KATY FAUST | Children are Greater Than Equal (Ep. 928)

Let's be honest, most men drift. We wake up, we scroll, we work, and then we just rinse and repeat. And we know we're softer than we should be. That's why I built the 31-day resilience reset. This is not a devotional, it is a field manual for men ready to stop drifting and start fighting back. So, for 31 days, you'll train your spirit, mind, and body with scripture, prayer, and daily challenges that forge real resilience. Go to www.undaunted.life/31days to download this resource for free. That's undaunted.life/31days. Start your reset today. This is Undaunted Life, a man's podcast. I'm your host, Kyle Thompson. Let's get into it. Katy Faust, welcome back to the show. I had to get you on for a second time because people were so excited and happy with your first appearance. They're like, "We got to make sure she can keep that energy up for two episodes in a row." So, are you up to the challenge? >> Let me check. Yes. >> Bam. There it is. That's That's what I thought. >> [laughter] >> That's what I thought it was going to be. Now, I will tell you, I talk pretty fast, and I have a tendency I listen to podcasts at three times speed and all that. I still struggle with you at like two, two and a half times speed cuz whenever you get on a roll, you just start getting after it immediately. So, hopefully we get you on a roll right from the beginning because one of the main reasons why I wanted to have you come back on the show because we solved all the world's problems the last time. Why in the world do we need to do it again? Because last time there was not the public announcement yet of the greater than campaign. So, as opposed to me trying to do my best to set it up, you're here, you do it professionally. So, what is the greater than campaign? Why now? Why you? >> We're going to overturn gay marriage. That's what we're doing. We are going to retake marriage on behalf of children. That over the last almost 11 years of having this Obergefell decision that mandated gay marriage across the country over and above the objections of probably 30 states that had defined marriage as the relationship between a man and a woman in their own constitutions. Over the last 11 years we've seen a complete reordering of the Parenthood laws across the country. There is a direct connection between gay marriage and child commodification. When you legalize gay marriage, you must redefine the family. You must redefine every aspect of the natural family. So, it's it's unacceptable because what you're doing is you're saying in the name of adult equality, in the name of non-discrimination, we need to strip children of their own mother and father so that we can have equal rights. Um and that's not just a problem for the children made intentionally motherless and fatherless who are being raised in same-sex homes. That actually is a problem for every parent and every child because what happened with the decision of gay marriage is well, we can go into that like legally how much ever you want to know, but the bottom line is like this is an absolute restructuring of everything that connects to marriage, family, parenthood, and actually what it means to be a human child. So, we've got 11 years of receipts of how gay marriage has impacted Parenthood law and we we the coalition, you included, you know, you're um thank God we're so grateful to be one of our official partners. You can go to greaterthan.com, go to about us, and take a look at the dozens of you know, we're going to have about 75 I hope by the time this um podcast airs of like coalition members just all coming together and saying, "No. Whatever you're going to do in your private life, fine. But don't touch the kids." So, this is all of conservatism saying, "Leave the kids alone." >> Well, so let's talk about a lot of that uh there. First of all, the argument this is where I think the do whatever you want to do in your private life thing falls apart because that's where the LGBTQ or or the the gay marriage lobby began with, "Hey, just don't try to tell me. Don't try to moralize my bedroom." Then it was like, hey, if we hold hands and want to peck each other on the lips in public, don't even look, don't even think about it, you bigot. And then it was like, hey, just let us have civil unions. Hey, just let us get married. It's the legal stuff, you know, we love each other, who cares? And then it was, let us adopt orphans. And then it's where it is now to where it's like, let us make designer babies and and put them in the wombs of women. Well, I'm getting a little bit ahead of myself. >> [clears throat] >> One of the things that's interesting about this issue, Katie, is as soon as Obergefell came down, Republicans rolled over and just decided, that's it, rolled over and oh, we're dead, this is a non-issue. This issue doesn't come up on the campaign trail. This isn't on the Republican National Committee website. This isn't going to come up in the run-up in the before the general election for the Republican Party. This is not going to be an issue. They're not going to ask J.D. Vance or Marco Rubio or anybody else that's going to run for the Republican ticket in the primary. They're not going to ask them what do they feel about gay marriage? This immediately became a sealed societal issue. It wasn't that the Overton window shifted, Katie. It was that the Overton window closed. This is no longer a debate. We're not talking about this anymore. And so a lot of people, Katie, think that you and I are crazy. You for starting this and me for signing on because they're like, got this is like, you know, trying to go back in time. What are What are you trying to do here? >> We are trying to reverse the revolution of the legal earth. That's true. Um and a lot of people do think that it's impossible. It is not. We absolutely will win. Not We will win because natural reality demands that we win win and child protection demands that we triumph here. And like, it does not matter what five Supreme Court justices say. It doesn't matter how often we repeat love makes a family. It doesn't matter what the GOP says on you know, what they force the national platform to say when it relates to, you know, their identity and their beliefs. There are fundamental natural realities of the human child that are going to be true whether the culture, law, and technology recognizes them or whether they ignore them. What are those realities? Those realities are children come from a man and a woman. That one man and that one woman grant them something that children crave, which is their biological identity. It's very hard for kids to answer the question, "Who am I?" if they can't answer the question, "Whose am I?" That one man and that one woman statistically are the safest, most connected to, most protective of, most invested in children. If you want children to be safe and loved, they are being raised by their married biological mother and father. That man and that woman gives children something that maximizes their development, which is maternal love and paternal love. Those two things do very different things for children at every single stage of their development. So, all those things are true about kids. Every single one of them. And that fundamental natural biological reality is like a beach ball. You can hold it under the surface of the water for only so long before it reemerges reemerges with force, and that is what we're seeing. Like, since I started Them Before Us in 2018, um if I used to post pictures of two men with a baby in the hospital, and I'd say, "This is an injustice. This child has lost their mother. This child is suffering a primal wound because they've lost the connection with the only person they know. This child is going to have identity struggles. This baby is going to have mother hunger making them susceptible and vulnerable to people that will prey on them because they're not having the fundamental needs met." People would say, "All I see are two loving parents." Not anymore, Kyle. Now, I post pictures of two men in a hospital bed with a baby, and people retweet that and they say, "My politics is whatever makes this illegal." Or, "Shut down the baby buying industry." Or, "We need to end gay surrogacy." I mean, like, people are actually outraged. Why? Because we are now seeing, unfortunately, once or twice a month another story of a child who has been sexually abused or killed in the home of two men raising a baby, very often that they customized and ordered through reproductive technologies under these brand new Parenthood laws that Obergefell mandated. So, the victims are now much harder to ignore. The victims are children. So, my job is now just to validate, honestly, what almost everybody on the right already believes. Kids need a mother and a father. And if you go one step upstream from these terrible stories, you get to gay marriage. You get to gay marriage where five Supreme Court justices said mothers and fathers are optional in the life of a child. We need to deliver unrelated kids to same-sex couples in the name of adult equality. And I think I think that the vibe shift has allowed people to say, "I don't like this, and I've never liked it." >> Well, I think the thing that's interesting about this as well is we're supposed to just not notice that gay couples, uh they say they're married even though it's not a marriage. God gets to define marriage, that's not marriage. But, gay couples prefer boy children at a clip of like uh 75% 80% of the time they want male children in their care without any oversight. We're just supposed to not notice that. That's supposed to not be interesting intel whatsoever. And then, obviously, the shift for people is, you know, when a story comes out about, you know, two adoptive gay fathers in the UK raping like an 18-month-old baby to death, sexually assaulting this baby to death, we'll hear the story about, "Well hey uh this straight foster family was uh molesting their kids." Or, "Hey, I was uh molested by my father, and that was my paternal father." You'll get these stories. It's It's this kind of macabre version of whataboutism. But, even getting back to to my main point about the politics of the whole thing, because yes, politics do matter. So, Christians out there that just want to stick your heads in the sand and you don't want to do the Benedict option and you would you don't want to have anything to do with the political sphere. This is a downstream consequence of Christians not paying attention and not being a part of the political process. But Katie, conservatives like me, like Allie Beth Stuckey who's a partner in this, Alyssa Childers who's a partner in this, like there there are those outspoken people out there. But who are the conservative politicians that are talking about this? Because how are we going to get the public to really shift on this? Now, Daily Wire what they did with kind of the the transgenderism stuff and the what is a woman, they created the groundswell which removed the >> [clears throat] >> the ability for the Republican people to hide, right? Cuz they they wanted to hide from the issue. It was too toxic. It was radioactive. They didn't want to go anywhere near it. And so we created this groundswell to where it's like, "Hey, if you start talking about this publicly, I got your back and I'll still vote for you." Is that kind of the ideology here that we're trying to create the groundswell from the bottom as opposed to waiting for the Republicans get their heads out of their rear ends? >> Yep. We're going to We are absolutely going to do that. So, what are we doing with the greater than campaign? Three different things. Number one, we need a credible judicial strategy that is going to force the courts to make a decision. So, we're all of the legislation that we have on tap, mainly for the states. Like we are starting with a state-level strategy. What are we going to be doing? Well, the model legislation, the policy recommendations that we have for the states, it simply forces the government to tell the truth about the natural family. We're going to force these natural contours of the family to reemerge in state law. We're going to do things like say, "Don't say parent one, parent two. Say mother and father. Put mother and father back on your birth certificate. Don't allow people to put unrelated adults on Don't allow people to assign parentage at birth. Just like sex, parentage is recognized. It's not assigned, right? We recognize the two people from whom to put that on the birth certificate. Just make sure that unrelated adults cannot opt in to taking a vulnerable infant home without background checks and screenings like adoptive parents do. We have several different policy recommendations for state-level lawmakers that are simply going to force the government to tell the truth about the natural family. And when they do, what that's going to do it it's going to alert gay couples or gay advocacy groups. They'll say, "Well, wait a second. Like, you can't end sperm and egg donation because we have a right to parented. And if we cannot purchase children, that means that we're not equal under the gay marriage regime." And they'll challenge something like that. But then the question before the courts when that is challenged that's unconstitutional, the question before the courts is not going to be, "Do gay couples have dignity? Like, what's the sad LGBT backstory here? Are they a second-class citizen?" Which is a lot of the sort of emotionally manipulative narrative that they used to push Obergefell to push the gay marriage decision in 2015. The question before the courts is going to be, "Do children benefit from their own mother and father? Or is a state-assigned stranger just as good?" That is the question that's going to be put before the courts. And when that is the question, we have 400 years of common law in our country privileging the natural parent-child relationship. We have 100 years of Supreme Court precedents saying there cannot be outsiders interfering in the natural parent-child relationship. We have common sense. We have social science. We have the testimonies of kids. And when I say we're going to win, it's because I know we're going to win. We absolutely are going to win. Why? Because when you ask the right question, when you properly identify the victims, which is not gay adults that don't get what they want. It's children whose needs, rights, and security, and identity is threatened because we've redefined the family, the courts are going to come to the right answer. So, we need this judicial strategy, which we have. Thank God, I've got the best legal minds um working behind the scenes to advance these kinds of legis- legislative ideas. But, like you said, that is not enough. We have to change public opinion. So, one of the reasons why I conscripted these absolute superstars, these people with pretty significant platforms, like you, like Dr. Albert Mohler, like Robert George, like Josh Hammer, like Michael Knowles, um you know, like Lila Rose. I mean, like I literally have the A team of people who are in my working group, my major influence that we just got Dinesh D'Souza, you know, like when you get the A team together, what we're going to do is now when a politician does choose to say, "Hey, you know what? I'm going to ban I'm going to create some kind of background check for anybody using surrogacy to make sure that a convicted sex offender cannot acquire a newborn without any background checks." Well, the LGBT lobby is going to lose it. They're going to say, "Oh, you're coming out against the gay community. They need support. They need to be rewarded for standing up and defending kids. And so, now we have this army of influencers that can say, "Hey, everybody, go over to this attorney general's Facebook page and support him because he is actually here protecting kids." So, we do need the ground forces. We need the army of people that are going to make this politically rewarding for the lawmakers who do choose to step in despite the fact that they're going to be outgunned by um the fertility industry, by the LGBT lobby, by the entire Democrat party for standing up on behalf of kids. And then we're going to mobilize the church. The other thing that I'm doing is I'm creating materials for both sides of the fiber, Protestants and Catholics, to say, "You do not get to choose the Benedictine option. And if you do, if you run away, if you choose to be silent, if you choose to just like um you know, stay out of the fray, what you're saying is my social acceptance matters more than protection of the vulnerable. And that's not actually a calculation that Christians are allowed to make." >> Especially if you're a Christian that actually reads the Bible, which unfortunately, if you looked at the Ligonier Ministries Lifeway State of Theology from 2025, you had to be a self-described evangelical to even opt into the survey, and then more than 50% of those people surveyed said that God accepts the worship of all religions including including Judaism and Islam, that only around 50% of Christians believe that marriage is between one man and one woman and all those types of things. And so, these are people that are self-described evangelicals that don't spend any time in the Bible. But, if you do read the Bible, the biblical narrative is not you're a Christian now, okay, nothing's expected of you, don't really take you can't You know, hey, you can love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength and not vote. Yeah, that makes total sense because some dork on the internet convinced you of it. But, the ultimate reality here is that all this It's almost like we have to give the public permission to to say to these people, to the LGBTQ+ lobby, to the fertility industry, to the Democratic Party, "Hey, life's tough, get a helmet." Like, two dads is not the same as biological mom and biological dad. And there are plenty of circumstances where biological mom and biological dad are not possible because dad's a deadbeat or dad, mom, you know, passed away unfortunately during childbirth. There are there are those kinds of situations, but that doesn't mean the Democratic Party and the gay lobby gets to swoop in and decide what to do with that infant. The local body of believers more than likely should should decide what needs to be done in order to support that infant and raise them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. But, you you actually alluded this towards the beginning. The foundations of this fight, not created by you, but the foundations that were created by Obergefell, started way before that. The the legal maneuverings and meanderings by the people that wanted to make this a reality. This was a long march for them, and it's sped up considerably since 2015 since Obergefell. But, go ahead and take us through some of the highlights of legally how we got to where we are right now. >> Yeah, first let me say on the topic of the church, the Seattle Times did a front-page hit piece on me in their Sunday paper on Mother's Day that they promoted across all of their social media channels. It was Yeah, it was 2,000 words of an awful lot of unnecessary personal identifying information literally just for the purpose of like go-getter, find her, track her down, intimidate her. But what you know and the reporter pulled out all of these like salacious quotes from different like didn't link to them because man has no balls at all. But like didn't link to them, but he did say and she goes around telling pastors that their primary job is not to be welcoming and affirming of non-traditional relationships. Can you believe it? And I'm like >> The scandal. >> That's correct. Like and I I tell pastors your primary job as it relates to your social disposition towards the outside world world is child protection. That matters more than validation. It matters more than being welcoming and affirming. It matters more than the evangelistic whatever spin you want to softening your message. >> Let's go back to the early church and don't lose don't lose your your space. What was one of the earliest signs that Christians were becoming the hands and the feet of the gospel in the Roman Empire? If you had a dis child that was not desirable whether they were a female child or had some sort of deformity or medical malady of some kind, they would put them out basically in the dump for exposure and the Christians, the followers of Christ, would go and get those children, adopt them and raise them as their own and in the Roman system when you adopted a child you had the same rights, the exact same rights as a biological child in that pagan system. And so this entire idea 2026 pastor that don't want to doesn't want to step on persnickety, you know, cultural landmines, go back to your founding. What did the early mothers and fathers of your movement even do? But anyway, that's just a quick aside so we can get back to legal stuff. >> It's actually a huge part of the curriculum that [clears throat] I'm building for churches is like let's talk about the Old Testament. Let's talk about the 39 verses where God explicitly says that you are not to harm the orphan and the fatherless. You're supposed to protect the orphan and the You can go back to the first century church where they protected the orphan. They rescued them. They brought them into their families, right? The children of exposure. They fished them out of rivers. The The women would The nursing mothers, the Christians, would stand at the middle of the square in case somebody brought an infant to them that they had recently rescued so that she could feed them. I mean, like And don't give me this, "Oh, we're going to stay out of politics." Then wipe Amy Carmichael's name off of your lips. Don't bring to me all of these heroes who like have protected babies and children from infanticide around the world. This is what Christians do. The threats to children change. The cultural assault against children changes depending on the country, depending on the century. The Christian response never does. The Christian response always stands between the child and whatever cultural threat is coming against their life, their body, their family. Like and they say, "No, in the name of our God, the answer is no. We will not cause one of these little ones to stumble." Christians are mandated with child protection. And what's happening in the marriage and family realm is we are green-lighting their victimization. We are not protecting the fatherless. We are manufacturing the fatherless in the name of gay rights. And that is the place where Christians have to step into the great cloud of witnesses. And like actually embody the courage and the clarity that your biblical forebearers and historical forebearers have demonstrated for you. So, I I'm I just don't have a lot of patience for the Christians that are like, "Oh, I just want to love God, love people." And so, I'm not going to get into this. I'm like, "Fine." Then you're actually forsaking like one of the the the manifestation of your pure and undefiled religion. If you're not getting involved in this, you got to re-examine literally your faith. >> Well, and Katie, if you're trying to love your neighbor as yourself, you have to ask yourself, "Are these children my neighbors?" >> Yes. >> Because the only answer is yes. Now, are these gay men that are {quote} and {quote} married, are they your neighbors? Yes, they are your neighbors that need the gospel, right? And so, that they need the gospel spread to them. Same thing with your Islamic neighbor, with your atheistic neighbor, with your pagan neighbor. They need the gospel of Jesus Christ. And then the downstream net positives that come from those decisions or that reality of faith in Christ are going to lead to a lot of things that we're advocating for. But if you as a Christian, because of your own personal cowardice or laziness, don't want to {quote} and {quote} get into the fight, no one's asking you to go knock doors. No one's asking you to stand up at a rally and give a, you know, a full-throated endorsement of a candidate that's going to fight in the same way that you're talking about, Katie. But we are telling you that even in your silence, you can be supportive because a vote is a silent thing that has a public outcome, which very becomes very loud depending upon who uh who is in power and where it swings the power one way or another. And again, this takes place in the political sphere. This is not some sort of thing that's in the ether of society. No, this takes place in the political sphere and it takes place in the legal realm. And so, again, getting getting back to that, so much legality went into how we even got here. So, I know I I I threw you off into right field, so I'm yanking you back. Let's get into the legal stuff. >> I'm back. Let's do this right now. So, >> [clears throat] >> what happened in 2015 is five Supreme Court justices said, "Hey, in essence, it was a very Roe versus Wade decision. We've discovered this new right, this new right that the founders never would have conceived of, right? It's not mentioned anywhere in the Constitution. It should be a state-level issue, but we've actually discovered that there is a right to gay marriage in the Constitution. Who knew? I mean, certainly not Barack Obama, who even, you know, 10 years before that wouldn't have known that there was a right, but somehow the Supreme Court discovered this new right." What happens when something is a right? What is a right? It is something that must be protected by the government. And so, how do you protect this new found right to gay marriage? Well, Justice Kennedy said it in his opinion on Obergefell, he said, "Same-sex couples need to be afforded the full constellation of benefits of marriage, that there can be no distinction between same-sex and opposite-sex couples." Now, marriage, think about marriage law as the hub of a wheel, right? The hub of the legal wheel as it relates to all family, all parentage laws. What is in the center of that wheel is going to affect all the different spokes. We used to have a wheel a center of the wheel that was procreative. The whole, you know, in 1996 when a bipartisan Congress passed the Defense of Marriage Act, they literally said, "The government has an interest in marriage because it has an interest in children." Right? Parentage is the reason why government pays attention to marriage at all. So, when you redefine marriage, you must redefine parentage. It's not a question of if, it's that you must. It's how will you do that? So, how is it that you make sure there's no distinctions between same-sex and opposite-sex couples in marriage? You give them children. So, what we've seen is a complete overhaul of parentage laws in the last 11 years in the name of gay rights. What have they done? Think about all the different aspects of the natural family. In the natural family, there's always a man and there's always a woman. They create children through their union that are biologically connected to them. The children tend to be pretty spaced out, you know, you don't generally have eight children at once, for example. Um, and you're going to make sure that there is a both male and female presence in the home growing up all the time. There's also only two. There must be two to make a baby. So, every single aspect of that natural family is destroyed. Because now any kind of constraints, any kind of category, any kind of boundaries is regarded as discrimination. So, now what we're seeing is the mass production of children, right? We already have several cases in California, especially because California was one of the earliest states to redefine parentage in the name of gay rights. We have Chinese billionaires creating hundreds of kids. We've got the Chinese couple that created 21 children, now 26, because six more have been seven more have five more have been born since they were busted for like mass producing these children in their home, 15 of which were under the age of three, all which were born through surrogates. Now, we've got elderly people, single elderly men creating children under these new parentage laws. We now have the redefinition of infertility. It's no longer 12 months of unprotected heterosexual sex that doesn't result in a pregnancy or live birth. Now, single and same-sex couples are infertile, so that insurance or state benefits can manufacture motherless and fatherless children in the name of non-discrimination. And, most critically, we have new pathways of parentage being established. So, the two legitimate ways, the two child-centric ways to establish parentage, to make sure that an adult can take a vulnerable newborn home from the hospital, is that they're the biological parents or they've undergone significant screening and vetting and background checks through adoption. Both of those are discriminatory in the gay marriage universe, because both of them treat unequally opposite same-sex couples. So, we've had to create new ways of establishing parentage, and that's called de facto parentage or intent-based parenthood. I intend to parent this child. I've assembled sperm, egg, and womb. Therefore, I get to walk out of the hospital with a kid that I'm not related to, because I have a state-backed contract. So, what you have is now babies on demand. There can be one parent, there can be four parents. The parents can be the natural parents, they can be biological strangers, the children can be mass produced. You can have elderly couples making children that are or are not related. Who cares? Who knows? Nobody's asking. Any natural contour of the family has been obliterated because now the only thing that makes a family in the Obergefell universe is did the adult get the exact product they wanted at the exact time? And that is all taken place. Like we have receipts for every single one of those things that I talked about, those news headlines, the overhaul of parentage laws, the fact that we've reoriented birth certificates to serve adults rather than kids. We have very, very clearly the objectification and commodification of children in the name of validating this new adult right. And it has to end because children aren't commodities, right? They're not objects to be acquired by any and every random stranger. They are people with inherent rights, right to life, right to their mother and father, and those rights are under threat in the name of gay equality. >> Hey guys, real quick. You've probably heard the phrase ignorance is bliss, right? Well, some of you are ignorant about where the beef that you buy at the grocery store comes from and what it took to get to you. So, that single package of grocery store ground beef can contain meat from over 100 different cows, sometimes from multiple countries. And if one of those cows was sick or mishandled in some way, it's mixed right into your dinner. So, most people don't realize that some ground beef at the store isn't just beef, either. It's scraps and trimmings chemically treated with ammonia to kill bacteria and then blended in to bulk up the weight of what you're buying. It's legal, it's cheap, and it's on the plates of Americans all over the country, usually without the customer ever knowing. So, even if you buy what you think is a nice roast or steak, it's been passed from feed lot to processor to packaging plant, handled by people who will never eat it, and raised by farmers who will never see the end product. And in that journey, the cattle were likely fattened on hormone-packed feed, pumped full of antibiotics just to survive cramped feed lot conditions, and processed alongside meat from hundreds of other animals. And by the time it hits your grill, you don't know whose cow was, what it was fed, or what's actually in it. I don't want you or your family eating low-quality, jacked-up beef. That's why I want you to use the official beef delivery partner of Undaunted Life, Primal Beef. So, Primal Beef is a cattle operation owned and operated by Shawn Glass. He's a retired Navy SEAL that partnered with Jocko Willink to launch Primal Beef. So, what makes Primal Beef different from other beef delivery companies? It's a combo of the following. All-American black Angus cattle, and the beef comes from one farm, and that's in Virginia's Shenandoah Valley. The beef is all-natural, no hormones ever, no mRNA ever. And after slaughter, the entire carcass is dry-aged, then hand-cut by artisan butchers, and then flash-frozen to ensure that it maintains tenderness, marbling, and flavor. And here's another cool thing. For every box sold, Primal Beef donates meat directly to a member of America's special operations forces through the C4 Foundation. So, you can take pride in knowing that your purchase will help put literal food on the table for America's finest warriors. If you're still on the fence, it's probably because you've been eating too much soy, drying your emo tears with your bangs, and you've forgotten what real food tastes like. Primal Beef can help with that. Try Primal Beef out today by going to primalbeef.com. That's primalbeef.com. Use the promo code Kyle to get 25 bucks off your first order. Again, that's primalbeef.com, promo code Kyle to get $25 off your first order. Well, Katie, I I try to do a lot of steel manning of the other side. I try to figure out, okay, what are the foundations of this? And very quickly you find out that all roads lead back basically to spiritual warfare, to satanic influence, those types of things. But this is something that I can argue in the spiritual realm, but I can also argue it in the pagan realm. Because look, if you just think that time, space, and matter had a timeless, spaceless, and material beginning, and that somehow all the things that caused the Big Bang were just kind of there, even though we can't explain how they got there. And you know, that we as humans, we're just highly evolved chimps that used to be fish, that used to be goo, that used to be stardust. Even if you're one of those people, then guess what? Nature [clears throat] doesn't even like homosexual unions because there's not a single species that allows for the propagation of that species by the combination of two male gametes or two female gametes. It's not a thing. It doesn't exist. And so, whether you believe in God or whether you don't, it's it's just doesn't work. Like it literally just absolutely does not work. But the other thing I'm I want to kind of double click on it in terms of what you talked about, there are so many people that are going to be shocked and they may miss that you heard it. That's why I want you to go back to it. Because there are people that just assume that for a gay couple to you know, pay for IVF, and we'll get to more on IVF here in a second. Pay for surrogacy, we'll get more into that here in a second. Get this designer baby and take it home or these Chinese billionaires or these random people that are just sneaking across the border to to give birth to their baby so that that eventually the entire family can move here from Guatemala or from, you know, some somewhere around the world that that doesn't have American values. What people don't understand is the difference between what a straight adoptive couple in America, who are typically Christians by the way, that's the majority of adoptive couples are Christian families, what they have to go through in terms of background check to get legal access to care for an orphan versus we'll just keep it simple, the creation of an orphan, right? Yeah, someone that does not have biological mom or or or, you know, or birth mom or any of those types of things. And I know this because I've had some very very dear friends that have gone through the process of adoption and ended up popping smoking getting out of it because it was so unbelievably difficult and and intrusive and it didn't really suit their family anymore. And all they wanted to do was to care for for an orphan and to take them into their home. So, just explain the the differences between the background checks, the scrutiny that those two different groups have to go through. >> This is really important. And it's important um Let me let me illustrate by this. I was at a speaking event a week or so ago and there was a gay man in the audience who um is married to another man, married to another man, and he said, "I was going to be there for the event but I was going to leave when you spoke because you know, he was wearing a rainbow pin and um he's like, cuz I had heard about you and I didn't want to listen to you speak." But then somebody said, "Just stay. Just stay and see what you think." So I get on stage and I talk about these non-negotiables of the human child. I talk about what a child's own mother and father are able to offer them. And then I always do something when I talk about the statistics that children are most likely to be safe and loved when raised by their own biological parents. I always make the audience do something in the middle of my speech. I make them Google the words mother's boyfriend. So while I'm talking, while I am detailing the higher rates of risk of abuse and neglect at the hands of an unrelated man, they are reading all of these different headlines of some of the most horrific, graphic headlines of abuse and neglect, child torture. I mean, like the creative ways that unrelated men sharing living spaces with a child will torment and torture that child. It's it's horrific. It is true that some biological parents will neglect and abuse children. But the scale, the magnitude, [clears throat] and the numbers uh just are blown out of the water when you're talking about unrelated men sharing living spaces. And then I said, "Guess what's present in every same-sex headed household?" At least one unrelated man in 100% of cases. >> Right. >> Now, in heterosexual homes, you may have an unrelated man in the home, but the biological system is that if there is a heterosexual union, the children of that union are going to be related to both. That man is statistically the most protective man in a child's life. You can find exceptions, but the rule is a man is going to be ferociously protective of his own kids. So, that gay man came up to me afterwards and he said, "I didn't want to listen to you, but I did. And I am convinced that I am um you know, he's he's formerly transgender and he said, "I'm convinced that I had gender dysphoria because my mother's boyfriend lived with us for 8 years and he was a sexual predator and he abused me for 8 years and I know that that created this alienation from my own body. Um so, I'm not here to make gay adults feel good. I am here to protect him as a child. Uh he may not get what he wants as an adult in my world, but he would have gotten everything he needed and deserved in my world as a child and probably prevented him on like this pathway of body rejection and alienation from masculinity. So, I make people Google those stats because you cannot simply intend your way into parentage. You cannot simply say, "I'm going to be a good mom or dad." You can't simply design a child and then have it not affect them at all. The reason why adoptive parents like me, the reason why so many of your friends who wanted to care for the orphan got so discouraged is because social workers are not fools. They know that you can't just walk into an adoption agency and say, "Hey, we'd love to adopt a child. Trust us, we're great parents. And by the way, we've got a big bank account. So, this is going to all be fine." Social workers will lose their licenses. We have to do background checks, screenings, references. When I went through my adoption process, we got letters from the doctor. We sent them like our financial reports. Social workers came to our house. They watched how we parented our other kids. We had to go through adoption training. We had to do post-placement reports. We had to get fingerprinted. Why? Because actually children are at significant risk when they're raised by unrelated adults. And even adoptive parents that go through significant screening, they're still increased risk of abuse and neglect from adoptive parents compared to the average run-of-the-mill biological parent. So, when we are talk I I say this to all of my audiences, family can be very malleable from the adult's perspective. From the child's perspective, it can be a matter of life and death. So, what we're doing now is we have created a schizophrenia in parentage laws where we have said, either it's a biological basis, which statistically is the safest home for a child, or it's an adoptive basis, which is the state's best attempt to replicate the safeguards of biology. >> Right. >> Or you can manufacture a child in the name of reproductive technologies under these new Obergefell-mandated parentage statutes and take an unrelated child home with no biology and no adoptive screening. And why do you think that those homes are now being exposed as highly, highly risky as it relates to child abuse and child death? It's because unrelated adults it's not even the sexual orientation of adults. It is the relatedness of adults that safeguards children. And there's always unrelatedness in same-sex-headed households. >> There's something natural there. I've talked about this a lot before. So, I I you know, I'm I'm very interested in ancient warfare and things like that. Just like it's insane. We're we're so soft in modern society to think of two sides just running towards one another and the stabbing each other to death in the middle of the desert seems insane. But, if you go back to the Greek city-state days, there's something called the phalanx, right? So, we've seen that. That's from the movie 300, the turtle shell thing where I've got this big shield in my left arm and I've got my spear in my right. Well, my right side's exposed. So, how do I take care of that? Well, the guy to my right is protecting me with his shield. And we link that up all the way across to create this turtle shell, which is a great defensive and offensive fighting motion. But, I found out something. This was like a throwaway line in some sort of book that I was looking at. They would make sure to put brothers next to brothers, fathers next to sons, uncles next to nephews. Why in the world would they do that? >> [clears throat] >> Because the only way for the phalanx to be defeated is if it's cracked. If someone in the middle of the phalanx decides, I'm out of here, this is nonsense, and they take off running. But if I'm protecting my brother to my left and my dad is to my right, you think I'm going to take off running? The odds go incredibly way down. So the exact same thing is apply applicable here in that there is this innate protective mechanism, especially in men, for progeny, right? For the arrows that they're shooting in the next generation. You want to get me upset really, really quick? Show me a video or a headline where a kid was taken advantage of, and I'm ready to peel the skin off of these people. You know, I I don't have daughters, I have two sons, and so I'm trying to raise up the two most toxically masculine men possible, but I look at my my buddies that have daughters, and the things that I would do to anyone that would try to harm those daughters, like I'm certainly not hoping for that. But I think men have that innate sense, even with kids that are not theirs, but especially with kids that are biologically attached to them, and you're right, and the bear's repeating. The other Aside from their mother's womb, the most dangerous place for a child to be in America is in the presence of an unrelated adult male in the home. It is It's not even close, right? So you can you can save me your arguments about equality and all that, because a lot of this, Katie, I feel like is we live in a monoculture now, where everything is specific to you. We used to experience things as a wider society. We don't really do that anymore. We have the algorithmic culture that will give you your perfectly curated Amazon feed and Instagram feed and TikTok feed. And so we feel this entitlement to never be uncomfortable. And I think that that's part of this as well, to where these gay people that feel entitled to these things, we feel like as the normies, right? We feel like, oh, I'm sorry if this makes you uncomfortable, but no, you can't have a kid. Like, kick rocks. Like, well, why should I I be terribly concerned about whether or not you're going to be offended by my words? I'm concerned about the well-being of that child. Let's not pretend like these are the same thing. Go. >> That's exactly right. I'll tell you why we are where we are today. It's because gay adults frame themselves as victims in the marriage debate. They are like, well, we've suffered so much, you know, we never thought we'd be able to get married and have children. Well, we deserve to be happy like everybody else. Well, we're a second-class citizens. Well, why are we like why aren't we afforded the same level of dignity? And And you're like treating us as like less than. And they've successfully framed themselves as victims. But the problem is when you misidentify the victim, you get the wrong policy. So, we got the wrong policy because they framed themselves as the victims. The real victims are children. The real victims are children who are made intentionally motherless and fatherless. And And we're not just talking about some emotional wound. We are talking about significantly riskier households. We are talking about developmental disadvantage. Like, when a child is raised We're about to release a video of a young man who was raised by a two lesbians. Um and he was raised in a stable home, and they cared for his needs, and he had food in his belly, and he had a roof over his head, and he hungered for a father. He hungered hungered for masculine love. [clears throat] >> Yep. >> Because kids are made for it. And thank God. Thank God he found some trustworthy coaches and the fathers of some of his friends to help meet that need for male love. But children who are starving for male love are vulnerable children. Vulnerable to victimization because there's a lot of men that are very happy to give them masculine love. This is why girls who are fatherless, like in single-mother homes, this is why they have a 55% higher likelihood of being teen mothers. Right? This is why there's a 35% increased risk that fatherless boys are going to get involved in crime because they'll find a drug runner who's like, "Dude, I love you. You're part of my family. Just go take this over to the house next door." Right? This is why you see a 35 to 55% increased risk of early death in children whose parents divorce. Usually, that means losing a relationship with their father, because they are just in these more vulnerable spaces. There's less attention paid to them. Whatever adults are in their life are paying less attention. Not even just targeting them for abuse. They are more likely to suffer accidental death, because the people in their world do not have the same level of investment and protection to them. These are natural human realities. There is something you can either go back to like a evolutionary biologists who have actually done the most work on this, or you can just look at sin nature. And see, if you're not the genetic father of a child, you don't care about them as much. And And I know heroic stepfathers, and I know heroic stepmothers, who are desperately trying to bring redemption to a broken situation, and they deserve to be acknowledged, and they deserve to have the kind of encouragement that doing the hard thing on behalf of the kids in their home requires. They are anomalies. They're absolute anom- anomalies. There is something protective. It's It's probably the best recipe humanity has ever found is to have the genetic mother and father raising children together in a permanent married union. That best keeps away all of the predators, every kind of predator. And you're exactly right. Like, blood is thicker than water, and blood does conquer whatever form of sappy vacuous love the other side wants to preach. Your chosen family, unfortunately, statistically is not going to produce the same kind of outcomes as your blood family will. It's as if there's a fundamental design and embodiment to what it means to be human, and we are ignoring it. And as a result, children are being victimized. >> Well, and Katie, this sexual revolution is never going to be satiated. They simply will not be satiated. They will continue to push. Once they get the Once they've conquered the next hill and set up their forts, they're going to attack the one after that. Because again, like it's what I said earlier. It started with, "Hey, just let us have do whatever we want to do in the the privacy of our own rooms." But what they're doing in the privacy of their own rooms is destructive to the society outside of that home. And so I have a vested interest in what goes on in that household. Right? I don't think the police should bust in and you know, stop them from doing some sort of depraved act if that's what they're going to do. But it does spill over, no pun intended, into what's going on in the society around us. That's it. That's exactly what happens. And beyond that, I We're going ahead. >> Let me just explain why that is. Cuz people all the time, like in our comment section, like sending to our email inbox, they'll be like, "Why does my gay brother's marriage, and they're never even going to have kids, why are you so interested in their sex life and their love life?" I mean, like, keep your nose out of your own business. I'm like, let me explain why. Because your brother and his partner's marriage, even if they never have children, require that we dilute the natural parent-child relationship. It requires So, let me tell you actually what happened with gay marriage. There was a lot of people, conservatives included, and you really touched on this. They're like, "Well, we're out. We're not going to talk about this." They were okay with it because they're like, "Get the government out of marriage. Like, should the government be involved at all? Like, why do we even need them to like it's just a piece of paper. This is something created by God. Like, who cares whether or not gay marriage takes place?" There was a lot of sort of libertarian arguments being made. Like, why does the government need to be involved? Now, I'll tell you why. It is because there are natural pre-political rights, specifically parental rights to their own child, and reciprocally, children's right to be known and loved by their own mother and father. That typically is an area where the government will not go. Why? Because it's a natural right. The government doesn't establish it. The government exists to protect it. What happened after gay marriage is they not only started to interfere with that, they started to co-opt and overtake it. Now the government has If the government, let me explain this to everybody who's like, "Well, it still doesn't really affect me." If the government has the power to assign parentage to an unrelated adult, they have a lot more power to unassign it from you. This is actually such a massive power grab by the state. And so what these two men do in the privacy of their own home, right? Because we legalized gay marriage, the very legal existence of their relationship means your connection to your own biological child is a lot weaker than it was 11 years ago. And I I wrote about this um it's an article at First Things called The End of Natural Parentage, where I charted about nine different laws, nine different ways that we used to say this is an untouchable relationship, the parent-child relationship, that has either been weakened or completely abolished since gay marriage. So, you cannot have both. You cannot have the importance of parental rights to your own child and gay marriage. You have to pick one. And at some point the law is going to have to pick two. >> Well, we live in a society where if you don't confirm that yes, your little boy is actually a little girl because that he wants to be called Mary and wear a dress to school, in certain jurisdictions you can have your parentage removed, right? And I just need to make a quick side note and a lot of people in my audience are not going to like this, but hey, I say I say things, right? That's that's It's kind of my thing. I say things even if it's not comfortable. Libertarianism, uh libertarians in general, they're moral idiots. And I don't mean that to be as derisive as it sounds. So, so hang with me if you're a libertarian, right? Maybe you're a libertarian because you like Ron Swanson from Parks and Rec or maybe you heard some guy on Joe Rogan talking and he's like, "Libertarian, whatever." The highest virtue in the libertarian worldview is personal autonomy, right? Which works into the argument of the people saying that gay men should be able to create babies and to use surrogacy and all that because their personal autonomy is highest. There's no defined morality within libertarianism, right? There's actually no political structure that has Right, there there can't be because of the highest order virtue, which is hey, just leave me alone. Let me do what I'm going to do. You can't run a society that way cuz guess what? Society is not agnostic, right? We know if you read Romans 1, we know innately there's something that's put in there that shows us there is a moral law and a natural law that shows us what is good and what is not good, right? And so this this idea that you can extrapolate a worldview, it's just like new atheism. The reason why the new atheists aren't as popular as they were 15, 20 years ago is cuz people tried it and it doesn't work. You can't You can't make it. So the libertarian thing, they'll never be the third party here in this country. They simply cannot be. They don't have anything foundational. The Democrats have something foundational. It's foundationally wrong. It's dark and demonic, but they have some sort of foundation, but the libertarian thing is just basically like having your feet planted firmly in midair. And so we're we're we're somewhat winding to a close here and we got to get to the subject matter because Katie, every time I bring it up and when I brought it up in our last uh conversation, again, the the least popular thing that I've ever talked about is the fact that pitbulls are basically wild animals and shouldn't be owned by private citizens. Obviously, I've gotten a lot of hate for that, but you know what I'm going to say. It's IVF, in vitro fertilization. I have a niece and nephew because of that process. I have very, very good friends that have expanded their families because of the IVF process. >> [clears throat] >> I thought it was a net positive and had no moral implications whatsoever until I was exposed to the work of the great Al Mohler, of the great Lila Rose of Live Action. And they're talking about it as if there's a moral component to IVF and I'm like, "Ho Wait, hold on. Hold on. Wait a minute. What I What What are we talking about here? I thought this was like This is like basically getting your shoulder fixed, but we're creating a baby. What What's the issue?" And then I found out about the millions, ladies and gentlemen, the millions of children that are in frozen arrested development around the globe and specifically in this country. And so while people have expanded their families with IVF, no one's concerned about that baby's brothers or sisters that are either going to be thrown away, donated to science for experimental purposes. Almost none of them are going to be adopted. It's almost an impossibility at this point. And those are image bearers of God. But my goodness, Katie, when I talk about this and some of my best friends are like, "Kyle, bro, I'm with you. I get it. You're edgy and all that. Dude, you just can't talk about this." And I'm like, "If you start telling me what I can and can't talk about, you're ensuring that I'm going to talk about it more and more loudly." But you were very fervent in your first appearance on the show talking about IVF. And people, again, they're so offended by this because, again, we innately think that these babies are are amazing and should be protected. And why don't you want good Christian couples to be able to expand their families? It's cuz they're not really reckoning with the moral implications of the process. So, take that wherever you'd like to go with it. >> All right, listen to me, you guys. Kyle is right. Kyle is right. And I understand that you've had um sort of a defensive mechanism that's risen up in you because you know and love people that have used IVF and you know their children and you love their children. Why? Because those children need love and protection. They deserve a shot at life. The vast majority, maybe 90% of children created in vitro in a laboratory, in a Petri dish, the vast majority will never even get a chance to be transferred to the womb. You know, if you've gone through IVF, that your doctor encouraged you to mass produce embryos. They encouraged you to make as many as possible. Maybe you had 15, maybe you had 25, maybe you had 35. And why do they do that? You're not going to parent 35 children. You know, you know what took place. And that is that they let a lot of them grow and then maybe they told you some of them were non-viable, which if you go to them before us, you go to our Substack, we just published uh in the last couple weeks something about what does non-viable mean? And the answer is there's no scientific definition. What one doctor will say, "Oh, this is viable." Another one will say it's not. They're not grading your embryos. They're not determining viability based on whether or not they're developing properly. They're doing it based on how successful do we think this would be at implantation because we have to protect our live birth rates and if something looks sub-optimal, it might give us a kind of lower designation with the one shred of information that we have to share with the public and it actually hurt our bottom line if this embryo that we deem to be not be perfectly developed those non-viable embryos, we've got a lot of evidence that they're actually viable. They will develop. You can implant them, but you're being told, "Mass-produce these kids." Why? Because then you're going to whittle down the ones that you want. You know that your embryos got graded, didn't they? Didn't they? They graded your embryos. They made them. Here's the A grade. Here's the B grade grade. Let's throw out the non-viables, many of which actually would have developed into a child. And maybe they've said, "Hey, you know what? They're not going to be developmentally [clears throat] established anyway. Go ahead and donate them to science." So your children got experimented on in the name of non-viability, right? And maybe you felt maybe you were told, "Hey, this is good if for humanity. Donate your children to science." The rest of them got thrown away as medical waste. And then the A grade embryos, maybe you had five of them, so you implanted two. Then you froze the rest and you froze some of the B grade embryos as well. And then maybe those first two took and you went home with twins. Hallelujah! >> Yeah. >> Two out of your 25 survived. Thank God. But now the ones that you didn't discard, the ones you didn't donate to research, you've got 10 left in the freezer. What are you going to do with those 10? The truth is you're not parenting 12 children. Right? And then very a lot of you guys are going to end up writing my nonprofit Then Before Us 6 years from now saying, "I can't sleep at night. I can't sleep at night because I have these two perfect 8-year-olds that are sitting at my table doing their homework and I love them so much and I've got these frozen siblings that are fully my children and I can't donate them to research. They're just as much a child as the one that I love. I can't donate them to another family. Like a lot of these kids are going to look more like me than the two kids in my house do. They're my kids. What do I do?" We get those letters all the time because the fertility industry duped these absolutely desperate usually women into mass-producing their own children and then keeping them dependent on the fertility clinic if they want to have more and then telling them that the only option for these surplus children that they have is to destroy them or give them to strangers. And people are like, "What do I do?" And the answer is you're absolutely cooked. You're cooked because humans aren't made to be frozen and they're not made to be mass-produced and they're not made to be shelved in storage and they're not made to be eugenically selected out of existence because they're the wrong sex, because they have the wrong eye color, because maybe some kind of preimplantation screening said they could have a slightly elevated risk of cystic fibrosis or whatever it is. You're cooked because we're doing things to children that humanity has never done before. And when you look at the hundreds of the millions of embryos that we're creating every year, only 2 to 3% of those embryos are going to be born alive. 2 to 3% and if you believe if you believe that life begins at conception, you are now talking about the mass destruction of embryonic life at a scale that makes the abortion industry blush. Our best num our best estimate is the baby-making industry of IVF destroys four times the number of little lives as the baby taking industry of abortion. And maybe not you, but a lot of other people that are making children in vitro anywhere from 30 to 60,000 children of the 100,000 that are born every year through IVF also lose their mother or father or both in the process. So, not only is this victimizing children's right to life, it is commercially severing them from their mother and father. And the children that do make it through the process of life are going to struggle with identity issues. They're going to be living in those unstable households. They're very likely growing up in same-sex or single-parent homes. They're going to be more vulnerable to exploitation and abuse because they don't have their mother and father in the household. So, I'm sorry. I I'm very, very glad that your children survived. And now you need to come out and you need to talk about the child victimizing processes of IVF that you probably saw firsthand. >> And Katie, there's another layer to this because I was asked this question on a podcast where where I was being asked the question. So, this is actually from Jobie Martin, a partner of mine in ministry. He got a bunch of questions from people on his staff because there were people that were so mad when I did my episode called "Christians Shall Not Use IVF" that people were like, "Hey, you you can't have anything to do with Kyle anymore. Like you you can't talk to him anymore. You can't do ministry because this is so anathema. Like how could he say something like that?" And to Jobie's credit, he said, "Look, I don't agree with Kyle about everything that he's ever said, but like that's we need guys like that in the fight. We need guys that are willing to pull the pins on grenades and throw them into culture. You you need guys like that cuz you can't always do it from the pulpit." But he posed a question that I'd never heard before and never considered. And my immediate answer is the one I stand by now, which was, "Let's say, like with all technology, Big Fertility keeps pushing the IVF technology. They keep pushing it further and further and further. And let's say some Christians, some well-meaning Christians, they get in there. They've got a bunch of money. And we get the science right down to where we can do a one-for-one. And it doesn't cost $20,000, it doesn't cost $50,000, but we can do one-to-one. So, you have that couple that's been trying for 2 years to get pregnant for whatever reason, it's unexplained, they can't get there, and they can pay to make sure there's one embryo created, one implanted, and we got the science to make sure that baby can come to fruition. Is that okay? And I said, "No." And he was like, "Really?" And I'm like, "Because it takes away the conjugal union of man and wife to create that life. Just because the gamete comes from the male, the one-celled sperm cell, and the gamete comes from the female, the one-celled egg cell, and then they're combined into a one-celled zygote, it is biologically mom and biologically dad, but it didn't come through the through the conjugal union, which is the entire reason for the propagation of the species. That's how we're supposed to push the the species forward. That's part of be fruitful and multiply. And, you know, people evaluated that answer however they wanted, but that was my answer, that I think you're the further you get away from God's design, the less moral it becomes. That's just kind of direct, and if you're a Christian, you should believe that way. But I'm wondering if that question has come up for you all about, you know, the the ubiquity and the the furtherance of technology, how AI is going to work into all this, and how would you answer that question? >> Okay, there's two different things going on here. So, first of all, we have the ability now to create one embryo that we immediately implant. That's >> freezing, without So, nobody does it. It's too cost prohibitive. >> That's right. >> I've now spoken to tens of thousands of people at different conferences around the world, and everybody says, "Can I do IVF in a way that's that's okay?" And the answer is fine. Don't destroy any embryos. Don't grade any out of out of existence. Don't freeze any. When they go in the freezer, they very seldom come out. Um don't selectively reduce. Like, if you put in two, and it triples, or like, you know, then you have triplets, one of them twins, then you'll have to carry all of them to term, which you will be strongly advised to abort one of them because it's already a high IVF is high risk, multiples are high risk, you're probably 43, so you're already a geriatric pregnancy, triplets, girl, please. I mean, like that's a high-risk pregnancy. So, there is it's possible to do all of that, virtually nobody does. And now I've been, you know, approached by five different people that came up to me afterwards and said, "We actually did do that. We did use, you know, we did froze some, but we went back, we used every single one of them. We didn't screen out any of them. We didn't selectively reduce any of them. Um, you know, or we went back and we freshly made them and implanted them. We had to do five different rounds, but we ended up with two children." And I'm like, "Thanks for letting me know. Are you loaded? Are you rich?" And they're like, "Yes. Yes." >> Right. >> It takes so much money to do this in a way that's pro-life. And very often the people that try will fight their own doctors to do it. So, we actually can do this now, but nobody does. They don't have the money to do it. So, let's say we get to the place where it's not cost-prohibitive, right? Where you can do it and it's $2,000, right? To do the creation and then the embryo transfer. So, what you're doing here is you're like, "Let's make this little carve out for us who are going to do this in a way that respects children's right to life and right to their mother and father and right to be born free and not bought and sold." Fine, you get your little exception at the cost of an industry that's completely unregulated, and everybody else is still mass-producing babies, and predators are acquiring them, and those surplus embryos are going to 64-year-old men who are creating twins who then will be kept in cages, which is something that happened in LA discovered last year. I mean, and you have pensioners in the UK who are now creating children, you know, through these surplus embryos, in essence raising their own caregivers. Great. Congratulations. You've now figured out a sliver of a way to do IVF in a way where you're not violating the rights of the child, but the industry is still running rampant because if if the manufacturing of children exists, most people are not going to practice it the way that you do. So, let's talk about kind of the other aspect of this. Christian Christian theology Christian's ethics sexual ethics bioethicists will say three things always need to go together in the sociological world because it's what God prescribes in his biblical world and that is sex, marriage, and babies. We have tried to separate sex from babies, right? IVF, we've tried to separate babies from sex, birth control, we've tried to separate marriage from babies saying you can have babies without marriage. Now we're saying you can separate babies from marriage, right? Like you can have be married but you don't need to have kids. So, every single one of those if you separate sex, marriage, and babies, if that if that triad is separated in some way, children are victimized. There's something about severing any one of those three from the other two >> Right. >> where children pay the price. And so, that's what you've got like this it's what you're saying. If you're going to sever babies from sex, there is going to be a price to pay. Maybe that one child doesn't lose their right to life or their right to their mother and father, but you're still green-lighting a practice where babies are separated from sex and that's what we've got in the world of IVF. That's why we have 1 million to maybe 10 million frozen lives on storage in this country alone because we separated babies from sex. And separating babies from sex means we don't have to just wait for one egg to release a month. We can extract 25 eggs. We can fertilize all of them. We can take 20 of them. We can we can screen them for the eye color that we want and the sex that we want. We can now run them through these embryonic uh clinics where they will scan up to 1,200 different attributes to so that you can actually curate and customize the child that you want. I mean, we are now so firmly in the eugenics realm because us Christians are so desperate to justify IVF in some way, somehow um by disregarding God's natural design to make sure sex, marriage, and babies are always connected. So, people, Kyla's right. And if he's going to lose friends, and if he's going to lose funding for telling you something that is absolutely irrefutably true from a biological perspective and a biblical perspective, you probably need to share this episode. You need to make sure that his donor base and his viewer base increases because his kind of voice is the one that needs to be out there in the world, not the people that are saying, "Actually, it's okay for Christians to sever sex, marriage, and babies because sometimes we want something. Let's be against the gays. They're bad. But if we have to sacrifice for children, now you've gone too far." >> Well, Katie, I've certainly lost both. I've I've lost speaking opportunities, donors, I've lost friends, I've lost friends that were friends of mine for a long time. And the worst part about it and the most revealing thing about them is the fact that they did they didn't actually engage with the content. They read the title. Uh they didn't, you know, engage with any of the arguments around it. They didn't really cuz if someone brings a a moral argument to me and is claiming that I am thinking wrong about a subject matter morally, I have to take that seriously. I may come to a different conclusion than them, but I have to at least take it seriously. I have to I have to look through the lens of someone as if they're right and I'm wrong that I've I've missed something here. But but ultimately with all this, you've got the Greater Than campaign, guys. You can go to the show notes, you can check out the website. But uh last question of the day, if somebody wants to get involved in the work that you're doing, maybe they don't have a podcast, maybe they're not a newscaster newscaster or journalist, or maybe they don't have a pulpit or something like that. They're just, you know, regular Joe. Uh just listen to this show. How could they get involved and how can they help with the Greater Than campaign? >> You need to be an expert. You need to know more about this than anyone else. You need to absolutely be able to understand why same-sex couples pose a greater risk to children. How? Our laws have been reoriented in the name of gay rights. You actually need to know a lot about reproductive technologies. You should be able to know the stats on IVF. You should understand why surrogacy in all cases always requires children sacrifice for adults. Good news, that's the whole reason why Them Before Us exists. thembeforeus.com Go subscribe to our newsletter. Check out our fast facts. You should follow our campaign to overturn gay marriage. This sounds a little bit like um like a long shot. It's not. We're totally going to do this. Protection of children demands that we do it. We have a critical credible credible judicial strategy to get it done. We've got the right people involved. You should get in on it from the very beginning. We are totally fighting Goliath's if you have not dialed into that yet, but we're going to win because we have truth, we have social science, we have natural law, we have common law, we have judicial precedent on our side. We are com- We are absolutely committed to making the case because child protection demands it. So, go to greater than campaign.com. Subscribe. Once a month, I'll just tell you what's going on. Donate. Donate. Like this is a very resource-heavy project to have the kind of alliances, council, strategies, connections with state-level lawmakers across the entire country. It takes a lot of resources. I've told everybody in the coalition, I promise you one thing, nothing we do will suck. Everything that we're doing, like the website, the comms, the strategy, it is going to be top of the line. Um so, if you're if you want to get in this with us, go and donate. Um and just stay on top Go to all the social media channels. Follow our work. I will I will make you unassailable as it relates to defending the rights and well-being of children. I will give you the answers you need. I don't know if you've noticed, but Kyle's asked a lot of questions, and I bet you're like, "Yeah, what is about How is that?" And I bet you came away satisfied. I bet you're like, "Oh, never thought about that. Oh, that makes a lot of sense." Guess what? There's answers to every single one of the questions that you thought, "Ah, we should get out of this. Ah, what's the what's the point?" The point is children's lives and family and and well-being are at risk, and you have to get in on this with us. You have to join us in child protection. >> And Katie, guys can remember the lyrics to a Lynyrd Skynyrd song they haven't heard since high school. Uh, they know the starting lineup of some high school football team because that, you know, works into some part of their [clears throat] personal identity. They know who's coming down the pike for their favorite basketball team in terms of draft picks and all that. We've got all this information that we can just and regurgitate it any point. None of that stuff's important. It's fun having knowing stuff about your hobbies and stuff you're interested in. It's not necessarily bad. But, if you want to make the argument that you don't have room in your brain for arguments like this that will lead to the protection of children, let me just say I don't believe you. All right? So, that is the gauntlet being thrown down. That is the challenge. Know the stuff isn't fun. Doing all the research I did on IVF-T even create the episode to record it, to release it to the public, to get all the scrutiny and backlash that I got. That wasn't a fun process, but it's required. If you are a believer in Christ, if you are a follower of Christ, you are required to enter into the fray, and you have to understand that God's got your back. That doesn't mean it's going to be rainbows and sunshine. It doesn't mean that your bank account's going to be full of unicorn farts and you're going to be able to take over the world. It means that you're doing something that is worthwhile. It may not be worthwhile here, but you will get a crown of glory once you are taken to glory. And guess what you're going to do with that crown? You're going to take it off and put it down at the feet of Jesus anyway. So, you might as well get with the program down here. But, Katie, we've gone everywhere in this conversation. I always enjoy talking to you, but is there anything else you want to get off your chest? >> No, I'm just so glad that you're in the coalition with us. Um, I feel like we're at the place where Christianity has grown a spine. You know, we released the um greater than campaign in January. The trailer came out. There was weeping and gnashing of teeth. And nobody, nobody in the coalition, nobody on the website, nobody listed in the trailers like, you know what, actually can you take my name off? I I don't know I don't know if I really want this backlash. And they're like, yep, good. Let's go. We will not bend. We will not back down. And I do feel like uh we have seen a robust more masculine Christianity emerge. Um and a lot of it is because we have, I think, much stronger voices in the space in the masculine realm, in the Christian realm, than we do females, than women. I mean, we've got incredible women that I love and follow. There's no substitute for biblical men taking up the cause of justice for children. You guys, you guys should be the lead in terms of pro-life. You guys should be the lead as relates to understanding how reproductive technologies threaten children. You should be the lead as relates to advocating for it, natural marriage. You guys should be at the lead of overturning Obergefell. You should have been at the lead, and a lot of you were, overturning Roe. All of these are fundamentally matters of true masculinity. The protection of the most vulnerable. So, like I just I'm like, we just need more of you. I really do think that things are going to change because the church has changed. I feel like the church has finally become what it should be, the true salt and the true light that is like, you don't shake me, you don't influence me, I'm going to influence you. >> Well, I'm honored to be a part of the movement that you're creating, and you got a bunch of guys here, about 95% of this audience are killers, and the five percenters, my my ladies, those are my lionesses. Uh I'm just telling you, you got a bunch of people that are lean forward individuals, they're already going to the website. Katie, we're so thankful for you. Thanks again for coming on. >> Yeah, thanks for having me. >> Thank you everyone for listening to this episode. Wherever you're listening to this, please subscribe, rate, and leave us a positive five-star review. If you want me to come speak live at your event or on your podcast, just shoot me an email to info@undated.life. Follow us on Instagram, and like us on Facebook, and check out our website for everything else, including how to donate to keep more content like this coming. www.undated.life. The music on this podcast is the song Conqueror by the Christian metal band Void awaken. Be sure to stream their music on Spotify, Apple Music, and wherever else you get your music. I'm your host, Kyle Thompson. Remember, keep pushing back darkness, keep forging spiritual, mental, and physical resilience, keep seeking the lion of Judah. >> [music]