion, actually, on
numerous occasions would actually agree with abortion.
Speaker 5 (25:27):
And and they use the examples.
Speaker 2 (25:28):
Of of rape, particularly if they ever describe a rape
of your own daughter.
Speaker 6 (25:33):
Would you agree with abortion? Or incense? Not incense? Incest?
Speaker 5 (25:38):
I apologize?
Speaker 4 (25:39):
Uh?
Speaker 5 (25:40):
And uh.
Speaker 2 (25:41):
And you know, when it the death of the mother
is at risk and uh and often when it's very
early on in uh, in a pregnancy, and and you know,
you've talked about that. And then also people talk about,
you know, pregnancies that that end naturally and is that
death or is that just a pregnancy? That and did
with a miscarriage. And I had two children that that
(26:06):
were miscarried, and and you know, we were sad, but
we didn't treat it like it was a funeral and uh.
And there was not a birth certificate, and there wasn't
a death of a child in my mind and in
my religious belief. But were we sad, Yes, we were
very sad. And then on the other side of things
that that I think a lot of the polls have
(26:27):
suggested a lot of the studies and focus groups have
been done say the vast majority, if not almost all Democrats,
even if they say abortion should always be legal, wouldn't
feel terribly comfortable with.
Speaker 5 (26:39):
An abortion in the last trimester.
Speaker 3 (26:41):
And uh.
Speaker 2 (26:42):
And and so therefore, when we go to these extremes
of life begins at conception or life begins at at birth,
maybe those extremes aren't helpful. And maybe actually talking it
through and talking about the different points of view set
that you know what, maybe we'd come to some sort
(27:02):
of a agreement in the middle and or leave it
a little bit to women's right to choose or doctors
based on a doctor's advice or some combination thereof, particularly
if it's in the middle and realize that, as you
said a couple of minutes ago, it's money, it's something
that you know, really people should think about in their
own in their own circumstances and for what's right for them,
(27:26):
rather than imposing views on the rest of society.
Speaker 3 (27:29):
Let me raise another issue. Actually, let me do you
have a response to that.
Speaker 4 (27:34):
No, I agree with what you say, and yeah, I mean,
it would be lovely if the conversations about abortion brought
us into a more kind of common solution. But you know,
people who are you know, very Christian, are very Catholic
and believe in the tenets of the Bible. That's that's law, right,
(27:57):
So I think again, I think it comes down to
just showing grace and allowing people the space to make
decisions for themselves individually that's going to be best for
them in their lives because everybody's different and you know,
the circumstances are different as well, of course, So I
think conversation is wonderful always, but yeah, I certainly would
(28:21):
love if we could find a solution on that for sure.
Speaker 2 (28:24):
Let me raise another issue with you, racism. So Charlie
Kirk has been criticized by some of being racist. He
has has criticized affirmative action programs. He has criticized that
some people, including you know, one member of the US
Supreme Court, that he says, got their job only because
they weren't white.
Speaker 5 (28:46):
And he's been very.
Speaker 2 (28:48):
Critical of some of the sort of the d the
diversity equin inclusion rules and and other things in the
United States, particularly obviously that have helped what other people
would call marginalized communities and people of color and people
that have historically not had the opportunities that whites, white
(29:11):
people have had. Some people have called that racism, other
people have called it anti woke and reasonable.
Speaker 5 (29:19):
How do you feel about that.
Speaker 4 (29:20):
Oh, that is a yeah, that's a tough one because
it is such an emotional subject. For sure, I have
not heard anything that I feel that he said is racist,
but I'm not a Charlie Kirk expert, and I haven't
heard everything, so there might be. But what I have
heard him speak about is his views on DEI rite, diversity, equity,
and inclusion, and his belief that people should be hired
(29:44):
and treated on the merit of their abilities right, what
they're capable of, what they do, who they are, not
by what they are, and I agree with that, I
really do. And if you think about, like in a
symphony orchestra, when you audition for major symphony orchestra, all
of the auditions are behind screens. And while it's terrifying
(30:08):
because it is, you know, all they're doing is, you know,
nitpicking everything, right, I mean, this is the highest of
highest levels of playing, but it's to prevent the ability
to hire based on what they look like, who they are,
instead on how they play. And I do agree with that,
(30:32):
and I do agree with his views on that to
a certain degree as much as I know. But I
haven't heard him say much about racism. I have heard
and seen people speak about, you know, people of other
races talk about how inclusive he was towards them, how
he helped them, how he supported them, how he gave
(30:52):
them opportunities that they otherwise didn't have. So I mean,
and I also heard a clip of him and against
a very overtly, very i'll say, aggressive racist who was
arguing with Charlie and trying to defend his his views,
(31:14):
and Charlie was very opposed to what he was saying
and making very fair points as to well, how can
you be a Republican when there's people of color in
the Republican Party, how can you he was really challenging
this person. And I don't think somebody that's fundamentally racist
is going to do those things. You know, he might
(31:36):
have strong opinions in some areas, like in the DEI,
but it's not based on race. It's based on the
quality of the character of a person.
Speaker 2 (31:47):
He was also been criticized for being anti homosexual and
anti people that are are trans that are identifying as
a sex different than what they were born biologically. And again,
I think he uses Scripture as the justification for that
(32:07):
belief that homosexuality is a sin and wrong, and that
gay marriage is wrong, and that and that that trans
uh and and and accepting people that are going to
transition from one sex to another is wrong.
Speaker 3 (32:24):
How do you feel all about that?
Speaker 5 (32:25):
Is that appropriate or not well?
Speaker 4 (32:29):
Coming from his scripture and the Bible. I guess it
would be appropriate. However, I've also heard him speak to
you know, gays and lesbians and saying that you know,
they're people of children of God, and so he respects
and loves them too. He doesn't agree. He he believes
that a man and a woman, are you know, uh,
(32:53):
what should be in in a marriage and a Christian marriage.
But I've never heard him specifically say anything against any
gays in lesbian's and now the trans community. Yeah, he
questions their perspectives and their choices, but he also supports
what I really appreciated hearing him say specifically with this
(33:15):
one trans woman, was you know, kind of asking her,
you know, why are you doing this to your body
and just kind of giving her a platform to really
explore her reasons why and maybe instead of you know,
(33:35):
immediately coming to a decision or you know, the answers
that she normally gives, she's really started to kind of
dissect it and go into it a little bit, a
little bit more deeper with him. And so there was
a nice conversation and a nice dialogue, and it wasn't
oppressive in any way. It was really open and I
really appreciated hearing both of their perspectives inside. So, he
(33:57):
might have his opinions, but I don't. I don't think
that he's denying anybody the ability to be themselves. I
thought's what makes them happy.
Speaker 3 (34:07):
So this is an interesting conversation.
Speaker 2 (34:08):
I really appreciate you joining us and and talking about it,
and I think that your post was excellent and UH,
and it was wonderful reading some of the comments of
the different points of view. Probably one of the best
podcasts I ever heard of Charlie Kirk was when he
was on Governor Gavin Newsom's podcast Governor of California. One
(34:29):
was very progressive, may in fact be the Democratic nominee
for president and the upcoming next federal action assuming we
have one H in the United States and UH and
Charlie Kirk and UH. And the fact that the two
of them sat down for a long period of time
and UH and discussed a whole slew of very important
issues comparable to the way that we've discussed them today
(34:52):
and put forward their points of view, put forward their facts,
put forward their.
Speaker 5 (34:54):
Background, I think was really helpful. And then also.
Speaker 2 (34:59):
That you don't get a Newssen talked about how Charlie
Kirk had motivated his son to become Gavinussen's son, to
become more involved in politics and political discourse, even if
he disagreed with Charlie Kirk. I think is really helpful.
And that's one of the things that Charlie Kirk did
is that he he made people think, and I think
that's good.
Speaker 3 (35:20):
Whether you agree or disagree with him, I think that's good.
Speaker 2 (35:23):
I think one of the and I've been criticized for
this is I think one of the big mistakes that
Justin Trudeau, our former prime minister, made, is that he
didn't go meet with the Trucker convoy people in Ottawa.
And a lot of people thought the Trunker can convoy
people were wrong. And there's a you know, a case
in courts in Ottawa going on right now in regards
to whether what they were doing was legal or not.
(35:45):
But the polls said that fifteen percent of Canadians agreed
with their policies their point of view in regards to
vaccine mandates and mask mandates and things like that. And
fifteen percent is not a majority. Fifteen percent isn't everybody.
Fifteen percent you know, wouldn't get elected to the House
of Commons. You know, you know a huge amount of people.
(36:08):
But it's a couple of million people. And when a
couple of million people believe something, I think you should
sit down and listen to them and find out what
they're all about. And I think the fact that we
didn't listen to them and we didn't give them an
opportunity to speak, and we didn't give them representation in
the House of Commons.
Speaker 5 (36:25):
Were one of the reasons.
Speaker 2 (36:26):
Why they protested the way they did and had the
convoy that they did, or some people would call an occupation.
Speaker 6 (36:34):
And I think that's the.
Speaker 2 (36:36):
Key, is to listen to people. And some people have
criticized that he would, you know, take a very oppositional manner,
He would rapid fire answers, he would quote scriptures, he
wouldn't give people an answer a chance to answer.
Speaker 5 (36:48):
Well, maybe, but he.
Speaker 2 (36:50):
Did sit down with them and invited them to speak
and listened and all sides of view, and so I
think that he created discussion.
Speaker 5 (37:00):
And I think that's what we need more of.
Speaker 2 (37:02):
Is exactly the way you've described it, Frank, honest, open,
respectful discussion rather than treating the person as the enemy.
And one of the other examples I'll give you, I
think it was during the Great Recession back in two
thousand and eight, two thousand and nine, and we talked
about how all political parties got together and supported a
(37:27):
bill to support banks and fiscal stimulus, and they came
together from different points of view, and they said in Canada.
When we disagree, we're competitors, but we're not enemies. And
I think that's the key, is that we should compete
with ideas and debate and respectful discussion, but we shouldn't
(37:47):
be enemies. We should be like the two hockey teams
that fight like crazy when they're on the ice, but
when the game's over, they shake hands and you know what,
a month later they might be on the same team
for Team Canada or Team USA. And and so thinking
about us as competitors in public opinion or on the
(38:11):
field or on the rink and not enemies, I think
it's key and having that respectful discussion. And so Beth,
I really appreciate before we close, tell us all what
you do. You're a coach and a a healer and
you've got these sessions on uh, finding your inner warrior.
Speaker 5 (38:32):
What do you do?
Speaker 4 (38:34):
That's a good question. I kind of say. I'm I'm
an artist, right, so I work in the healing arts,
but I'm also cellist. So really in both cases it's
kind of harmonizing life, harmonizing you know, through my music,
but also harmonizing people. So what do I do as
a healer is it's basically therapy that gets into the
(38:57):
subconscious mind and finds out why people think and do
and believe the things they do, and so that we
can at least have conscious understanding and make better choices
for ourselves. So yeah, I'm trained in shamanism and spiritual healing,
and we call it energy medicine, so I kind of
(39:18):
use a combination of all of those when I'm working
with my clients. I do run a retreat for women
where I take them to the Adirondacks and we go
hiking and really give them that opportunity to kind of
push themselves physically. But then we also do some meditations
and we really have a great time as well. So
(39:41):
that's something I really enjoy doing. We'll probably do more.
Speaker 2 (39:44):
People want to check out your coaching or your retreats
or some of your courses.
Speaker 5 (39:49):
How do they best do that?
Speaker 4 (39:51):
They can look at my website Bethsturtivant dot com, and
I try to keep it as updated as I can,
but I'm not a huge fan of the internet.
Speaker 2 (40:02):
So Beth, I really thank you for coming on tonight,
and I thank you for your post, and I encourage
you to to keep on it even if you get
some people that unfriend you, and I hope people will
respectfully read the comments and your posts and and and
participate in the discussion, because I think that having the
(40:22):
discussion is the key.
Speaker 5 (40:24):
And and you know, if we're.
Speaker 2 (40:25):
Not going to listen to each other, and if we're
not gonna talk to each other, and if we're not
gonna seek to understand before we seek to be understood,
is that what was it one minute manager pitched at
one point.
Speaker 3 (40:38):
In time, how are we going to have a community.
Speaker 5 (40:41):
I think that that's the key. And uh, and so
I really appreciate I.
Speaker 3 (40:45):
Really appreciate the discussion.
Speaker 5 (40:47):
Thanks so much.
Speaker 4 (40:49):
Yeah, thanks for having me Brian, and for a welcome.
Speaker 2 (40:52):
We're going to take a final break and I'm gonna
come back with a couple of my own thoughts in
just two minutes.
Speaker 5 (40:57):
Stay with us, everyone back into Beth. Thank you so much.
Really appreciate it.
Speaker 1 (41:04):
No Radio, No Problem stream is live on SAGA ninety
sixty am dot C.
Speaker 2 (41:09):
A welcome back everyone to the Brian cremby rat R.
I thought that conversation with the best sort.
Speaker 6 (41:24):
Event about Charlie Kirk was it was really interesting.
Speaker 2 (41:30):
And I thought her post on Facebook that got comments
both pro and negative to her and to Charlie Kirk,
were generally respectful and detailed in their responses, and I
think that that's good. Obviously, she says that some people
made some negative comments and defriended her. I didn't see them,
and so I don't know about that, And that's a
(41:50):
real shame that some people reacted the way that they did.
Speaker 3 (41:56):
You know, when I was.
Speaker 6 (41:57):
Growing up, the best seminar room I was ever at.
Speaker 5 (42:00):
Was my dinner table.
Speaker 2 (42:02):
And I had, uh, three siblings that were all smart, articulate,
well educated, passionate, and we all had at different times
different points of view, and a mother and a father
who were similarly really interested in discussions, and we had
really healthy discussions every night. My eldest brother ended up
(42:22):
becoming a minister, my sister becoming a PhD in biology microbiology,
my brother becoming an engineer. I was a business person.
We all went in different ways from an occupational career standpoint,
and uh and and you know, different political sort of
(42:43):
not terribly diverse, but different political ways. And some of
us have shifted our political views and uh and and
we've also had some challenges in life and UH and
I think that UH you know, that makes for an
interesting discussion, and when we get together now, it's still
an interesting discussion amongst us all. I tried to have
(43:03):
a similar kind of attitude with the dinner table with
my own children and my wife at the time, and
I think that that was a really healthy discussion. And
Jim Pattison, who I used to work with, would invite
people to speak, and he thought that one of the
best ways to get the best point of view was
to give everyone an opportunity to speak for two minutes, unfettered, uninterrupted,
(43:26):
because very rarely do you have the chance to actually
stand up in front of a group and speak for
two minutes. And I learned a lot from Jim Pattison,
who really thought that not creating opposition, but inviting discussion
and debate was really helpful.
Speaker 3 (43:38):
And so I think Charlie Kirk did that.
Speaker 2 (43:41):
And you know, has he been criticized that sometimes he
was a little bit I rate or oppositional, or aggressive
or short in his answers. Maybe I don't know, But
as I mentioned with Beth, one of the best podcasts
I've listened to was a discussion between Governor Gavin Newsoen
of California and Charlie Kirk where Gavin Newson invited Charlie
(44:04):
Kirk on his podcast and they had a really good,
respectful discussion of a bunch of different issues. And they
didn't they didn't hold hold back. They really discussed and
and and uh and debated. And I thought that was
really interesting exchange of views. We need to do that
more often. And so I'm going to talk about a
couple of these issues that Charlie Kirk has talked about
(44:26):
at the risk of being criticized, but I think it's helpful.
And let me say at the at the top, I'm
more in the death of Charlie Kirk. I think that
he contributed to public discourse. I think he was an interesting,
uh individual And no one deserves to be murdered or.
Speaker 5 (44:42):
Assassinated and uh.
Speaker 2 (44:44):
And I think that you know, any family left without
a father or a mother.
Speaker 6 (44:50):
Is is a tragedy.
Speaker 2 (44:52):
And so I just think clearly, you know, no question
that that was wrong, absolutely wrong. And uh, an assassin,
nation murder of any type is wrong. But let's talk
about some of his issues, just for a couple of minutes.
Speaker 5 (45:06):
Gun control.
Speaker 2 (45:08):
Chartie Kirk made the comment that some gun deaths in
the United States are worth it to ensure the continued
existence of the Second Amendment to the US Constitution, which
is all about the right to bear arms. I disagree
with that completely. I've been a strong believer in gun registration,
if not gun control. I think that there's far too
many guns in Canada, let alone too many guns in
(45:30):
the United States. I don't think that hunters are the problem,
and I think that people should have the right to hunt,
and so I think that some of the gun control
that has limited hunting is completely wrong. But I think
that that air fifteens that you know, there are weapons
(45:51):
on Canadian streets that are completely inappropriate and need to
be and need to be controlled and banned and done
away with. I was the foreman of a jury trial,
a murder trial where a policeman shot his wife with
a rifle, and it was a harrowing experience for me
to be in the jury and listening for days on
(46:14):
end about the whole testimony of how even though he
was trained to protect his guns and his munitions, he
didn't do it, and he exposed it to his friend's
way too often, and.
Speaker 5 (46:29):
Then he got drunk and used them.
Speaker 2 (46:33):
And I thought that was wrong, so I disagree with
his position on gun control. On civil rights, he criticized
Martin Luther King Junior, calling Martin Luther King Junior awful
and not a good person, and that the Civil Rights
Act of nineteen sixty five that outlawed discrimination on the
basis of race, color, religion, sex, and national origin and
(46:56):
inhibited segregation was wrong. He said it was a huge
mistake that the United States passed the Civil Rights Act.
So I think the reality is that people actually are
in the middle of the extremes on this debate, and
if we realize that the vast majority of us really
are in the muddy middle, it would be a lot easier.
So I disagree with Charlie Kirk where there's never an
(47:19):
opportunity for, or a reason for or rationale for abortion,
and I certainly disagree with him that the state should
impose their views on everyone else. But at the same time,
I'm not one that says that any abortion up to
the line.
Speaker 3 (47:35):
Of birth should be allowed.
Speaker 2 (47:39):
I think there probably is some spot somewhere in the middle,
and whether it's the second trimester or the first trimester,
or somewhere in the middle, I don't know. I know
how I would personally believe, and I guess that's the
key in the end. I think it should be a
personal decision, and frankly, probably not including me. Probably the
mother and her physician should be the people that decide
(48:02):
what's right for them and for the potential life that's
inside of them. He's also talked about fertility collapse because
of abortion. I don't think that's because of abortion. I
think that's choice, and if it was an abortion, it
would be the sect themes, the.
Speaker 3 (48:23):
Pill, abstinence, et cetera.
Speaker 2 (48:27):
I think in every society around the world, when females
have become more educated, we become more city oriented, less
agriculturally oriented.
Speaker 5 (48:36):
You've seen the.
Speaker 2 (48:37):
Drop in fertility, and I think that that is therefore
choice and that's what people want. I think Israel is
another issue that needs to be thought about, and again
on this one.
Speaker 3 (48:51):
I think the vast majority of people actually.
Speaker 5 (48:56):
Are in the middle of this.
Speaker 2 (48:57):
I think that Israel has a right and a responsibility
to defend itself, and I think what happened on October seventh,
two years ago was unbelievable, disgusting. It was the worst
thing since the Holocaust that happened to the Jewish people,
and I think Israel had a right and a responsibility
(49:20):
to attack Hamas and defend itself. That said, at the
same time, I can believe that I think that the
current Israeli activities in Gaza have gone too far and
too many citizens have lost their life, innocent citizens. Do
(49:42):
I think that Hamas was using them as shields human shields, Yes,
and I think that's wrong. But I think at the
same time, too many innocent people have lost their lives.
So I think that the vast majority of people actually
can think two ways, not just supportive of Israel, as
Charlie Kirk was, but also very disappointed, if not disgusted
(50:06):
with the loss of life in Gaza. And then the
last one is conspiracy theories. And I think Charlie Kirk
was one of those people that was very anti vax
He called it the China China virus.
Speaker 5 (50:20):
I think he he.
Speaker 6 (50:22):
He equated vaccine mandates to apartheid. I think that was wrong.
I think that went way too far.
Speaker 5 (50:31):
Do I at.
Speaker 2 (50:32):
The same time think that some of the vaccine mandates,
some of the the prohibitions that were put in place,
some of the closures that were in place, went too far.
I do, and I've argued this on my show. I
think that when Mississaga closed parks, it was wrong, and
then I was corrected. It wasn't parks, it was the
parking lot of parks, but it.
Speaker 5 (50:51):
Had the same fact.
Speaker 2 (50:52):
And you know, later on we found out that the
best possible thing you could do is go for a
walk outside and so, and that the chance of catching
COVID outside was like next to nothing. I think that
to closing down schools to the extent that we did
and robbing young people that were, you know, obviously that's
susceptible to fatalities from COVID was wrong and it robbed
(51:14):
them of a developmental and critically developmental opportunity in high
school or university.
Speaker 5 (51:19):
And so I think that was wrong.
Speaker 2 (51:20):
And at the same time, I don't think we did
a good enough job with seniors' homes. So I think
we did too much with young people and not enough
with older people. And so again I think the reality
is somewhere in the middle. And so I guess when
I come out is I think what Charlie Kirk was
doing in talking and getting people engaged in discussion and
(51:42):
debates and motivating a whole bunch of people that may
not have even paid attention to the issues before was helpful.
And I think that the fact that he quoted scripture
was helpful. It makes people go back and read. And
you know, one of the favorite scenes I have from
the West Wing is when President Bartlett quote scripture back
to the to the to the TV personality that was
(52:07):
saying homosexuality was was against the Old Testament, and he
points out that a whole bunch of other things, like
holding up football and uh and and working on the Sabbath,
we're also against the Old Testament. So he uses a
very good humor to combat the point of view. And
so I think that that's good that I think there's
(52:27):
a lot of stuff in the New Testament that that
I believe very strongly in that disagrees with a lot
of the things that are in the Old Testament that
Charlie Kirk was quoting. And so I think to be
a good Christian one needs to read both.
Speaker 5 (52:40):
Books and think about it.
Speaker 2 (52:42):
And so I love the Jewish attitude of studying the
Talmud and and really studying things and thinking about things
and talking about things and discussing things before one comes
to a definitive point of view. Bottom line, it's very
sad that anyone was assassinated or murdered, and it's obviously
(53:05):
a tragedy that Charlie Kirk was assassinated. And I think,
while I don't want to celebrate his life, I do
want to remember him. I want to remember the role
he played in bringing forth debate and discussion. And I
think that the idea of going on college campuses or
going into the community and having respectful discussions and doing
(53:28):
that on social media and doing that on my radio
show and anywhere else that people can have good discussions
is critically important because that's the only way we're going
to have a good community and hopefully in the end
become less polarized and never be enemies but be friends
slash at times competitors, because I think we go better
(53:50):
if we have good discussions, We get better at our
points of view, we get better at playing soccer or
hockey or football or whatever it is if we've got
tough competitors. But then after we're shake hands, give him
a hug, say thanks for the good good game. Anyway,
that's a couple of thoughts from Brian Crombie on Charlie Kirk.
Speaker 3 (54:11):
I hope you don't think I've been.
Speaker 2 (54:13):
In reasonable because I don't think I have good it everybody.
I remind you all want everybody through Friday at six o'clock.
Speaker 5 (54:18):
At nine sixty AM, All the Best Get Me
Speaker 7 (54:25):
Stream us live at SAGA nine am dot CA.
The views expressed in the following program are those of
the participants and do not necessarily reflect the views of
Saga nine sixty am or its management.
Speaker 2 (00:18):
Good evening, everyone, and welcome to the Bran Crombie Radio Wire.
So the assassination of Charlie Kirk has really created a
huge storm of comments on social media and probably you know,
around dinner tables and coffee pots and water coolers and
different coffee shops, et cetera, on both sides, if not,
(00:39):
frankly more than both sides of the issues. And an
individual who I've had the pleasure of interviewing a couple
times before, best urd of It from Ottawa, who is
a coach and and does a lot of things to
try to talk to people about, you know, finding their
inner inner self and their courageous in herself, has written
a couple of posts that are really quite interesting, has
(01:00):
created numerous different comments in response to her comments on
Facebook and social media about talking about this issue and
talking about this issue on both sides, and so I
thought it'd be really interesting to chat with Beth about
why she made this post and what some of the
responses have been and why she wanted to get involved
(01:21):
in something that some people think is political, some people
think is religious, some people think is racist, some people
think is you know, sort.
Speaker 3 (01:28):
Of obvious, Beth, why did you get involved in this
whole process?
Speaker 4 (01:31):
I honestly buy. And there's just a feeling that it
needs to happen. For myself, I have remained you know,
pretty quiet and my views. I read and see a
lot of people's opinions, and you know, in my practice
as a healer, I hold space for all perspectives, all opinions,
(01:54):
all walks of life, and that's fundamentally what I believe
everyone should do. However, this situation feels different in that
the conversation often tends to be one sided, or at
least there's more suppression. And I myself have not felt
(02:18):
comfortable or courageous enough in speaking up and speaking out
because of the the attacks and the labels and all
of the misunderstandings that happened oftentimes on social media, because
I mean, how can we really go into dialogue in
actual conversation on social media? And you know, people extract
(02:41):
things and misinterpret things, and their emotions are extremely high,
and so they might read what you say and filter
it through their emotions and then interpret it in a
different way. So it's a very volatile place, the World
Wide Web, and so I have been very cautious, but
it just doesn't feel right to be silent anymore.
Speaker 3 (03:02):
And so I want to, if I could, apologize for interrupting.
Speaker 2 (03:08):
But I want to quote, if I could, from your post,
because I think it puts what you're saying an interesting
perspective and people will get a good sense of what
you said, why you said it, and and some of
what I'm going to ask you about next, which is
what some of the reactions were.
Speaker 3 (03:22):
Quote.
Speaker 2 (03:23):
No good comes from talking about these things online, someone
recently said to me. And while fundamentally I agree with them,
and that social media is not a space for calm,
open minded, respectful discussions, in fact, it often does the
opposite and creating a false sense of security and our
abilities to fan the flames of discourse from the safety
of our screens. I do feel like it can be
(03:44):
an opportunity to help us gather information, listen objectively to
others opinions, and explore our thoughts in our own way.
So what you're saying is that sometimes it's certainly not
a place for calm, open minded respectful discussions, but you
want that opportunity to express your point of view and
see what people say.
Speaker 3 (04:04):
Is that the case?
Speaker 4 (04:06):
Yes? For me, what I enjoy is listening to what
the whys and hows of what people think. I use
that information to then kind of go into my own
spaces and into my own time and integrate that information
so that I can make my own opinions and you know,
formulate my own thoughts. But you know, in this in
(04:27):
this time and age where everything's so reactive and immediate,
we don't have a chance to really process our feelings
and our thoughts, and so we're very reactive, and social
media is an outlet for that reactivity. And so I think,
you know, being able to share your thoughts should be
(04:48):
welcomed without feeling like you're you're going to be attacked
or demonized for it. And interesting, excuse me, interestingly enough, Brian, I,
over the months and years, you know, read posts from
friends of things that I don't agree with, and you know,
(05:09):
thoughts and opinions and attacks on people political or socially
or whatever, and I never say anything, I never think
negatively about them. I really kind of listen to them
objectively and just allow them to have that space to
express themselves without imposing my thoughts in you know, smearing
(05:30):
what they're saying. But interestingly enough, I don't get that
same respect. So when I post for the first time
last night about something controversial like this, I mean the
the amount of friends that have unfriended me, the amount
of accusations I have, the amount of all of that
stuff usually from and I hate sides. I don't believe
(05:51):
in sides, one particular side of this equation. It's quite disappointing,
I have to say, because why why should I be
giving space and compassion and understanding for others if I
cannot receive the same in return?
Speaker 3 (06:09):
Why did people unfriend you?
Speaker 5 (06:12):
Because?
Speaker 4 (06:13):
Well, because now I'm the enemy, because now they assume
that my views are because now they assume I am
a right wing Republican, that I agree with everything. Charlie
says that now I'm a presser, now I'm racist. I mean,
you know, the list goes on. I mean, who knows why.
But now I've become a threat. And I used to
think like that back in the day. I was raised
(06:36):
in a very liberal arts family, and you know, you
start to kind of look at other people who don't
believe the same things that you do as threats, and
it just changes your perspective and you're just weary of them.
And so now I've become that for other people, and
(06:57):
so rather than questioning or trying to understand or reaching
out to me and having a conversation, it's just easier
to silence me.
Speaker 2 (07:08):
So it's interesting that you know, you've got on your
comments all points of view, And it's interesting that you know,
as I read through them, some people very critical of
of of the individual and and others very supportive. And
so you know, maybe they've the friend being unfriended you
(07:30):
after the fact. But there's lots of people that have
made those comments and uh, and have quoted other people
and have posted videos and uh and given you source material,
et cetera.
Speaker 3 (07:40):
So you did get some respectful replies.
Speaker 4 (07:46):
Absolutely, I did, Yeah, which is wonderful. I really was
welcoming in that post last night that I that I shared.
I was really looking for, you know, objective, I guess,
evidence of sorts that would help me to better understand
their perspectives as to why they feel Charlie Kirk is
a Nazi, why they're calling him a fascist, why they
(08:07):
think he's a racist. You know, all these things that
I myself haven't heard when I've listened to him speak,
and I have listened to him in many debates. I'm curious.
I want to know maybe there's things that I haven't
heard or perspectives that I haven't seen. And I appreciate.
You know, a lot of people have actually reached out
to me outside of social media to thank me for
(08:31):
having the courage to speak up to bring a voice
to this and also sharing my sentiments of fear in
doing so.
Speaker 2 (08:40):
So yeah, so what do you think about the people
that took a different point of view?
Speaker 5 (08:46):
And you know you said?
Speaker 2 (08:47):
One person said, I think watching the ended version of
the Cambridge debate is probably better than one in Kirk's channel.
This was not a thoughtful person seeking out conversation on
the issues of the day. He is a zealot that
is constantly talking over the people that he has debating
in rapid fire manner, et cetera, et cetera. How do
you feel about you know, this person gave you a
post that was extremely long and detailed in response to
(09:08):
your comments.
Speaker 4 (09:10):
I actually didn't see that that comment because there's so
many and you don't. Facebook doesn't always tell you in
so many comments. My response to that is, I mean,
maybe in one debate he's like that or a few,
but there's also there's also many other debates or conversations
he's had where other people speak over him and shout
at him, and he's extremely calm and gives them the
(09:33):
space and actually tells other people who are shouting and
trying to interrupt the conversation to give them space and
allow them to talk. So I mean, yeah, maybe he's
done that a couple of times. I don't know. But
should I judge somebody or judge you on your worst day,
in your worst moments in life and say that's who
you are forever. No, but I should at least be
open to listening and seeing different perspectives in different know
(10:01):
situations that might show you otherwise.
Speaker 2 (10:03):
Yeah, he someone else said the opposite. Every time I've
ever heard him speak or debate, he brought up fact, stats, data, literature, verbatim, scripture.
He generally spoke to everyone with kindness and open mind
and a courage to talk about difficult topics to talk about,
especially with people that had strong opinions. So you know,
it is interesting to me as I read through your
(10:24):
post and the comments that you got, you got what
you actually wanted, which was that sort of respectful debate
and different points of view from different people. Now, maybe
the people that that defriend unfriended you were more nasty
and those comments are gone, but you got both sides
(10:44):
of the both sides of the issue presented to you
on your comments, and I thought it was interesting reading through.
So you really do have friends, it would appear across
the political spectrum.
Speaker 4 (10:55):
Absolutely I do. And that's the kind of person I am.
Like I said, I'm extremely open minded. I I I
hold the space of love basically, and I don't judge
people for their thoughts, whether I agree with them or not.
I really appreciate understanding how things come into how people,
(11:19):
you know, form their beliefs, and oftentimes we don't even
understand why we believe what we believe. So talking about
them and talking through them and having this, you know,
the safe space to explore our thoughts really allows us
to sometimes kind of bring air to our differences and
(11:39):
help us see with clearer eyes. And that's what you know. Obviously,
I'm started to do that on Facebook with my post
which is wonderful, because I do not have patience for
people who are vicious and attack others, even people I'm
(12:00):
opposed to ethically. But yeah, so I think it was good.
And it is a scary place to be in, for sure,
but it feels right to be to be going down
this path and at least talking openly.
Speaker 2 (12:18):
I I agree with you, and I encourage you and
encourage others to have these conversations because I think it
is a very difficult situation that that, particularly the United
States is, but I think in Canada as well, because
we've become so polarized and living in echo chambers of
only people that believe what we believe and think the
(12:39):
way we think.
Speaker 5 (12:41):
And and I think that as lots of.
Speaker 2 (12:42):
People have talked about, these algorithms and social media tend
to give us posts that are are are self fulfilling
our current belief system and and accentuating it and and
and adding to it, rather than necessarily the opposite point
of view. And so I think the posts like yours
are helpful where you're actually asking for information. And I
(13:04):
did find it interesting reading through some of the comments
that we're really expressing very different points of view and
opposite points of view, but doing so in respectful is
I think the right word. But it's also just a
sort of a factual representation of what that person believes
in them and what they got out of listening to
(13:26):
the individual. And then you quote Bill Maher and you
say what he said is too many people think that
to prove you wrong is to eliminate you all together.
Speaker 5 (13:36):
And I think that is part of the problem today
is that too many of us.
Speaker 2 (13:41):
Are so wedded to our beliefs that we almost have
to destroy the other person, the other side of you,
rather than just sort of.
Speaker 5 (13:52):
Listen to it.
Speaker 2 (13:53):
We don't have to agree to it, but listening to
it is beneficial.
Speaker 6 (13:58):
It's true.
Speaker 4 (13:58):
Absolutely. I said to somebody, I said, you don't need
to mourn or agree with Charlie Kirk or even anybody
that you have opposing views with, but you do need
to hold space and show grace to the people who do.
That's the problem is that we lose all humanity in
(14:19):
our ability to expect or accept or should say that
other people don't think and believe what we do. And
that's okay. Where it becomes a problem is when we
take our beliefs and now we impose it onto others.
And that's difficult because we live in a very complex
society where we all share space and we all have
(14:40):
to you know, live together. And it's not a simple
black and white situation. But you know, if I say
I believe this, and now you know, Brian, now you
need to believe that, and you don't believe it, well,
therefore I'm going to impose that on you, and I'm
going to take away your rights and I'm going to
like that's where really starts become extremely problem problematic, And
(15:02):
I don't really know what the answer is, to be honest.
Speaker 2 (15:05):
Well, I think it is a posts like yours that
are welcoming of different points of view and encouraging people
to have a discussion. So let's take a break for
some messages and then I'm going to ask you a
couple of questions and see how you respond and see
if we can have a respectful debate discussion about some
of these issues. Stay with us, everyone back in two
(15:25):
minutes with the best start of it from Ottawa, who
is a coach and a healer. That really is all
about openness and and being authentic and finding your inner
confidence and your inner warrior.
Speaker 5 (15:39):
I think is what you've called some of.
Speaker 2 (15:41):
Your your the courses that you that you provide and
and I think you've described yourself as being progressive in
a lot of things historically and now influenced by Charlie
cook Kirk and some of his statements. And so it'll
be an interesting discussion. Stay with us, everyone back in two.
Speaker 7 (15:58):
Minutes stream us live at SAGA nine sixty am dot C.
Speaker 6 (16:07):
A Welcome back everyone to the Brian Cromby Radio R.
I've got Beth Sturt of It with us today.
Speaker 3 (16:22):
And Beth has made a couple of posts.
Speaker 2 (16:23):
In the last couple of days about the assassination of Charlie
Kirk and wondering about his policies and why some people
are so positive toward.
Speaker 6 (16:31):
Charlie Kirk and why other people are so negative to
Charlie Kirk.
Speaker 2 (16:35):
And I think you know, off the bat, I should
say that, you know, I think that you know, violence
of any kind, but particularly assassination murder, is completely inappropriate.
Speaker 4 (16:46):
Uh.
Speaker 2 (16:47):
And so I think that, you know, I think hopefully
everyone can agree to that. You know, you you talked
about mourning. I think that some people have called, uh,
the sort of the situation right that you should clearly
feel empathy for the victim's family, for the death of
anyone that's contributing to public discourse and their community in
(17:09):
every any way that they think is appropriate. At the
same time, you don't have to celebrate them if you
disagree with them. And so that there is a difference
between mourning or showing appropriate human empathy versus celebrating uh
and what what someone might say.
Speaker 5 (17:25):
So let's talk about some of the issues.
Speaker 2 (17:29):
A lot of the issues that that that that Charlie
Kirk talked about were in regards to the role of
females and uh. And he had what some people would
describe as a fairly traditional role view of the role
of females and that uh that you know, females should
obey their husband as his sort of he quotes Scripture
(17:50):
in that regard and uh.
Speaker 5 (17:52):
And and and and.
Speaker 2 (17:53):
Be more subservient and uh and and rear children, raised children.
Speaker 5 (18:00):
What do you think of that?
Speaker 4 (18:03):
Well, I mean, I understand given the fact that he
was such a devout Christian where his perspective comes from.
I mean, that makes sense why he would feel and
believe those things. As a sing I mean, I've been
a single mother for eighteen years, I've raised my two
boys on my own, and I have to say it
wasn't my choice. I was kind of thrown into that situation,
(18:24):
and being the independent and strong woman that I am,
I put my all into that and I did the
best I could with what I had. That being said,
I would not have chosen that life. And I do
not think that children should be raised in single parent households.
(18:44):
I do kind of seeing the way that society is
well children will say the way that children are becoming
more violent and we're dependent upon so you know, their
device is and there's a a lack of you know,
real solid parenting and commitment. I will say there's a
(19:05):
lack of commitment and dedication to family. That part of
me kind of I'll say, agrees with him. And I
know people are going to twist that, But what I
mean in that is that I really think it's important
to have that solid family foundation with a male role
model and a female role model that could be, you know,
(19:27):
in whatever context that could be. You know, I personally
believe that what we need is to come together as
a community right have it. Living in these separate homes
and these separate lives is not healthy for anybody, especially
our children. But you know, until we come back to
that system where we're all living in a community, in
(19:47):
a communal setting, where we start helping each other and
help raise their children, I think having some type of
a solid family. I mean, I personally would never want
lots of children. I am not subservient to anybody, but
I understand and I kind of agree that having somebody
at home taking care of the family, whether that's a man,
(20:10):
if that's what he actually wants, or a woman, I
think it would be healthy for our children and for
our families, and for society down the road. Yeah.
Speaker 2 (20:21):
So, you know, one side of the issue is that
he has a biblical attitude, a traditional values attitude, and
more historic attitude toward you know, the more traditional role
of females. Another point of view would be that he's racist.
Speaker 5 (20:38):
Not racist.
Speaker 2 (20:39):
I apologize that he's misogynistic and believes in sort of
male superiority. When does one become okay and the other
become inappropriate in your mind?
Speaker 4 (20:53):
Honestly, I can't really speak to his views on women
because I haven't really heard him speak other than his
views on having a wife and having lots of children
and continuing to to you know, have large families and
a wife that stays at home or puts at least
her family ahead of her career.
Speaker 3 (21:14):
Message.
Speaker 4 (21:14):
I don't really like titles, and I don't like the
title misogyny. I feel like that's it's a slippery slope.
I really do not agree with ident like titles and
labels and things like that. But you know, honestly, if
that's what he believes and his wife's okay with it,
and what harm does it do, and his children are
(21:36):
happy and they're happy, I don't really see a problem
with that, so long as they're not enforcing it on everybody.
Speaker 2 (21:42):
Well, I guess that's the issue is that, you know,
some people think he was trying to enforce it with
some of his policies on everyone. But it's interesting that,
you know, traditional values can be very positive to some people,
and other people can take a look at that same
And you know, I've interviewed people and you and I've
talked about this before. Some people think that women's liberation
may have taken things too far, and people that wanted
(22:03):
to to be feminine and feel feminine.
Speaker 5 (22:06):
And and and and have a.
Speaker 2 (22:08):
Life raising children felt that they were ostracized from society
and weren't allowed to have that kind of uh of
an opportunity, and and and and we're sad that that
opportunity was looked down upon. Uh uh they perceived by society,
and then other people think, no, you know, equality of opportunity, equality,
women's rights, equal uh uh, equal pay for equal value,
(22:31):
the Me Too movement, the sexual revolution, all that kind
of stuff was incredibly positive. Uh and uh and and
was way past the time that we should have achieved
all those things.
Speaker 5 (22:41):
So it's interesting.
Speaker 3 (22:42):
Okay, let's talk about another issue.
Speaker 2 (22:45):
He Chardie Kirk, from understand equated abortion with murder. And
again he uh he quoted Scripture in that regard. And
and you know that's certainly his attitude toward his own
family and his own people, but he wanted to enforce
that belief on the rest of society.
Speaker 3 (23:04):
Is that right or wrong?
Speaker 4 (23:09):
Well, I don't Again, I don't think you should have
forced it on anybody. However, Yeah, I mean, I do
not agree with his views on abortion, but I really
appreciate hearing them. I really appreciate hearing why he feels
what he does, and he makes some valid points. I
mean again, because he's such a Christian man. Of course
he's opposed to abortion, and in their views, you're killing
(23:33):
life your you know, life is at begins at conception,
So yeah, it's murder in my belief system. In the
shamanism that I've been trained in, the spirit doesn't enter
into the into the embryo until thirty days after conception,
So there's a little bit of wigger room in there, obviously.
But I've also heard him compare Charlie Kirk compare abortion
(23:56):
to at least the number of abortions per to the
number of deaths and the Holocaust, and people tend to
obviously because that's a very sensitive subject and tragic, tragic
period in human history. And he's not comparing it. He's
not saying it's it's worse than the Holocaust. He's just
(24:17):
saying the numbers are worse as far as the deaths,
according to the fact that in his views and biblical
understanding of abortion, you're killing wives. And so I can
understand his perspective, while I don't agree with it, because
I do feel like there is there are some circumstances
where sometimes abortions are warranted. It's a very hot debate
(24:41):
for sure, and something that I don't think people are
really going to ever agree on.
Speaker 2 (24:47):
I hope you're wrong. I hope that people will agree
on it eventually. And so I do think that you're
right that talking about it is critically important because I
think that some people, you know, how of one point
of view, and we'll only listen to that one point
of view, and other people have an extreme other point
of view, and we'll only you know, listen to that
extreme point of view. And you know, the best example
(25:09):
that I've heard is that, uh, the vast majority of
of right wing people in the United States that that
say that they that they are anti abortion, actually, on
numerous occasions would actually agree with abortion.
Speaker 5 (25:27):
And and they use the examples.
Speaker 2 (25:28):
Of of rape, particularly if they ever describe a rape
of your own daughter.
Speaker 6 (25:33):
Would you agree with abortion? Or incense? Not incense? Incest?
Speaker 5 (25:38):
I apologize?
Speaker 4 (25:39):
Uh?
Speaker 5 (25:40):
And uh.
Speaker 2 (25:41):
And you know, when it the death of the mother
is at risk and uh and often when it's very
early on in uh, in a pregnancy, and and you know,
you've talked about that. And then also people talk about,
you know, pregnancies that that end naturally and is that
death or is that just a pregnancy? That and did
with a miscarriage. And I had two children that that
(26:06):
were miscarried, and and you know, we were sad, but
we didn't treat it like it was a funeral and uh.
And there was not a birth certificate, and there wasn't
a death of a child in my mind and in
my religious belief. But were we sad, Yes, we were
very sad. And then on the other side of things
that that I think a lot of the polls have
(26:27):
suggested a lot of the studies and focus groups have
been done say the vast majority, if not almost all Democrats,
even if they say abortion should always be legal, wouldn't
feel terribly comfortable with.
Speaker 5 (26:39):
An abortion in the last trimester.
Speaker 3 (26:41):
And uh.
Speaker 2 (26:42):
And and so therefore, when we go to these extremes
of life begins at conception or life begins at at birth,
maybe those extremes aren't helpful. And maybe actually talking it
through and talking about the different points of view set
that you know what, maybe we'd come to some sort
(27:02):
of a agreement in the middle and or leave it
a little bit to women's right to choose or doctors
based on a doctor's advice or some combination thereof, particularly
if it's in the middle and realize that, as you
said a couple of minutes ago, it's money, it's something
that you know, really people should think about in their
own in their own circumstances and for what's right for them,
(27:26):
rather than imposing views on the rest of society.
Speaker 3 (27:29):
Let me raise another issue. Actually, let me do you
have a response to that.
Speaker 4 (27:34):
No, I agree with what you say, and yeah, I mean,
it would be lovely if the conversations about abortion brought
us into a more kind of common solution. But you know,
people who are you know, very Christian, are very Catholic
and believe in the tenets of the Bible. That's that's law, right,
(27:57):
So I think again, I think it comes down to
just showing grace and allowing people the space to make
decisions for themselves individually that's going to be best for
them in their lives because everybody's different and you know,
the circumstances are different as well, of course, So I
think conversation is wonderful always, but yeah, I certainly would
(28:21):
love if we could find a solution on that for sure.
Speaker 2 (28:24):
Let me raise another issue with you, racism. So Charlie
Kirk has been criticized by some of being racist. He
has has criticized affirmative action programs. He has criticized that
some people, including you know, one member of the US
Supreme Court, that he says, got their job only because
they weren't white.
Speaker 5 (28:46):
And he's been very.
Speaker 2 (28:48):
Critical of some of the sort of the d the
diversity equin inclusion rules and and other things in the
United States, particularly obviously that have helped what other people
would call marginalized communities and people of color and people
that have historically not had the opportunities that whites, white
(29:11):
people have had. Some people have called that racism, other
people have called it anti woke and reasonable.
Speaker 5 (29:19):
How do you feel about that.
Speaker 4 (29:20):
Oh, that is a yeah, that's a tough one because
it is such an emotional subject. For sure, I have
not heard anything that I feel that he said is racist,
but I'm not a Charlie Kirk expert, and I haven't
heard everything, so there might be. But what I have
heard him speak about is his views on DEI rite, diversity, equity,
and inclusion, and his belief that people should be hired
(29:44):
and treated on the merit of their abilities right, what
they're capable of, what they do, who they are, not
by what they are, and I agree with that, I
really do. And if you think about, like in a
symphony orchestra, when you audition for major symphony orchestra, all
of the auditions are behind screens. And while it's terrifying
(30:08):
because it is, you know, all they're doing is, you know,
nitpicking everything, right, I mean, this is the highest of
highest levels of playing, but it's to prevent the ability
to hire based on what they look like, who they are,
instead on how they play. And I do agree with that,
(30:32):
and I do agree with his views on that to
a certain degree as much as I know. But I
haven't heard him say much about racism. I have heard
and seen people speak about, you know, people of other
races talk about how inclusive he was towards them, how
he helped them, how he supported them, how he gave
(30:52):
them opportunities that they otherwise didn't have. So I mean,
and I also heard a clip of him and against
a very overtly, very i'll say, aggressive racist who was
arguing with Charlie and trying to defend his his views,
(31:14):
and Charlie was very opposed to what he was saying
and making very fair points as to well, how can
you be a Republican when there's people of color in
the Republican Party, how can you he was really challenging
this person. And I don't think somebody that's fundamentally racist
is going to do those things. You know, he might
(31:36):
have strong opinions in some areas, like in the DEI,
but it's not based on race. It's based on the
quality of the character of a person.
Speaker 2 (31:47):
He was also been criticized for being anti homosexual and
anti people that are are trans that are identifying as
a sex different than what they were born biologically. And again,
I think he uses Scripture as the justification for that
(32:07):
belief that homosexuality is a sin and wrong, and that
gay marriage is wrong, and that and that that trans
uh and and and accepting people that are going to
transition from one sex to another is wrong.
Speaker 3 (32:24):
How do you feel all about that?
Speaker 5 (32:25):
Is that appropriate or not well?
Speaker 4 (32:29):
Coming from his scripture and the Bible. I guess it
would be appropriate. However, I've also heard him speak to
you know, gays and lesbians and saying that you know,
they're people of children of God, and so he respects
and loves them too. He doesn't agree. He he believes
that a man and a woman, are you know, uh,
(32:53):
what should be in in a marriage and a Christian marriage.
But I've never heard him specifically say anything against any
gays in lesbian's and now the trans community. Yeah, he
questions their perspectives and their choices, but he also supports
what I really appreciated hearing him say specifically with this
(33:15):
one trans woman, was you know, kind of asking her,
you know, why are you doing this to your body
and just kind of giving her a platform to really
explore her reasons why and maybe instead of you know,
(33:35):
immediately coming to a decision or you know, the answers
that she normally gives, she's really started to kind of
dissect it and go into it a little bit, a
little bit more deeper with him. And so there was
a nice conversation and a nice dialogue, and it wasn't
oppressive in any way. It was really open and I
really appreciated hearing both of their perspectives inside. So, he
(33:57):
might have his opinions, but I don't. I don't think
that he's denying anybody the ability to be themselves. I
thought's what makes them happy.
Speaker 3 (34:07):
So this is an interesting conversation.
Speaker 2 (34:08):
I really appreciate you joining us and and talking about it,
and I think that your post was excellent and UH,
and it was wonderful reading some of the comments of
the different points of view. Probably one of the best
podcasts I ever heard of Charlie Kirk was when he
was on Governor Gavin Newsom's podcast Governor of California. One
(34:29):
was very progressive, may in fact be the Democratic nominee
for president and the upcoming next federal action assuming we
have one H in the United States and UH and
Charlie Kirk and UH. And the fact that the two
of them sat down for a long period of time
and UH and discussed a whole slew of very important
issues comparable to the way that we've discussed them today
(34:52):
and put forward their points of view, put forward their facts,
put forward their.
Speaker 5 (34:54):
Background, I think was really helpful. And then also.
Speaker 2 (34:59):
That you don't get a Newssen talked about how Charlie
Kirk had motivated his son to become Gavinussen's son, to
become more involved in politics and political discourse, even if
he disagreed with Charlie Kirk. I think is really helpful.
And that's one of the things that Charlie Kirk did
is that he he made people think, and I think
that's good.
Speaker 3 (35:20):
Whether you agree or disagree with him, I think that's good.
Speaker 2 (35:23):
I think one of the and I've been criticized for
this is I think one of the big mistakes that
Justin Trudeau, our former prime minister, made, is that he
didn't go meet with the Trucker convoy people in Ottawa.
And a lot of people thought the Trunker can convoy
people were wrong. And there's a you know, a case
in courts in Ottawa going on right now in regards
to whether what they were doing was legal or not.
(35:45):
But the polls said that fifteen percent of Canadians agreed
with their policies their point of view in regards to
vaccine mandates and mask mandates and things like that. And
fifteen percent is not a majority. Fifteen percent isn't everybody.
Fifteen percent you know, wouldn't get elected to the House
of Commons. You know, you know a huge amount of people.
(36:08):
But it's a couple of million people. And when a
couple of million people believe something, I think you should
sit down and listen to them and find out what
they're all about. And I think the fact that we
didn't listen to them and we didn't give them an
opportunity to speak, and we didn't give them representation in
the House of Commons.
Speaker 5 (36:25):
Were one of the reasons.
Speaker 2 (36:26):
Why they protested the way they did and had the
convoy that they did, or some people would call an occupation.
Speaker 6 (36:34):
And I think that's the.
Speaker 2 (36:36):
Key, is to listen to people. And some people have
criticized that he would, you know, take a very oppositional manner,
He would rapid fire answers, he would quote scriptures, he
wouldn't give people an answer a chance to answer.
Speaker 5 (36:48):
Well, maybe, but he.
Speaker 2 (36:50):
Did sit down with them and invited them to speak
and listened and all sides of view, and so I
think that he created discussion.
Speaker 5 (37:00):
And I think that's what we need more of.
Speaker 2 (37:02):
Is exactly the way you've described it, Frank, honest, open,
respectful discussion rather than treating the person as the enemy.
And one of the other examples I'll give you, I
think it was during the Great Recession back in two
thousand and eight, two thousand and nine, and we talked
about how all political parties got together and supported a
(37:27):
bill to support banks and fiscal stimulus, and they came
together from different points of view, and they said in Canada.
When we disagree, we're competitors, but we're not enemies. And
I think that's the key, is that we should compete
with ideas and debate and respectful discussion, but we shouldn't
(37:47):
be enemies. We should be like the two hockey teams
that fight like crazy when they're on the ice, but
when the game's over, they shake hands and you know what,
a month later they might be on the same team
for Team Canada or Team USA. And and so thinking
about us as competitors in public opinion or on the
(38:11):
field or on the rink and not enemies, I think
it's key and having that respectful discussion. And so Beth,
I really appreciate before we close, tell us all what
you do. You're a coach and a a healer and
you've got these sessions on uh, finding your inner warrior.
Speaker 5 (38:32):
What do you do?
Speaker 4 (38:34):
That's a good question. I kind of say. I'm I'm
an artist, right, so I work in the healing arts,
but I'm also cellist. So really in both cases it's
kind of harmonizing life, harmonizing you know, through my music,
but also harmonizing people. So what do I do as
a healer is it's basically therapy that gets into the
(38:57):
subconscious mind and finds out why people think and do
and believe the things they do, and so that we
can at least have conscious understanding and make better choices
for ourselves. So yeah, I'm trained in shamanism and spiritual healing,
and we call it energy medicine, so I kind of
(39:18):
use a combination of all of those when I'm working
with my clients. I do run a retreat for women
where I take them to the Adirondacks and we go
hiking and really give them that opportunity to kind of
push themselves physically. But then we also do some meditations
and we really have a great time as well. So
(39:41):
that's something I really enjoy doing. We'll probably do more.
Speaker 2 (39:44):
People want to check out your coaching or your retreats
or some of your courses.
Speaker 5 (39:49):
How do they best do that?
Speaker 4 (39:51):
They can look at my website Bethsturtivant dot com, and
I try to keep it as updated as I can,
but I'm not a huge fan of the internet.
Speaker 2 (40:02):
So Beth, I really thank you for coming on tonight,
and I thank you for your post, and I encourage
you to to keep on it even if you get
some people that unfriend you, and I hope people will
respectfully read the comments and your posts and and and
participate in the discussion, because I think that having the
(40:22):
discussion is the key.
Speaker 5 (40:24):
And and you know, if we're.
Speaker 2 (40:25):
Not going to listen to each other, and if we're
not gonna talk to each other, and if we're not
gonna seek to understand before we seek to be understood,
is that what was it one minute manager pitched at
one point.
Speaker 3 (40:38):
In time, how are we going to have a community.
Speaker 5 (40:41):
I think that that's the key. And uh, and so
I really appreciate I.
Speaker 3 (40:45):
Really appreciate the discussion.
Speaker 5 (40:47):
Thanks so much.
Speaker 4 (40:49):
Yeah, thanks for having me Brian, and for a welcome.
Speaker 2 (40:52):
We're going to take a final break and I'm gonna
come back with a couple of my own thoughts in
just two minutes.
Speaker 5 (40:57):
Stay with us, everyone back into Beth. Thank you so much.
Really appreciate it.
Speaker 1 (41:04):
No Radio, No Problem stream is live on SAGA ninety
sixty am dot C.
Speaker 2 (41:09):
A welcome back everyone to the Brian cremby rat R.
I thought that conversation with the best sort.
Speaker 6 (41:24):
Event about Charlie Kirk was it was really interesting.
Speaker 2 (41:30):
And I thought her post on Facebook that got comments
both pro and negative to her and to Charlie Kirk,
were generally respectful and detailed in their responses, and I
think that that's good. Obviously, she says that some people
made some negative comments and defriended her. I didn't see them,
and so I don't know about that, And that's a
(41:50):
real shame that some people reacted the way that they did.
Speaker 3 (41:56):
You know, when I was.
Speaker 6 (41:57):
Growing up, the best seminar room I was ever at.
Speaker 5 (42:00):
Was my dinner table.
Speaker 2 (42:02):
And I had, uh, three siblings that were all smart, articulate,
well educated, passionate, and we all had at different times
different points of view, and a mother and a father
who were similarly really interested in discussions, and we had
really healthy discussions every night. My eldest brother ended up
(42:22):
becoming a minister, my sister becoming a PhD in biology microbiology,
my brother becoming an engineer. I was a business person.
We all went in different ways from an occupational career standpoint,
and uh and and you know, different political sort of
(42:43):
not terribly diverse, but different political ways. And some of
us have shifted our political views and uh and and
we've also had some challenges in life and UH and
I think that UH you know, that makes for an
interesting discussion, and when we get together now, it's still
an interesting discussion amongst us all. I tried to have
(43:03):
a similar kind of attitude with the dinner table with
my own children and my wife at the time, and
I think that that was a really healthy discussion. And
Jim Pattison, who I used to work with, would invite
people to speak, and he thought that one of the
best ways to get the best point of view was
to give everyone an opportunity to speak for two minutes, unfettered, uninterrupted,
(43:26):
because very rarely do you have the chance to actually
stand up in front of a group and speak for
two minutes. And I learned a lot from Jim Pattison,
who really thought that not creating opposition, but inviting discussion
and debate was really helpful.
Speaker 3 (43:38):
And so I think Charlie Kirk did that.
Speaker 2 (43:41):
And you know, has he been criticized that sometimes he
was a little bit I rate or oppositional, or aggressive
or short in his answers. Maybe I don't know, But
as I mentioned with Beth, one of the best podcasts
I've listened to was a discussion between Governor Gavin Newsoen
of California and Charlie Kirk where Gavin Newson invited Charlie
(44:04):
Kirk on his podcast and they had a really good,
respectful discussion of a bunch of different issues. And they
didn't they didn't hold hold back. They really discussed and
and and uh and debated. And I thought that was
really interesting exchange of views. We need to do that
more often. And so I'm going to talk about a
couple of these issues that Charlie Kirk has talked about
(44:26):
at the risk of being criticized, but I think it's helpful.
And let me say at the at the top, I'm
more in the death of Charlie Kirk. I think that
he contributed to public discourse. I think he was an interesting,
uh individual And no one deserves to be murdered or.
Speaker 5 (44:42):
Assassinated and uh.
Speaker 2 (44:44):
And I think that you know, any family left without
a father or a mother.
Speaker 6 (44:50):
Is is a tragedy.
Speaker 2 (44:52):
And so I just think clearly, you know, no question
that that was wrong, absolutely wrong. And uh, an assassin,
nation murder of any type is wrong. But let's talk
about some of his issues, just for a couple of minutes.
Speaker 5 (45:06):
Gun control.
Speaker 2 (45:08):
Chartie Kirk made the comment that some gun deaths in
the United States are worth it to ensure the continued
existence of the Second Amendment to the US Constitution, which
is all about the right to bear arms. I disagree
with that completely. I've been a strong believer in gun registration,
if not gun control. I think that there's far too
many guns in Canada, let alone too many guns in
(45:30):
the United States. I don't think that hunters are the problem,
and I think that people should have the right to hunt,
and so I think that some of the gun control
that has limited hunting is completely wrong. But I think
that that air fifteens that you know, there are weapons
(45:51):
on Canadian streets that are completely inappropriate and need to
be and need to be controlled and banned and done
away with. I was the foreman of a jury trial,
a murder trial where a policeman shot his wife with
a rifle, and it was a harrowing experience for me
to be in the jury and listening for days on
(46:14):
end about the whole testimony of how even though he
was trained to protect his guns and his munitions, he
didn't do it, and he exposed it to his friend's
way too often, and.
Speaker 5 (46:29):
Then he got drunk and used them.
Speaker 2 (46:33):
And I thought that was wrong, so I disagree with
his position on gun control. On civil rights, he criticized
Martin Luther King Junior, calling Martin Luther King Junior awful
and not a good person, and that the Civil Rights
Act of nineteen sixty five that outlawed discrimination on the
basis of race, color, religion, sex, and national origin and
(46:56):
inhibited segregation was wrong. He said it was a huge
mistake that the United States passed the Civil Rights Act.
So I think the reality is that people actually are
in the middle of the extremes on this debate, and
if we realize that the vast majority of us really
are in the muddy middle, it would be a lot easier.
So I disagree with Charlie Kirk where there's never an
(47:19):
opportunity for, or a reason for or rationale for abortion,
and I certainly disagree with him that the state should
impose their views on everyone else. But at the same time,
I'm not one that says that any abortion up to
the line.
Speaker 3 (47:35):
Of birth should be allowed.
Speaker 2 (47:39):
I think there probably is some spot somewhere in the middle,
and whether it's the second trimester or the first trimester,
or somewhere in the middle, I don't know. I know
how I would personally believe, and I guess that's the
key in the end. I think it should be a
personal decision, and frankly, probably not including me. Probably the
mother and her physician should be the people that decide
(48:02):
what's right for them and for the potential life that's
inside of them. He's also talked about fertility collapse because
of abortion. I don't think that's because of abortion. I
think that's choice, and if it was an abortion, it
would be the sect themes, the.
Speaker 3 (48:23):
Pill, abstinence, et cetera.
Speaker 2 (48:27):
I think in every society around the world, when females
have become more educated, we become more city oriented, less
agriculturally oriented.
Speaker 5 (48:36):
You've seen the.
Speaker 2 (48:37):
Drop in fertility, and I think that that is therefore
choice and that's what people want. I think Israel is
another issue that needs to be thought about, and again
on this one.
Speaker 3 (48:51):
I think the vast majority of people actually.
Speaker 5 (48:56):
Are in the middle of this.
Speaker 2 (48:57):
I think that Israel has a right and a responsibility
to defend itself, and I think what happened on October seventh,
two years ago was unbelievable, disgusting. It was the worst
thing since the Holocaust that happened to the Jewish people,
and I think Israel had a right and a responsibility
(49:20):
to attack Hamas and defend itself. That said, at the
same time, I can believe that I think that the
current Israeli activities in Gaza have gone too far and
too many citizens have lost their life, innocent citizens. Do
(49:42):
I think that Hamas was using them as shields human shields, Yes,
and I think that's wrong. But I think at the
same time, too many innocent people have lost their lives.
So I think that the vast majority of people actually
can think two ways, not just supportive of Israel, as
Charlie Kirk was, but also very disappointed, if not disgusted
(50:06):
with the loss of life in Gaza. And then the
last one is conspiracy theories. And I think Charlie Kirk
was one of those people that was very anti vax
He called it the China China virus.
Speaker 5 (50:20):
I think he he.
Speaker 6 (50:22):
He equated vaccine mandates to apartheid. I think that was wrong.
I think that went way too far.
Speaker 5 (50:31):
Do I at.
Speaker 2 (50:32):
The same time think that some of the vaccine mandates,
some of the the prohibitions that were put in place,
some of the closures that were in place, went too far.
I do, and I've argued this on my show. I
think that when Mississaga closed parks, it was wrong, and
then I was corrected. It wasn't parks, it was the
parking lot of parks, but it.
Speaker 5 (50:51):
Had the same fact.
Speaker 2 (50:52):
And you know, later on we found out that the
best possible thing you could do is go for a
walk outside and so, and that the chance of catching
COVID outside was like next to nothing. I think that
to closing down schools to the extent that we did
and robbing young people that were, you know, obviously that's
susceptible to fatalities from COVID was wrong and it robbed
(51:14):
them of a developmental and critically developmental opportunity in high
school or university.
Speaker 5 (51:19):
And so I think that was wrong.
Speaker 2 (51:20):
And at the same time, I don't think we did
a good enough job with seniors' homes. So I think
we did too much with young people and not enough
with older people. And so again I think the reality
is somewhere in the middle. And so I guess when
I come out is I think what Charlie Kirk was
doing in talking and getting people engaged in discussion and
(51:42):
debates and motivating a whole bunch of people that may
not have even paid attention to the issues before was helpful.
And I think that the fact that he quoted scripture
was helpful. It makes people go back and read. And
you know, one of the favorite scenes I have from
the West Wing is when President Bartlett quote scripture back
to the to the to the TV personality that was
(52:07):
saying homosexuality was was against the Old Testament, and he
points out that a whole bunch of other things, like
holding up football and uh and and working on the Sabbath,
we're also against the Old Testament. So he uses a
very good humor to combat the point of view. And
so I think that that's good that I think there's
(52:27):
a lot of stuff in the New Testament that that
I believe very strongly in that disagrees with a lot
of the things that are in the Old Testament that
Charlie Kirk was quoting. And so I think to be
a good Christian one needs to read both.
Speaker 5 (52:40):
Books and think about it.
Speaker 2 (52:42):
And so I love the Jewish attitude of studying the
Talmud and and really studying things and thinking about things
and talking about things and discussing things before one comes
to a definitive point of view. Bottom line, it's very
sad that anyone was assassinated or murdered, and it's obviously
(53:05):
a tragedy that Charlie Kirk was assassinated. And I think,
while I don't want to celebrate his life, I do
want to remember him. I want to remember the role
he played in bringing forth debate and discussion. And I
think that the idea of going on college campuses or
going into the community and having respectful discussions and doing
(53:28):
that on social media and doing that on my radio
show and anywhere else that people can have good discussions
is critically important because that's the only way we're going
to have a good community and hopefully in the end
become less polarized and never be enemies but be friends
slash at times competitors, because I think we go better
(53:50):
if we have good discussions, We get better at our
points of view, we get better at playing soccer or
hockey or football or whatever it is if we've got
tough competitors. But then after we're shake hands, give him
a hug, say thanks for the good good game. Anyway,
that's a couple of thoughts from Brian Crombie on Charlie Kirk.
Speaker 3 (54:11):
I hope you don't think I've been.
Speaker 2 (54:13):
In reasonable because I don't think I have good it everybody.
I remind you all want everybody through Friday at six o'clock.
Speaker 5 (54:18):
At nine sixty AM, All the Best Get Me
Speaker 7 (54:25):
Stream us live at SAGA nine am dot CA.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy, Jess Hilarious, And Charlamagne Tha God!