Episode Transcript
[00:00:04] Speaker A: Katie, thank you so much for coming on the dispatches to have this important conversation. Before we jump into some of the things I'd love to talk with you about, tell us a little bit about the work of them before us and what it was that really motivated you to actually get into this particular and very important work that you do.
[00:00:21] Speaker B: Then before us is a global movement committed to defending children's rights in the family.
So think about it as what pro lifers do in terms of defending children from abortion, then before does on issues related to the definition of marriage, divorce, reproductive technologies, a proper understanding of adoption, all the different rises and manifestations of the modern family that almost always require a child lose their mother or father to be in that family. So we speak up on behalf of children. We defend their fundamental right to be known and loved by both their mother and father, and insist that all adults, single, married, gay, straight, fertile and infertile, sacrifice for children because the only alternative is for kids to sacrifice for adults. And that's an injustice.
So I got into this beginning with the definition of marriage, where what I heard from the gay marriage crowd was that kids don't care if they have two moms or two dads. And I've worked with kids long enough to know that actually it's really harmful when kids lose their mother or father. And that's what's happening in a two mom or two dad household. When you're looking at a household with two fathers, you're looking at a child who has lost their mom.
And when you're looking at a kid with two moms, you're looking at a child who has lost their dad. So that is fundamentally backwards. It should not be adults insisting that children fit in to their desired family arrangement. It should be all adults that are fitting their lives and choices around the rights and needs of kids.
[00:01:52] Speaker A: I really love the approach that you've taken. And there is something profoundly important and yet at the same time so simple and succinct in the name that you've chosen them before us. So I want to flip that on its head a little bit now and ask you, what do you think are some of the ideologies perhaps that have contributed to the current us before them mentality, which is the opposite of what you're proposing, and that it seems increasingly concerning lack of adult concern for the natural rights of children?
[00:02:21] Speaker B: I think that an easy way to understand it is, in essence, over the last 50 or 60 years, we've gone through three different revolutions. A cultural revolution, a technological revolution, and a legal Revolution. So the cultural revolution began with the sexual revolution. This idea that we're going to throw off the oppressive ideas about marriage and family where you need to save sex for marriage or that sex should only happen within marriage, even if you are married. Ideas of all different kinds of partnering. The real idea was that marriage and sex were really about adult fulfillment and not necessarily about the fundamental rights of the people that result from sex, which is kids. But then you've got a technological revelation that was, I would say, enabled by the cultural revolution and happening in tandem with the cultural revolution. The first part of that was the birth control pill that separated sex from babies. But very soon after that was IVF that separated babies from sex.
And then moving beyond that, once we realized that we could make babies in a laboratory, there was no need to just use the gametes of the man and woman that were taking the baby home. You could use somebody else's sperm or somebody else's egg. And so the huge marketplace of sperm don and egg donation took off. And now you can go and you can peruse online catalogs if you want to shop for your child's genetic mother or father. And then we started to perfect the ability to implant embryos in other women altogether in the form of commercial surrogacy. And so now commercial surrogacy is a way where we genuinely customize children, design them, and then ship them worldwide to anybody that has a valid contract behind their name. But then we had a legal revolution as well. We had the rise, especially in divorce, enabled by no fault divorce. We previously understood marriage to be a permanent relationship, but but that could be broken in cases of addiction, adultery, abuse, abandonment if somebody was found at fault. But then we moved into that space of marriage being a vehicle of adult fulfillment. And now adults could end that marriage even if there wasn't somebody that was at faul fault. And so we saw the first redefinition of marriage by removing the aspect of permanence. Well, same sex couples said it's no longer about children. If it's not a critical institution that society is built upon, then maybe if this is just about adult fulfillment, I am fulfilled by being married to another man or another woman. So we remove the complementarity of marriage in that aspect of the legal revolution. And now there's groups pushing to remove the third critical stool on which marriage sits, and that's monogamy. And so we're trying to pull out monogamy from the marital relationship and normalize polyamory and polygamy. So all of these different revolutions, especially as it relates to marriage, have very damaging effects on kids, but they're going even further. There's legal revolutions so that adults who intend to parent children can walk away with newborns even though they're not genetically related and they haven't undergone any adoption screening. This is often on the heels of legalizing gay marriage. So in all of those different realms, the cultural, the legal and the technological, what we see is a gradual move away from the realities of the human child and toward adult validation. And now what we've got here in 2025 is the culmination of the cultural, legal and technological that render children as functional accessories for any adult that has the money and means to acquire them.
[00:06:00] Speaker A: I want to talk to you about surrogacy in just a second, because I know that's something that you have and your organisation has a special focus on at the moment, and it's a growing concern in the West. But before I get there, we've had a lot of talk over recent decades about perhaps the devaluing of motherhood, and I think that is a very real thing. I think it's probably why we have our declining birth rate. We actually don't give proper status to motherhood. And those countries that have tried financial incentives has not really succeeded in getting back to replacement fertility, because it's about more than money, it's about status.
However, at the same time, am I right in the sense that I have, that probably fatherhood, it feels like, has been sidelined the most in all of this and that that has just been absolutely devastating to a lot of these issues and areas that you talk about.
[00:06:44] Speaker B: I think the degradation of fathers and the pushing them out of the family through mechanisms like welfare has absolutely been going on a lot longer than the devaluation of motherhood has. I think that we still understand largely that mothers are critical. And even though I will say that the gay lobby that is so promoting surrogacy right now is really trying to de. Emphasize the importance of that distinct female parent in the life of a child, whether or not the public is going to buy it, I don't know. But I think that you've actually hit on something really important here, because we are seeing cratering birth rates in every developed nation.
Only about 30% of countries around the world are living in places where they're above replacement rate when it comes to total fertility rates. And you're exactly right. You have seen Japan, Scandinavia, South Korea throwing money at this problem and not moving the needle at all, because you're Right. This is not about money. This is about the story that we tell about human children and by extension their mothers and the importance of mothers when it comes to elevating that level of that role to a special social significance. And it is. That's why we're actually seeing fertility rates higher in highly religious communities, because those women are a part of a community that is telling an exalted story about the role of motherhood. So you can't buy your way out of this problem. You have to tell a story that exalts and, like you said, gives a higher status to women who choose to have children.
[00:08:23] Speaker A: Let's talk about one of those horrors that impacts children and that is the issue of surrogacy. And obviously both women as well, the mothers of those, the biological mothers of those children.
It's kind of astounding to me. It seems that certainly in my country this has become like a high profile, sort of celebrity type pursuit, and it gets promoted constantly in the media that way. But there's these major moral, ethical and practical outcomes that none of these are good. And it's all of that's been sidelined, again because of us before them, the want of the adults. But tell us a little bit, particularly for those maybe who are watching, who are not quite clear on why surrogacy is such a problem that we should be concerned about. What is the issue here?
[00:09:05] Speaker B: Well, if you're looking at it from the perspective of adults, there's no issue because the people that are commissioning or designing the children tend to love it. The people selling their sperm or selling their egg, they've consented to it. The woman who's renting out her body, if she's not being trafficked, she's probably consented and is financially benefiting from it. So if you want to look at it from the perspective of the adults, this is great. This is just capitalism, right? This is just, you know, maximizing all and leveraging all the consumer choices that the marketplace of big fertility world offers you. But if you're looking at it from the child's perspective, it's always a problem.
The best way to understand surrogacy from the perspective of the baby is that it splices what should be one person mother into three purchasable and optional women. The first one is the genetic mother, the woman who provides the egg that grants the child some aspect, at least 50% of their biological identity. That woman helps the child answer the question, who am I?
The second mother is the birth mother, the one with whom the baby Bonds for the first nine months of their life. The one to whom she's already attached when the baby emerges from the womb, the one whose body is going to calm the child, lower the cortisol rates, the smell that the baby recognizes, the heartbeat that the baby knows, the woman that lays the foundation for trust and attachment throughout the rest of their life. And the third woman is the social mother, the woman that provides the daily maternal love that is going to maximize the child's development and satisfy their cravings for mother love. So surrogacy allows customers to decide which of these mothers do they want, which one do they not need, which one do they want to purchase, which one are they going to go without completely? So you might have a heterosexual couple that says, here's our egg, we're going to take the baby home. We just need to sever the child from the birth mother. But then you might have a gay single or double or triple throuple men who say, we're going to purchase the egg, the child will lose their genetic mother, we're going to rent the womb and the child will lose the birth mother, and we are going to take the child home to a household where there's no mother love at all. And that baby loses all three mothers. The problem, obviously from the child is none of those mothers are optional. The child needs every single one of them for different reasons, usually all their life.
This allows adults to cut out the mothers that are inconvenient to them and customize the child exactly the way that they want.
All the adults may consent. The child never would. No child would consent to losing half of their genetic identity, suffering the primal wound of losing their birth mother, and being starved of maternal love every day, all day, all their life.
[00:11:44] Speaker A: What I don't understand in particular too is that we're starting to hear more horror stories now that really do speak to the commodification of persons. Like almost like a modern day agreed upon sort of chattel slavery, where literally you have horror stories like people who are purchasing the child, then demanding that because something hasn't gone quite right, that the child be aborted, for example.
And this whole thing is happening very publicly too. And like there's just, it seems to me, the very people who would normally be upset about this kind of treatment of persons are actually quite happy with this. What do you think is behind that? Why is that we're not seeing the deeper issue there?
[00:12:26] Speaker B: Well, I'll tell you, in the work that we do at them before us, we are up against probably one of the most powerful forces on the face of the earth. And that is adult self interest.
You get between something that an adult really, really wants and you try to say no, and you are going to incur incredible wrath.
So when an adult wants a specific child, not any child, that child, that exactly specific child, the one that they've customized and that they've ordered, it makes sense that abortion would be a big part of that conversation. Because when you're spending six figures on a baby, you need to make sure that you get the product exactly right. And if that child is going to be premature, have some kind of developmental problems, maybe have a medical issue, of course you're going to cancel the order, send them back. Right? That's exactly what we do when we don't get what we have ordered from the catalogs that we have picked out the possession.
So it shouldn't be a surprise, right? We're not. Nobody goes into this thinking, this child is a gift, I'm going to receive them. They go in saying, I am, I am filtering out the specific results for my child's birth mother. I want to make sure that she's white, she needs to be under the age of 25, have an Ivy League education, be above 5 foot 8 and have blue eyes. And then I'm going to create 12 embryos, I'm going to implant the ones that have the specific shade of blue eyes that I want, I'm going to freeze or discard all of the rest, and then I'm going to take her home to a motherless household. That doesn't sound like the beginnings of a parent child relationship where you are saying, I am in this for them, they're not in it for me. So of course things like abortion is going to be on the table. But I'd say that might not even be the worst part of it. The worst part is that there is no surrogacy contract. There's no jurisdiction that requires that these adults undergo any kind of vetting or screening or background checks. And so we already have horror stories of pedophiles, of convicted child predators that would never have been able to successfully adopt, who can easily acquire children through surrogacy. Like this really is custom ordered children delivered to anybody and everybody that has the money to get their hands on them. It doesn't matter if they're foreign nationals, it doesn't matter if they're convicted pedophiles. It doesn't matter if they are elderly couples. I mean, all of these things are happening all across the world of surrogacy and of course big fertility in any of these countries is totally allergic to any kind of, not just regulation, but record keeping. We don't even know how many children are being made and with whom they are going home. There's nobody doing any post placement report on these kids. Unlike adoptees, these kids often disappear across borders never to be heard of again.
[00:15:07] Speaker A: I have this belief, and I'd love to hear your thoughts on this, that basically.
Well, we have, we have crafted an entire culture now on the idea of hedonism and self gratification and personal happiness fulfilment. But my belief is that you can't actually have that and at the same time have genuine respect and care for women and children in particular. Because basically the stronger who are men primarily, will always have their way. They'll take what they want. If you prioritise or try and prioritise hedonism and self gratification. Am I right do you think in that belief?
[00:15:40] Speaker B: Yeah. So everybody has a hierarchy of values, right? That's kind of how the Jordan Peterson's would speak about the things that matter to us in life. Or if you want to speak in biblical terms, you're talking about what's your God, what is at the very, very top of your decision making and the thing that you focus on, the thing you give the greatest weight and value to. And so I would say that the functional God of our culture is adult sexual gratification. That sex has become God, a functional God for our cult and all the things that go with sex, right? Our relationship choices and certainly children. That's the problem is when sex is God, children are always the required sacrifice. We see that in matters of abortion, right? If there's unexplained pregnancy because there were people that were pursuing sex, a baby making activity for the sake of pleasure and they did not necessarily account for the fact that a baby might result from that baby making activity. The child is the required sacrifice for that recreational activity. But it's the same thing when you've got a single mother, single mother who wants to be a single mother by choice, right? Her decisions have led her to the place where she is single as a 41 year old. And the child is going to have to lose their father so that she can become the mother that she wants. The same thing with two men, right? They have chosen a life that creates a household around their romantic inclinations or their sexual attractions and the result is a child will have to lose their mother. And so anytime that you have sex as the top of Your value hierarchy, everything is going to subordinate themselves to that hierarchy. And children will be subordinate, subordinated to those adult sexual feelings, choices, identities and agendas.
[00:17:19] Speaker A: And it also seems to me too, that it's such a powerful, you know, the whole psychosexual drive as well. There's so much embroiled, and it is a powerful human drive to reproduce. And obviously the sexual act is associated with that, but then also the biochemical stuff that happens in the brain around that. And it seems that it's the worst sort of perfect storm. Like it's, you know, you do these things that are destructive, but then you don't want to stop doing them because there's that dopamine component that's just so powerful and compelling going on in all of this. Right.
[00:17:50] Speaker B: Well, what's amazing to me is we totally understand the power of sex as it relates to, like you said, the reinforcement, the neuroplasticity that goes into cravings, choices that reinforce those cravings, that then strengthen the cravings in the future, that then repeat the behavior. And those, those incredible sexual drives can be channeled for good, or they can be channeled towards destruction. And I think that a lot of us in the adult world understand that. What I would like to focus on is the fact that children actually have these critical, non negotiable needs that are very often going to interfere with the biological wiring that we have decided to reinforce in our own lives. And those are things that are non negotiable. I mean, I think that we know people that have suffered with porn addiction. I personally have counseled a lot of different males, married couples that have gotten themselves into emotional affairs or actual adultery situations. And then their lives and their brains can be rewired either away or towards those behaviors. Children are also wired.
Children come from a man and woman. They need that man and woman. They developmentally benefit when they're raised by that man and woman. They get their identity through that man and woman. And so we give so much weight to the sexual, like you said, psychosocial aspects of these adult relationships.
But there actually is something that I would say is even more of a irrefutable, undeniable reality. And it is the nature of the human child. So why is it that we can't shape, form and retrain our sexual decisions, our sexual affections, and definitely our sexual choices around the non negotiable realities of the human child? But what does that mean? That means that we adults have to do hard things.
We are going to have to sacrifice so, so children don't have to. And why would you do that? Kids. Kids can. They can't object, they can't vote, they can't take you to court, they can't sue you. And so kids just have to put up with whatever it is that we choose that they're going to have to deal with, whether it's leaving their perfectly good father because he doesn't do 50% of the housework, or deciding to exit a marriage and become your true self by identifying as a lesbian, you know, or create a fatherless child through IVF as a single woman by choice or a female couple. I mean, in all of these different areas, what we're seeing is adults elevating their own sexual desires above the fundamental rights of children, and children are suffering as a result.
[00:20:22] Speaker A: Yeah, it seems to me we're back to the same problem again. The loss of that Christian anthropology. I know there are some scholars who have argued, and I think compellingly that even the concept of the category of childhood is a result of the Christian anthropology where children are not treated as sort of chattels. They are seen as persons, dignity. And then there's also like that very Greek idea of the habitus. Once you get into a habit like that, it just takes over. So again, I think that Christian anthropology is key in seeing the dignity of children as such.
[00:20:57] Speaker B: It's not only key, because that's 100% true, that we can look at the pagan Roman world into which Christianity itself was born, and we can see the ways that children were victimized in terms of losing their right to life in abortion or infanticide. The practice of exposure was widespread, spread a sexual ethic that did not direct male sexual behavior towards only their wife. So there were a lot of children that were born outside of the protective umbrella of the married husband, wife, home. We saw children sold into slavery, debt slavery, sexual slavery.
We saw mutilation of children if they wanted to become eunuchs, not wanted to, but were sold into a wealthy home and became eunuchs so they could grow up there without being a threat to the posterity of the.
The free male household owner.
And so Christianity came in and they said, we're not gonna do any of that. Like, we are rejecting infanticides, we're rejecting abortion, we're only going to have sex with our wife. So all of our children are going to be raised by their father. We're not going to sell them, we're not going to mutilate them. Christianity had a totally different ethic around this. Why?
Because we served a savior who was once A fetus and an infant and a toddler and a teenager. And he is a the Savior that said, if you want to enter the kingdom of heaven, you have to become like little children. He said, if you cause one of these little ones to assemble, you're going to deal with me and it's going to be some pretty cruel and unusual forms of corporal punishment. And the Christian way of interacting with children was so different that like you said, sociologists actually will say Christianity invented childhood in the Roman world. They didn't even think that a child was fully human until they could walk and talk. And so you can do anything you want with somebody that's not fully human. So not only is this the proper understanding of children and childhood, but it needs to be a motivator for Christians. Christians approach children differently. We always promote it with a I will die so they can thrive kind of mentality. And like I said, this, this idea that children have a right to life and a right to their mother and father. No adult gets a pass here. At some point, every single adult is going to say, is it going to be me or is it going to be them? Am I going to do the hard thing? Or I'm going to force the kids to do the hard thing. So Christians themselves need to do this first and then show the of the world what it looks like.
[00:23:12] Speaker A: There's a lot of talk right now across the board, but I think, particularly in conservative circles about what is deemed to be the greatest threat at this given moment. What do you think if you were to answer that question, what do you think is the biggest threat possibly that we're facing?
Or maybe they're more than, might be more than one that you think is pressing, but what do you think on your radar you see as the biggest threat?
[00:23:32] Speaker B: Okay, so the biggest problem is an inaccurate anthropology.
Every single issue that we are facing today, every crisis, every, every bill that we're trying to battle back when it's coming in terms of, like, the destructiveness, they all get the question wrong. The question is, what does it mean to be human? If you cannot answer the question, what does it mean to be human Correctly, you're not going to get anything else right, especially in the cultural, like, landscape. So children are humans, okay, so what is a human? It is somebody made in the image of God, male and female. He created them. So we are sexed beings. We have a right to life from the moment of conception until natural death. Our bodies are not obstacles to our true self. They are our true self. So when you get the Nature of human right. When you understand the imago DEI and the implications for that, you get the right solution to all of the major issues that we are facing, from abortion to transgenderism, to marriage to divorce to same sex marriage to euthanasia and death with dignity. I mean all of them made to pornography, all of these things are going to come back to a proper anthropology and understanding what it means to be human. And hey Christians, you guys are the ones that have the right answer to that. So it's time to take that robust worldview into the political and the policy sphere because we've got real lives at stake.
[00:25:00] Speaker A: Where does the role of government lie in all of this? It seems to me that we've had a strong liberalism since post enlightenment, sort of the enlightenment liberal period that has been last couple hundred years. And liberalism has really become quite dominant. And there's been, I think, a hesitancy to say that the government actually does have to play some role in upholding the common good. It's not just have a free for all and hopefully everyone will choose the right path.
What do you think is the balance there? What's the role of government in securing and protecting these fundamental truths, this important anthropology and ultimately children?
[00:25:36] Speaker B: There's no balance, there's just justice.
Do justice protect the vulnerable?
Now the problem is that we often say it then before us, the victim determines the policy.
And so whoever is identified as the victim, they're going to get the policy. And when it comes to these matters of marriage and family and reproduction, unfortunately we have misidentified the victims. Going back 60 years, we've said that the victims are the adults that don't get what they want. When the reality is the true victims are the children who are denied their fundamental rights, denied their right to life and denied their right to their mother and father. All the government needs to do is protect the actual victims. And that is something that if they did it, not only would individual children be protected, but all of society would thrive.
[00:26:26] Speaker A: You speaking of victims, I know one of the issues that you have talked about and focused on is that of IVF and the fertility industry and the likes. It seems to me that largely speaking, I would say probably apart from somewhere like the Catholic church, the Christian church has been silent and has sort of been absent and missing and often even in with our own congregations, people have just sort of made up their own morality because no one has offered them a way forward. How the heck do we begin to have that conversation then about ivf? In light of all of that, I.
[00:26:58] Speaker B: Think that you begin the conversation, especially if you're talking about Christians, with what's your job?
What is your job? Yes, you want to worship God.
But everywhere that the church has gone throughout history, beginning with the Romans, but then going into any other country and any other era, Christians have continually been the agent of child protection against whatever cultural threats are being borne down upon children, whether it's foot binding in China, female genital mutilation in the Islamic world, the conscripting of poor street kids. During the Industrial revolution in the uk, it was Christians that stepped up and said, you cannot use and abuse children like that.
So we have the opportunity to step into that great cloud of witnesses today in matters of marriage and family. One of those is the making of human life in laboratories. Right now in this country, IVF is responsible for destroying more little lives every year than abortion is. And of the 2 to 3% of children that actually do make it through the process alive, 2 to 3% of all the children made in the laboratory are actually going to be born. And of those that fraction of children, anywhere from 1/3 to 2/3 of them are going to lose their mother or father in the process. IVF is a child victimizing technology.
So, number one, you need to know about this. And number two, you need to prefer child protection over social acceptance, because that's really the problem. Once you actually know the way that IVF victimizes children, now you have a choice to make. Do you want to protect the vulnerable or do you want to keep your friends?
And that's a very real choice. Like you will lose friends or you will lose donors if you talk about ivf. So you just have to decide what do you care about more? Do you care about genuinely protecting the vulnerable, or do you genuinely want to protect your contact list and your pocketbook?
[00:28:51] Speaker A: Do you feel that the church in America at the moment grasps the very real and deep tragedy of something like the Trump administration's expansion of IVF and then calling it on top of that like a really pro life policy?
It's hard to tell from the outside what's going on within the Christian community in response to something like that.
[00:29:10] Speaker B: There's a fight, that's for sure. But what I do know is that bravado that President Trump promised on the campaign to be the granddaddy of ivf. He gave his executive order last February. He promised that it would be free or cheap or more available, and then went way past the 90 day deadline to actually say what it was that executive order was going to result in. And it resulted in not as much as everybody thought that it would. And that's because there's a lot of pro life, pro family, pro child organizations and voices speaking to his administration behind the scenes and talking about how, hey, we all love babies, we would like to increase the birth weight. IVF is not the way to advance either of those priorities.
So this is an issue, IVF especially, where there is a huge learning curve that needs to take place, not just among the Trump administration, but among all conservatives and even among pro lifers. But we are seeing some movement.
When I started doing this in 2018, even as late as 2021, 22 people would have me on and I'd talk about IVF and they would lose donors and they would revolt. And everybody just assumed that I was Cathol because I was talking about ivf. But that's not the case today. Now pretty much every major pro life organization talks about the harms of ivf, from Live Action to Students for Life.
Seth Gruber like hammers at this regularly. The Heritage foundation has taken a huge lead when it comes to critiquing IVF and reproductive technologies. It is going more and more mainstream in conservatism. We do still have a ways to go, though.
[00:30:45] Speaker A: Gosh, that's great to hear. I've got two questions that I want to finish with.
Number one, it seems to me that a lot of conservatives need to recover the. Their confidence in the goodness, truth and beauty of that conservative reality, that vision of reality that we offer the world.
Do you think that that's a fair assessment?
[00:31:06] Speaker B: It just. Right now we've got a war of voices.
Somebody's going to have to come out on of top, top. So there is a battle for the soul of conservatism and the people that are actually conservative that understand that this isn't just a, a nice libertarian way for all of us to have what we want, but actually this is critical for a thriving society. Those voices, they need to get louder, they need to get bigger, and they need to be funded because there are a lot of crazies out there that presented as conservative when it benefited them. But over the last couple years especially, we've seen that they're not really right. They are drifting more that sort of horseshoe theory of politics. You're seeing a lot of people that used to be on the right kind of jump over and be like, mom, Donnie, not so bad. Okay, so it's like, it's just a matter of like, the true. Can all the true conservatives stand up, get louder, be more clear and be more courageous. That's what it's going to take.
[00:32:01] Speaker A: My final question to you is this. And it's this seems to lead quite nicely into what you've just said. Said. How important is the natural law tradition to the success of the conservative voice? And I was literally just last night speaking to a group, and this is a Christian group, and we're talking about cultural matters. And I had a part of my presentation was talking about natural law. And I asked the question, how many people actually had heard of natural law? And no one put their hand up in the room. And I was kind of even I was surprised by that. So how important do you think is the natural law tradition to the success of the conservative voice?
[00:32:37] Speaker B: Whether or not people call it natural law?
What. It's critical for us to explain the why behind what God says.
So that's what matters. There's a lot of Christians that love the word of God that would say scripture is my ultimate authority. Fantastic same. That's how I feel, too. But quoting chapter and verse does not move a questioning public. It is grounding your arguments in reason and natural law, sociology, the lived experience of the people that have been genuine victims of leftist policy.
That is what convinces your neighbor. It takes a little bit more work to create those kinds of arguments. But you also, if you are able to be fishers of men using those kinds of tools and you get them into your camp, number one, they will then much more easily be led to an understanding and a knowledge of God. That's. That's one thing that we has been made very clear over the last year, especially in the United States, is we are seeing a revolution even within conservatism, of bringing people that were politically conservative into the church, which is incredible. But number two, then you keep those converts because they're not being converted on something that is superficial. They're being converted to conservatism with a deep understanding of the fact that this aligns with biological, economic, and historical reality.
And it grounds them much more deeply so they're less susceptible to be held captive by hollow and deceptive philosophies.
[00:34:04] Speaker A: Katie, thank you so much for taking the time to have this conversation today. Can I ask you just one last little thing?
Katie Faust is looking towards the future. You've got a hope meter in front of you. Is it waning?
Is it high? What are you seeing as you look towards the future of things?
[00:34:21] Speaker B: Total global domination.
We are. We are going to defend children all around the world.
We have a message, we have a method that is true for every child, whether they are in South Africa or South Korea or South Carolina. These are the fundamentals of what it means to be a human baby. And we are going to raise up generations of adults to defend them. I am very hopeful.
[00:34:50] Speaker A: Katie, thank you so much for your time. It's been a blessing to have the conversation.
[00:34:54] Speaker B: Yeah, thanks, Brendan.
