Assalamu alaikum guys and welcome to another episode of Small to Jenner. Looking clean, I am rocking this 20 pound thobbe. Yes indeed. I'm sure you guys were waiting and were excited for the debate of Muhammad hijab and Lars Gouley in no way on the apt topic of liberalism. Hmm, looks like a professional setup, good camera work, decent lighting, hijab, make sure you behave yourself here. And someone please explain to me why this guy has turned up dressed as Willy Wonka. Alright, it seems to be a good turnout. This guy has decided to come in with a traffic cone on his head and this guy has managed to sneak in his own recliner. Nice. Now, you know the debate is going to be interesting when the moderator is forced to say, okay, let's stop the penis talk now and go on. Guys, the debate was over three hours. If you like me, fail asleep when you try to watch it and understand the big words hijab was using. Wait a minute, now you're using too many words. For a simple folk, I'm going to break it down. This bloke right here, Lars Gouley. Thank you very much. Bigs up liberalism and claims we should all follow it. Because traditional Islam need to be liberalized. The answer is yes. And I could actually stop here and give the remainder of my time to my honorable opponent because he will need more than he has allowed it 20 minutes to explain why he is outdated and dysfunctional religious tradition does not need liberalization in the 21st century. Hey, job. Told darken handsome like myself. Says, yo, if you're saying that, you've got to give me proof in it. Now I'm saying. But where is the scientific evidence for liberalism? And you cannot even prove human rights because you cannot even prove its seedbed, a systemic seedbed which is liberalism. Don't run away from the question. This guy, Lars Gouley, I don't need to give proofs. I'm not a liberal and I don't even have the proofs. Liberalism is based on a fallacy on something that cannot be proven. That's true. I don't need to give proofs of liberalism. It doesn't make any sense. First of all, I'm not a liberalist in the philosophical sense. And second, it is a sort of system that cannot be given proofs. Hey, job goes. Thank you very much. He actually agrees with me on all three of those points. Which is, I think, a very good way to end it. But during the way we had a few laughs because Lars tried to pull a sly one. These said I don't spend much time reading the Quran. I know. I don't think I've mentioned the Quran at all. With Hamza Zosus. Our two minutes 23. I do not spend much time on looking at the Quran. I know. I don't think I've mentioned the Quran at all. We can go and find out. And giving credit where credit is due, you could see Lars was hitting the YouTube videos to perfect his Arabic. Jihad Fisabil ala. So, Fadda, you can believe whatever you want. You're nice trying, mate, but it clearly didn't help, did it? So when he jobs stepped up to the mark, this guy could only look on in awe. There were, of course, a couple of beast moments in there. A completely outdated method. Then he mentioned democracy, which is even older than Muhammad. So it's even more outdated. So it should be even more wrong in your understanding. And that's another issue with human rights. There are many issues with human rights. They focus too much on rights, what you're owed, and not enough on duties. What you owe. That's why you don't have any mother's rights. Just because something is cruel, it doesn't mean it's false. That's a fallacy, actually. That is liberalism in a nutshell. White man's, not even woman for the most part, white man's sensibilities. Yeah, it's okay for a brother and sister to have sex, but cutting the hand of the thief. No, no, no, no, that's, come on, man. The 1948 Convention of Human Rights. The ones who had the biggest say in that were American white men. You say the thing about animals? As long as you're not hurting the animals. How can a dog consent when they can't even speak? I want to have sex with you, dog. How? The discrimination of women needs to be changed as we can see here today. With the women relegated to the back. It says why are women in the back and in the front? This is a second wave feminist interrogation. Why should we go for a second wave feminist interrogation? Not a third wave feminist interrogation. How do you know they're women? Have you asked for their pronouns? That wherever there is a ban on Nicarabh, because of communication or the Allah or the causative reasoning, is communication problems, then there should be a ban on blind people, being communicators, judges, or otherwise arbitrators in those settings as well. Don't be a preacher. Be a teacher. FGM is practiced most by Western women. Because the way that the WHO defines FGM, including things like piercings, which we know now, Dr. Gule is against, in the vagina, and LaBia Plasty. But despite all the roasting and toasting, he jarred just couldn't get the guy's name right. Dave. Dr. Gule. Gule. Gule said that. Was Dr. Gule. Rodney. Dr. Gule. Dr. Gule. Jimbo. Which, Lars Gule. Steve. In Gule. Lars Gule. Dr. Gule. Dave, yeah. Lars Gule. Dr. Gule comes up. I mean, it got so heated at one point, this guy had to make a run for it. 175 meters down from the finish, and we're here at the finish. Hey, job just couldn't help himself. Plug his own literature. Actually, I've written a book on this. Which I want to give to you. This is available online in Amazon. It's called Kalam Cosmological Arguments. I'm your question in detail, hopefully. But then Lars came back, and he's like, yo, I've got my book as well, mate. Because I have also a book. It's actually my doctoral dissertation. A little bit thicker than Mr. K. Jav's book. It was a nice moment. They shared their books, and there was mutual respect. Then it went back to the moderator. He was in charge of making this moment truly special, mate. His words were very important and integral at this moment in time. Did he step up to the mark? Good to see that love is in there. Alright, so we've reached the end. Both of them have hugged it out. It was clearly a beautiful moment of respect, of understanding by the end of the debate. It's gonna go back to the moderator. He's had a chance to reflect over how we handed the previous situation. At this time, he needs to hold it together and take the debate into a nice finish. It has been a great honor for me today to hold this great debate. It's just not your day today, is it, mate? Goodbye. You