The Rise of the Irrational

Just in case anyone has missed the rise of the irrational in American society, below are three recent events that should convince any rational person that we have a problem in our society

The first example involves the March, 2022, questioning of Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson, who had been nominated for the Supreme Court. When she was asked by Senator Marsha Blackburn to define a woman, she had the temerity to say, "I can't. I'm not a biologist." Seriously? Are you a woman? But you can't define what you are? Anyone who cannot answer a question like this one should not be trusted with the post of dogcatcher—let alone be put on the Supreme Court. (A dog catcher might need to know the difference between a male and female dog.)

Some may remember seeing a video of a debate, in which candidate Abigail Spamberger was pressed by her opponent to give a definitive answer about males being allowed to participate in female sports programs, she remained silent and refused to answer. It's a simple yes-or-no answer. More than 80% of Americans would be opposed to it and have no trouble saying so. Spamberger refuse to answer but was elected governor anyway. How sad. How can Virginia be for lovers when some can't figure out who's a male and who's a female?

The Hawley – Verma Exchange

One can find on the Internet the conversation between Senator Josh Hawley and Nisha Verma. She is a board certified OBGYN and complex planning subspecialist. Hawley repeatedly asked whether men could become pregnant. The reader will see that as an OBGYN, she is an excellent "Dodgeball" player. The conversation is provided below.

H: Dr. Verma, I wasn't sure I understood your answer to Senator Moody a moment ago. Do you think that men can get pregnant?

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

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

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

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

V: I take care of people with many identities, but, um…

H: Can men get pregnant?

V: I do take care of people who don't identify as women.

V: Again, as I'm saying….

H: Let me just remind you what you testified to a moment ago. Science and evidence should control—not politics. So. Should, can men get pregnant? You're a doctor.

V: I totally agree. Science and evidence should guide medicine. I….

H: Do science and evidence tell us that men can get pregnant? Biological men. Can they get pregnant?

V: I also think yes-no questions like this are a political tool….

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

V: I think you're trying to reduce the complexity of the….

H: I'm not. It's not complex. I'm trying to get to an answer. I'm trying to test, frankly, your veracity as a medical professional and a scientist. Can men get pregnant?

V: I think you're also conflating male and female….

H: This is extraordinary. No, I'm not conflating male and female. They're two different things. There's biological men and biological women. And I want to know: Can men get pregnant?

V: What you are talking about is biological males—

H: You're not going to answer my question. This isn't hard, doctor. Can men get pregnant? Yes or no.

V: I would be more than happy to have a conversation with you that is not coming from a place of not trying to be polarized and push…

H: I'm not trying to be polarizing. I'm trying to ask… I think it is extraordinary that we are here in a hearing about science and about women, and for the record, it is women who get pregnant—not men.

Irrationality Is a Choice

How many people do not know how to answer the obvious question repeated several times in the conversation above? No one will ever find out what the next question was going to be, but really, does it matter? If an easy question was dodged, avoided, and refused a simple consideration, how would Verma answer a complicated question? Does anyone want a person to be part of a court system who cannot define a woman or on a medical staff who is not willing to admit that men don't get pregnant?

Those feminists from Planned Parenthood certainly have not had a difficult time trying to admit the facts. They have reminded pro-life folks for years that men should not have a say in whether or not women can have an abortion. How often have we all heard, "Men should not even be able to speak about abortion because they're not women, and they can't have babies"? Sound familiar? For decades, feminists have loudly proclaimed that men cannot have babies, but now some female, a board certified OBGYN, is confused on the subject.

No, they are not confused; the Supreme Court Justice, the governor, and the OBGYN are acting irrationally because they do not want to say what everyone knows is the truth. A woman possesses two x chromosomes and female parts that a man does not have. Men should not be allowed to compete with women in sports. Men cannot have babies. All other claims are irrational. Note that these forays into the irrational are by choice. No one has forced these people to behave so bizarrely. Either they choose to exhibit such expressions of mental quirkiness, or their position on certain topics made them seek refuge there.

Other Examples

Some possess a mean character, which is not news to anyone, but a few have made videos and posted them online, which is also an irrational thing to do. One female anesthesiologist in Virginia publicly encouraged nurses to inject ICE agents with succinylcholine. For those who have never watched Forensic Files, succinylcholine is a drug that pretty much paralyzes a person. One may be fully conscious and experience pain—but is unable to move or speak. She also thought it would be cool to put Ex-Lax in an agent's drink. Are nurses supposed to be politically motivated, or are they supposed to help people? Had the Good Samaritan been like this woman, he probably would have concluded that the man beaten and robbed deserved it, being a Jew, and left him at the side of the road.

In another instance, a maternity nurse in Florida said that she hoped that Caroline Leavitt (the President's Press secretary) had a difficult delivery—that she would have a 4" tear, and be ripped "from bow to stern." Is this the kind of nurse anyone would like to have taking care of them? Both of these women were terminated. Even if she thought this, how rational was it to post it publicly where everyone could see it? She was fired, as was the anesthesiologist. Incidentally, the Florence Nightingale Pledge, which many nurses take, says:

I solemnly pledge myself before God and in the presence of this assembly, to pass my life in purity and to practice my profession faithfully. I will abstain from whatever is deleterious and mischievous, and will not take or knowingly administer any harmful drug. I will do all in my power to maintain and elevate the standard of my profession, and will hold in confidence all personal matters committed to my keeping and all family affairs coming to my knowledge in the practice of my calling.

Did these two nurses take this pledge—or just forget it? Doctors and nurses do not play judge and jury. Even if they are called upon to treat a criminal (or suspect that someone is), it is their job to first treat a person, perhaps saving his life, and then let the proper authorities apply justice. Saving lives is what they do. It does not matter what their politics are—or if they have a college education—or live in a bad part of town. They cannot desire harm to others without losing sight of the purpose of their profession.

Conclusion

But more than these observations, how rational is it to display one's biases on the Internet? It is as if to say, "I'm prejudiced (though I am a nurse), and I want you, the public, to share in my thinking." Well, no, the public would like nurses to practice their profession and leave politics to politicians, to movie stars, and recording artists! Just kidding about those last two, but many such figures seem to think they are authorities.

The irrational has succeeded in invading in the religious world, also. Some have made up their minds on certain subjects and refuse to read what the Scriptures teach. Some place their own judgment above God's. In fact, this evidently began with Eve. When told that she would not surely die because God was unjustly prohibiting her and her husband from eating something beneficial to them, she gave in. God told Cain and Abel to offer a blood sacrifice (cf. Heb. 11:4; 12:24), but Cain preferred his own take on the situation.

Today, people say, "I don't need to attend worship; I'm a good enough person." "God will save me because I'm not like Charles Manson or Timothy McVeigh." "My salvation is secure because I once said that I believe in Jesus, and I occasionally give $20 to some benevolent cause." All of these extravagant claims show a massive misunderstanding of the Scriptures with respect to salvation. Oh, yes. They're also irrational.