Relatable with Allie Beth Stuckey - Ep 791 | The U.N.’s Push to Decriminalize Child Rape | Guest: James Lindsay

Starting point is 00:00:00 Hey, this is Steve Day. If you're listening to Allie, you already understand that the biggest issues facing our country aren't just political. They're moral, spiritual, and rooted in what we believe is true about God, humanity, and reality itself. On the Steve Day show, we take the news of the day and tested against first principles, faith, truth, and objective reality. We don't just chase narratives and we don't offer false comfort. We ask the hard questions and follow the answers wherever they leave, even when it's unpopular. This is a show for people who want honesty over hype and clarity over chaos. If you're looking for commentary grounded in conviction and unwilling to lie to you about where we are or where we're headed.

Starting point is 00:00:33 You can watch this D-Day show right here on Blaze TV or listen wherever you get podcasts. I hope you'll join us. The United Nations is now pushing for the decriminalization of child rape. Also, Washington State is passing a law that takes away the rights of parents who disagree with their child's choice to quote-unquote transition. Also, Bud Light, you probably saw, used Dylan Mulvaney as. a spokesperson and there's something really dark and disturbing behind their reasoning to do so. All of these stories are very connected.

Starting point is 00:01:09 And to explain that connection to us today is our friend James Lindsay. We've had him on several times before and really no one analyzes what's going on ideologically behind the scenes of these new stories like he does. This episode is brought to you by our friends at Good Ranchers. Go to Good Ranchers.com. use code alley at checkout good ranchers.com code alley. So let me explain how this is working. So as always, I had a really long conversation with James.

Starting point is 00:01:50 And actually what I'm going to play you today is the second half of our conversation. So if it kind of seems like we're starting in the middle of our discussion, that's because we are. In this part of the conversation that you are going to hear today, we're talking about these news stories. Now, in the first part of our conversation that I think we're going to play on Monday, which will actually be the part two, we have a discussion in a semi-debat about Christian nationalism. As you probably know, James is an atheist. He used to consider himself a leftist, but he has spoken out against critical theory. Educated a lot of people about the dangers of social justice and leftism and queer theory and all of that.

Starting point is 00:02:32 And so we discuss where worldview comes from, how we decide laws, what Christian nationalism would really look like, whether it's a theocracy or whether it's Christians just kind of exercising their faith as they vote and try to influence culture and policy. So that's a fascinating discussion and debate. And we will have that on Monday. Today we are going to get through as much as we can of these stories. It's a little rush towards the end because we didn't have enough time. but you are going to be absolutely fascinated by everything that he has to say, as you always are. I certainly was. So without further ado, here is our friend James Lindsay.

Starting point is 00:03:13 Speaking of dark and disturbing, and also the whole gender thing, I want to talk first about Dylan Mulvaney. And I know I'm kind of late on the story. I have been waiting to talk about this whole Bud Light thing until I can have you on. Because you had such interesting tweets come out of this. And one thing that you said, as soon as you said this, I said it to my producer, I was like, I want to know what he's talking about. You said that there is a reason, a very disturbing, this is not your exact language, but a very disturbing troubling reason why these corporations, like Bud Light are hoisting up Dylan Mulvaney. And for people who don't know, this is a grown man who pretends to be not just a caricature of a woman, but also like a young girl, like probably 12 years old. Pre-fribesen girl, yeah.

Starting point is 00:04:00 Yeah, very disturbing all around, as we've discussed many times on this show. What is the reason? In your estimation, what is this dark and disturbing reason? I can't say for certain that I don't know, because I don't know what's going on in boardrooms, for absolute certain that Dylan Mulvaney himself is this, but it's probably the case. There is a score called the Corporate Equality Index as published by the Human Rights Campaign, which used to be allegedly gay civil rights. advocacy group, it started to receive a lot of money from the Open Society Foundation in the late 2000s, 2007, 8.

Starting point is 00:04:38 That's Soros's. That's right. So it started to receive large, like, 25 plus million dollar grants in the late 2000s. And their focus is almost entirely just trans stuff now under the umbrella of LGBTQ plus. And they have this scoring index that they've been using since 2002 called the Corporate Equality Index. and you get scored as a corporation. There's also one that's called a municipal equality index that scores like, you know, public utilities and even city councils and things like that.

Starting point is 00:05:09 But you have to sign up to be a part of it. Some, I don't know, 1,500 corporations in the United States have signed up for the human rights campaign CEI scoring scheme. And it's scored out of 100 points. And they give you up to 40 points for having, you know, workplace policies that, are, you know, non-discriminatory, et cetera, against LGBTQ, whatever kind of expansive definition of your inclusive workplace that might have. And they have 30 points for something else.

Starting point is 00:05:38 And I have 30 points set aside for, and I forget what the something else is. I could go look it up again. But 30 points set aside for what they call social responsibility and visibility. And this is where the Mulvaney situation probably lands, is that they are giving up to 30 points for making displays to make trans or queer or even just LGBT, whatever the whole thing, gay or whatever, to make that more visible in society. So that's going to be like ad campaigns and stuff. And this is why you're going to be likely to see somebody like Dylan Mulvaney being a brand ambassador is likely to raise that score. Now, Anheuser Bush, which is the local parent company of Budweiser.

Starting point is 00:06:26 and there's a parent company that's actually headquartered in Belgium that actually owns the whole thing now. It's not even an American company and hasn't been for a while. But Anheuser-Busch has a 100 score. There's also, by the way, that's the carrot side. That's the you go do these things and earn these points. That's the carrot. There's also a stick, by the way, of social responsibility. If you get caught up, you get found out, say, like Chick-fil-A giving money to something that they deem as anti-LGBQ, they'll take points away, no matter what your other stuff is.

Starting point is 00:06:56 There's a carrot and a stick. Well, Anhydrubus has had a 100. They're one of the 840 corporations in the United States that will have a perfect CEI, a perfect corporate equality index score. This number matters a lot. You can tell this number matters a lot because they put out press releases. They brag about it. I just saw somebody sent me one this morning. Southwest Airlines is very proud of their 100.

Starting point is 00:07:16 By the way, all four major carriers in the United States. So Southwest, United, American, and Delta all have one hundreds. American is very centered there in Dallas. is very proud of its 100 all the way back to 2002. It got a 100 in the first year and has maintained it every year. I heard from an insider last year that to maintain their 100s, the airlines had to give away free tickets to gay activists to fly to Pride events so that the Pride events could be bigger.

Starting point is 00:07:43 And so we're talking millions of dollars of free airline tickets being given away or reduced price airline tickets to fly activists around a Pride events. These are the kinds of tactics that the human rights campaign comes to and says these are the things you have to do in order to raise your score. Now, Anheuser-Busch got in trouble a couple of years ago. I forget what they did, but it made the gay activists mad. And they went to Stonewall. Then they bought a bunch of Bud Light, and they all very visibly poured it out in the street.

Starting point is 00:08:05 I think there was 2019. So they're kind of on notice. So, of course, they're probably trying to overcompensate right now. So Dylan Mulvaney becomes a character who is very visible right now. He's being made brand ambassador for like a million things. I don't have absolute proof that he's raising their CEI scores, but that's the exact kind of thing that would raise their CEI score. So it's probably something they're pursuing.

Starting point is 00:08:29 I don't know if the HRC came and said, you must elevate Dillon Mulvaney to more visibility. But it's very, very clear that Mulvaney has become this very useful tool in their kind of operation. Like you said, this is a peculiar point. He's not claiming to identify as a woman. He's claiming to identify as a girl, 100 days or 365 days, was of girlhood, right? And he's very obviously acts like a fool that is prepubescent,

Starting point is 00:09:01 his interpretation of a prepubescent, like, I don't know if it's 12, I don't know if it's supposed to be five-year-old girl, but at the same time, he tries to portray himself as the reincarnation of Audrey Hepburn. So you have this blurring of girlhood and womanhood at the same time as it's actually a 28-year-old gay man who's obviously flamboyant and out of control and loves attention. So he's got all the incentives in the world to do this because he's getting crazy attention. But there are a lot of operational things. Why would it go into the CEI score, which is going to become a proxy, a measurable proxy for their ESG score, the S part of their ESG is going to be, are you doing these kind of social responsibility things? The G score can be determined by, do you have these policies?

Starting point is 00:09:41 Those are both parts of the corporate equality. So it becomes a measuring stick that the ESG gods at BlackRock or World Economic Forum or whatever can use to score companies. Why would they want to do that? Well, there's a lot of strategic operations. First of all, Budweiser, we all know Budweiser's not very good, but it doesn't matter. It's a iconic American brand. And the goal of cultural Marxism is to destroy culture, to destroy iconic brands. It doesn't matter if they're good or bad.

Starting point is 00:10:09 It's something American. There could be zero Americans who actually like to drink Budweiser, but I mean, I remember I went to a bar. I went to D.C. for an event last year or whatever, and we went across the street to the bar. It's a very famous bar. A lot of people hang out. there. It's a union pub. And they actually had an American flag done up on the wall with the red, white, and blue caps of the different Budweiser products, right? Like all the bottle caps. And it was kind of cool. I remember looking at it from anything. Well, that's kind of cool. You know,

Starting point is 00:10:38 you get the white caps, the blue caps, the red caps. And so it's this very American identity. Not anymore. Not anymore. Now it's weird for Americans, conservative Americans, who see themselves as Americans and our value being American. Now something that used to be, you know, an iconic American thing is no longer American. It's poisoned. So you have what the Germans called, the cultural Marxist called Alf Habender culture, the abolishment of culture. But you also have Dylan Mulvaney saying like, hey, look, I'm an influencer. All you have to do is change your face. You can get facial surgery on his TikTok, telling little kids. You can get facial surgery and you can be an influencer like, man, we know that we're in this weird situation where because of TikTok

Starting point is 00:11:15 and so on, that like something like 40% of American kids say that the job they want when they grow up as influencer. So you see that they know they're reaching to the to the young people and trying to say, that thing you want to be, guess what? There's a back door. Transition. We can elevate you. We can make you huge. Look, Dillan Mulvaney. It's just one thing after another, after another, after another. And then there's another operation. You'll notice not many people are happy about Dillan Mavani. It's true. I mean, I don't see even Democrat people celebrating Dillan Mowany. I see almost nobody using the female pronouns for Dillam. It just isn't, and nobody likes it. So they're just ramming it on us.

Starting point is 00:11:51 They're forcing us. They're demoralizing us. They're saying, we don't care how much you don't like it. Oh, yeah, we'll lose $6 billion. We don't care. We're just going to keep forcing it on you. And you can't do, this is the magic line. You can't do anything about it.

Starting point is 00:12:04 Yeah. And the reason I think that it's actually, why are the corporations playing along? Because the corporations are this kind of epicenter of power is because they are beholden to that score. I think that that CEI score has, maybe it's not merely Dylan Mulvaney. I think that maybe that it is true that just they hired this woke, you know, marketing manager who made the worst decision in brand history because she's woke and stupid. But it's certainly the case that the CEI score or this corporate equality index score is something that they, the corporations chase, that they're willing to lose large amounts of money for, that they're willing to do very strange things like get free airline tickets away in order to maintain that they put out press releases, that they celebrate. I mean, Southwest has this stupidest image I ever saw. of how proud they are of their it's like all these like very very diverse group of I guess

Starting point is 00:12:54 gay people of every color doing like little hearts with their hands and they're all proud of their we have a 100 CEI and that's again the same thing though because which airline are you gonna boycott America oh all of them all of them do it so enjoy I think the only one that doesn't is spirit because they clearly don't care about anybody or anything if you've ever flown on them so well who you're gonna fly you know right you sorry you're just gonna know no matter where you turn, you're going to support these issues or whatever. Now, I agree. Matt Walsh, you know, says we're going to make an example of a brand and try to punish them.

Starting point is 00:13:27 Maybe we can with Bud Light, but at the same time, you have this national multinational corporation now. It owns, you know, Leffa is a Belgian beer. Hoagarton's a Belgian beer that's in their orbit. Stella Artois, huge Belgian beer. It's all, the same company owns those. A lot of people don't even realize. So we're going to kill the American corporate umbrella. Right.

Starting point is 00:13:48 So we're going to boycott and kill the American part of this multinational and basically take the American part off the table. Hey, this is Steve Day. If you're listening to Allie, you already understand that the biggest issues facing our country aren't just political. They're moral, spiritual, and rooted in what we believe is true about God, humanity, and reality itself. On the Steve Day show, we take the news of the day and tested against first principles, faith, truth, and objective reality. We don't just chase narratives and we don't offer false comfort. We ask the hard questions and follow the answers wherever they leave, even when it's unpopular. This is a show for people who want honesty over hype and clarity over chaos.

Starting point is 00:14:26 If you're looking for commentary grounded in conviction and unwilling to lie to you about where we are or where we're headed, you can watch this D-Day show right here on Blaze TV or listen wherever you get podcasts. I hope you'll join us. I think a lot of people don't understand what you're talking about. We've talked about ESG and the Great Reset and things like this on this podcast. And obviously you talk about it a lot. A lot of people, whenever you see Nike, for example, or Bud Light, using someone like Dylan Mulvaney who, I mean, he does have a lot of followers.

Starting point is 00:15:02 He does have a lot of people who are praising him. But you're right. Like kind of in the mainstream, it's hard to find a lot of people who are super sympathetic towards him because it is embarrassing. He portrays himself as this like flusy bimbo of a 12 year old girl. And I think even left-wing women are like, me, I don't know if I want to be, if I really want to be made into that kind of character. I don't know if I necessarily want to include this person in womanhood.

Starting point is 00:15:30 And so I think you're right about that. So you have a lot of people asking the question, well, why would Nike do that? Don't they know their audience? Don't they understand that only women buy those sports bras? And, you know, I said something like this, too, obviously joking and knowing the reality behind it, knowing why they don't care whether or not I will buy their products. But, I mean, they are, when they put their clothing on someone like Dylan Mulvaney, there is no opportunity for a woman to see that model to see, oh,

Starting point is 00:15:57 okay, I can see what that looks like on me. You can't because he is a man's body. He doesn't have any hips. He has large shoulders. He's tight. And that's obviously not the point. Nike knows that. Nike knows that this is not a female body that I can't relate to it in any way.

Starting point is 00:16:13 Bud Light knows that the people that buy their beer cans are more like Kid Rock than they are like Dylan Mulvaney. They know that. It's not. And I don't think, and you touched on this, it's not only because of their CEI scores. I think it's also, it's the same reason why a particular show at Fox News decided to run that egregious segment about the child whose parents transitioned her into a boy. It's not that they don't know that their audience is conservative. It's not that they don't understand that they're talking to people in the heartland who want nothing to do with that least child transition. It's actually because these people hate their audience.

Starting point is 00:16:53 these people hate that part of their customer base and they actually want to change them. And they think that they can. So yes, the CEI scores and things like that caring more about that than profits. But I also think it is antagonism towards that audience. It's either it's like, you know what, if you don't support this, I don't even want your money. I don't care what you do. But also maybe we can, as you said, like force you to comply with it and change you. It's not the same age that we used to live in where we can kind of scare these major corporations by saying, well, I'm not going to use your product because the response that they often give is good. I don't care. I mean, that's what the VP of marketing, who apparently came up with this whole campaign, she kind of, she kind of doubled down on it and was like, you know, we're moving away from this frat star brand. We don't want to be, we don't want to be seen as just this.

Starting point is 00:17:52 this, you know, frat bro thing. She said, if we do not attract young drinkers to come and drink this brand, there will be no more future for Bud Light. So I had this super clear mandate. We need to evolve and elevate this incredibly iconic brand. What does involve and evolve and elevate me? I mean, she says it right here. It means inclusivity.

Starting point is 00:18:11 Representation is at the heart of its evolution. And I would say not just evolution, but revolution. Now, I don't even think that this is, she's telling the whole truth here, because I don't think that she really thinks that this is going to attract a lot of young people. And then you have the CEO, though, kind of not apologizing, but an answer that didn't make the right or the left happy, kind of saying. Yeah, I made nobody happy.

Starting point is 00:18:38 Yeah, just, I mean, because he kind of looks like your average conservative American. You know, he basically was like, you know, representation matters, but we're not trying to divide people. we're not trying to enter a political discussion, kind of apologizing but not apologizing. So I don't know. Obviously, the boycott got like a response. I don't know if that's good enough.

Starting point is 00:19:00 I don't know if it really makes a dent. But it's interesting the kind of two different kinds of responses that we got from the C-suite there. Well, what you're actually, what we're dealing with. And, you know, you invoke the world economic form here where Klaus Schwab says this all the time. It's in his last couple of. books explicitly. I mean, I could tell you exactly what he says. He just recently actually had an interview where he said the most ridiculous thing. But what he's saying is, and I'll tell you what he said in just a second, but what he's actually saying is that in what they're doing is that

Starting point is 00:19:34 they are trying to impose new values on our society. And what they have decided is that the young people are the target for those new values. Those values are going to be inclusivity and sustainability. I've been banging this drum for about two years now. I remember being in my driveway and having the epiphany. I'm like, oh my God, its sustainability and inclusivity are the two new values of the future. And then as soon as you realize that, it's like you read their writing and it's in every page and you feel stupid that you couldn't figure it out before. But this is the idea. They think that the future, that the children are brainwashed. This is what Klaus Schwab says in the book, The Great Narrative for a Better Future, which he published last year. He says that they're going

Starting point is 00:20:10 to use the ESG and the public-private partnership model to get the governments and the corporations on board with the new value system. But if they won't all go along with it, he says, that's one paragraph. The next paragraph, he says, if they won't go along with it, that doesn't matter. We're going to transform the youth to demand only products, services, workplaces, etc., that are on board with the new sustainable and inclusive value system. And then he says, third, we're going to use that opportunity to rewrite the social contract to be a sustainable and inclusive future.

Starting point is 00:20:44 And then this is what he said in the interview. just the other day, he said that we are rewriting the social contract. So, part of the purpose of this dilemma of anything from the marketing VP that we're hearing from is to force new values, believing that the young people already accept these values and that those are the only values that they're ever going to accept in their lives. We're going to force them. We're going to rewrite the social contract. Because what Klaus said is, we're rewriting the social contract and you'll hear kind of,

Starting point is 00:21:10 why do they not care if they lose $6 billion or whatever? We're rewriting the social contract. He said, away from an economy of production and consumption and into an economy of sharing and caring. That's a direct quote. I don't know what an economy of sharing and caring actually looks like, but I know that that's just updated communism. They're going to tell you who you're going to share with, when you're going to share, and how you're going to share for equity. Now, they're going to tell you what you're going to care about for sustainability and inclusion. And that's what the economy of caring and sharing is going to be based on.

Starting point is 00:21:43 off of, but we're not going to focus on production and consumption. So production and consumption of, say, a brand like Bud Light isn't that important anymore. It's about pushing these new values on the society under the assumption that the young people have already adopted these values and are incontrovertible in these values, which I think they're in for a rude awakening because I'm looking at the Gen Z and some of them are very into this stuff, but man, a lot of them are mad at it. A lot of them are sick of it. I saw this announcement from a group in Canada, which is totally cooked. You know, Canada is completely. gone, woke. And this was a statement. There was an incident and it went viral. I can't remember

Starting point is 00:22:19 the exact details. But a young, I think is a high school student, ties a trans flag around his neck. They always make themselves into superheroes, right? And all the other kids take it away from him. They're like putting it on the ground and like stepping on it and all this and like, no, we're not doing this anymore. And they put out a statement on Twitter, you've tried to indoctrinate us, we're done. You tried to, you know, steal our childhood. We're done. And I don't know that they are aware that they've tried to force false values on people, and whether we want to take a biblical perspective and say the truth is written on their hearts is fine. They know this is fake. A lot of them, and a growing number of them know that this is fake. And so I don't think that they're going to be able

Starting point is 00:22:55 to just force new values. This is always been the communist project. It's the same Gnostic thing. We're going to be born as new Soviet men. We're going to be born as new people. We're going to, as Herbert Marcruza put it in the 60s, interject new values by forcing people to live under the new values. This is what the Soviets did. They created a tyrannical regime to force people to live under communist values. And if you didn't like it, they sent you to labor camp to re-educate to learn communist values. It's what Mao did. He created a cultural revolution. And if it didn't work, he didn't take up the values yourself. He sent you to labor camp for re-education. Or maybe even if it did, it sent you to labor camp for re-education.

Starting point is 00:23:28 Sent you out to work in primitive conditions and in the peasantry in the fields and in horrible, horrible circumstances for three, four years to re-educate you. The goal was to make you into that which you're not. And we see this exact same mentality with Dylan Mulvaney. We're going to force this new value. We're going to include him. We're going to celebrate him. We're going to affirm him.

Starting point is 00:23:51 And then, by the way, kids, look at his TikTok. If you have facial surgery, you can become an influencer like me. Yay! Let's dance around like a fool. Now, Nike, by the way, since you brought Nike is a little bit of a different story. It's a more complicated story because unlike Bud Light, the market for Nike, like, You can go try to boycott Nike all you want because their overwhelming market is in China now. They are serving the Chinese market.

Starting point is 00:24:16 They are not serving the American market. And the CCP is going to be perfectly happy with them doing a destruction of American happiness. Yeah. Even though the CCP does not align with those values, but they understand. And they censor them too. You aren't allowed to have any LGBTQ messages on social media or media. So they're not really worried about how Dylan Mulvaney is going to brainwash their youth because they do not allow their youth to have access to that.

Starting point is 00:24:42 You're not allowed to, you're not allowed to transition. I read about this recently until you're 21. But even then, even then, they have this basically structure in place where they intimidate the family to the degree that if the family doesn't shame that person out of homosexuality or transgenderism, then basically there's trouble. So it's basically banned entirely. So that's an interesting point. They're serving China, not really interested in conforming China.

Starting point is 00:25:09 to our, you know, queer values. Yeah, China won't take their messaging. Yeah. They won't see Dylan Mulvaney, but what-N-Q will get favorable deals. Yes. Exactly. So they do it in America, and China will give them favorable business deals throughout China. And that's the real market that they're after.

Starting point is 00:25:26 Because the Chinese market is, you know, close to a billion and a half people. Best case scenario in the United States, you have 300 million. It's not even comparable. And, you know, there's a lot of, I mean, there's a lot of popular. poverty still in China, but there's a lot of money in China, too. And they are, our corporations around the world or around the country are obviously bending over backwards to serve China. So we might be able to damage Bud Light and make a point, or Anheuser-Busch and make a point

Starting point is 00:25:53 with, and I think maybe we are. I don't know. I'm actually kind of in favor of this idea. I don't think it's going to be the solution, but I think it actually is sending a powerful message to the ESG powers that be that people are pissed off about it. But Nike's another story. You're not going to hurt Nike. I don't mean to be discouraging and disempowering, but they are serving another master, which is something that Americans need to start thinking about very, very seriously.

Starting point is 00:26:17 Which of our corporations are serving China, which of our governors are serving China instead of serving the United States. That doesn't mean that you as an individual can't boycott Nike. Like, for example, I won't buy Nike products. That's not because I think that they're going to be like, how can we win Ali Stucky's business back? But just that's, you know, just a personal choice. So on an individual level, some people want to integrate their lives into their values. So that's fine. But I totally agree with you.

Starting point is 00:26:56 Listen, listen, James, we've only got 20 minutes left. And I've got to talk about two big subjects. So first, since we're talking on a global level, I want to talk about, because I haven't touched on this yet, the UN advocating for decriminalizing child rape. And I know that you're going to have a fascinating analysis of this because this is not, as you know, probably better than anyone happening. in a vacuum. So the International Committee of Juris and the United Nations have issued a new report calling for all forms of drug use and sexual activity to be decriminalized globally. And this

Starting point is 00:27:31 includes sex between adults and minors. That should be decriminalized. The UN is saying so long as the minors quote unquote consent, they say that this kind of sexual interaction between a minor It doesn't actually specify from what I saw of the age of the minor. Even if it is not legal in a particular country, it still can. The UN says in fact be consensual and therefore should be decriminalized. They say using the law to punish this kind of behavior and drug use should be the absolute last resort. There should be all these other strategies put into place. But they don't even say that, yes, this is something that should be prevented or it should be stigmatized.

Starting point is 00:28:15 or it should be something that we should try to shame people out of or prevent in other ways. It just says it should be decriminalized. And it could be something that a child chooses to do with an adult. So, you know, slippery slope fallacy we keep hearing from the Christian right. Christians have been slippery sloping for the past several years saying that the sexual revolution is finally and fully going to manifest itself in the not just condoning of, but as all things go with progressivism, the celebration of pedophilia. And it will be all done under this. What I've said for a long time is very flimsy consent-based morality.

Starting point is 00:28:59 As long as you consent to something and the definition of consent is always changing. It's always moving. Then it is moral. So tell me, like, does this surprise you at all that the United Nations pretending to be a safeguard of, you know, children and morality and all of that. Basically, our world beacon of morality, doesn't surprise you that they are now saying, ah, pedophiles, no, not just pedophiles, but child sex abusers, they shouldn't go to jail. No, it doesn't surprise me.

Starting point is 00:29:30 I don't know how much more evidence Americans need that the top priority, a top policy priority, for anybody who has the, whether it's in Congress, whether it's a president that has the will to do so, is to remove the United States from the United Nations and pull all of our funding I don't know how much more evidence we need of this. That should be a top priority. The United Nations is a catastrophe. I think it's somebody corrected me recently, so I'll say I think it's the fifth international communist party.

Starting point is 00:29:58 It's its instantiation. And I think its goal is to actually destroy the West. This is part and parcel with what the left has been pushing for for decades. And I think, honestly, this is a controversial statement, but I actually think in the same way that they accuse America of being structurally racist, that the left is actually structurally pedophilic. This idea that consent is up to the minor, that you could have this concept that what you have in your head probably, and we'll use American law, because it varies from

Starting point is 00:30:30 country to country. Some countries, age of consent is 18, like in the United States. Some countries it's 19. Some countries it's 15. I think in one or two countries, it's 13, which is freaking horrifying. But whatever. We'll pause and just use the. American context. You're thinking maybe, okay, so you have a 16-year-old who's being kind of initiated

Starting point is 00:30:49 by an adult into like adulthood-ish sexual themes and topics. Can a 16-year-old consent and it's kind of blurry? The answer, of course, legally is no. We draw the line somewhere that it's not actually blurry. It doesn't matter that, well, it's 16 in this country and 18 in this country so that it's arbitrary. We've drawn the line and we've decided that this is where the line is. And we don't, there should be no negotiation about that. We have to pick some kind of a standard and go with it. If you want to negotiate and say, well, 18's too old, let's try to change the law to 17, then okay, fine. So maybe you changed the law to 17, but now that's a new standard and it's just as absolute and we don't talk about it. This is all tangential. The point is that they've been

Starting point is 00:31:28 trying to get rid of this idea of age of consent that somebody under this line is not legally or even maybe psychologically capable of giving legal consent. They've been trying to get rid of that idea for a long time. The postmodernists, Foucault, Derrida, you name it, all of them, Sartre. They all, he wasn't technically a postmodernist, but he's an existentialist Marxist. They were all signing this petition in the 70s, a very famous petition. They were signing this to get rid of the age of consent laws in France entirely, which were 15 at the time, to get rid of him entirely. This has always been a goal. And you hear this argument. Every now and then we'll see kind of, you know, anti-woke leftist usually get absolutely blown up,

Starting point is 00:32:10 or even a conservative, Milo Yanopoulos got this, get absolutely blown up. because they come out and try to make the argument that, you know, teenagers under certain circumstances can consent. But then what we see here is not just that. It's the same leftist agenda that, no, no, no, we're going to talk about the rights of the child. And the child is a person. So the person should have absolute human rights. And human rights becomes kind of this word that means that you can't question their awful program. And so anybody, if they claim that they like it, can consent.

Starting point is 00:32:43 Well, if you know anything about child grooming, and I've actually talked with some survivors of being groomed as a child, like five years old, six years old. Right. The child virtually always consents because they get kind of like. That's quote unquote for people who are listening. Yeah, they get grew with quotes around it because the child is brought in the groomer, the pedophile is like, oh, don't you want to be, you know, this or that? And they get them kind of like very comfortable and they're violating to their boundaries one by all. Why don't you lay on me? Why don't you spend time with me?

Starting point is 00:33:15 Why don't we cuddle a little bit while we watch a movie? Don't do you want to touch them? Don't you want to make me feel good? It's this whole thing. And the child, literal from the survivors that I've talked to, gets this psychological impression that they want to please this adult. Yeah. And so they think they are consenting to what's going on when they're actually being grotesquely violated.

Starting point is 00:33:37 And that means that that standard cannot possibly, that the one that the United Nations is putting out, cannot possibly be used. This is absolutely abhorrent that they would try to put such a standard out. But again, this has been a project of the left openly signing big petitions, doing big drives. If you read the literature and queer theory, it's throughout the literature and queer theory, the first paper, I think we've talked about this before, thinking sex by Gail Rubin, 1984, explicitly says that it's an unfair demonization of what she calls cross-generation. sexual relationships. And that that has to be done away with because, you know, that criminalizes something

Starting point is 00:34:19 that, you know, love is love or some horrific statement. This has been a goal. So when I say that in the same way that they accuse our society being structurally racist, that they are actually legitimately structurally pedophilic. I wish I would have worn one of my OK Groomer T-shirts for the show. This is so OK Groomer, Will. This is opening the door. I mean, besides the drug use stuff, which is its own topic.

Starting point is 00:34:53 This is opening the door to rampant decriminalized, thus de facto legal grooming where you're going to be able to convince a young person. Maybe it's a 14-year-old girl who's decided she's rebelling against her family or whatever or a 14-year-old boy who's been groomed by somebody. Maybe he's a young gay man and it's like, oh, or a young gay boy, I guess. And we're going to teach you what it means to be a gay or something like this, a kind of gay grooming that conservative. have been very afraid of would be part and parcel with gay civil rights for a long time. I don't think that most gay people are interested in doing this, but we know that some are, Milo Yanopoulos, openly talked about it and got blown up because he said that he'd think that that's a good idea a number of years ago.

Starting point is 00:35:39 Or he at least said, I think it was meaningful and valuable or something like that. I thought he said that it. I think he was positive about it, but I don't want to make, I don't want to put words in his mouth. So that's not fair. I don't know. Let's be careful. Anyway.

Starting point is 00:35:52 We can go look it up. Yes. And I, yeah, go ahead. This is, but yeah, this is the structural pedophilic move. And I think there are deep, nasty reasons for it that we don't have to get into. It's very simple also is that there are predator type people who believe that they should have access to do whatever they want. Again, it's kind of their own God. But when we talk about that slippery slope, and this is kind of the thing that I want to say, and I think you'll think is interesting, social constructionism, which is what the left operates on. Everything's a social construct.

Starting point is 00:36:22 is always a slippery slope. There's no limit. There's no limiting principle in a social construction world. If gender is a social construct, for example, there is absolutely no place where you can say, well, sex is not, because it's only a political decision that you're making to decide that biology reflects upon that. So you're going to end up, if you start with gender as a social construct,

Starting point is 00:36:48 feminism, you're going to end up in the trans thing destroying your feminism. If you start to say that, you know, everything to do with sexuality is socially constructed, it's only a matter of time until you're going to say that age is a social construct. And we have to start talking about the so-called rights of the child. And if the child consents, this is. So the slippery slope is real. Everywhere you start to believe that things are actually socially constructed instead of rooted in reality. Right.

Starting point is 00:37:12 And this is where we have to start pulling things back. This is what, you know, and a lot of people know that, I mean, I don't dislike Matt. I'm not a huge fan of Matt Walsh, but this is where he was so good and so powerful and so effective, where he gave that speech recently at the university for YAF, but I don't remember which university. And he said, I'm here to tell you the truth that other people won't tell you. I'm going to pull you back to reality. You will never become a woman or a man, whichever one you're transitioning to. Your transition will never complete. And the fact of the matter is a child can never consent. This is reality. They are too impressionable, too

Starting point is 00:37:50 vulnerable, too innocent, they cannot give meaningful consent. Their brains actually have not developed far enough and no amount of queer theory changes that. It may be the case that what we decide as a society is the line, the age of consent line, is somewhat arbitrary in that we could have a public debate and decide, well, maybe 18's too young, maybe it's 21 now, maybe 18's too old, maybe it's 16 now. Different societies have decided different things. But when you draw that line, that line is representative of an agreement that we're going to say, we recognize that before at least some level of psychological development, that you are not meaningfully able to consent to adult activity like sexual activity.

Starting point is 00:38:35 And that's not ambiguous. And it's damaging to children. And unfortunately, the left doesn't understand boundaries. And that's why they're so, they don't like reality. They feel, it's nostalgic. They feel imprisoned by reality. Reality is such that children can't consent and our society reifies that and socially constructed law so that I can't go, you know, chase after my dreams or whatever. This is the fundamental problem on the left.

Starting point is 00:39:03 And so, of course, they go after it. The United Nations, all, in my opinion, it's done is kind of taken the mask off and showed us that all of these warnings that people have been issuing, which I can back up with lots of theory and history or whatever, were. completely accurate that the socially constructivist left has no limiting principles and eventually all of the perversions that they brag about wanting to participate in in the queer theory literature will get put on the table they'll get put institutionally on the table and that you're going to have an organization like the united nations doing this in my opinion the most important takeaway is it's time for the united states to step away from the united nations and pull all of our funding from it and to no longer participate in fact

Starting point is 00:39:47 ideally to condemn this organization as a disaster. And, you know, I want to rehash all of that. I wish I could talk. We could talk more about just the roots of queer theory and how there's a reason why we coincidentally keep seeing these trans activists also caught up in these like grooming schemes and things like that. And as you just talked about, it's not happening in a vacuum.

Starting point is 00:40:22 But rather than just rehash it since we don't have time, go back and everyone should go back and listen to the conversation that you and I had. maybe last summer where we talked about all that, that episode was insanely popular because most people just don't know that it's not just a coincidence that these things are happening. It comes from an actual ideology. And you did mention it being the UN being anti-Western. And I do just want to point out this idea of age of consent is absent in much of the

Starting point is 00:40:49 non-Western world today. Not every religion believes that taking a child bride is perverted or pedophilic in anyone. way there are religions that condone that kind of thing. I would argue because of the biblical mandate to be fruitful and multiply, this biblical idea that marriage, the point of marriage is actually procreation. There's plenty of people who disagree with that, but I would say biblically that's true, that even though there's no exact so-called age of consent in the Bible, because sex is tied to procreation, there is at least a standard that the person, the people, give getting married cannot be children. It's not, you don't take a child bride if the purpose of marriage

Starting point is 00:41:34 is procreation and not just based, you know, perverted pedophilic pleasure. So I do think that, like, biblical morality in Western civilization has played a part in the rightful stigmatization of something like pedophilia. Okay, before, I know you have something to say, but you can't respond to it because we don't have time. No, actually, I don't. I just agree. We have like, we have like two seconds talk about this huge story. I'll have to talk about it more later because we don't have time to get into it. But this goes actually hand in hand with what we're talking about. I'm sure you saw the law that is being passed in Washington State that now allows the state to legally hide runaway children from their parents if the parents do not consent to the child's so-called gender transition or

Starting point is 00:42:16 abortion. This is SB 5599 supporting youth and young adult seeking protected health care services. is this is going to be signed into law by Governor J. Inslee. Okay, so the pointed question that I have for you and try to answer it in like two minutes, if you can. I know. Is how does this law, how does this law to connect to the ideology that you're talking about, the queer theory idea that children actually need to be liberated from their parents as oppressors and sexually liberated, gender.

Starting point is 00:42:54 liberated. Is this a part of that? Yeah, it's exactly the same. And by the way, there are already laws for this in California and Vermont that are horrific as well. So it's not just Washington. Washington's just the newest. And so what you're seeing is that march through the country that starts in the blue states and eventually makes its way to other states. The goal with this is very, very clear. They're going to put parents on notice that affirmation of trans and sexuality issues in children is going to be what you have to do. They're going to threaten to be able to take away your kids or for you to lose your kids if you don't go along with it.

Starting point is 00:43:28 So they are forcing. It's not power at the end of the barrel of a gun, but it kind of is because CPS is going to get involved. And if you try to resist, this is an absolute imposition. This is a direct intentional strike at the idea of parental authority and parental autonomy with their children. And the state is saying absolutely that here's this ideology, queer theory. We endorse this. And not only are you expected socially to affirm it, you are going to participate in the, I'll say, grooming or the ideological brainwashing of your own children or else we're going to step in and take them away. And so this is, I think the queer theory, honestly, is a religion.

Starting point is 00:44:10 And I've already said why. It's a gnostic and hermetic. I think that this is the state imposing a new state religion on parents. But this is what you see in the education literature, by the way, with some. social emotional learning. It's not going to be enough that there's going to be a social emotional learning time at school. Every subject is going to be social emotional learning. Everything that happens at the school. But also they say we're going to get the parents involved to reinforce this. So parents are going to have to do social emotional learning activities with

Starting point is 00:44:35 their children. And then if they don't, eventually what you're going to see under things like the community school models that they're pushing toward the so-called WISC model, whole child, what is it, WSECC, whole school, whole community, whole child model that they're trying to push for. This is already in many states. It's in Oklahoma. That's not blue state. It's all over California. That is a blue state.

Starting point is 00:44:56 This model is going to, the goal is to force parents to participate in the ideological brainwashing, so-called affirmation and celebration of their kids. And it's exactly the same thing we've been talking about. And it is a state imposing a value system that answers fundamental questions about the world and our role in it and that inspires duties of conscience, which in this case is affirmation of a particular idea. ideology and everything that goes with it, which means it meets the First Amendment Establishment Clause definition of a religion according to the Supreme Court.

Starting point is 00:45:30 Totally, totally. But and you can kind of see, you can kind of see why people believe that the only response to a religion like that is a religious response on the other end of it. And I know we could talk about, you know, what that looks like and all of that. And we don't have time. We'll have you back on. No, I understand it, though. I do understand the impulse.

Starting point is 00:45:49 Yeah. I just, I advise care. Yeah, yeah. Okay, thank you, James. As always, I so appreciate your insight. Fascinating, as it always is. Thank you so much. And people can find you on Twitter.

Starting point is 00:46:03 They can find your links. They can find all your books, all that good stuff. You're easy to find. So thank you so much, James. Yeah, I love talking to you, so thanks for having me. Thanks. Hey, this is Steve Deist. If you're listening to Allie, you already understand that the biggest issues facing our country

Starting point is 00:46:23 aren't just political. They're moral, spiritual, and rooted. and what we believe is true about God, humanity, and reality itself. On the Steve Day show, we take the news of the day and tested against first principles, faith, truth, and objective reality. We don't just chase narratives and we don't offer false comfort. We ask the hard questions and follow the answers wherever they leave, even when it's unpopular. This is a show for people who want honesty over hype and clarity over chaos.

Starting point is 00:46:46 If you're looking for commentary grounded in conviction and unwilling to lie to you about where we are or where we're headed, you can watch the Steve Day show right here on Blaze TV or listen wherever you get podcast. I hope you'll join us.

Relatable with Allie Beth Stuckey - Ep 791 | The U.N.’s Push to Decriminalize Child Rape | Guest: James Lindsay

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.