Cover of The Amanda Anderson Show

The Amanda Anderson Show

The Amanda Anderson Show

By: Pro-Life Pro Reality
Listen for free

Season's Savings | 0.99 €/month for 3 months

5.99 €/month thereafter - terms apply. Cancel monthly.
The Amanda Anderson Show is your go-to podcast for insightful discussions on pro-life activism. Join us as we nurture community ties and advocate for truth, aiming to build strong relationships within this vital movement. Note: This podcast is a scripted audio production written and created by human authors. To ensure rapid delivery of major events and maintain studio-quality sound precision across every update, the scripts are performed by professional digital voice narrators.

theamandaandersonshow.substack.comThe Amanda Anderson Show Social Sciences
Episodes
  • The Big Fact Check

    The Big Fact Check
    9 Oct 2026
    Welcome to The Amanda Anderson Show. I’m your host, Amanda Anderson, and I am joined by my co-host, Kassidy Martin. Good to be here, Amanda. In today’s show, we are discussing the top democratic party figures of Michigan’s November 2026 Midterm election cycle. The democratic party gets so many things wrong on these issues, even when the scientific reality is right in front of them. It wouldn’t take them that much research to discover that they are wrong, but they still choose not to look at the scientific facts. They couldn’t bear to be proven wrong by actual science, because they worked so hard fabricating their lies about it. And the truth would never change their minds, because they will just cancel or censor the people and outlets who actually speak the truth.Let us begin with Abdul El-Sayed, the democratic nominee for Senate in Michigan. El-Sayed is advocating explicitly for relying on the ‘if it isn’t broke, don’t fix it’ mindset; here’s a clip of what he said at a campaign event. Clip 1. (standard set by Roe: 0:41-1:06). He calls out both abortion and gender transitions for minors as a civil right; him doing so at a public event really speaks volumes as to what other things he likely believes. At its core, this says he doesn’t believe medical truth should guide medical issues like this, and he likely doesn’t even understand what that medical truth is, or what it says. And the fact that he called it healthcare without any hesitation when this harms people and affirms a mental disorder in the case of gender dysphoria, or it kills people in the case of the unborn children by elective abortion, really says that he doesn’t seek out scientific realities to be the guide for medical fact issues like this. Based on these clear indicators, he is telling the citizens that he will either ignore the truly proven reality because it doesn’t suit his largely fabricated position, while knowing full well what that reality is, or he will fail to seek out the education necessary for him to even realize that his stance is rooted in inaccuracies to begin with. We turn now to Congresswoman Hillary Scholten, who is running for re-election. Scholten’s statements on the issue of abortion are deeply troubling, and especially regarding the context of some of the places she has publicly spoken up at, she is actively denying the medical truth of the distinct individual human being in the womb. And she once did that while being a matter of feet away from a child in the arms of her guest on Straight Talk with Scholten, and basically told this young child, whether he could understand it or not, that when he existed within his mother’s womb, his life was not recognized in her eyes, and when in the womb, his life ultimately didn’t matter. First, let’s take a look at her statements on the House floor when addressing Congress on January 11th, 2023. Clip 2 (clip 0:56-1:22) Wow, Kassidy, that is very profound in the sense that she is so open with making it well known to everyone that she does not have the slightest clue as to the realities of what she is talking about and advocating for, as if she never seeks scientific reality on this, and just relies on her own inaccurate viewpoint as her guide without even seeking real knowledge. Classic Dunning-Kruger effect in action. Yeah, exactly. The government is not regulating pregnancies or intruding on anything; they are just acknowledging the scientific reality of when a new life begins, and drawing a line that will protect that child from people who want to unjustly kill them, and drawing that line in alignment with the medical reality of when life begins, rather than in a place outside the scope of reality where the beliefs of the overwhelming majority lie. It is not the government’s problem that so many of its citizens do not see the truth for what it is. Yeah, it’s ridiculous. Because so many people also hold the same untrue beliefs as democrat leaders like Scholten, they just blindly follow a political party’s lead and never even feel the need to look to reality. I want to play a short clip from an informal one-on-one interview that Scholten was a part of with a creator at an event. Clip 3 (Clip 0:00-1:07) Once again, women do not have fewer rights. Something that was just deemed to have been a right was never truly a right from the beginning. And they call it harmful because they don’t understand the reality, where the true harm in this situation is the harm that comes to the child who is murdered in the abortion. But real health complications are a real issue; we shouldn’t downplay that, but saying that they don’t care about women’s rights, that is not the most accurate way to say it. Yeah, they do care; they just understand the medical reality of when new life begins, and also care about the life of the unborn child, even when someone who doesn’t see the truth doesn’t care or even uphold the truth of the new life. We now turn ...
    Show more Show less
    33 min
  • Legally Speaking - Understanding the lies that led to the so-called “protection” of Roe v. Wade

    Legally Speaking - Understanding the lies that led to the so-called “protection” of Roe v. Wade
    23 Jun 2026
    Welcome to The Amanda Anderson Show. I’m your host, Amanda Anderson, and I am here in the studio with my co-host, Kassidy Martin. Good to be here, Amanda. Today, June 24th, 2026, is the 4th anniversary of the day the most famous case on this issue, which was rooted in falsehood and lies from its very inception, was finally struck down. Roe versus Wade was never about protecting people, because if an abortion was deemed “successful”, a child would always be murdered as a direct result of it. And what is crazy, is the same people politically who would tell you that they are trying to fight for the quote, “good of every american” or the “freedom for all american’s” conveniently disregard the scientific fact of when life begins, wich makes their own statement false, while they very likely fail to acknowledge reality, or don’t even realize the absurdity of their own statement.Let us begin with a large lie told by the media, calling a pregnancy a, quote “potential life.” This baseless statement is a false narrative, spoken by someone who is not educated in what they are arguing. Anyone who seeks scientific facts from an unbiased source will see the absurdity of this. And they call the pro-life side intolerant or hateful. Yeah, last time I checked, intentionally not telling someone the truth because their feelings are different than the truth, is what is truly hateful.Roe was never about the decision of whether or not to bear a child, because if you are pregnant, the “bear” part of the equation has already begun. It is a simple biological fact. And things like the ultrasound and sonogram should stand to prove it. But they don’t, because things have been twisted around so many times. It is so hard to keep a straight face when talking to someone who believes that, just due to the sheer absurdity of it. And their act of calling anyone who disagrees with them the ones who “need help” is just comical.Viability should make no difference in the case of abortion. The “Pro-Choice” movement is a carefully constructed fiction designed to tell anyone who actually believes in scientific reality that they are wrong. The case of viability is wrongly used as if it is a complete justification for an abortion.One of the largest cases aside from Roe versus Wade is Planned Parenthood versus Casey. Casey ruled that before viability, the state could not place a so-called undue burden on the decision to have an abortion. A burden on someone deciding something of that magnitude, which really comes down to whether or not to commit murder. That is not a burden; that is a reality check.Any abortion being called “safe” is a lie, because nothing safe would always result in someone’s death. Something being done properly, or as intended, that resulted in someone's death was called murder, the last time I checked. Exactly, things have been twisted around so many times by political figures and news channel talking points that the people who are being led astray are the ones who believe they are informed.Nothing that kills can rightly be called healthcare. This is extremely dangerous because this cloaking of vocabulary is changing people's minds on this issue at a rapid pace. True healthcare would see the child in the womb as a person and care for both mother and child together. This is the side that is truly backed by science and reality. Those who are calling the overturn of Roe a “harm” or “harmful” really lack the knowledge of what harm means. The true harm of this was the passing of Roe v Wade itself. It was grounded in deception and a lack of education from the very beginning. People almost definitely lacked the education on the scientific reality of when new life begins, to be able to stand by in support of Roe.Calling abortion “freedom” is a massive lie and a toxic ideology that is rooted in deception. It is grounded in relying on people who will just blindly follow a political party’s lead, question nothing, and never seek out what is actually the truth for themselves. If more people questioned the members of the democratic party on this issue, it would likely result in far more Pro-Life activists. The democratic party, as well as the pro-abortion movement, relies on its supporters being misinformed or uneducated on these issues for the party to have traction. Completely, it not only tells people what they want to hear, but it also creates that want, or the sense of a need to be affirmed in the lie, all within itself.The truth of why Roe existed was to shield a doctor from prosecution when committing an atrocity that they themselves likely wouldn’t consider to be murder; however, in reality, it absolutely is. Yeah, and that legal prosecution was indeed what was truly justice in this case, to anyone who would care to look to reality for the knowledge of things like this. And because of this shield from prosecution, the doctors are now starting to feel worried now that Roe Vs. ...
    Show more Show less
    11 min
  • The misinformation taught to our nation's children.

    The misinformation taught to our nation's children.
    19 Jun 2026
    Welcome to The Amanda Anderson Show. I’m your host, Amanda Anderson, and I am here in the studio with my co-host, Kassidy Martin. Good to be here, Amanda. In today’s show, we are going to discuss the misinformation on these issues taught to our nation’s children, specifically regarding news and talk shows that are on in the home, as well as education platforms supposedly created for children, and the impact of these views on people who were given to the public uncritically.To start the show, I want to address the common narrative from the mainstream media, which is calling it “an attack.” Clip 1. (Clip) (1:13-1:47) The words used really do matter. If children hear the words “under attack” or similar terms, they will instinctively see it as an injustice or something that is wrong, when, in this case, the injustice is the child being murdered in the abortion. What is under attack in this situation is the people and the outlets that promote reality, which is completely backwards. (1:47-2:24) When our children hear the wording being used in these news broadcasts, they instinctively are made to think that something is wrong, or they will experience a loss of rights or power, when in reality these sources have it backwards, and the so called power would never have been awarded in the first place, if the ones who decided to give it, cared at all about having their facts straight, and grounding their argument in actual reality. It is not a right that was taken away; what happened was that it has been made a lot harder for someone to commit an injustice and violent act of murdering the absolute most vulnerable members of society among us. Let us now hear a part of the story of Rebecca Kiessling from that same news broadcast to understand the pro-life views of those whom the news very regularly silences. (2:33-3:18) The rape of her mother is indeed a grave injustice, and something that needs to be taken seriously, and that rapist should very well be prosecuted to the fullest extent. Absolutely, but on the other hand, as Kiessling pointed out, she is no less worthy of life than anyone who is planned, and the circumstances of her conception should never mean that she is not worthy of life, protection, and love.We turn now to Steven Colbert Late Show on CBS. Clip 2. (clip) (2:26-2:49) It is not about a moral code; it is about what has a foundation in scientific and medical reality, and what does not. And does Steven know where babies come from? He would not be advocating for the things he is if he did. (2:49-3:24) Well, sure, Steven, however, if the people who spoke out about this looked to reality first, they would see that the “personal rights” should begin with the child in the womb’s right to live, and not be murdered in an abortion. (4:04-4:57) The majorities do not matter if the common consensus is factually flawed. And this being on in the home in front of children is a large culprit of the belief in these lies, because of how impressionable children are.Switching gears here, we turn to a clip from NBC News Now, from January 20th 2023, discussing the 50-year mark after the Roe v. Wade decision. Clip 3 (clip) (3:19-3:47) It would have never been called a quote “sorrowful decision” if education on abortion had been grounded in reality and actual biological and scientific facts. It’s a case of the uneducated teaching the impressionable. (3:48-4:03) Having a child or not, in this case, is not personal autonomy, but is a case of whether your already living son or daughter continues to live or is horrifically murdered. If wombs had windows, abortion would be unthinkable. The life being unseen is a very large part of this misunderstanding and lying. (4:03-4:35) When a woman is pregnant, it is no longer selfishly only about the mother alone. Yeah, and a mother referring to her own baby as a “burden” is abusive and despicable. And all issues described could be solved if access to truth, as well as adoption access, were made a priority. With the possibility of how many others who physically cannot be a mother and father, because of health or other related problems, but would love to be, adoption access should be the top priority for mothers who don’t think they can raise a child, not abortion. (5:50-6:13) Murdering a child is in no way a necessity, that is lie number one from her. Right, murder is not a necessity. It has just been twisted by the media, like we are talking about today, so people believe that, but that is a lie. Another large lie, primarily told to our nation’s young girls now that Roe v. Wade was struck down is the saying, quote: “the government is now in charge of your pregnancy.” This is complete misinformation. The government is not in charge of citizens’ pregnancies; they are just drawing the line at what the woman can or can’t control at the new life in the womb, rather than in another place. This is equivalent to the government having a law against ...
    Show more Show less
    19 min
adbl_web_anon_alc_button_suppression_t1
No reviews yet