Relatable with Allie Beth Stuckey - Ep 716 ｜ Congress Perverts Marriage; The Church Must Resist

00:00:00.000 Congress officially moves to redefine marriage without sufficient religious liberty protections.

00:00:08.760 And I will tell you what I think about that from a political, legal, constitutional, and also

00:00:14.320 theological perspective. And then we are talking to my friend Pedro Gonzalez about a recent report

00:00:21.180 that he published for the American Principles Project, just fascinating and so detailed,

00:00:25.840 called the Transgender Leviathan. What is the money? What are the profits behind transgender

00:00:32.540 treatment and activism? This is really important for us to know. So we'll be discussing all of this

00:00:38.720 today. This episode is brought to you by our friends at GoToRanchers. Go to GoToRanchers.com

00:00:43.040 slash Allie. That's GoToRanchers.com slash Allie.

00:00:45.760 All right, guys. First, I want to talk about this so-called Respect for Marriage Act. We've

00:01:00.800 talked about it. We talked about it a couple of weeks ago. And then we talked about it over the

00:01:06.120 summer, who defines marriage and why it's important. But I want to get more into what is actually

00:01:10.460 happening with this bill right now. Before we get into it, I just want to show you YouTube viewers

00:01:15.500 that I've got my Christmas merch on, my new relatable Christmas crew neck sweatshirt in Olive

00:01:23.000 that I love. It kind of matches my wall back there. I'm going to try to turn around, but I can't talk

00:01:26.860 into the microphone when I do. So, oh, there you go. I don't even have to turn around. You can see it.

00:01:31.560 That's what the back of the sweatshirt looks like. And let me say, I was a little concerned that it

00:01:36.240 was a little bit too high on the sweatshirt. But when you put sweatshirts on, you know, you kind of

00:01:41.380 roll up the bottom a little bit. And so when you do that, it's really like perfect placement. This is

00:01:46.680 a size large. I got a large. And I would typically say that just like in most clothes, just so to use

00:01:53.260 me as a reference, ladies, I'm like a medium gal. But in sweatshirts, you know, I like them a little

00:01:58.780 roomier so you can layer and it's just more comfy that way. And so I got a large. I really like how it

00:02:04.500 fits. Super cute. Very happy with the color. Very happy with the design. Also, it comes in white.

00:02:10.180 And then we've got Razor Joyful Ruckus, a play on Razor Respectful Ruckus, one of our mottos here

00:02:16.340 in blue and also in olive. And then we've got our little Pitbull stickers, which are still making you

00:02:23.260 some of you angry in the YouTube comments. And so we've got lots of good stuff. And then I also love

00:02:28.800 our new little Share Your Arrow sticker. It's so tiny. And I really like it. And so we've got that

00:02:35.100 available and much more in our merch store. We'll put the description in the, we'll put the link in

00:02:41.320 the description of this episode so you can click on it. Related Bros. I'm still, okay, so Related Bros,

00:02:48.220 by the way, seems to have kind of taken off for some of you because I've got messages and comments

00:02:53.360 and reviews saying that you're a Related Bro. And so now I'm like, well, I feel like I have to use

00:02:58.720 it. I'm still thinking of something for the ladies, Related Bells, Related Gals. It's all a little bit

00:03:06.740 cheesy for me. And yet, if you guys like it and want these nicknames as an identity marker for

00:03:13.740 Relatable listeners, then I am happy to oblige. And maybe we can even get some merch one day with

00:03:19.900 this. So let me know what you think about those names, but Related Bros out there. This is like a

00:03:26.860 great gift for your loved one, for your girlfriend, for your wife, maybe just for your sister or for

00:03:35.800 your mom who loves Relatable. But for the Christmas merch, you should definitely get it before Christmas

00:03:40.840 time. But we've got lots of other merch that you can actually get them for Christmas if you're

00:03:45.020 interested. All right, let's get into the so-called Respect for Marriage Act, as we talked about a

00:03:52.720 couple weeks ago. The problem with this, according to Alliance Defending Freedom, who is an organization

00:03:59.860 that I really trust, this is egregious for religious liberty. So let me read you part of why it is so

00:04:10.740 troubling for those of us who care about religious liberty. And what I mean by that is that I believe

00:04:15.740 that mosques, that churches, that synagogues should be able to function as they see fit in alignment

00:04:25.580 with their religious beliefs without fear whatsoever of a lawsuit of any kind of legal reprisal.

00:04:35.960 And that is what this bill that will be signed into law takes away in the same way that the

00:04:42.920 Equality Act does. The Equality Act is an attack on the theological beliefs and practices of churches

00:04:51.320 and private schools and religious nonprofit organizations by forcing them to comply with

00:04:57.620 newfangled ideas of gender and sexuality and redefinitions of marriage. And so people who

00:05:07.220 say, well, you know, I believe in the Respect for Marriage Act because I believe in the separation

00:05:11.800 of church and state. No, you don't. No, you don't. Because this actually obliterates the separation of

00:05:17.360 church and state. A lot of people who say separation of church and state, they think that its only

00:05:23.180 intention was to protect the state from the church. That was not its intention. Its main intention was to

00:05:28.160 protect the church from the state. And so the Equality Act, the so-called Respect for Marriage Act, actually

00:05:35.180 tears down those walls by getting the state involved in churches and not offering the protections that we are

00:05:45.060 supposed to have under the First Amendment to be able to operate as religious people as we see fit.

00:05:53.700 And there are people who are saying, oh, you know, that's not true. Like David French, he wrote this

00:05:58.820 whole long article saying, no, this is actually respecting religious liberty, too. We shouldn't have a

00:06:04.320 problem with that. But he actually says, and I asked him about this, no response. He actually says in there,

00:06:09.620 oh, well, this bill doesn't pretend that it addresses all religious liberty concerns, like

00:06:15.760 corporations, if what kind of protections do they have against complying, against having to comply

00:06:23.440 with this new redefinition of marriage. There are lots of things that he even admits that the bill

00:06:28.120 doesn't address. And yet he doesn't really even attempt to talk about those things to say, well, yeah,

00:06:35.320 that's a problem. That is problematic. But let me read you what ADF says about this. So they say,

00:06:42.460 while proponents of the bill claim that it simply codifies the 2015 Obergefell decision,

00:06:47.760 the Obergefell decision was the Supreme Court decision saying that people, that gay people have

00:06:53.600 a right to get married in the eyes of the law. In reality, is an intentional attack on the religious

00:07:01.020 freedom of millions of Americans with sincerely held beliefs about marriage.

00:07:04.400 The respect for marriage acts threatens religious freedom in the institution of marriage in multiple

00:07:08.660 ways. It further embeds a false definition of marriage in the American legal fabric. That, of course,

00:07:14.420 is the most important to me. And I'll just pause right there, is that marriage cannot be defined by the

00:07:20.460 state. Marriage can't be defined by the American government. It can't be redefined by the American

00:07:25.340 government. Marriage is pre-civilizational. Even if you do not believe that the Bible is the word of God,

00:07:32.020 which I understand not everyone in America believes. I don't believe in forcing everyone

00:07:36.080 in America to believe that. You couldn't even do that if you tried. But whether you believe that the

00:07:40.920 Bible is the inspired word of God, it was still a book written thousands of years ago in which we see

00:07:46.760 the definition of marriage in the very first chapter of the very first book of the Bible. So even if you

00:07:54.000 just see it as a historical document, even if you see it as a work of fiction, it still has served as the

00:08:03.060 foundation of the definition of marriage, or at least speaks to what people thought was the definition

00:08:11.680 of marriage thousands and thousands of years ago that we did not just see in ancient Israel, but we saw

00:08:17.620 repeated in societies, Christian or not, around the world who simply saw the natural reality of marriage

00:08:26.380 being between a man and a woman for the purpose not just of procreation, although that has traditionally

00:08:32.380 been one of the most important aspects of marriage, but also for the stability of society,

00:08:38.680 for the protection of the children who are going to grow up and end up leading these civilizations

00:08:44.440 and nations, also for the preservation of values, for a dependency on one another rather than a

00:08:52.960 dependency on the states. Conservatives used to know that the natural family, mother, father, child,

00:09:00.760 was the incubator of liberty, was the nucleus of society. You know, you've got a lot of conservatives

00:09:08.260 saying that you can't diminish or you can't replace the definitions of male and female, that a man can't

00:09:16.900 be a woman, a woman can't be a man. Probably every conservative person who identifies as a conservative

00:09:22.800 would say that, and yet they somehow say that redefining marriage is different. No, by redefining

00:09:29.780 marriage as something other than between one man and one woman, you are saying that men and women are

00:09:35.620 indeed interchangeable. You are saying that there really is no difference between two men getting

00:09:41.520 married, two women getting married, and a man and a woman getting married, which is the same argument

00:09:46.840 that transgender activists make when they say that there is no difference between men and women,

00:09:52.820 which, by the way, is an argument that feminists pushed forward 50 years ago, and the chickens are now

00:09:58.740 coming home to roost because of that idea, which really goes all the way back to the garden. But we won't get into

00:10:05.440 all of that. I mean, if you believe that marriage can legally be defined as something that it has

00:10:11.420 never, ever been throughout history, you are basically saying that men and women are interchangeable,

00:10:15.940 that mothers and fathers are interchangeable. If you are legally recognizing marriage as between two

00:10:21.780 men, you are saying that they have a right to children. They have a right to then rent the wombs of

00:10:28.320 women, to buy the eggs of women, to create a child, to purposely take him or her away from her

00:10:35.440 mother and the woman who carried them, because that is what it takes for them to have any sort of

00:10:41.100 biological child, and you are taking away from children the firm foundation of a natural nuclear

00:10:48.500 family. And that is going to have long-term consequences on the stability of your nation.

00:10:53.740 And if you don't believe me, take a look around. Like, how can a conservative,

00:11:00.360 you claim to be a conservative, you claim to see the insanity of transgender ideology,

00:11:04.900 of drag queen story hour, of all of the sexualization that is so pervasive, as we've been

00:11:11.720 talking about this week in society, and not see that every single part of the sexual revolution

00:11:17.240 for the past 50 years led us here. Like, you can't logically separate the obliteration of the

00:11:23.600 definition of natural marriage from the transgender activism that we're seeing. You see that it all goes

00:11:30.640 together. Like, for the past 50 years, from the sexual revolution of the 1960s to today, whether

00:11:37.060 you're talking about the normalization and commercialization of widespread and widely

00:11:45.500 accessible birth control pills, hormonal birth control pills, no-fault divorce, and then, of course,

00:11:53.260 the redefinition of marriage. All of this has played a part into the absurdity that we are seeing in the

00:12:00.180 denial of gender. Because just as transgenderism denies the biological differences, really, between

00:12:08.560 man and woman, so does the redefinition of marriage. And so it is really difficult for me to understand how

00:12:16.200 a conservative can really be a conservative and support this. You're not just saying, oh, let's just live

00:12:22.160 and let live. The government shouldn't have a say in marriage. We should just let adults live how they

00:12:28.220 want to live. You don't really believe that, do you? Adults should just be able to live how they want

00:12:34.020 to live? Do you believe that five people should be legally recognized as in a marriage, and that they

00:12:41.300 should be able to bring a child in, and that that child should be forced into an unstable and statistically

00:12:48.480 very risky home? Like, do you believe that an adult should be able to marry a dog? Do you believe an

00:12:55.100 adult should be able to marry a child? If not, why not? What is it in your mind about childhood that

00:13:02.420 separates them from this conversation? I know what it is for me, because I see the biblical standard

00:13:10.360 standard and the civilizationally healthy standard of marriage between one adult man and one adult

00:13:21.160 woman. And so, of course, you do think that the state has something to say about marriage in which two

00:13:27.100 people can be involved in a marriage. And so people saying, oh, I'm just small government live and let live.

00:13:32.960 You don't really believe that. You believe that there are lines to be drawn about what should be a legal

00:13:37.920 marriage, right? And so why is your line here and not on natural marriage? That's where mine is.

00:13:47.720 So the ADF goes on to say, it jeopardizes the tax-exempt status of nonprofits that exercise

00:13:52.820 their belief that marriage is the union of one man and one woman. It endangers faith-based social

00:13:57.640 service organizations by threatening litigation and liability risk if they follow their views on

00:14:02.520 marriage when working with the government. It could make religious freedom and free speech cases

00:14:07.220 harder to win. The truth is the Respect for Marriage Act does nothing to change the status of same-sex

00:14:11.860 marriage or the benefits afforded to same-sex couples following Obergefell. It does much, however, to

00:14:16.700 endanger religious freedom. And so to try to rectify this, Senator Mike Lee, along with Marco Rubio

00:14:28.480 and James Lankford, these are Republican senators, they tried to put forth additional amendments to the

00:14:36.340 bill to protect religious liberty. So Marco Rubio says that the bill right now does not protect faith-based

00:14:42.860 organizations besides the ones specified in the Collins-Baldwin amendment. Collins is a Republican

00:14:49.860 senator. Baldwin is a Democrat senator. They proposed an amendment to at least look like they're protecting

00:14:56.160 religious liberty. Marco Rubio is saying that their amendment does not actually do this. He says that

00:15:01.460 other organizations could still be sued by individuals because they won't comply with this

00:15:07.140 redefinition of marriage. Rubio filed an amendment to strike the private right of action from the bill.

00:15:12.740 Mike Lee filed an amendment to prohibit discrimination against people who believe in the biblical view of

00:15:17.060 marriage. James Lankford filed an amendment to clarify that faith-based groups with a traditional view

00:15:21.640 of marriage that provide social services under state contracts cannot be deemed state actors and sued for

00:15:27.320 discrimination. Also eliminates the ability of a private individual to sue a faith-based group for

00:15:33.720 not condoning gay marriage. And these amendments failed. They failed. So Democrats are pretty open

00:15:40.320 about this. They do not care about your religious liberty. They do not want you to be able to abide by

00:15:46.300 what you believe the Bible says or your religious text says about marriage. And so them saying separation of

00:15:54.260 church and state is a lie. They very much believe that the state should be involved in your church

00:15:59.200 and tell you what to do. Like we see the writing in the wall in Europe and other countries in which it

00:16:05.280 is illegal to even say things like what Romans 1 says about homosexuality. If you think that the

00:16:11.620 Democrats here are any less radical than that, you are kidding yourselves. And every time they pass a bill

00:16:17.420 like this, every time a bill like this is signed into law, they get closer to it. And the fact that we have

00:16:22.300 feckless and cowardly and just weak and intellectually flimsy Republicans who call themselves conservatives

00:16:32.000 who aren't able to see the damaging effects of the sexual revolution both here and abroad

00:16:37.640 tells you something about who we're voting for, tells you something about the state the country is in.

00:16:45.880 Now, the bill is not done. It doesn't go to the president's desk yet. This is from CNN. The House

00:16:51.660 will now need to approve the legislation before sending it to President Joe Biden's desk to be

00:16:55.320 signed into law. The House is expected to pass the bill before the end of the year, possibly as soon

00:16:59.280 as next week. So we will see, however, if there are more religious liberty exemptions protections

00:17:08.020 put in the final version of the bill. So it could be very important for you to call and email

00:17:15.000 your representatives in the House of Representatives to ensure that religious protections are placed in

00:17:24.000 the bill. Now, it is still wrong. It's still egregious because it's still trying to redefine

00:17:29.860 something that the state just does not have the power to redefine. However, the least that we can do

00:17:38.300 is to hope for the religious protections that can be placed into the bill to ensure that your

00:17:45.320 nonprofit organization, your Christian adoption agency, your church, your private school, you as a

00:17:52.640 Christian business owner are not going to be sued because you are simply abiding by your religious

00:17:59.560 beliefs about marriage and about sexuality. If the left is honest, they really don't care about those

00:18:05.960 protections at all. But if Republicans are worth anything, shouldn't they guarantee that? I mean,

00:18:12.400 Republicans are now the majority in the House. You're saying that you can't accomplish that?

00:18:17.060 Come on. And so that's where we are. Now, obviously, from a Christian perspective, just to close this

00:18:22.200 segment out, we know the definition of marriage. The definition of marriage is, as we use this

00:18:29.080 alliteration a lot, rooted in creation, as we see in Genesis 1. It's reiterated throughout Scripture,

00:18:34.320 such as, for example, in the command to honor your father and mother. Those gender designations are

00:18:41.200 not arbitrary or accidental, repeated by Jesus himself in Matthew 19, 4 through 5. It's very

00:18:47.520 explicit about the definition of marriage there. Of course, Jesus is God. So whatever God says in the

00:18:52.520 Old Testament, Jesus also says. It is representative of Christ in the church, as we see in Ephesians 5.

00:19:00.100 Christ is the bridegroom. The church is the bride. Again, those gender role designations are not

00:19:09.960 arbitrary or accidental. And in that way, it is also reflective of the gospel. The Bible starts with

00:19:16.040 a marriage and ends with a marriage that is not accidental. And so the definition of marriage is

00:19:22.820 hugely consequential for the Christian. It is not something that you can compromise on and still be

00:19:27.480 theologically sound, period. It's not one of the secondary or tertiary issues. It is the underlying

00:19:32.620 narrative of the entire canon of Scripture. It's that important. It has gospel significance.

00:19:39.000 It has spiritual significance. And we also believe, as Christians, that Christ is Lord overall. So while we

00:19:46.580 can't expect everyone in America to believe the same way we do and to live the same way we do,

00:19:53.420 and while we cannot inflict that by force for them to believe what we believe, we also believe

00:19:58.760 that our politics, that our voting, that our values cannot be separated from the belief that God is

00:20:05.460 in control. If you believe, Genesis 1-1, that God created the heavens and the earth, then you believe

00:20:11.820 his definitions of things. You submit to his authority. If you believe that, you believe that he is in

00:20:17.780 charge, you believe that his ways are better, you believe 1 John 4-8, that God is love, then you are

00:20:27.260 not being loving by disagreeing with him through your politics or through how you vote. If God is love

00:20:36.360 and God says in Genesis 1 that God made them male and female, that is his definition of marriage, then I am

00:20:42.240 not only loving God, but also loving my neighbor by reflecting that definition in how I vote. Do not

00:20:49.700 allow the world to bear the authority for what is loving and what is not. They're going to call you

00:20:55.880 a bunch of names. You stay true to God's word, knowing that his ways, his definitions are always

00:21:01.580 better, not just for us, but for society as a whole. The more godless we get, the more chaos we will

00:21:08.160 see, but thankfully Jesus reigns. Thankfully Jesus is coming back. Thankfully every knee will bow,

00:21:13.900 every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord and he will be in perfect authority for ever

00:21:19.540 and ever. Until then, we raise a respectful ruckus about the things that matter. And in this conversation

00:21:24.840 that I'm about to have with my friend Pedro Gonzalez, we are talking about something that we need to be

00:21:28.760 raising a respectful ruckus about, especially to our friends, especially within the church. We are talking

00:21:33.300 about the leviathan that is transgender activism and the money that is a part of that. It's really

00:21:39.080 important for us to know that. And so before we get into that conversation with Pedro, which you're

00:21:45.060 really going to love, let me take a quick pause and tell you about our first sponsor of the day.

00:21:50.120 Pedro, thank you so much for joining us again. This time I want to talk about the work that you have

00:22:07.280 put into this report about the transgender leviathan. First, what made you take on this massive endeavor

00:22:16.780 of looking at where the money and where the power is coming from in this movement?

00:22:22.300 Well, Ali, thanks so much for having me. And I actually didn't know just how big the problem was

00:22:28.940 until I dove into it. It started with a feeling that the criticisms against transgenderism,

00:22:37.820 I don't want to use the term unserious, but it was like we were dealing mostly with sort of making fun of

00:22:43.020 these seemingly goofy left-wing people epitomizing someone like Sam Brinton in the Biden administration,

00:22:51.040 right? But I thought that there has to be something more to this because despite all evidence against

00:22:57.440 all reason, this stuff continues to advance and it continues to proliferate. So there has to be

00:23:01.420 something more going on. And that's when I started to look at basically the incentive structure,

00:23:07.600 the interest groups behind transgenderism. And it culminated in an article for the New York Post

00:23:14.080 in the last two years, it was the 2020 or 2021 that I wrote. And I used the term the transgender

00:23:23.160 industrial complex because again, when I started to take a closer look at this, I realized like,

00:23:28.200 okay, there's a lot more than just goofy left-wing ideology here. Like this is actually an extremely

00:23:34.040 well-funded, well-organized machine that has, it's not going to slow down on its own

00:23:40.300 just because you can make the better argument because there's just, there's too many interested

00:23:45.080 groups behind this. And that article for the New York Post seems to have changed the way that a lot

00:23:53.340 of people, at least the ones that read it and told me that they read it, were looking at the issue

00:23:57.440 where initially they were kind of just confused, you know, just scratching their heads at the idea that

00:24:02.520 you can just snap your fingers and, you know, take some hormones and undergo a mastectomy

00:24:07.720 or delt mastectomy and become a man or whatever. But then when you add the interest component to it,

00:24:16.120 it starts to make a lot more sense. And so that 700 word article inspired this 10,000 word report

00:24:23.580 that although it's about 40 pages or so, including the, including the notes, it still only scratches

00:24:30.760 the surface. That's why I chose the name of the life. And I didn't know what to call it.

00:24:34.900 So the, the, the biblical monster came to mind because it's this, this enormous creature that

00:24:42.500 you can't really ever see because it's always sort of beneath the surface and you can only really kind

00:24:46.740 of catch glimpses of, of, of its immensity. And I mean, again, this is, I write in the report,

00:24:52.120 this is not exhaustive as long as this is.

00:24:54.020 Yeah. Let me give people an example of what you're talking about, just to kind of give an

00:24:59.000 idea of how profitable this is in the Leviathan that you're referring to. And this is from your

00:25:04.940 report. Consider the case of L Bradford, who began man to female transition as a teen and notably was

00:25:11.880 encouraged by YouTube videos to undergo the process. That is something that I hear in a lot of these

00:25:16.400 stories, YouTube, Reddit, Tumblr, different forms of media in which these kids, TikTok, they may be

00:25:25.220 kind of predisposed to this kind of thing. And this is just my own aside here. Or maybe they were lonely

00:25:30.800 or they were depressed or they were anxious or they're dealing with some kind of instability in

00:25:35.560 their family life. And though, so they're simply looking for some kind of community and belonging.

00:25:40.280 Then the algorithm, I mean, talk about a part of this Leviathan, the algorithm is kind of feeding

00:25:47.140 into this confusion. And once you click on one video, it shows you more videos. Before you know

00:25:52.680 it, you are being affirmed into this new identity. And I know that we're supposed to pretend like that

00:25:58.520 doesn't exist, but it does. Anyway, was encouraged by YouTube, you say, to undergo the process. Bradford

00:26:04.820 paid around $30,000 for gender confirmation surgery, so-called, and roughly the same amount

00:26:11.540 for facial feminization surgery, plus a breast augmentation surgery that runs between $5,000

00:26:17.720 and $10,000. Hormone therapy costs at least $1,500 per year. In Bradford's experience, who plans to be a

00:26:26.220 lifelong user, as is common with transgenderism. The drugs are incredibly expensive. They also act as

00:26:34.380 accelerants. Most people who start them move on to surgeries. And that doesn't even include the

00:26:40.720 different kinds of reproductive technology that is the necessary down the line for these people

00:26:46.460 to have children when you're talking about surrogacy, if it's females talking about freezing their eggs,

00:26:52.160 IVF, all that stuff. So, wow, that's a lot. Yeah. And by the way, before we come back to the

00:26:59.980 question of money, you're right about the phenomenon of what is... There are two terms

00:27:06.660 that are used to describe this. There's a doctor named Lisa Lippman who's written about this,

00:27:10.880 basically how transgenderism spreads through peer contagion and social contagion. Peer contagion

00:27:16.480 is exactly what it sounds like, things that children will learn and imitate from their peer groups.

00:27:23.660 Social contagion is similar, but typically refers to things that we see through social media or media

00:27:31.500 in general, right? Things in the social atmosphere. So what Lippman argued in an article that got her

00:27:39.780 pretty severe backlash, because it's true, of course, right? So that's why studies that we don't

00:27:45.740 like are severely qualified or unpublished, or the authors become canceled. It's because they're

00:27:51.740 often because they're true. And so what Lippman observed was that transgenderism seems to be

00:27:57.360 spreading in much the same way that things like anorexia do. And when she spoke to parents who

00:28:03.120 have children who experienced so-called gender dysphoria, or in this case, the rapid onset of

00:28:10.480 confusion about their bodies, it was usually preceded by their children spending a lot of time

00:28:17.400 on social media, and by members of their child's peer group also experiencing confusion about their

00:28:25.540 identity and their bodies. And that almost in every single case that happened immediately before their

00:28:31.360 own child decided that, you know, I think I'm a boy, or I think I'm a girl or whatever. And it spreads

00:28:37.560 the same way as anorexia. And the way that anorexia spreads, I mean, and the funny thing is,

00:28:41.540 is that most people agree that anorexia spreads in this way, through peer groups and through social

00:28:46.500 networks, right? That basically one person in a peer group, obviously mostly girls, will become

00:28:51.480 anorexic because she'll be fixated on, you know, unhealthy body image or whatever. I mean, I think

00:28:57.440 transgenderism is actually the most unhealthy kind of fixation that you could have with regard to one's

00:29:02.520 body. But that's how anorexia works, right? A girl becomes fixated on some body,

00:29:07.440 on an idea of the ideal body image. She engages in behavior that's self-harming. And then her other

00:29:16.180 friends in her immediate peer group will imitate her. And then it'll spread beyond the immediate

00:29:21.680 peer group through social media or through social networks. And Lipman is saying, this seems to be

00:29:26.580 how transgenderism is spreading, specifically among girls. But obviously, it's not just girls that are

00:29:31.400 doing this. And it's totally true. And she got tons of backlash for it. But I talk about this in my

00:29:37.700 report. But on the question of money, until recently, if you said that transgenderism is

00:29:46.000 extremely lucrative, you might have been dismissed. How could you even say that this is about saving

00:29:52.320 lives, right? And reducing suicidality and things like that. Well, you recently had this video that,

00:29:58.280 this is just one example. You recently had this video that was surfaced, where a Dr. Shane Taylor,

00:30:03.500 professor and physician at Vanderbilt Clinic for Transgender Health was saying that the way that I

00:30:08.160 convinced Nashville to get progressive on transgenderism, and opening a clinic to do this

00:30:14.080 stuff was by explaining that this is extremely profitable. And she said that female to male chest

00:30:20.260 reconstructive surgery, very, that's a wonderful euphemism, right? Can be as much as $40,000. And

00:30:27.320 she specifically said, even routine, routine, as in a repeat customer, routine hormone therapy

00:30:34.280 can be 1000s of dollars. And I mean, that that's, I think this is something that doesn't get talked

00:30:40.940 about enough. When you're talking about someone that decides to, you know, become trans, you're really

00:30:46.400 talking about a lifetime medical consumer who will have to, you know, go back to the doctor's office

00:30:52.800 and will basically be hooked on on drugs. And I mean, it's really fascinating when you think about it

00:31:00.320 as a kind of just like as a kind of addiction. Yeah, right. Tell me a little bit more about

00:31:07.200 specifically, Lupron. And then AbbVie, which is Lupron's manufacturer, you found out some things

00:31:15.440 about not just this drug, but also this company and who they're donating to and why they're so

00:31:21.060 influential, right? Yeah. On the state level, one of the people that has received money from

00:31:26.400 AbbVie's generous giving is State Senator Scott Wiener, a California Democrat in San Francisco,

00:31:33.780 who, who tweeted that as an idea for a bill, he would like to propose a drag queen 101 to be

00:31:40.260 included in K through 12 curriculum and attending drag queen story hour would satisfy the requirement.

00:31:47.200 Scott Wiener was someone who coauthored a bill to reduce the penalty for knowingly infecting someone

00:31:54.400 with HIV, which was signed into law. And he also did some work with what he said was removing the

00:32:00.880 stigma from how we handle sex offenders. So yeah, pedophile sex offenders. He worked to

00:32:08.960 reduce the penalty for sex offenders who offended a child as long as the age gap was just 10 years.

00:32:18.860 And so he said that that was advancing equality for LGBTQ people. You can make of that what you will,

00:32:25.740 but really every perverse and just absolutely disgusting bill that you can think of coming

00:32:33.660 out of California is because of Senator Scott Wiener. So you're saying that he was donated to

00:32:41.300 by AbbVie, by this company that creates Lupron that is used to block the puberty process of children.

00:32:48.160 Yeah, that's right. And so Lupron has a long and complicated history. It was originally developed

00:32:57.020 by Abbott Laboratories and as part of a joint venture. But from the beginning, it's been plagued

00:33:01.980 with problems. There has always been a lot of scandal around Lupron. There are a ton of adverse side

00:33:09.600 effects associated with it. I mean, this is a drug that from the very beginning, people have had kind of,

00:33:16.240 let's just say, reluctance to normalize its use. And I'll give you one example. In 2009,

00:33:27.920 a doctor named Peter Allen of the Penn State Medical School told the Chicago Tribune that Lupron

00:33:36.580 deprives users of the benefits of puberty and can also adversely affect cardiovascular and

00:33:43.460 reproductive health. That was in 2009. In 2010, Allen authored a study that was submitted to the FDA

00:33:52.180 on the use of Lupron for children. And that study conspicuously omitted two of the more severe side

00:33:59.520 effects, one which adversely affects bone health. And that study was funded or sponsored by Abbott

00:34:07.300 Laboratories. The thing about Lupron is that it's used for other things, not just for suppressing

00:34:14.560 puberty in children. It's used for treating symptoms related to prostate cancer in men,

00:34:20.760 symptoms related to endometriosis in women. But it's also used to chemically castrate the most

00:34:26.480 deviant kinds of sex offenders, the ones who are most likely to repeat because they can't control

00:34:30.940 themselves. It's only used to treat the most extreme sex offenders because it has so many side

00:34:37.960 effects. But now we use it. I mean, this doesn't say much, but the FDA hasn't authorized it for use

00:34:44.140 with regard to puberty suppression in trans youth. But it's now one of the top two drugs. And I think

00:34:50.120 it's actually the most common drug. The other one is Suprelin LA, but it's more expensive. So Lupron is

00:34:55.300 really the go-to for the sequence of suppressing puberty, which then leads to cross-sex hormones

00:35:02.180 and then medical surgeries, right? Lupron is not approved by the FDA for that use. Again, not that

00:35:09.300 that really matters because the FDA is not the last word on what's right or wrong. But it tells you that

00:35:13.860 something is deeply wrong here. And you can connect all of these different doctors who you'll hear

00:35:23.100 or read about how gender affirming, saying that gender affirming care is life-saving. And so one of these

00:35:29.620 is Dr. Stephen Rosenthal, who wrote an article in the San Francisco Chronicle condemning a bill in Idaho

00:35:35.800 that if it would have been signed into law, it would have banned the administration of hormones, puberty

00:35:42.740 suppression, and surgeries to kids. Dr. Rosenthal said that it was nothing short of life-saving to give kids

00:35:50.120 access to the treatment, right? Which is not true. There's no data proving that at all.

00:35:54.340 Right. No. And the thing is, is that even the data that you could argue at some point did suggest that

00:36:01.200 basically all this stuff is proven false. Yeah. Like, and we can talk about the Dutch protocol,

00:36:05.240 but basically all of the data that people will point to is either deeply flawed or ends up being

00:36:11.860 proven false in the end. So you almost don't even have to address the arguments from that perspective,

00:36:19.860 because they always end up falling apart somehow. And we can talk about the Dutch thing. But

00:36:23.340 basically, so yeah, Rosenthal, you know, he cares deeply about kids, right? We certainly don't want

00:36:29.100 kids killing themselves if they can't immediately get access to puberty suppression and cross-sex

00:36:33.400 hormones and stuff. Well, it turns out that Rosenthal is a doctor who has received money in connection

00:36:39.300 to both Lupron and Superlin LA, both of the two main drugs used in transgender, the so-called

00:36:49.420 gender affirming care model. It's difficult to use these terms because they're all just euphemisms for

00:36:53.240 like the most grotesque things that we're doing to kids, right? But yeah, gender affirming care.

00:36:58.480 So Rosenthal has received money in connection to both of those drugs. What that means is that he gets

00:37:02.520 money to go around the country and talk about them and conferences and things like that.

00:37:06.500 But not only has he received money in connection to both of those drugs, Lupron being manufactured by

00:37:13.420 AbbVie and Superlin LA being manufactured by Endo Pharmaceuticals, I looked at a repository of

00:37:20.480 projects funded by the National Institutes of Health. And Rosenthal's research into early medical

00:37:28.240 intervention for transgender youth received a $5.7 million award. So I'm sure that Rosenthal,

00:37:36.320 and a lot of these doctors really probably do believe in this stuff. In other words,

00:37:40.180 they're ideologues. They really do believe this, you know, the things that they're saying.

00:37:44.660 But it also happens that there are nice financial incentives to say these things.

00:37:48.560 It is a combination of ideology and greed, because going back to the anorexia conversation,

00:38:07.720 I guess a lot of money perhaps could be made in marketing to young women, diet pills,

00:38:15.540 laxatives, whatever it is to keep them skinny, that could become an entire industry. But it really

00:38:22.200 didn't, at least not in the same way that this is. So ideology obviously plays a big part. But who are

00:38:29.040 these ideologues or these just greedy people at the top who are really pushing this? I mean,

00:38:35.760 why has this taken off in a way that anorexia didn't, at least on like an official industry level?

00:38:44.860 Yeah. Well, I forgot to mention that Dr. Allen, who initially said that Lupron deprives people of,

00:38:51.440 you know, the good effects of puberty and things like that, and then, you know,

00:38:55.980 inexplicably wrote that study that was submitted to the FDA that omitted some of the more severe

00:39:00.540 consequences. Between 2013 and 2018, financial records show that Dr. Allen received more than

00:39:07.080 $300,000 in connection to Lupron. And that was just what I found in the ProPublica database. He

00:39:13.680 received more money specifically in connection to Lupron Depot Pediatric, which is the one that's used for

00:39:20.100 kids. More recently, that open the ProPublica database that I used did not have the kind of

00:39:29.300 like the fine delineation, because there are different kinds of Lupron that are given to

00:39:33.400 adults and children. But we can pretty much assume that a lot of that money between 2013 and 18 was

00:39:39.600 related to the pediatric use of that medication, because that's what Allen was writing about,

00:39:45.700 right, when he submitted this report to the FDA. Right. So, I mean, but again, some of these people

00:39:50.540 are cheap dates, like Dr. Allen received hundreds of thousands of dollars in connection to this stuff.

00:39:55.240 Some people receive much less than that. And I think that gets back to the question of ideology.

00:39:59.960 I think the reason that something like transgenderism has taken off the way that anorexia never did

00:40:04.120 is that it's just, I mean, I don't know, how do you make money off of anorexia in a way that you,

00:40:10.820 I mean, besides, I guess, like clothing, right? And, uh, advertisement, I don't know,

00:40:16.040 different diet pills. Yeah. Dieting pills. But, but I mean, it's just seems harder, um,

00:40:23.440 to make something like anorexia profitable. I maybe, I mean, this sounds kind of macabre,

00:40:28.420 but maybe because the people that are anorexic, uh, are probably going to die faster, right?

00:40:33.320 Right. Where you can, you can keep someone who's going through the whole transgender process a lot,

00:40:37.860 basically hooked on this stuff. And it doesn't work to fundamentally change society the way that

00:40:46.320 I think transgender ideologues want. I think that they have an interest or they think that they have

00:40:52.300 an interest in the breakdown of any kind of tradition or reality. And so that includes gender,

00:40:57.660 that includes marriage, that includes natural procreation. And so I think the transgender

00:41:02.260 movement is convenient in a lot of ways, profit as you're covering here, but also in advancing the

00:41:09.680 societal goals that a lot of progressives think that they have. And just the general breakdown of

00:41:15.840 reality, it really is the ultimate two plus two equals five. And any dystopian novel can tell you

00:41:22.160 that that's what the people in charge want to be able to convince you is true.

00:41:25.500 No, I'm glad that you said that because it, it, it turns my mind to the John Joan case. So I actually

00:41:32.700 opened my report with this and the John Joan case is what I call like the kind of like patient zero of

00:41:38.120 transgenderism, a man named David Reamer. So David Reamer was born Bruce Reamer, uh, but, um, his,

00:41:45.760 his penis was severely damaged during a botched circumcision. And in 1967, uh, his parents took him to,

00:41:55.500 uh, uh, an influential psychologist and sexologist named John Money. So Money opened the Johns Hopkins,

00:42:04.740 uh, gender identity clinic in 1966. It was an extremely controversial thing at the time,

00:42:09.420 uh, but Money was a really good marketer. So when he opened this clinic, he went to the New York

00:42:14.280 Times and he knew that if he gave an exclusive statement to the Times, the Times was going to be

00:42:18.660 friendly and its coverage was going to be positive about the gender identity clinic. And that would set

00:42:23.740 the tone for the rest of the media. And it worked. So, um, the Reamer family had heard about Money and

00:42:31.460 the research that he was doing with regard to sex reassignment, uh, Money made his bones working with

00:42:37.780 hermaphrodites, but he was really out to prove a general theory of human nature. And that is that the

00:42:43.920 primary factors that determine psychosexual differentiation, um, are not necessarily a matter of nature, but nurture.

00:42:52.340 And so basically the parents had heard about these, you know, radical ideas that John Money was

00:42:59.600 pioneering through the media and they went to him. I mean, it doesn't really make sense to us now,

00:43:05.320 right? In our shoes, because we've seen what this stuff looks like, um, at its most extreme,

00:43:09.840 but the parents were desperate and they basically hoped that Money could turn, uh, Bruce Reamer into a

00:43:17.520 girl so that he could have something of a normal life. Right. I mean, again, it doesn't really make

00:43:21.440 sense to us. The parents were desperate. Um, but after their meeting, the parents were actually kind

00:43:26.820 of reluctant because this is a pretty extreme thing, right? This, this, this kind of sex reassignment

00:43:31.900 had never been performed on somebody who was born with normal genitals and nervous system.

00:43:36.080 Yeah. So understandably by a doctor that, you know, he, John Money, as you said, he just believed

00:43:42.120 that gender was something that was basically conditioned. And so if you raise someone as a

00:43:47.300 girl, there'll be a girl and the insides really don't make a difference. And so I guess if you're

00:43:51.420 told that by a doctor, there are still people who believe that today. And so it doesn't make sense to

00:43:55.660 you and me, but apparently it still makes sense to a lot of crazy people out there. So I guess

00:44:01.020 these parents just bought into it. Yeah. Well, this gets into the question of ideology really

00:44:05.060 well, but basically, um, in 67, they, they do this sex reassignment. Bruce Reamer becomes Brenda

00:44:11.540 Reamer. And, uh, until the age of 15 has no idea that Brenda was actually born a boy. Um, the, the,

00:44:20.520 the case is called the John Joan case because, uh, money concealed the identities of the, of, of, uh,

00:44:26.220 Brenda is confusing because there's three names, Bruce, Brenda, and ultimately David.

00:44:31.020 But basically, uh, money included the twin brother, Brian Reamer in this experiment.

00:44:36.880 Yeah. And this, this is really, uh, grotesque, but basically at the age of six, money introduced

00:44:44.840 the twin brothers to simulating sexual acts because he believed that the way that you get

00:44:50.060 Brenda to really become a girl was to do the, these kinds of simulated sexual acts to affirm

00:44:55.600 what money called the gender schema. And according to Brian Reamer, on at least one occasion,

00:45:00.600 Dr. Money photographed, uh, Brian and Brenda simulating having sex, really disgusting stuff.

00:45:07.460 Right. But basically the study was a failure. Um, money marketed as a total success, but Brenda

00:45:13.880 was miserable throughout his entire, as David Reamer was miserable throughout his entire adolescence.

00:45:19.340 Like it never worked right. Money knew that, but he marketed it as a success. And even when the

00:45:24.660 truth came out that, that the whole experiment was a complete failure and that David Reamer was

00:45:29.600 miserable, um, the, the one of, um, of money's academic rivals, his name was, uh, this last name

00:45:38.300 is Diamond. I can't remember his first name. I talk about him in my report, but he said like,

00:45:42.660 when I was writing about this stuff and like exposing it, um, from, from a scientific perspective,

00:45:48.280 what I found was that people believed in the success of the John Joan case as almost a kind of

00:45:53.960 religious article of faith, like nothing that this, uh, doctor, nothing that he could write or say

00:46:01.720 could shake people of their belief that, uh, that Bruce Reamer was transformed into a girl,

00:46:09.600 Brenda, before he decided to just become a man again. Like they, they just, people and money went to

00:46:15.120 the grave, uh, having never publicly, um, apologized for what he did. And in the end,

00:46:21.680 uh, David Reamer ended up blowing his head off with a shotgun in 2004.

00:46:25.000 And his twin brother did too, right? Killed himself in another way.

00:46:29.180 His twin brother died, uh, died of an antidepressant overdose two years before.

00:46:33.240 And, and there was, you know, all this kind of like, well, they were troubled and they had financial

00:46:37.180 problems and stuff like that. It's like, yeah, I wonder what could have been at the source of the

00:46:41.640 trauma in the lives of the Reamer brothers. Right. Right.

00:46:44.400 But the point is, is that, um, that, that was, I think the ultimate case of ideology,

00:46:50.040 uh, the John Jones case was a complete failure, but, but even when it was completely disproven

00:46:57.220 and ripped to shreds, people continue to believe in it. And I think part of that was the fact that,

00:47:02.360 that money went to the media and, uh, it was, it was promoted as a success by time magazine.

00:47:08.660 Uh, the New York times book review also helped promote, promote the experiment as a success.

00:47:12.940 Like it became, uh, it filled the pages of textbooks from sociology to endocrinology and,

00:47:19.360 and, and, and you name it. Like it was just promulgated as, as an article of faith that this

00:47:24.040 is proof that we can kind of just snap our fingers. And by the proper application of, of man's

00:47:30.700 reasoned and, and technical powers, we can just kind of play with human nature. Actually human

00:47:37.400 nature is such doesn't really exist. And the nature versus nurture debate, progressives

00:47:52.700 always assume things are nurtured. That's why they think that they can rearrange society and

00:47:57.020 that people will eventually comply because they don't actually believe that we are made by a

00:48:01.720 creator with not only certain inherent rights, but also just certain, um, inherent characteristics

00:48:08.080 and needs. They think that they can replace them with whatever idea that they have. Um,

00:48:14.500 going back to the money conversation about this. Well, one thing I do just want to say,

00:48:20.020 so we're talking about profit, but something that you see in money, something that you see in Kinsey,

00:48:24.340 something that you see in, um, Gail Rubin and all of these queer apologists throughout the sixties

00:48:32.360 and seventies, I mean, a common thread in all of them is pedophilia apologists. So we're talking

00:48:37.780 about ideology as a part of this. We're talking about profit as a part of this, but I don't think

00:48:42.220 that we can discount that perversion is also a huge part of this. I think pornography is a huge part

00:48:48.840 of this, especially for the men who start to identify as women. And so, as you said, it is a

00:48:54.280 Leviathan because there's so many aspects of society that have really been growing underneath

00:49:00.800 the surface for the past 50 to 60 years that have led to this moment. And the profit is really,

00:49:07.860 I think, just kind of a response to the ideology and the perversion and the worldviews that led us

00:49:14.160 here. So how in the world, how in the world do we respond to that? I think that the right response to

00:49:20.080 it, you know, ideology, uh, ideologically, we're trying to respond to it philosophically, biologically,

00:49:25.660 all of these things, but I don't know if we have even begun to chip away at the profit part of this,

00:49:35.160 the part of this that has become so corporate, which has been wedded together by, with government

00:49:40.200 power. Like, I don't even know how to begin to approach all of that.

00:49:43.700 Yeah. Yeah. Well, I think, um, really quick, going back to the, to the money case,

00:49:49.740 one of the reasons also that to your, to your point about, you know, uh, how, how these dynamics

00:49:54.760 work, one of the reasons this, the experiment was so quickly embraced was because it, it fit the

00:50:01.200 zeitgeist, right. Uh, and in particular it, it, it fit the, the views of feminists who were trying

00:50:09.140 to disprove any kind of biological basis for the differences between the sexes. So, so you're

00:50:14.960 right. It was part of this broader kind of rebellion against human nature, um, that the left has been

00:50:20.240 waging for the longest time. I think, I mean, geez, the problem with ideology is that the problem with

00:50:28.680 ideology is that no amount of facts and logic as conservatives like to say that you can muster

00:50:35.140 will ever overcome it. Um, it's really not accountable to, to, to the better argument or

00:50:41.180 whatever. And this is why I don't really think, I mean, there are, there are people that you can

00:50:46.540 reach people that are kind of on the fence about these things. And you see this now, uh, I don't

00:50:50.740 really have any sympathy and I don't give any credit to the New York times, but the New York

00:50:54.600 times recently had that article that was talking about how, you know, maybe we should pump the

00:50:59.220 brakes on, on giving kids hormones and things like that. Uh, but of course, like the reason I don't

00:51:04.900 care about that and the reason I didn't, I didn't like share that article or celebrate it was because

00:51:08.840 the New York times is complicit in all this stuff. Like this is your fault. Uh, and, and now you're

00:51:13.500 like, Oh, we should, uh, we should maybe ask some questions before we irreversibly ruin the lives of

00:51:18.180 children. Right. Um, but I think that the only, oftentimes the only antidote for ideology is just a

00:51:25.500 confrontation with reality. Like people have to see for themselves the consequences of these things

00:51:29.480 or know someone who experiences the consequences of these things. But, but me like writing or

00:51:35.040 debating with them is not going to change their mind. The only people you can hope to reach, I think

00:51:39.540 in that way are people that are kind of undecided, that kind of intuitively sense that something's

00:51:44.640 wrong. Uh, but are afraid to say something because I mean, you, you look around, you see what

00:51:48.600 happened, like what, what happened to, uh, like people like Dr. Lipman, right. Uh, the, they tried to

00:51:54.100 destroy you. Uh, you're, you're painted as not only someone who's kind of backwards and bigoted,

00:51:58.140 but also as someone who's endangering the lives of children, that by depriving them of this

00:52:02.320 treatment, uh, you're basically putting them on path to kill themselves. Yeah. And you're called

00:52:06.540 a terrorist. If you highlight the fact that there are hospitals that are cutting off the healthy

00:52:10.680 breasts of 12 year old girls. That's right. Yeah. So, I mean, that's, that's the, the sort of black

00:52:17.100 pill, if you will, of, of ideology and ideologues. And I, I cite James Burnham in my report, who's

00:52:23.060 a big influence on me. And he talks about this, that basically the problem with arguing

00:52:28.100 with an ideologue is that the ideologue in his mind has already won before the debate

00:52:31.600 even begins. They've already decided that they're right. And that any, any, uh, rebuttal

00:52:39.040 that you throw at them, uh, will, will simply kind of bounce off, um, the, the bubble of

00:52:44.600 ideology. Um, so that's why I think that the solutions are not necessarily, I mean, obviously

00:52:49.640 you have to be able to, to point to things like, uh, the studies and things like that and

00:52:54.260 show why the stuff is bad. Like that's, that's a huge part of it. Uh, or not just bad, but

00:52:58.160 also based on bad science. Like, uh, I'll get into the, into what I think is the power

00:53:03.320 component, but the, I think the Dutch protocol is a good example of this. So the gender affirming

00:53:10.320 model is, is largely based on a study that was published in 2014 by a Dutch team, um, that

00:53:17.800 conducted an experiment with a group of adolescents. And the point of this was to, to figure out if

00:53:23.300 you could develop a protocol to determine whether an individual would benefit from medical

00:53:26.760 intervention. That is the sequence of suppressing puberty, administering cross-sex hormones and,

00:53:32.540 uh, surgeries. And during this experiment, uh, one patient died from a post, uh, post-surgical

00:53:40.680 infection. Uh, there were several new diagnosis of metabolic illness and several, uh, several

00:53:47.220 subjects dropped out. And despite the fact that you had all these problems with the study,

00:53:51.440 it was promulgated as a success, uh, as a success, of course, by, uh, media outlets like

00:53:56.440 the New York times. Uh, but that became the kind of like medical basis for doing this stuff

00:54:01.520 that again, we, we can properly discern who would benefit from being subjected to this

00:54:07.920 treatment. The problem is, is that, uh, the people that tried to replicate the Dutch protocol

00:54:14.160 couldn't do it. Uh, and basically like the, the entire thing has, has, has fallen apart.

00:54:20.620 And that's why you see other countries in Europe, uh, backpedaling on, on transgenderism, uh, as it,

00:54:28.140 as it pertains to young people, like the United States is singularly committed to all of this stuff

00:54:34.180 more than any other country. You're seeing clinics are in Europe being shut down over this stuff.

00:54:39.140 Uh, protocols are being rewritten because again, we're, we're coming to the conclusion that a lot

00:54:43.620 of this stuff was wrong. Um, and with the Dutch protocol, that's become the basis of, of a lot

00:54:48.820 of the stuff in the U S it wasn't even, it's not even applicable to current populations. For example,

00:54:54.120 in, in, in the Dutch study subjects younger than 18 were not eligible for surgeries, but in the United

00:55:01.660 States, an NIH funded study has recommended, uh, mastectomies for patients as young as 13.

00:55:09.760 The, uh, W path, the world professional association for transgender health has recommended

00:55:15.900 that puberty suppression can begin as young as nine. So, I mean, it's really extreme how we're

00:55:22.840 committed to this stuff in the United States by we, I mean the medical establishment, the political

00:55:26.280 establishment, obviously not you and I. And so that's why I think that apart from bringing to bear

00:55:30.760 the evidence and, you know, point even pointing to other countries that are trying to roll back the

00:55:36.240 tide on this stuff to show that we're on the right side when it comes to facts. I think you also need

00:55:40.900 the proper application of political power. And I think a good example of that that's on everyone's

00:55:45.200 mind is, is what Florida is trying to do with this stuff. Yes. And I, I want to hear more about the

00:55:50.300 political power component. Let me read something from, um, from your report about where a lot of

00:55:56.640 this money is coming from. And it's really bipartisan in a lot of ways. So you write that

00:56:02.240 in 2021, the Ballard partners signed a lobbying agreement with Freedom for All Americans, a Washington

00:56:06.660 based nonprofit pushing for the passage of the Equality Act, which would enable the federal government

00:56:11.640 to infringe upon the individual liberties in the name of anti-discrimination. And we can link a past

00:56:17.960 episode that we've done on the Equality Act. Trent Morse, who served as President Trump's liaison

00:56:22.620 to the Department of Health and Human Services, works at Freedom for All Americans. Democrats are

00:56:28.200 the biggest beneficiaries of giving related to LGBT issues like transgenderism. Open secret status shows

00:56:35.420 that in this, that they spent $6.9 million supporting Democrats, these groups, and only $79,800

00:56:43.360 on Republicans. But you're arguing that it's both Republicans and Democrats that are a part

00:56:49.340 of this, correct? Yes. Yeah. Democrats are, they definitely, uh, reap the lion's share when it comes

00:56:56.520 to giving related to this stuff. But no, unfortunately it's not just Democrats. And I think in some ways

00:57:02.340 this makes the, this makes Republican advocacy for this stuff, frankly, more pathetic because you're not

00:57:08.940 even getting paid that much. And it's, you could almost even say that the Republicans that believe,

00:57:13.860 support this stuff, it's almost like they believe in it more than Democrats because Democrats at least

00:57:19.700 get, you know, a decent amount of, of donations. Selfish motivation. Yeah. Right. Uh, so you could say

00:57:26.860 like Democrats are, are more cynical where Republicans, because they get so little out of this in terms of,

00:57:32.660 you know, uh, monetary benefits. It's like, on the one hand, it's, it's pathetic. And on the other hand,

00:57:37.180 it's pathetic because they, they don't even like profit from it. Yeah. I mean, it's a really,

00:57:42.140 when you think of it like that, it's, it's, it's actually astonishing. And some, like I said,

00:57:45.540 in some ways worse than, than the democratic party. But an example of this that I cite in my

00:57:49.600 report is the American unity fund, which is a, uh, quote, conservative LGBT advocacy organization.

00:57:56.620 And, uh, if you look at it's, uh, it's, it's IRS, uh, excuse me, it's, it's IRS, uh, tax forms,

00:58:05.820 you'll see that this conservative LGBTQ advocacy organization has given money to organizations

00:58:13.680 that support ballot initiatives for so-called transgender rights. I mean, these are like

00:58:22.140 major players in the conservative political scene that you can connect to, uh, people like,

00:58:28.420 uh, the athlete formerly known as Bruce Jenner. Uh, and, and like, like Republican mega donors like

00:58:36.620 Paul Singer. So yes, Republicans, you could argue are like a, a smaller part of the problem because

00:58:43.920 Democrats are obviously the ones that are leading the charge on this and also reaping the, like most

00:58:47.660 of the benefits from it. But Republicans are complicit as well. I mean, I really can't get over that.

00:58:52.680 I was almost blue in the face when I kept pointing out that, that the, I mean, a problem with like the

00:58:59.800 Trump moment was the fact that we, we almost are not almost, but there was a moment where it sounded

00:59:05.220 like Republicans were going to call Democrats, the real transphobes because of how Jenner was being

00:59:10.400 attacked during, uh, that the whole gubernatorial candidacy campaign. Right. I'm sure. And it was really

00:59:17.340 like, it was like on, it was like on the, on the, the tip of these people's mouths, like Democrats say

00:59:23.540 they love transgender people, but they won't vote. They won't vote for our candidate. It's like,

00:59:27.400 this is insane. I'm pretty sure that that actually was said. I'm pretty sure that people like Tommy

00:59:32.500 Lahren actually did say something like that. I'm, I'm sure that there was like an actual Democrats

00:59:38.800 with a real transphobes moment. Um, but again, it it's, it's more obscene in my view when, when

00:59:45.760 Republicans do it, um, because it's like you people actually seem to believe in this more than like

00:59:50.400 Nancy Pelosi does. You don't get anything out of it. And you're obviously not interested at all in

00:59:56.060 representing the interests of most of your base where at least Democrats are reflecting what a lot

01:00:02.360 of their constituents really want. They're not only getting profit from it, but they are also getting

01:00:08.060 support from their base. Whereas Republicans really don't care. They really don't care if

01:00:14.220 their base gets angry about this. I mean, as you point out a lot, Republicans really probably even

01:00:20.380 more than Democrats do truly hate and resent the values of their voters. I would say a lot of

01:00:26.820 mainstream big media outlets really hate their audience, like really think that we're just a bunch

01:00:32.220 of rubes and archaic barbarians for believing in things like traditional marriage. And like,

01:00:38.780 you can sense that superiority complex that they have. But I mean, I, I don't really know

01:00:44.820 the answer. I'm not going to vote Democrat. I'm not going to support the Democrat platform.

01:00:52.000 And until we have more Ron DeSantis says, I'm not really sure what to do. It doesn't seem like

01:00:57.980 there are a lot of Republicans who are interested in wielding the power that is available to them

01:01:02.000 to put a stop to any part of this Leviathan. And so, I mean, talk about a black pill.

01:01:08.100 Oh, well, what are we supposed to do about it?

01:01:11.740 I think that things have to get worse before they get better. I just think that this is something that

01:01:17.900 it's, it's a matter of time. It's, it's, and by time, I mean, um, we, you're not going to see,

01:01:24.900 I think, a strong, desirable course correction in the immediate future. I think you just have to wait

01:01:32.140 until there are more people like Ron DeSantis, more people like JD Vance that are willing to

01:01:37.660 not just talk about these issues, but take them on in a smart way. Right. Because I think that's,

01:01:42.680 that's actually a huge problem as well. Uh, Republicans will often talk about things,

01:01:47.440 um, and pay lip service to the things that we, that we also care about, but then not do anything.

01:01:52.320 And an example I always use is, is Greg Abbott in Texas. The governor recently declared that,

01:01:57.980 uh, there's an invasion in Texas, which we all know. And, uh, but when you actually look at in

01:02:03.620 terms of like policy and what he's saying, he's going to do, it was, it was interesting, uh, how

01:02:09.200 quickly he was actually criticized by, by like people who are actually very smart in the movement and,

01:02:15.240 uh, like decent conservative policy walks for, for lack of a better word, who pointed out

01:02:20.920 that you're calling this an invasion, but you're not actually treating it like one in practice.

01:02:24.620 And you're not using all of the available tools in your toolbox to deal with the crisis on the

01:02:29.820 border, uh, as, as a governor of Texas. In other words, you're just paying lip service to these

01:02:34.660 things. You're just, you're just issuing strongly worded letters and tweeting, but you're not actually

01:02:38.900 doing everything that you could be doing. And I think that that that's really, I don't want to

01:02:44.720 say demoralizing, but it's the problem with that is, is if you do that enough times, people become

01:02:50.220 cynical. They stop believing that, that anything else is possible. Uh, they, they basically kind of

01:02:57.100 check out of, of the political, um, the political process. And I think you, you kind of see that right

01:03:04.700 now, especially like after midterms. Um, but my view is, is that things actually have to get that

01:03:10.920 bad before they get better. Like I don't, like, again, it's, it's the related to the issue of

01:03:16.580 ideology, right? Um, sometimes there is no better argument and you, you just have to let people be

01:03:22.200 confronted by reality and like the consequences of the policies they support or they're in action.

01:03:27.840 And, uh, between, you know, now and then, uh, we just have to fight where we can. And like states like

01:03:34.040 Florida are trying to do what they can on the state level. Um, other states are trying as well.

01:03:40.060 Uh, but obviously, I mean, like there's this whole problem of the courts, uh, that will just, you know,

01:03:44.400 decide to arbitrarily overturn the will of, of, uh, of Republican voters and red states that want to

01:03:50.760 push back on this stuff. I mean, it's, it's a really uphill battle. Uh, it's one that I, it's hard to

01:03:56.220 think of an analog for this kind of thing. Um, but again, that's why I'm hopeful about political

01:04:02.160 leaders like to say this in Florida. Uh, if you follow me, you know, that I'm no one's cheerleader

01:04:06.080 in terms of, in terms of politics. But I think that Florida is a rare example of, of where you

01:04:13.420 have a state GOP that's actually trying. And like, I've spoken to the people on DeSantis' team that are

01:04:19.440 involved in a lot of this stuff and they are actually very smart and they're very serious and

01:04:23.580 they really do care about these issues. And basically the question is, is like, how do we,

01:04:27.440 how do we take that and then drop it into other red states? Right. Um, it's, it's tough, but I

01:04:33.900 think that's really all we can do right now is basically focus on where we live. Um, stop,

01:04:38.640 stop paying attention to the proclamations of Mitch McConnell and Kevin McCarthy and start

01:04:42.880 focusing on what's happening, uh, on the state level.

01:04:45.280 I think it kind of starts for a lot of these people in power, just maybe the average individual

01:05:00.900 with an attitude of not caring what you're going to be called. And that's not to say that you

01:05:07.100 shouldn't care at all about the consequences that are coming. If you push back against the LGBTQ lobby,

01:05:11.680 as you talked about, it's very powerful force, but I do see a lot of conservatives falling into

01:05:16.900 not exactly what you just said about the, Oh, you're the real transphobes. Although I do think

01:05:22.020 sometimes that happens with people like Caitlyn Jenner, but the, um, I'm not anti-trans, but,

01:05:30.720 or it's not anti-trans to say that men shouldn't go into girls' bathrooms. And I'm like, you know,

01:05:36.380 it actually is. It actually is. And that's okay. It's okay to be that don't defend yourself because

01:05:43.960 it's not going to matter. Who are you even defending yourself against? You're defending

01:05:47.860 yourself against people who want you to lose custody of your child because you won't allow

01:05:52.600 your 12 year old son to be chemically castrated. Like who are you even trying to appeal to?

01:05:57.200 So I think it does take a hardened attitude, um, by a lot of people just to say, I do not care what

01:06:04.200 you call me. I do not care what you're going to do. I care about the lives and the bodies and the

01:06:08.540 wellbeing of children. And that's what I'm, I care about reality by the way. And that's what I'm

01:06:12.880 fighting for. And there's nothing that you can do or say, or call me to stop me. And it's just going

01:06:18.600 to take a little bit, I think, to wake the rest of the people up to that, as you said. And that is

01:06:25.120 actually why the arguments and the logic and the appeals actually do matter because even if they

01:06:32.400 never convince anyone on the left or anyone profiting from this, there are still millions of

01:06:37.900 people who do agree with us, but who just not have, who just have not been convinced yet to be

01:06:43.800 activated against it. So that's who, that's who I care about. And that's who I think that, you know,

01:06:49.400 still has a lot of potential in this.

01:06:51.660 Yeah, no, I completely agree. And that's who I wrote this report for, right?

01:06:54.700 Yes.

01:06:55.040 It's exactly that. The people, like I said earlier, who are, who are on the fence,

01:06:59.300 but intuitively sense that something is wrong, right? That something is wrong, and it's not

01:07:03.940 going to stop on its own. And I think on the note that you just mentioned, there's a another doctor

01:07:08.700 named Johanna Olson Kennedy. And this gets to the whole thing of it needing to get a lot worse before

01:07:14.640 it gets better. So in 2017, at the United States Professional Association of Transgender Health

01:07:21.560 Conference, Olson Kennedy talked about how there have been cases where she has had to bring the

01:07:28.540 courts to bear on recalcitrant parents who have children that decide that they are trans, and the

01:07:36.480 parents decide that they're not going to, you know, begin the process of allowing their child to

01:07:42.640 transition into a different gender. And Olson Kennedy said that in several cases, where parents

01:07:50.920 simply are given every chance to, you know, comply, to get with the times, but remain recalcitrant,

01:07:57.400 she has brought the courts to bear, which is a nice way of saying, I have broken up families in

01:08:01.180 order to transition kids. Right. And Olson Kennedy also was, she was one of the authors of this NIH

01:08:11.060 study that recommended mastectomies for 13 year olds. So there is no opting out of this, like they're

01:08:18.200 doing, on the one hand, they're doing a lot of the research with your money, whether you like it or not.

01:08:22.780 And on the other hand, they will literally come for your kids. Abigail Schreer has documented examples

01:08:29.980 of this stuff for City Journal. I mean, it's you hear about this more and more, a child will decide

01:08:35.820 that they're trans, because of something that they either heard or saw, or, you know, in more and more

01:08:41.240 cases heard from their teachers at school. And then the child comes home and says they're trans.

01:08:46.780 The parents say that's ridiculous. And the next thing you know, there's there's social workers in

01:08:51.180 courts involved. But it needed to, I think it needed to get to that point. Exactly. So people

01:08:56.660 so that basically, the the cost benefit, like, do I do I say these things that could seem transphobic?

01:09:05.400 Or do I keep my mouth shut, and live in a society where social workers and courts can take your kids

01:09:11.380 away to forcibly transition them after they get brainwashed? Yeah. And I mean, it's the the which one

01:09:17.920 of these things is worse becomes pretty obvious in that light, right? And you're totally right. Like,

01:09:22.200 you don't need to preface your reservations about these things, your protests about these things,

01:09:27.900 with these qualifications, like, well, like, I love trans people, or whatever, like, you know,

01:09:33.820 I'm not a transphobe. You don't have to do that. Like, it's just stop them. And the moment that you do

01:09:38.400 that, you kind of put yourself, you basically accept the left's moral high ground. Basically,

01:09:44.700 they're the ones looking down on you. And you have to kind of before you begin talking to them,

01:09:48.720 you have to apologize. Yeah, you know, before you're allowed to speak your piece.

01:09:52.740 So I tell my audience a lot, because I think that they are the number one targets of what I call

01:09:58.760 empathy shaming, or toxic empathy. It's Christian women, suburban moms. And I tell them, don't let

01:10:07.640 yourself be emotionally extorted and empathy shamed into either just shutting up or caveating.

01:10:14.880 And nuancing everything that you believe until it just sounds like you don't believe anything at all.

01:10:21.500 And just from a Christian perspective, I always remind people, like, you can't out love God.

01:10:25.960 And if God says that he made us male and female, you're not being unloving by agreeing with him.

01:10:30.640 It's actually the most loving thing that you can do is agree with him. And so as you said,

01:10:35.220 by saying, well, I'm not this, or I'm not that, or, you know, providing all these carve outs,

01:10:40.220 you are actually giving the left the authority to define what's loving, what's bigoted, and what's

01:10:45.900 not. And I just reject that authority entirely. So thank you so much for writing this huge report.

01:10:54.480 And it really is. It's for those people who need to be armed with the tools, not only for

01:11:00.480 their own convictions, but also to convince people in their lives of what a huge problem

01:11:06.960 this is. Where can people find it? And we'll make sure to link it in the description as well.

01:11:12.580 The AmericanPrinciplesProject.org. And yeah, it's 10,000 words. But I try to make it as readable

01:11:21.420 as possible. It's not like a boring white paper. It's written as kind of like a, I don't want to

01:11:27.960 say a novel, but it's written more in the style of a novel, as opposed to just, you know, a white

01:11:33.720 paper that's going to make your eyes water over. And I plan to also do an audio version of it and

01:11:39.240 basically just read it and then release it somehow as a kind of podcast so that you can

01:11:43.860 also listen to it. And I've got a kind of write up on why I chose the name at my sub stack at

01:11:50.760 contra.substack.com. And there's one thing I think I may have said, Dr. Peter Allen, it's Dr.

01:11:57.580 Peter Lee of the Penn State College of Medicine. I think I might have misspoken on his last name

01:12:02.260 because there's, I have a list of several doctors. Yeah, that are mentioned in my report. And so I just

01:12:07.620 want to make sure I didn't combine two of the names. It's Peter Lee. Okay, well, we will link

01:12:12.080 it. And so if anyone needs clarity on anything that you said or wants to hear it expounded upon,

01:12:17.140 they can, they can read it in the description. Thank you so much, Pedro, for taking the time to

01:12:21.360 come on. And thanks again for writing this. It's really important. Thank you.

Relatable with Allie Beth Stuckey - November 30, 2022

Ep 716 ｜ Congress Perverts Marriage; The Church Must Resist ｜ Guest： Pedro Gonzalez

Episode Stats

Length

Words per Minute

Word Count

Sentence Count

Misogynist Sentences

Hate Speech Sentences

Summary

Transcript