The Dr J Show

Welcome to our newest project. The Dr. J Show is a weekly broadcast with an interview segment that features some of the foremost leaders and thinkers on issues relating to marriage, family and human sexuality. New episodes come out every Friday; catch them here or over at our YouTube channel.


When Did We Start Leaving Reality? The History of the Sexual Revolution

Carl R. Trueman is a Christian theologian and ecclesiastical historian. He was Professor of Historical Theology and Church History at Westminster Theological Seminary, and in 2018 he became a professor at Grove City College in their Department of Biblical and Religious Studies.

Among Dr. Trueman's books are John Owen: Reformed Catholic, Renaissance Man, The Creedal Imperative, Fools Rush in Where Monkeys Fear to Tread: Taking Aim at Everyone, and Republocrat: Confessions of a Liberal Conservative. An ordained minister in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, Dr. Trueman contributes to First Things journal, blogs regularly at Reformation21 and co-hosts the Mortification of Spin podcast.


Trueman studied at Marling School, Gloucestershire, St Catharine's College, Cambridge and the University of Aberdeen, and previously taught at the University of Aberdeen and the University of Nottingham. He was editor of Themelios from 1998 to 2007, and is a council member of the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals.

Readings & Resources

 
Transcript

Jennifer Roback Morse, Ph.D.

Hi, everyone, I'm Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse, founder and president of the Ruth Institute. My guest today on this episode of the Dr. J show is Dr. Carl Trueman, history professor at Grove City College in Grove City, Pennsylvania. And I think he's going to be especially interesting to the many people among our followers who are concerned about the transgender issue. Now, we're going to be talking about the self and modern philosophy and the development of the concept of the self. So, it's going to sound like it's very abstract. But I know that those of you who care about the transgender issue are going to be very interested in what he has to say. So, hang in there with us. And I think you'll get right to the point pretty quick, about why this topic is going to be very interesting for you. And I welcome everybody who is concerned about the transgender issue, including our friends across the religious traditions, our friends who are radical feminists, our friends who are lesbians, everybody who's concerned about this, and especially, I want to have a special welcome to those of you who are parents of trans children, and who are really, really struggling with how to deal with this issue and how to make sense of it. So, without further ado, Dr. Carl Trueman, I am so grateful that you've made the time to come and join us today.

Dr. Carl Trueman

It's a pleasure to be on. Thanks for having me.

Jennifer Roback Morse, Ph.D.

Great. Well, now you've got-- it was a book that caught my attention. Tell everyone the name of the book, and what got you interested in writing such a topic.

Dr. Carl Trueman

The title of the book is The Rise and Triumph of the Modern Self. And it's really an attempt to look at the sexual revolution, and particular aspects of the sexual revolution in terms of broader changes in culture, and society over the last 300 years. The origins of the book are a little odd in that I'm really a 16th 17th century reformation historian, that's my training and my background. But I was approached a few years ago by Rod Dreyer, the American Conservative, and Justin Taylor, the senior editor at Crossway Publishing House, who asked me if I would be interested in writing a little introduction to the sociologist Philip Rieff thought. Philip Rieff famously wrote, The triumph of the therapeutic in the mid-1960s, which is a very intense prophetic book about the situation we now find ourselves in. And while doing research for what was originally intended to be a short introduction, I realized that a far more interesting book would actually be an application of Rieff's thinking to the current situation in which we find ourselves and coincided with the explosion of the trans question in the popular media, particularly with the transition of Bruce to Caitlyn Jenner. So, I decided it would be interesting to use Rieff in order to try to understand how it is that the sentence, I am a woman trapped in a man's body has come to make sense, not just to Philosophers in university seminars, but intuitively to the man or the woman in the street. So that was the origin and intention line behind the book.

Jennifer Roback Morse, Ph.D.

Well, and I think the main idea of your book is that the modern concept of the self is something very different from something that pre modern people would have thought of 400 years ago, 500 years ago from your preferred period around the reformation. Reformation man would never have thought of-- it would be incomprehensible to him to say that I'm a man trapped in a woman's body or whatever. But that the whole concept of the self now is quite different. Can you tell us a little bit, give us kind of a quick tour, if you will, of how the pre modern self-developed into the sense of self that seem to have today?

Dr. Carl Trueman

Just on the way in which thinking about the self has changed. Obviously, the causes for that are very complicated, but primarily, we could say the big difference between the selves that we have today, the way we think about our identity, the way we think about what makes us who we are today and say, the view that would have been dominant 600 years ago is that today, we really give huge or authority to that inner space, that inner voice within us to determine who we are. A graphic example that would bring this home and it would be if let's say, 300 years ago, you'd gone to a doctor and it said, I'm a woman trapped in a man's body, or a man trapped in a woman's body, the doctor would have said, Wow, you have a problem with your mind, with your inner feelings, we need to work on those inner feelings to bring them into line with your physical body. If you go to a doctor today and ask that question, he'd say, well, we got a problem with your body, we need to bring your body into line with your inner feelings, that inner space. So, the story of the modern self is really the story of how we have come to give supreme authority to our inner emotions, sentiments, convictions, feelings, however you want to characterize them. And I see that as involving three basic steps. The first one occurs really in the late 18th through to the mid-19th century where the idea that the ‘true you’ is your inner feelings emerges, comes out of the thinking of a man like Jacques Rousseau, the Geneva philosopher and finds artistic expression. In the work of the romantics, you read romantic poetry or you listen to romantic music, Franz Liszt, for example. And you realize that it's different to Mozart, it plays on your emotions, what it's trying to do is get you in touch with that inner voice. So that's the first stage. The second stage is the transformation of that inner space into a sexual space. And really, Sigmund Freud is not the only figure in that, but he's the key most influential figure in that story where he sort of agrees with the romantics. Yeah, that the ‘real you’ is that inner space, that inner voice, but you know what? That inner voice is primarily a sexual voice, that inner voice is primarily shaped by your sexual desires. And in doing that Freud, the genius of Freud, if you like is he turns sex from being an activity, something we do into something we are no longer is sex, something we do with somebody else, by sexual desires are fundamentally determinative of who I am. And then the third phase which occurs in the early in the mid-20th century, and it's almost inevitable after one starts to identify oneself with one's sexual desires is that liberation, political liberation, personal liberation comes to be identified with throwing off the old sexual taboos and the old sexual codes because by definition, if I am stopped from fulfilling my sexual desires, or my sexual desires are not approved by society, then by definition, I'm being oppressed in some way. And that's why sex becomes so politicized. Why even in the week where we're recording in the week where the new president aside a couple of executive orders on the transgender issue, those orders only make sense once that inner space has been authorized and sexualized and politicized in a dramatic way.

Dr. Carl Trueman

Well, that's a very good summary that you just gave that is first authorized, then sexualized, then politicized, it seems to be one of the things that changes along the way is the understanding of human nature itself. And our mutual friend [08:23] Scott Yenor has talked a lot about that, how the concept of human nature becomes kind of disconnected from the natural order and becomes connected purely to something subjective. Talk a little bit about how we think of human nature, versus how your reformation era people would have thought about human nature.

Dr. Carl Trueman

Yes, I think Scott's absolutely hits the mark in in his arguments on that front. We could look at it in terms of the end. What is the end of being human being? What's the purpose of being a human being? And in the book, I draw a contrast between my grandfather and myself, it's always good to put yourself in the crosshairs in these things as you appear to be speaking about other people. If you could ask my grandfather, does he get job satisfaction, he'd have said something to the effect of, Sure, my job allows me to have money that enables me to put shoes on my children's feet and bread on the family table. My children are clothed and fed. My grandfather worked in a factory all his life, on a factory production line. Well, I would have regarded as very boring, tedious job, but he could have said no, it was satisfying because it allowed him to fulfill his obligations to others, there was an external direction to the purpose of his life. Once we allow that inner psychological space to become dominant, then the tendency is to regard the purpose of human existence as me feeling psychologically happy. And if you ask me the question, Trueman, do you have job satisfaction? I'm intuitively going to answer the question long lines of Yeah, I enjoy standing in front of a class, I get great personal satisfaction. When I see light bulbs going on in the students minds as they come to grasp a complicated idea. You'll notice the self referentiality of the answer.

Jennifer Roback Morse, Ph.D.

That's right. That's right. So, there's so there's nothing wrong with either of these answers. But what we're calling attention to is that-- and one might think that a well-balanced person would need to have some elements of both. But what you're calling attention to is the way that the balance has tipped way down to the inner life, as you say, and away from the exterior sort of lower objective, I don't want to say completely objective, but at least more objective standards of satisfaction. Is that right?

Dr. Carl Trueman

Yes. And I think the key move here that I didn't mention in my earlier summary is, in the 19th century, let's say beginning of the 19th century, Rousseau, the romantics, they may have given up on Orthodox Christianity, but they still assume that human nature has a moral structure, that it doesn't matter where you are in the world, if you get to that inner voice, it sounds the same as it does everywhere else, that human beings have a common nature and a common moral structure that gives them a common purpose. By the end of the 19th century, thanks to the critical theories of people like Karl Marx and Friedrich Nietzsche, that idea has been abandoned, there is no moral structure to human nature that all human beings need to discover and conform themselves to. As Nietzsche would have said, You're, you're a work of art, you need to go and make your own meaning and purpose in life. And that, of course, tends to default then on the therapeutic inner satisfaction.

Jennifer Roback Morse, Ph.D.

And, the part about Nietzsche in your book was apart one of the-- one of the parts that I found chilling actually, to see him take that and run it way down, you know, like this, pedal to the metal, all the way, where do you end up with that. And one of the things that's striking about it is that it appeals to a person's vanity to say, you can be the author of your own self. But on the other hand, no one ever thinks about, well, what would it be like to be the Untermensch? Everyone wants to be the Übermensch and make the world according to their precepts and to dominate and so on and so forth. That's appealing, but what would it be like to be on the bottom in that system? What would it be like to be used-- I often think of our sexual cultures as used and be used rather than love and be loved. And the used and be used, we all think about ourselves as the user. But somebody is going to be the 'usee' here somewhere along the line, they never thought of that. Talk to people a little bit about Nietzsche and his influence on this, because most people I think, are not used to thinking about Nietzsche as being somehow implicated in the sexual revolution.

Dr. Carl Trueman

Yeah, Nietzsche is interesting, in some ways. He's one of my favorite philosophers from the perspective that he calls it as he sees it, he's very consistent. And he's the man, really, in the middle of the 19th century, who turns around to the Enlightenment atheists and essentially says, if you've got rid of God, you have to build everything from the bottom up. You can't keep Christian morality and get rid of Christian metaphysics. And interestingly, you were commenting there that you found Nietzsche chilling, when Nietzsche talks about this, he's somewhat ambiguous. On one hand, he sees this as exhilarating, we've got to do it for ourselves. On the other hand, he also uses imagery about the Earth is unchanged from the sun, can we drink up the ocean, he uses language that also indicates this is exhilarating. Both, because it gives us power. But also, because it's terrifying. It brings with it, terrifying responsibilities. Nietzsche is the man who uncouples humanity from any moral structure, if you like it. And where he fits into the sexual revolution, I think it'd be on a couple of [14:06] fronts. One; clearly sexual morality for nature, the imposition of sexual morality becomes a power play, it becomes a contract pulled off by one group in society to keep another group subordinate to themselves. And so, the smashing of sexual morality, the smashing of all morality becomes key to finding yourself as an individual. Secondly, one of the things I say to the students in class is the big human dilemma is that we want to be free but we want to belong. Nietzsche is all about freedom. There's very little about belonging in Nietzsche. Nietzsche's view of human relations is a very stark and very bleak about Individual power, not love and self-giving as--

Jennifer Roback Morse, Ph.D.

Right. One word that kept coming to my mind throughout your book, not Just about Nietzsche, is narcissism, if we're all looking inside the self for all of the sense of meaning that you're describing in the grounding of morality and all the rest of it, is there any room for love? Is there any room to even take notice of another person? It seems to me this is the big cost of this exhilarating will to power that he's talking about.

Dr. Carl Trueman

Yes. It's interesting at the moment I'm rereading Michel Foucault's History of Sexuality, the great classic sort of post mortem critique of sexual mores in the ancient world. What's fascinating about Foucault and he draws very deeply on Nietzsche is he never mentions love. When he talks about sex, it's all about pleasure. Now, he's onto something there. Clearly, sex is about pleasure. But there's nothing about the giving of oneself for another. There's nothing about sex having a significance and intrinsic significance beyond the momentary pleasure. I looked up in the index of Volume One Love isn't mentioned. It's a very, very stark and bleak understanding of human existence that comes through in the post-Nietzschean world.

Jennifer Roback Morse, Ph.D.

And when they talk about unchaining and unshackling the self and then saying, well, the people who put the shackles on, they're conning us, they're tricking us and so on. One way to turn that on its head, you could say is that the people who were saying you have to repress your sexual desires, you can't act on all your sexual desires, they were reining in something that people with lots of power would use in a harmful manner. When I look at the me-too movement, and how sexual abuse and harassment seems to be endemic throughout so many different areas of society, and it's all patched over with Well, it was consent or you were really being liberated or whatever, it really is a preying upon the week. And the priests or whoever it was who were supposed to be holding his in and repressing it. Yeah, they were repressing it. They were repressing Harvey Weinstein, okay. They were repressing Theodore McCarrick, I'm okay with that. I don't know. I'm okay with that.

Dr. Carl Trueman

Yeah, I couldn't agree more. And I think, one of the good things about the hashtag me too movement is of course, that it's acknowledging that sex has some kind of significance. If I slap, perish the thought, but if I slapped you in the face, that'd be a very unpleasant thing to do. But it will not shape the rest of your life in a way that as a pastor, when I came across individuals who have been subject to sexual abuse, it shaped the rest of their life--

Jennifer Roback Morse, Ph.D.

Yes, yes, it does.

Dr. Carl Trueman

in a profound way. Yeah. And the hashtag metoo movement kind of acknowledges, or the irony is it's all Hollywood actors who spent their entire careers telling us that sex is just recreation. Now, they're telling us that it's just recreation, but it's also very, very serious as well.

Jennifer Roback Morse, Ph.D.

All right, right. And it's very confused, because it's been unmoored from any kind of grounding, it's become confused. One of the things that I found striking that we haven't brought up yet, which has to do with Philip Rieff, is the loss of the sacred. Sometimes I feel that, that here's the Ruth Institute, we think sex is sacred and a lot of our opponents think sex is natural. Right? And so that beginning orientation, tracks a lot of other things. So, say something to people about Philip Rieff, how he sees the move away from having a cultural sense of the sacred and, and how that plays into all of this?

Dr. Carl Trueman

Yeah, revisit interesting figures, actually, he was a Jewish scholar, but I think was a secular Jewish scholar. I don't think he had any belief in God Himself.

Jennifer Roback Morse, Ph.D.

Is that so?

Dr. Carl Trueman

I think so. But he sort of thought God was a good idea, even though he may not actually exist. But one of the things he observed about society was that societies of the past have, without exception, organize themselves with some sort of sacred authority. What do you mean by that? Well, go back to ancient Sparta. In ancient Sparta, the let's say, you're a teenager and you're rebelling against your parents and the parents say to you “don't do that.” And your teenager says, why can't I do that? Say, well, because the law says you shouldn't. And the law was given to Lycurgus, the first king by the Oracle Adelphi. In other words, the law has an origin outside of this world. It has a sacred origin and therefore an authority. Same applies in the Middle Ages or the Reformation only with Christian scripture, why shouldn't I be rude to my parents? Well, the law was given to Moses. Honor your mother and your father, and it comes with the authority of God. These are societies that look beyond themselves in order to justify their moral and ethical codes. Rieff's observation on late 20th, early 20th century Western society is we'd got rid of that sacred elements, we don't see that there's anything beyond society by which we might justify how to organize society. And then, well why shouldn't I be rude to my parents? The response becomes a kind of, “because I say so.” We all know that that's not a particularly persuasive argument. Extrapolate that to our cultures in general, and you have a situation where, really, all cultures, of course, have ethical codes, we have no firm way to ground them there, which means they will tend to degenerate into constant conflict. And ultimately, moral codes will be set by the arbitrary will of whoever happens to be the most powerful group within a society at one time, it's a recipe for instability, long term instability.

Jennifer Roback Morse, Ph.D.

It's also a recipe for the law of the strongest. That's what you just said, it's the law of the strongest. So, whereas in ancient times or in Christian times, medieval Christendom, Catholic or Protestant, a person could say, that's wrong and everybody would have an idea what that meant on what basis he said that. And a poor person could say, you can't steal from me, and everybody would get that there was something there, and that the lawgiver was not allowed to —The court or the executive or whoever the sheriff, they weren't allowed to redefine the law as they went along, just because they happen to be the top guy on the totem pole, there would be something illegitimate about that. And even the critical Legal Studies people can complain all day long about power and abuse of power, but having an outside perspective, put some limits on what the most powerful guy can do. And ironically, maybe it's not ironic, maybe it was purposeful. I can't really say but the people who are complaining the most about abuses of power are in fact tearing down the various structures that would allow abuses of power to be reined in, in some way. So, I found that part about the sense of the sacred to be really compelling, very interesting. And what medieval Christendom adds to the picture, it has a faith and reason element to it the whole natural-- I think you talk about natural law a little bit, that idea of natural law is to say that there's a harmony between what is and what ought to be. And we can link those two in some intelligible manner. Talk a little bit about that, because I think that'll be interesting to people.

Dr. Carl Trueman

Yeah, but I think the point of [23:04] natural order, various iterations of natural law, but the essential point is that moral codes should reflect in some sense the structure of nature. Without wanting to be too distasteful, one might say that the heterosexual sex reflects the structure of the male and the female body and their complementarity in a way that other sexual activities does not. So, there is something in the structure of nature that actually brings with it a certain gravity towards certain kinds of morality. We might put it this way, we might say that natural law asserts ultimately that the universe is not just stuff, the universe is a Cosmos that has an order. Human beings have an order there are appropriate uses for our bodies, and there are inappropriate uses for our bodies. And in order to flourish, we need to find out what those appropriate uses are, and conform ourselves to them. And I think this has certainly with a rising generation of younger Christians, this can be helpful in explaining why the church takes such a stand as it does on sexual matters. Because there could be a knee jerk reaction from young people saying, Well, okay, I see that God teaches this about sex, does God just teach that because he doesn't want people to be happy? Well, if you have a natural law perspective, you can say, well, it should be enough for you that God says this is wrong to believe it's wrong, but actually God doesn't behave irrationally or unreasonably. There are reasons why and in the issue of say, male homosexual sex, well could point to government websites where the health conditions that come about through inappropriate sexual activity are laid forth with some tragic statistics, and we'll point to those and say, that's a good example of why it's best to follow God's design for the body and not to balk at that.

Jennifer Roback Morse, Ph.D.

Right? Well, you know, there are two different directions we can go here, I want to start by talking about children a little bit. Because at the Ruth Institute, we always try to start with the child and say what is owed to children? And one of our themes that we like to talk about is the fact that children have a right to relationship with their parents, they have a right to know who their parents are, to know their own personal identity, and that they have a right to be loved and welcomed into life by two people who love them and who love each other. The people who give them life should be involved in their life. And we talk about that in terms of legitimate entitlements of children. And when you start thinking like that, then you realize that traditional Christian sexual morality, Traditional Judeo-Christian Sexual morality, I should say, protects those rights of children. Whereas the sexual revolution ignores those rights of children, the sexual revolution shunts all of those considerations to one side, and when I was reading your book, on the part where you were talking about Wilhelm Reich and some of the other figures. But particularly Reich, they're keen that children should be allowed to have sex, the children are sexual beings, and children should be allowed to be sexual, and the world should be reorganized so that children can have sex. That's what they think of as children's rights, we think of as children's rights as the right to be with their parents and to be loved by their parents. Can you say something about Reich and other thinkers and their thought process about children just because I think a lot of people won't be familiar with what these guys have to say.

Dr. Carl Trueman

Yeah, well, Wilhelm Reich is a very significant figure, his book, The Sexual Revolution, which was written in 1936 could have been written last week. I mean, it's so stunning, in terms of what it is asserting as being good for human beings, which is essentially lots of sex all the time. It's a very prophetic book from that front. And of course, Reich is working with precisely that sexualized inner space I talked about earlier on. And when you think about that, when you think about, well, what does it mean that the self is really the inner space and is all about personal sexual satisfaction? It means that one thinks about the self as being in primarily an adversarial relationship with everybody else. Everybody else is a potential hindrance to one's happiness. So, when you say, well, you're we believe children have rights over their parents, children have a right, to parents have a right to a happy home, etc., etc., in the back of my mind is thinking yeah, that's true but the modern self sees children, actually, as primarily and first of all as a problem for parents because—

Jennifer Roback Morse, Ph.D.

That's right. That's exactly right.

Dr. Carl Trueman

-- children get in the way of careers, they get in the way of a regular sex life. There are all kinds of ways that children interfere with the personal happiness of their parents. So that's very much the background Reich's working with. Then one could say that if you have the view of Reich that human fulfillment is found, really through to finer point on it, found through orgasms, then having orgasms is key to human happiness, becomes key to childhood happiness. Where it gets difficult for Reich, of course, is he's very clear that he doesn't want to legitimate pedophilia. He says, it'd be wrong for an adult to do this with a child. But yeah, as I press in the book, why? Reich actually can't give you from his own thinking any rationale as to why that might not be good for children, beyond the fact that Wilhelm Reich himself finds it rather distasteful.

Jennifer Roback Morse, Ph.D.

That's right. It's all taste. When you've taken out the T loss, all you're left with is taste. Yeah. And so, I put this question to Scott [29:04] Yenor also because he talks about a number of the same figures. And to me, it looks like the pedophilia crisis that we're dealing with, it's like pedophilia is baked into the sexual revolution from the beginning. Because to make their worldview make sense, they had to kind of redefine childhood, they had to reimagine what it means to be a child. And so, for Reich, as I suppose for Freud, a child is a sexual being and so the priority is for the child to be able to have sex, but you don't think about what you're attracting when you do that. What other thoughts and feelings and actions are being encouraged by that kind of position?

Dr. Carl Trueman

Yeah. And it goes down to what we were talking about earlier on when you think that sex is purely pleasure and that any attempt to grounded in morality or grant it greater significance is just an ideological oppressive construct, you're missing something very important about sex, it is intrinsically something distinctive. And we intuitively know that that's what a slap on the face is treated differently at law than a rape. And again, one of the problems with Reich is he really wants to say that there's no-- sex acts have no intrinsic morality, they're just acts. What makes them moral or immoral is the issue of consent, whether the parties are consenting. And the problem with that relative to pedophilia is we don't actually respect the importance of children's consent for a whole heap of stuff in this life. At a trivial level, my kids, when they were small, they had to eat their greens and go to bed at a certain time, whether they consented or not, when they're a little bit older, they had to go to school. Consent is a spider thread thin string upon which to hang sexual morality. And as hashtag me too as revealed, consent is extremely difficult to pass a law. When you have adults versus children or powerful people versus weak people, how do you define consent in those?

Jennifer Roback Morse, Ph.D.

And how do you prove it in a court of law? I mean, it's a right that is difficult to honor in the court of law. When you think that through and you realize these poor women who have been abused by Harvey Weinstein or Jeffrey Epstein, or these seminarians who were abused by Theodore McCarrick and so on, what would protect them? Well, what protected them was the taboos. The whole system of taboos that makes certain things unthinkable. That's what protects them. It keeps them from ever being in these compromised situations where something just happened that's not right. And how do we get anybody to be able to intervene and do something about it? And the other thing, and you may have seen this too, Carl, since you have pastoral experience, I've talked to any number of people who have experienced childhood sexual abuse. And I have yet to talk to one who said, yeah, it was okay. It was no big deal. So, do you think it's fair to blame guys like Reich for our current pedophilia situation, directly or indirectly? I mean, I'm of two minds about it. What do you think about that?

Dr. Carl Trueman

I think as a historian, you're asking the question, is it ideas or is it material factors that really drive things? I think it's both. Reich provides a sort of rationale for this kind of thing. But I think if we wanted to ask why is pedophilia becomes such a problem, and why is it increasingly apparently moving towards some sort of legitimation? I think we'd have to throw into the mix, internet pornography. I mean, clearly internet pornography is huge. Very few people, was 70% of men use internet pornography. 70% of men have not read Wilhelm Reich, that's the 1% have read Wilhelm Reich. But internet pornography, I think is very significant in shaping how people think about sex.

Jennifer Roback Morse, Ph.D.

Yeah, I'm sure that's right. I have no doubt about that, that's right. But on the other hand, the thing that you're really calling attention to is that you can have a whole menu of intellectual ideas. But some ideas are more useful for certain people than other ideas. And those are people with a lot of money, or a lot of influence are going to pick up that ball and run with it and institutionalize certain things and stuff like that. And I assume that's part of when historians talk about material factors versus ideas. That's the kind of stuff you guys are talking about.

Dr. Carl Trueman

Yes, very much so. I mean, there's a sense in which technology makes things possible and plausible that would not have been otherwise. I mean, take transgender issue for instance, it would be impossible for transgenderism to be a powerful movement prior to the development of hormone, therapies and surgeries, etc., etc. You could have had the idea, "I'm a woman trapped in a man's body", but it would never have gained any traction because there is no wider framework within which that could have been speciously realized.

Jennifer Roback Morse, Ph.D.

Right, right. At the material level. So, let's go ahead and start talking about transgenderism a little bit because it you spend quite a bit of time in the book talking about that. And what you contribute to the discussion, I think is an understanding of how the changed idea of the self is really part of what makes that first statement that you started with, intelligible. I'm a man trapped in a woman's body, that becomes intelligible only after these whole successions of thinkers that you're talking about. So, talk to people a bit about that, Carl.

Dr. Carl Trueman

Yes. Well, if you think about the statements, I'm a woman trapped in a man's body, for that to have gained the popular traction in society that it has done so rapidly, really tells us that an awful lot of what we might call the philosophical assumptions that lie behind it were already intuitive in our culture. One of those assumptions would be; feelings trump the body. One of those assumptions is the real me is not my body, my body is something the eye inhabits. And it's interesting to hear this language about, you know, people will draw a distinction between the body and themselves. So, a third factor would be the idea that the gender is something that is constructed, it's not intrinsic to our physical bodies. As with a lot of this stuff that has a certain truth to it, we know that being a man, being a woman today is different to what it was before the advent of industrial machinery. Physical strength is of less significance in the workplace now than it was 300 years ago. We know that men and women in North and South Korea relate to each other differently than they do in the United States or the United Kingdom. We're aware that male and female roles look different around the world. But I like Scott [36:23] Yenor’s comment that gender differences always run along the grooves of sexual difference. That sexual difference, our physical and hormonal makeup provides a sort of a framework within which manhood and womanhood can look differently. Esau is a man who hunts, Jacob is the man who sits in the tent reading poetry, and even in the Bible, we see that knowledge. But that idea that gender, that being a woman is actually something that's kind of invented rather than intrinsic, that has to have become plausible to the popular imagination for transgenderism to become an intuitive truth.

Jennifer Roback Morse, Ph.D.

So, let me ask you this the distinction between gender and sex. This is again, something that is a recent concept. Is this a distinction that Christians ought to use? Or is there some better language to get at the subject matter that should be gotten out? I mean, there is a distinction. But should these be the words or there's some better words we could use? Talk it.

Dr. Carl Trueman

I think it's hard not to use those words now because they are the pervasive words of discussing this--

Jennifer Roback Morse, Ph.D.

And just define them carefully for everybody. So, everybody knows what we're talking about.

Dr. Carl Trueman

Sex typically refers to biological difference. Men and women have different hormones, different physiology. There are some people we call intersex who are born with hormonal or physiological distinctives that make it's somewhat difficult at times, for doctors to know, is this a boy or is it a girl? But by and large, boys are born boys, girls or girls, we have certain physiology, complimentary physiology, different physiology. That's what we mean when we talk about sex. When we talk about gender, we're typically talking about the roles that people play in society. And right up until sort of the day before yesterday, it seems there was a very close connection in any given society, between the sex of a person and the gender, the role they played. Really from the mid-20th century onwards, starting with the great French philosopher Simone de Beauvoir, in her book, The Second Sex, she begins part two of that work by saying, No one is not born a woman, one becomes a woman. And it's the idea that being a woman is actually a performance. It's a set of behaviors that are learned that society just happens to have somewhat arbitrarily almost mapped onto human beings who have a certain physiology. And that's where that gap between sex and gender starts to open up. Now Christians, we do need to be careful because-- we need to be careful as Christians that we don't make our particular society's view of what it means to be a man or means to be a woman the absolute biblical norm for everybody. John Wayne works in certain parts of America, he doesn't work in South Korea, he doesn't work in in Britain. And it's not because South Koreans or British men are somehow feminists or not biblical. It's because gender is real that there are ways we perform. The difference, I think, is as Christians, we need to remember that these may differ but they're not arbitrarily connected to the sex differences again, Scott [39:48] Yenor's language of gender runs along the grooves set by sexual difference.

Jennifer Roback Morse, Ph.D.

And in my conversations with a lot of parents of young people who have decided that they were born in the wrong body, these parents are struggling. I mean, they're in agony, Carl, I can't tell you how painful this is for a lot of them. But one of the things that we have come up with together, I don't know if I invented this or I saw somebody else invent it, but I use it all the time now. So, whoever invented it, it's great. That’s to say, number one, no one's born in the wrong body. And I've counseled people to say this, and I think people can, they can grasp that you and your body are okay. And number two, there are lots of ways to be a boy, there are lots of ways to be a girl, just because you like things that are not gender conforming or something like that, don't worry about it. There's nothing wrong with your body, there's nothing wrong with you, that's okay, that you're doing something that's not gender stereotypical. And what I find is that helps people relax, it helps the parents relax, it helps the children relax. And on the point that you made about some Christians being kind of insistent on certain gender roles, you know, that you've got to have some flexibility about that. You've just got to have some flexibility about it, because that's just not going to work for everybody.

Dr. Carl Trueman

Yeah, well, as I say, the Bible itself points that. My personal diary, I'm just reading the book of Genesis, and I'm struck out Esau as a hunter, dad liked him because he was a hunter. Jacob was a man of the tent, I imagine him sitting, composing poetry in the tent. But the narrative doesn't condemn either of them for those things. It doesn't say one's a man and the other one's a bit deviant. They're both sort of set forth as, hey, some men are bookish, some men love hunting. It's the way it is.

Jennifer Roback Morse, Ph.D.

And it's okay. And also, as part of the Christian tradition that we have the idea that each person is created by God uniquely, every single person is absolutely utterly unique, created in the image and likeness of God to image some aspect of God. And God wants you to live the life and the mission that he has for you. You don't need to be looking to the left and the right all the time to figure out if you're conforming or your head or you're below or whatever, you don't need to be worried about that. But to accept that your body and your mind, you're okay, it really is okay. Christianity actually has an elevated view of the body. We're not denigrating the body or saying there's something evil about the body or we're certainly not saying you have to manipulate the body in order to become who you really are. There's a profound respect for the human body there. So that brings me to another wonderful word that you use, which you use the word gnostic, you used the word nominalism. And I have often thought that what we're dealing with here is kind of-- the sexual revolution is kind of a gnostic death cult. Tell people what nominalism is, and why it's relevant to our current situation.

Dr. Carl Trueman

Yeah. nominalism is a word that has a variety of uses. And often when you refer to somebody as a nominal Christian or their Christianity is very nominalist, we tend to be not very committed. That's not how I'm using the word here. Here, I'm really referring to a broad philosophical tradition that places great Stark in the importance of words as being constitutive of reality. And again, we might say, transgenderism, I don't want to pick on the transgender movement all the time. But trans ideology provides us a great example of this. That the person who says I'm a woman trapped in a man's body is essentially saying, "by saying that I am a woman, I am making it so". The empirical reality of my body is actually not the ultimate reality is my statement. And of course, this plays over then into the demand that you use appropriate pronouns about me, I may have the body of a male but if I say I'm a woman, you better call me she and you better you she and her". And there's a sense in which what one has there is the material essence of the person, that which would traditionally have been regarded as making the person they are, is seen as almost irrelevant. If not irrelevant, what really matters are the words used, the names used. Now, words are powerful, we use an epithet, a racial epithet, a racial slur. We heard somebody, we are aware that words can create realities, they can put people down, they can build people up. So, words do have a power to them. But what they don't have is the ultimate creative power of making you into something you aren't simply by demanding that somebody uses certain words to refer to you.

Jennifer Roback Morse, Ph.D.

And you know, this is one place where you can really see the LGBT coalition breaking down, that the Ls and the T's are open warfare with each other. And this is something that we are very much aware of here with the Ruth Institute, because we're in communication with a lot of those women. Talk to people a little bit for who maybe are not familiar with it, about the conflict between the lesbians and the transgenders and what that's about. And it's based on this philosophical point that you just made.

Dr. Carl Trueman

Yeah. Well, the Lesbians and Gays essentially accept what we call the gender binary. They accept that biological sex is significant that there’s a difference between men and women. I could probably illustrate the problem by using an anecdote that I use in the book that I drew from a feminist, a pro trans feminist text, actually, where Testament is given by a lesbian woman who's been in a stable, monogamous lesbian relationship with her partner for 10 years. And the partner suddenly comes out as a trans male. In other words, she's a woman, but is now identifying as a man. And this means the partner is plunged into crisis because her friends and are telling her that she's straight, because she's living with a man, somebody identifies as a man. But she still feels that she's a lesbian. She's not attracted to men, but she's attracted to her partner. And she's left with this sort of, on the one hand kind of comic, on the other hand, deeply tragic, because there are human beings involved here. Dilemma. Does she deny her own identity as a lesbian in order to affirm the identity of her partner? Or does she deny the identity of her partner in order to affirm her own identity as a lesbian? It's a tragic scenario, we have a similar situation recently, where Andrew Sullivan, the gay journalist who said, it's not transphobic that I as a gay man, I'm not attracted to women who are claiming to be men. And then you get to the heart of the real difficulty, lesbians and gays, except that there are fundamental differences between men and women biological differences, and they're attracted to one group and not the other. The Trans movement and the queer movement denies that. Raises the question of well, how did they all get together to be part of the safe lobby group? And the answer is victimhood and marginalization, and opposition to what they call hetero-normativity, making heterosexuals the norm. Now, they've kind of won the culture war on that front, I suspect, we'll see, as you've already alluded to, we will see cracks, and then chasms emerging within this alliance as the various groups fall out with each other.

Jennifer Roback Morse, Ph.D.

Well, it's a marriage of convenience up until now. And the convenience has kind of gone away. Well, more than kind of gone away. What I'm seeing among the lesbians and many strands of feminists who are involved in this debate, is they deeply, deeply resent men saying they're women. And simply by saying, I'm a woman, they now have access to women's spaces. And the sex segregated spaces, which in some cases that feminists and lesbians have fought very hard to achieve and to maintain, in some cases, they were there all along. So, for instance, one of the grossest ones is women's prisons. There are cases of men who are in prison for sex crimes, claiming now that they are women, and demanding to be housed in women's prisons. Well, the lesbians and the feminists are the ones who are pounding the table saying, heck, no, we're not going along with this. This is a man. And they will not fall for the nominalist trick. They're not believed, they're not intimidated. This is a man who says he's a woman. And they don't care whether he's deluded or whether he's opportunistic, or whether he's-- they don't care. He is a man; his reasons don't matter and therefore he does not belong in women's spaces. So, it's very interesting to me that a kind of reversion to the more-- what's the opposite of nominalism?

Dr. Carl Trueman

Essentialism or realism. Yes, realism.

Jennifer Roback Morse, Ph.D.

Yes. They're reverting to that. It's almost like that norm has a gravitational pull to it.

Dr. Carl Trueman

You can only fight nature for so long, and then you get mugged by reality. It doesn't mean you can't do a lot of damage when you fight nature, you really can. But ultimately, nature has the last laugh, nature has the last word.

Jennifer Roback Morse, Ph.D.

Yes. And it also it takes a lot of power to fight nature. It takes a lot of power to try to do something that's impossible, and it requires a lot of propaganda. And this is something we emphasize that the Ruth Institute also the whole sexual revolution has resulted in vast accumulations of power for people who already had power actually, a lot of cases, right? In order to proceed with this agenda that it cannot be, it cannot be. Do you have any thoughts about the recent appointment of Dr. Levine as Assistant Secretary of Health and Human Services, Dr. Levine, who was born Dr. Richard Levine, who now has changed his name to Dr. Rachel Levine, do you have any thoughts about this appointment and what it means?

Dr. Carl Trueman

On a purely professional competence level? I would say Dr. Levine didn't do a very good job in Pennsylvania, in the COVID crisis. So, I'm surprised that Dr. Levine has been appointed at federal level. That's right.

Jennifer Roback Morse, Ph.D.

You live in you. Oh, yeah. You live in Pennsylvania?

Dr. Carl Trueman

Yes, yes. Yeah. I've had firsthand experience of Pennsylvania health policy over the last 12 months. I can't read President Biden's mind. Anything I say is pure speculation. But one has to ask the question, “is this based on professional competence? Or is it sending a signal to the LGBTQ lobby?" and given within hours of being sworn in as president, President Biden signed an executive order on transgender issues and public schooling. One has to think that the fact that Dr. Levine as transgender may well have been a significant factor in the choice.

Jennifer Roback Morse, Ph.D.

Yeah, no kidding.

Dr. Carl Trueman

I'm trying not to judge lest I be judged. But it's hard not to be pointed in that direction.

Jennifer Roback Morse, Ph.D.

And it points to the fact that far from being a marginalized group, the transgender lobby, and the LGBT lobby, generally, but now that the LGBT lobby is a powerful lobby, it is a political force to be reckoned with, they've got lots of money. And now that there's this rift between the T's and everybody else, the tees have kind of taken over a lot of the high leverage points. I have my own theory about the situation, Carl, my theory is that having Dr. Levine in that very prominent position, means he is now a litmus test, and everyone must call him her, everyone must state an obvious untruth. And when you say something that you know to be untrue, you are morally weakened somehow, right? You're now morally compromised. And when you're morally compromised, it's easier to break you down on other areas. And honestly, I think that's the whole point of the appointment.

Dr. Carl Trueman

Yeah. And it's reminiscent of course of Solzhenitsyn saying —that my friend Rod Dreher has picked up as the title of his new book, Live Not by Lies. And so, we made to live by lies, that's a catastrophic situation to find yourself in.

Jennifer Roback Morse, Ph.D.

That's right. And so, by putting this particular person in a very prominent position like that, they're forcing the issue. Yeah. And they're basically daring people to say that-- to tell the truth. They're raising the stakes and telling the truth. So, I'm just gonna say, Dr. Levine can change his name to Rachel, that does not make him a woman. He could change his name to Daffy, and that would not make him a duck.

Dr. Carl Trueman

You've been reading Germaine Greer; I can tell that.

Jennifer Roback Morse, Ph.D.

Oh, is that so? Did she say that?

Dr. Carl Trueman

Well, she said-- she used an expletive. But she said, if I have extensions, liver spots and wear a brown coat, it doesn't make me a beagle. She said it in a slightly cruder way. But I'd say one of the footnotes in my book, actually got one of my research assistants dug that up for me and said, Dr. Trueman, you need to use this. And I said, Yes, that's a really good statement.

Jennifer Roback Morse, Ph.D.

You know what? Speaking of Germaine Greer though, there was a quote from her in your book that I posted on one of these groups that I'm in, and it was her quote, Germaine Greer's quote about the mother and the position of the mother and the live for the transgender person. Do you remember that quote?

Dr. Carl Trueman

Yeah, it's essentially Greer is saying that transgenderism is all about erasing the mother, getting rid of the mother, killing the mother, if you like, in the narrative of identity. And I think she's correct. When you think about what transgenderism is it's about creating an identity for yourself that detaches you from, I would say from both parents. Not just the mother, but it detaches you from both parents. It’s an erasure of the past

Jennifer Roback Morse, Ph.D.

Yes. And in that sense, it brings us full circle to the definition of the self, because your grandpa would have just defined himself in terms of who he was related to. And who his parents were. And modern man wants to cut loose from all of our connections to the past, all of our history. Because all of those things are then confining. Yeah. And identifies too closely. We can't remake ourselves in any further than that, Dr. Trueman, this has been really, really pleasant, tell the people again, the name of your book and where they can get it and anything else you want to tell people about how they can be in touch with you and your work.

Dr. Carl Trueman

The name of the book is The Rise and Triumph of the Modern Self: Cultural Amnesia, Expressive Individualism, and the Road to Sexual Revolution. It's published by crossway. You can still get it from Amazon, I've not been cancelled, you can still get it from Amazon or from crossway themselves. I do most of my writing these days at first things online, firstthings.com and occasionally at public discourse. And I would recommend that the listeners check out those websites, it's not so much for my writing, but you will find very good articles there on the culture. Keep you up to date, the good intelligent way on cultural developments. I teach at Grove City College, and you can find my website, my email via the Grove City College website.

Jennifer Roback Morse, Ph.D.

Well, Dr. Carl Trueman, thank you so much for being my guest today on the Dr. J show.

Dr. Carl Trueman

Thanks for having me. It's been a pleasure.

@font-face {font-family:"Cambria Math"; panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:roman; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;}@font-face {font-family:Calibri; panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:swiss; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-469750017 -1073732485 9 0 511 0;}p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-unhide:no; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; margin:0in; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}.MsoChpDefault {mso-style-type:export-only; mso-default-props:yes; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}div.WordSection1 {page:WordSection1;}




Divorce Does Hurt Kids: The Research Doesn't Begin to Tell the Whole Story

Dr. Daniel Meola is an adult child of divorce who earned his Ph.D. in Theology of Marriage and Family from the Pontifical John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family in Washington, D.C. He has been leading retreats and support groups for adult children of divorce or separation since 2015 in the Archdiocese of Washington, and in 2018 he founded Life-Giving Wounds to spread the retreat, support groups, and other ministry to adult children of divorce or separation around the country.

Bethany Meola is a stay-at-home mom with a master of theological studies degree from the Pontifical John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family in Washington, D.C. She and Dan met there and married in 2011. Bethany served the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops for seven years in the Secretariat of Laity, Marriage, Family Life and Youth. Among other tasks, she managed the website For Your Marriage and researched and wrote on various topics related to marriage and family. In 2017, Dan and Bethany welcomed their daughter Zelie-Louise through the gift of adoption, and Bethany became a stay-at-home mom. And in 2019, Grace joined their family, also through adoption. Bethany assists with many of the behind-the-scenes operations of Life-Giving Wounds.


Readings & Resources


The Recovery of Family Life: Political Scientist Talks About Protecting the Family

Scott Yenor earned his Ph.D. at Loyola University Chicago. He now is a professor of political science at Boise State University and is a Washington Fellow at the Claremont Institute's Center for the American Way of Life.

Scott lives near Boise with his wife, Amy. They have five kids, one out of college and married, two in college, one senior in high school, and a sixth grader. Scott is also chairman of the board at a classical Christian school, the Ambrose School, which is in Meridian, Idaho.

Scott has written two books on the family: Family Politics: The Idea of Marriage in Modern Political Thought (Baylor 2010) and The Recovery of Family Life: Exposing the Limits of Modern Ideologies (Baylor 2020).

Readings & Resources


A Christian Approach to Psychotherapy

Dr Suzanne Baars is a licensed professional counselor and marriage and family therapist in Irving, Texas, where she operates her private practice, In His Image Christian Counseling. Sue has worked extensively in the field of counseling since 1986 in both hospital and outpatient settings, and focuses her work on the integration of the Christian anthropology of St. Thomas Aquinas with the treatment of a variety of emotional & spiritual problems, among them Emotional Deprivation Disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder and scrupulosity. She is also a popular presenter at Catholic conferences around the country and has been a frequent guest on EWTN’s Women of Grace. She often presents the work of her late father, psychiatrist and author Conrad Baars, a pioneer in the field of Catholic psychology. Sue cites the cultural erosion of the family as the root of the lack of affirmation from which many people in our time suffer.


Some of Sue’s lecture series include: Made in His Image: Healing and Wholeness for Living the Affirming Life (4 CDs) and The Abode of Love: Developing the Heart (10 CDs). She and a colleague edited a collection of Dr. Baars’ articles and monographs related to the priesthood entitled, I Will Give Them a New Heart: Reflections on the Priesthood and the Renewal of the Church.

Sue has been on the faculty of the Institute for Priestly Formation almost every summer since 2008, where she teaches diocesan seminarians. She is a Past President of the Catholic Psychotherapy Association and holds a doctorate in Family Therapy from Texas Woman’s University.

Resources


Forced Abortions Really Happen. Why Do We Never Hear About Them?

Attorney Catherine Glenn Foster serves as President and CEO of Americans United for Life. AUL’s legal strategists have been involved in every pro-life case before the U.S. Supreme Court since Roe v. Wade. Under Foster’s leadership, AUL pursues and refines a mother-child strategy that looks at the interests and vulnerabilities of both, protecting them from abortion industry abuses.

Foster has litigated precedent-setting constitutional questions, abortion and maternal health, health and safety regulations, euthanasia and assisted suicide, denial of medical care, First Amendment rights, genetic engineering issues, the Freedom of Information Act, and more.

Foster has testified before and advised the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Energy and Commerce Select Investigative Panel and Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, and other federal and state bodies and representatives. She and her award-winning work have appeared extensively in national media.


Foster spent seven years as litigation counsel with Alliance Defending Freedom. She then founded a law practice focusing on respect for the sanctity of innocent human life. She also led Euthanasia Prevention Coalition USA as Executive Director.

Foster serves on the boards of And Then There Were None, Christian Legal Society D.C. Metro Chapter, and Rockville Women’s Center, as well as on the advisory board of the Center for Bioethics & Human Dignity.

Foster earned her J.D. at Georgetown University Law Center and also holds an M.A. in French from the University of South Florida, and a B.A. in History and French from Berry College.

Foster is admitted to the bar in Virginia and Washington D.C., as well as the U.S. Supreme Court; the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the 1st, 5th, 8th, and 9th Circuits; and the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. She is an inaugural member of the Federalist Society Founders Club, Senior Fellow in Legal Policy at the Charlotte Lozier Institute, and a fellow with the James Wilson Institute on Natural Rights and the American Founding.

Readings & Resources


 


What Happens When We Start Disrespecting Family?

Louisiana priest Father Shenan J. Boquet travels around the world spreading the Gospel of Life as president of Human Life International. Having journeyed over a million miles to more than 87 countries, Father Boquet has given numerous talks at conferences and symposia in the United States and around the world on issues ranging from the dignity of the human person and the nature of marriage to social justice and moral theology.

Father Boquet has appeared on EWTN television and radio shows, Catholic Answers Live, Ave Maria Radio, Vatican Radio, as well as a number of local Catholic radio programs in the U.S. and in other international media outlets. His writings have appeared in numerous publications such as: LifeSiteNews, LifeNews, Catholic Exchange, CNSNews, Catholic Lane, Catholic Online, Crux, Legatus, and The Wanderer. Father Boquet’s weekly newsletter, “Spirit and Life,” goes online Mondays at ww.HLI.org.

Readings & Resources


Make 2021 the Year of T-RUTH!

In this special New Year's edition of the Dr J Show, we talk with our president, Dr Jennifer Roback Morse, and give you an invitation to make 2021 the year of T-Ruth. Dr. Morse is the founder of The Ruth Institute, an interfaith international coalition to defend the family and build a Civilization of love. Dr. Morse was a campaign spokeswoman for California’s winning Proposition 8 campaign, defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman. She has authored or co-authored six books and spoken around the globe. Her latest book is The Sexual State: How Elite Ideologies are Destroying Lives and Why the Church was Right Along.


She earned her Ph.D. at the University of Rochester and taught economics at Yale and George Mason Universities. Dr. Morse was named one of the “Catholic Stars of 2013,” on a list that included Pope Francis and Pope Benedict XVI. Dr. Morse and her husband are parents of an adopted child, a birth child, a goddaughter and were foster parents for San Diego County to eight foster children. In 2015, Dr. Morse and her husband relocated to Lake Charles, Louisiana, where the work of the Ruth Institute continues.

Dr. Morse’s books include:

  • Love and Economics: It Takes a Family to Raise a Village (2001)
  • Smart Sex: Finding Lifelong Love in a Hookup World (2005)
  • 101 Tips for a Happier Marriage (2013), coauthored with Betsy Kerekes
  • The Sexual Revolution and Its Victims (2015)
  • 101 Tips for Marrying the Right Person (2016), coauthored with Betsy Kerekes
  • The Sexual State: How Elite Ideologies are Destroying Lives and Why the Church was Right Along (2018)

MAKE 2021 THE YEAR OF T-RUTH! Be not afraid! Be encouraged by Dr J in this special episode. And be active! Dr J is calling on you! Topics include:

  • The world as we once knew it is gone, and it's not coming back
  • We are deciding what and who we are going to be for the next 500 years
  • We must not submit to fear
  • The issue behind all the other issues is the issue of Truth
  • Defeating demoralization
  • Using military concepts, strategy and tactics in the fight against the culture of death
  • Thinking in terms of psychological warfare
  • Christians have compassion on all people, loving their enemies
  • Do something small -- every little bit has a ripple effect!
  • Weapons of spiritual warfare: Wielding the power of the Church Triumphant
  • Calling on the angels
  • "Offering Up" our sufferings
  • Making 2021 the year of T-RUTH!

Action Items

  1. First and foremost, you must form small groups for prayer and study.
  2. Share one of our stories or podcasts on social media.
  3. Post a review of the Ruth Institute on Google. 
  4. Post a review of The Sexual State on its Amazon page.
  5. Write a note of encouragement to someone who may need it.
  6. Share a Survivor story with someone who needs to hear it. (see our Cloud of Witnesses project, among others.)
  7. Send us Survivor stories that you come across.
  8. Share your own Survivor Stories.
  9. Do your part to reclaim your profession, especially if you are now retired. They can’t fire you!
  10. Educate yourself to become a more effective advocate. I have heard it said that if you study something for 30 minutes a day, you will be an expert in 5 years. We need more experts! Pick a topic and dive into it. We’ll get you started!

Dr J Shows: ruthinstitute.org/dr-j-show

Archbishop Vigano’s Year End Reflection: "We are not alone: a 2020 recap" at LifeSite News


WHO IS THE REAL SAINT NICK?

In this special edition of The Dr J Show, we delve into who is the "Fatman" in the red suit behind the fake beard. Saint Nicholas of Myra in Lycia, who lived about seven hundred years ago, was a Christian bishop and a man of God who fasted and sacrificed his life for his flock. He was not fat, and was a fierce defender of Christianity. He even slapped a man in public! He willingly went to a dungeon prison for faith in Jesus Christ. He also saved women from sexual slavery and men from execution. In this commercialized age, we benefit from learning about the REAL Saint Nicholas.

Come hear the true story of the man who became a Saint. A story of hidden gifts, defending faith, and miracles. In this Ruth Institute Special, learn the truth and the history of this great man who inspired the creation of Santa Claus.

St Nicholas' ancient hymn
In truth you were revealed to your flock as a rule of faith,
an image of humility and a teacher of abstinence;
your humility exalted you;
your poverty enriched you.
Hierarch Father Nicholas,
entreat Christ our God
that our souls may be saved.

St Nicholas' life at oca.org

St Nicholas' ancient hymns: Troparion or  Kontakion


The UN is Forcing Abortion on Africa, but They Don't Want It

Dr Wahome Ngare is a member of the Kenya Catholic Doctors Association, which blew the whistle in 2014 on a World Health Organization vaccine which was secretly laced with abortifacient and sterilization drugs. Their medical investigation shows that W.H.O. researchers conjugated tetanus toxoid with human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) producing a “birth-control” vaccine.

W.H.O. publications show a long-range purpose to reduce population growth in unstable “less developed countries.” Conjugating TT with hCG causes pregnancy hormones to be attacked by the immune system.

“Birth control must lead ultimately to a cleaner race.” – Planned Parenthood Founder Margaret Sanger

“At the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth, and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of.” – U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg

This episode is also available as an audio podcast. More resources & readings after the cut.


Topics discussed in this Dr J Show include:

  • Kenya does not have a "population problem"
  • the Constitution of Kenya specifically states life begins at conception, and every person has the right to life.
    • Article 26 states abortion is legal if a doctor says the mother's treatment or life or health is in danger. As with Roe v Wade, the word "health" is defined so broadly (depression, stress, etc.) that abortion on demand for any reason can be obtained.
  • If the law is going to consider the right of "choice," both mother & child have this right.
  • Any society that considers itself moral would fight for the person with less power, namely the more vulnerable preborn person.
  • Pro-aborts scare women into believing the lie that abortion is safer than pregnancy. The truth is, maternal mortality is rare; almost zero.
  • In countries with legal abortion, 99% or more are elective, killing healthy babies.
  • NGOs (non-government organizations), often from the U.S., push abortion in foreign countries around the world. They tie compliance with abortion laws with needed funding.
  • "Safe abortion" is an oxymoron.
  • The ideology driving the push for abortion is used to sexualize children, to legalize sodomy and prostitution, and to distribute contraceptives to girls as young as 10 years of age.
  • Over 90% of the Kenyan people do not want abortion or sodomy legalized. NGOs pushing abortion can go against the will of the people by paying corrupt officials.
  • The whole concept of NGOs is foreign interference, including foreign interference in the elections of sovereign countries.
  • For the Sexual Revolution to take hold requires many people to be quiet. All of us must take it very seriously that this is not a fight for one or two people; it is a fight for the survival of the human race. The globalists are everywhere, and people need to stand up against their agenda -- otherwise, we have no humanity left.
  • Practitioners of medicine have to give hope; daily numbers of Wuhan virus infections & deaths do not.
  • There is an agenda going on. Fear is being generated in people. What are we being prepared for?

Readings Resources

 
 
Transcript:

Dr. Ngare

If we are going to discuss the right to life, the letters discuss the right to life of both the baby, and the mother. Both of them have a right to life. And therefore, the Mother cannot decide when to kill the pre-born person, just like she can’t decide when to kill her own child.

Dr. Morse

Right

Dr. Ngare

The section on reproductive health and rights is actually an ideology. It is an ideology, it is a culture. It believes that sex is for pleasure, and everyone should be able to experience it. From children at 4 or 5 years of age. It is being used to sexualize children, it is being used to legalize homosexuality. They want to legalize prostitution. They want children as young as 10 to use contraceptives. And a whole lot of stuff that is completely against what we stand for, even in the constitution.

Dr. Morse

Hi Everyone, I am Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse, founder and president of the Ruth Institute and welcome to today’s episode of the Dr. J Show. Today I have a very special guest. Dr. Wahome Ngare an OBGYN from Kenya. He is also associated with the Kenyan Catholic Dr.’s Association and he has some very important information for us about public policy going on in Kenya right now. I think Pro-life people all over the world, pro-family people all over the world need to be aware of what is going on in Kenya. Particularly our friends here in the United States in the pro-life movement. I think you are going to be sorry but glad to know, about the information that Dr. Wahome is going to be sharing with us. Dr. Ngare, thank you so much for being with us today.

Dr. Ngare

Thank you very much, it’s a pleasure.

Dr. Morse

Yes great! So, to start with, can you just tell us a little about your association, The Kenyan Catholic Dr.’s Association, because most people won’t have heard of it or won’t know what your mission is.

Dr. Ngare

Well, the Kenyan Catholic Dr.’s Association is an association that brings together Doctors who are catholic, who have taken a vow to practice medicine guided by the catholic faith. So, there are many doctors who are Catholics, but not all doctors who are Catholics can be a member of the association. See you must take a vow that you will serve the medical profession guided by the teachings of the catholic church. We specifically take the old and bastardized hypocritic oath that allows us to practice hypocritic medicine.

Dr. Morse

Oh golly, I recently interviewed Dr. Thomas Hilgers who explained to us that American Doctors don’t take the hypocritic oath anymore.

Dr. Ngare

Yes, and the few who do, it has been altered very many times to remove anything that would be considered anti-abortion and anti-euthanasia. So, a lot has changed. We use the old version.

Dr. Morse

So, you are actually more in tune with the ancient western tradition that goes back to the Greeks. You’re actually more Western than the West.

Dr. Ngare

Laughter*

Dr. Morse

Right? We’ve abandoned our roots over here. That was a beautiful thing that the Greeks came up with before Christ. They figured out that the medical profession had to first do no harm. Dr. Ngare, the reason that I wanted to have you on the program is that I read a couple of things that concern me, and I think will concern American pro-life people. But all of them have to do with population control and abortion, Contraception, related issues. So just to give people some perspective, Kenya has a fertility rate of 3.57 children per woman. In your opinion does Kenya have a population problem? And if so what is the population problem in Kenya?

Dr. Ngare

Well to be honest? Kenya does not have a population problem. In fact, the whole of Africa doesn’t have a population problem. When you look at the world statistics, the world does not have a population problem. What we have is a problem of resource distribution. If you fly over our country you’ll find a lot of land that is not occupied, just like if you flew over the US. There is a lot more than can support the current population. A problem is that there is somebody who is hell bent to reduce the world population, and especially the population of the people in Africa and that seems to be the biggest driver in today’s issue. We all know the population explosion story was a big hoax that has already been proved in the theory didn’t make sense, and what every he described didn’t happen. But there is somebody who took that and ran with it and is spreading a lot of lies.

Now we have seen countries who have taken up what we are being fed with in terms of population control who have negative population growth. Especially the Scandinavian Countries. They will not be able to replace themselves even if they started having six or eight children. We need a big robust population, so the idea is, if you look at human being as a resource, then you want bigger numbers to make sure they remain productive. If you look at the human numbers as a threat, the idea is to reduce the numbers.

Dr. Morse

Right Right.

Dr. Ngare

So, whoever is you know, perpetuating that agenda about population explosion basically has reduction in numbers as their intention.

Dr. Morse

Yes. Do you know, I don’t know if you are familiar with the late Julian Simon who is a professor at the university of Maryland, who wrote a book called “The Ultimate Resource” which meant that Human Beings were the ultimate resource and more people is a good thing and not a bad thing.

7:10 Dr. Ngare

And we would agree with him that all we need to do is insure that they are morally upright, and we’re good

Dr. Morse

Right right and so the family members are taking care of one another and not being left behind for strangers or for the government to take care of. So now, the thing that got my attention is that there is an attempt in Kenya to change the Kenyan Law, the constitution. It’s my understanding that right now the right to life is in the Kenyan constitution, is that correct? Can you tell people about that?

Dr. Ngare

Yes, we have that in article 26 of the bill of rights of the constitution. It makes it very clear that life of a person begins at conception, and that every person has a right to life. It’s a very unique article because it is one of the few that specified that the pre-born person can be referred to as a person in law. So, the conception starting —The life of the person starting at conception and every person having a right to life means that in the Kenyan constitution, the pre-born person is protected under the law.

Dr. Morse

Yes, and there is a move afoot by some of the population control people to try to change Kenyan law. So, can you tell people about that in general, what they are up to, and what particularly is going on right now?

Dr. Ngare

Well, during run-up to the constitution that we currently have that was made in 2010, there were forces from the population control movement through ICPD through the UN and other systems that sponsored people to fight that consensus. The Article 26 ended up with those two portions that I mentioned that were pushed by the pro-life people, but we had and article —Article 260 that was pushed by the so-called progressive forces, and that article says that abortion is not permitted unless recommended by a trained health professional. There is need for emergency treatment for the life or health of the mother.

Now the interpretation of that article is what they are using to try and expand access to abortion. So yeah, the article to us is very clear. It has always been the opinion of the trained health professional that determined that the pregnancy would be terminated or not. This is not necessarily bound to the gestation of the baby. Our argument is simple, the constitution is not a medical document. Abortion just means bringing to an end prematurely. So, they wanted it read differently. To them abortion is just the same as a medical term or whatever is described by them. In which case health professionals would be allowed to decide whether to terminate a pregnancy or not, without due regard to the world of the little one.

Dr. Morse

And so, then the question of maternal mortality becomes an important question. Because if the life of the mother is at risk, and if you can make the claim that the life of the mother is often at risk and can’t be solved any other way —her life can’t be solved any other way other tha terminating the pregnancy— now you’ve opened the door to abortion. Is that really what the issue is coming down to?

11:05Dr. Ngare

Yes, the term “Health” when the life of the mother is in danger, or is in need of emergency treatment, is not a problem. But when they say the “health of the mother” Health becomes very wide, and it can be used in the wrong way. So, what has happened is that there have been two or three ills that we have been fighting from parliament because they have crafted bills that try to bring to life article 26 by providing that abortion can be given as a service. That is where the mischief is. We are very clear that the law as it reads right now, and the practice of medicine, and medical ethics, the law is clearly protecting the little one. Now there is an issue of course, we have been accused of trying to protect the life of the pre-born person, instead of the life of the mother. And nothing can be farther from the truth. I think that what we need to do is clearly distinguish between which right we are discussing. If we are discussing the right to life, let us discuss the right to life of both the baby and the mother. Both of them have a right to life. And therefore, the mother cannot decide when to kill the pre-born person. Just like she can’t decide when to kill her own child.

If you are going to consider the right to choice, then again, both of them have a right of choice, both of them have a right to choice. If the mother says she doesn’t want the child, then we need to ask the child if the child is ready to exist. And the child cannot protect or speak about themselves. In any society that considers itself morally upright will basically fight for the least powerful person. In this case that is the pre-born person. And we are saying it is possible for us to respect the right to the mother, as soon as the child is born, then she doesn’t have to take care of the baby. The child can be taken and put up for adoption and we can release her of any obligations.

Dr. Morse

Right, but she doesn’t have the right to take the life of the child either before or after the child is born.

Dr. Ngare

Yes, and again like we are saying, it is just a simple human mortal body. Life is precious. The mother has every right to say that she doesn’t want to look after the child, and we can’t force her to look after the child. But it would be wrong for anybody to say they are practicing medicine by killing that child as a response to the Mother’s request. Because that would be impossible to do if the baby was born.

Dr. Morse

So, then the issue become, how often does this conflict really arise? What is the maternal mortality in Kenya? How likely is it that a Mother’s life is threatened by the continuation of pregnancy? Now as I mentioned I interviewed Dr. Thomas Hilgers a little bit ago, and he has been delivering babies for 40 years —like you he is an OBGYN— and I said, “Dr. Hilgers how many babies —how many mothers have you lost in that 40-year career?” and he said, “None. I have never lost a mother. I have never had a mother so —and I have dealt with crazy pregnancies.” Because he deals with high risk people and stuff like that. So, tell us, give us a little perspective on healthcare in Kenya. How often is it that a mother’s life is seriously threatened by the continuation of her pregnancy?

Dr. Ngare

Actually, the biggest challenge we have in Kenya and the rest of Africa is hemorrhage —blood loss during or after delivery is the most common killer of mothers. And this is followed by hypertensive disease in pregnancy, and sepsis. When you look at any pregnancy loss contributing to maternal mortality, it would be about 9% or less. What has happened is that those estimates, which are made by foreign NGO’s that come and do research here with wild estimations of maternal death, are what they pedal around with the ministry of health, and they put them in newspapers and they scare people. And they make abortion seem like it is a major concern. Of course, we don’t want to lose any mothers for whatever cost. But if we could sort out the problem of availability of blood, and mothers delivering in health institutions, we would actually reduce maternal mortality by almost half.

Dr. Morse

Right Right. That is the thing, there are other solutions other than killing the baby early term. And one of the problems we have over here in the US, is that we have legal abortions, and they are all supposed to be safe. But mothers having hemorrhages after their abortions and being very poorly treated with follow up care. This is one of the big scandals that the Pro-life movement calls attention to in the US, that nobody in the mainstream media wants to talk about, that sometimes people die from their abortions. So, tell us more, tell us more.

Dr. Ngare

The truth is, whatever the degree of risk abortion has, even assume say you terminate a pregnancy at 12 or 13 weeks, you would lose just 1% of the patients, the thing is once you make it legal, and now you don’t just have 100 people going through the procedure, you have 1,000 or 100,000 that 1% increases. The idea would be that it’s shameful for us as human being to be debating the question about a pregnancy after it has occurred, every adult, male and female, know that sexual intercourse leads to pregnancy. For people to engage and then say that they are shocked or surprised that they are pregnant, really sounds very very unfortunate. So, people have to learn to make good choices. And we are not going to take care of their bad choices by killing their children that they bring into this world. So, I think it is something that we just need to get very clear

Dr. Morse

Yes Yes. In one sense of the word, the numbers don’t matter, because the principle at stake is a principle that we have to defend regardless of the numbers. But the numbers do help us point out, well where should we be looking if we are trying to save both the mother and the baby, what should we be doing? And killing the baby is obviously a non-starter.

Dr. Ngare

In short, if you look at the —even the countries where abortion has been legalized, you realize that up to 90% of the time it is never the life or the health of the mother that is at risk. Most of them are people who are opting for abortion because it is legally available. In which case it makes nonsense of this claim that says, “It is the health of the mother we are worried about.” But even if we come to a basic understanding of medicine —because medicine is basically about the diagnosis treatment and prevention of disease— if a mother comes to me because she is very distressed, she has a crisis pregnancy, and she is wading in anxiety disorders or she might be depressed. If I take her history and examine her, my diagnosis will eventually be, this is a mother with a normal pregnancy who is suffering depression.

The treatment cannot be “Kill the baby” you see, whatever principle you use, whether you use medicine or common sense, the idea would basically be: treat the depression. Treat the anxiety, alleviate that which allow her to give up her child. But it can never be, Kill you baby.

The few times where you have, say an ectopic pregnancy. Where the mother has an ectopic pregnancy the baby is alive, you’ve done a scan, you can see the heart beat, but she is already bleeding, and you know that this will cause death. Then that doesn’t qualify as an abortion. Because the ectopic pregnancy is not a normal pregnancy. And when you go in as Dr. to work on that you are treating the mother, you are not killing the child.

Dr. Morse

Right Right. The pregnancy —This is not a normal pregnancy. This is not a viable pregnancy pretty much no matter what you do. But it is interesting though, that the claims that, “oh we’re all about helping the mother, we’re all about protecting the mother’s health.” That has led people to make other kinds of claims that are not necessarily accurate. And I have a sense that these same NGOs are exaggerating the extent of maternal mortality in order to justify this reinterpretation of the constitution. Is that right? Do you think they are exaggerating maternal mortality?

Dr. Ngare

Yes. They did that. There was a study that was carried out —I think it was carried out in 2003, I think it was repeated in 2012— that they keep quoting. Where they estimate that there was almost 400,000, or something like that, abortions happening in Kenya. They would claim then that abortion is a large, the third largest, that a third of maternal mortality is caused by abortion.

Dr. Morse

Illegal abortions? Illegal unsafe abortions.

Dr. Ngare

Yes, I try very hard not to use the term safe abortion because it is an oxymoron. You can’t call anything safe when the baby dies 100% of the time. There are many women who get psychological and emotional damage. Even if they don’t get physical injury. So it will never be safe. Therefore, in this country, both “safe” and “unsafe” abortion are illegal in this country. So, it doesn’t matter who does it. It doesn’t matter in what place they do it, the fact that they take the life of an innocent pre-born person is inadmissive.

So, they came up with this study, and the statistics, they use a very interesting methodology. It is called “The abortion incidence complication methodology” and I forwarded you a link, and maybe let the viewers do their own reading.

Dr. Morse

Yes, we will definitely link right to that study. And it was a doozy. I mean the truth is they don’t know. So, they are drawing a whole chain of inferences from one or two things they do know.

Dr. Ngare

Yes, they just expand and multiply this multiplication thing they do and come up with all sorts of weird stuff. So, we do not have that number of deaths they claim from abortion. And the abortions —even the abortions they discuss in the study— if you note these they were mainly spontaneous abortions (miscarriages). And then they say, “oh these are the spontaneous abortions then we estimate these must have been the unsafe ones” and they come up with some cooked broth.

Dr. Morse

Just to be clear for people who aren’t MDs —which most of our listeners are not going to be Doctors— The terms “spontaneous abortion” is the technical term for a miscarriage, okay? So, the differences between spontaneous abortion and induced abortion which is what we are normally —when you hear the term abortion, you are thinking of induced, but the medical term spontaneous abortion means that pregnancy ended midterm, spontaneously. No human agency caused that to happen. So that’s what is so, they came up with a guesstimate. They came up with how many were induced and how many were spontaneous. And all of this is based on women coming to the hospital with complications from pregnancy. Isn’t that where all this is from?

Dr. Ngare

Yes

Dr. Morse

So, tell us about that a little bit.

24:58 Dr. Ngare

Many women have come for treatment, seeking treatment because they have lost their pregnancies. Then these organizations go and ask doctors, and then they take the number of women in the country and they estimate how many are in the child rearing age, and they just come up with some wild stuff.

Dr. Morse

Right

Dr. Ngare

Now the way that they have done it in other countries, the estimates are so high, that even the countries that eventually legalize abortion, would never get to that number. And therefore, they are able to justify that.

Dr. Morse

Oohhh. So, they’ve cooked it from the start to say, “look how much safer we are now.”

Dr. Ngare

Yes. So even if you legalize abortion, you never get those kinds of numbers.

Dr. Morse

Right Right.

Dr. Ngare

So, it is a very clever trick from them.

Dr. Morse

Mhmm. So, tell us Dr. Ngare. Who are these people who are so intent on changing the laws in Kenya? Are these Kenyan people? Or are these people from outside? Who is this?

Dr. Ngare

Well, they have a come in an umbrella that they are calling “The Sexual Reproductive Health and Rights Advocates” So they are local NGOs that are sponsored by foreign NGOs. Some of those NGOs you are quite familiar with. Marie Stopes International, Planned Parenthood, then we have some operative in the UN Arms. Especially the UN PA. They organized the first ICPD conference in 1994 in Cairo Egypt. And that is where they introduced all this language of reproductive rights, you know, sexual rights and stuff. And then all the goals of the UN, the SDGs. The Sustainable Development Goals of the UN. They managed to push in that language through that. So what happens is that we get documents being brought by the ministry of health, coming from the UN and the UN Bodies and saying that these are the commitments the world has made, you know. Abortion is part of sexual reproductive health and rights, and these need to be implemented. Then they also come in through policy —they put in money and support the government to review policies. So anytime the government in the ministry of health is reviewing policies, in reproductive health or something. Or they want a policy for adolescent health, they put in a lot of money they offer to give you technical assistance, they pay their technical experts and make sure that all the staff goes on in there.

Now the sexual reproductive health and rights is actually an ideology.

Dr. Morse

Yes

Dr. Ngare

It is an ideology it is a culture. It believes that sex is for pleasure and everyone should be able to experience this right from children at 4 years or 5 years of age. It is being used to sexualize children. It is being used to legalize homosexuality. They want to legalize prostitution, they want children as young as 10 to be put on contraceptives. And a whole lot of stuff that is completely against what Kenyans stand for, even in the constitution. And it is against our African culture, and culture practices. And it is also against the faith of the majority of people who still believe strongly in the tradition of family.

So, they would be basically forcing, imposing cultural practices that are not for us. Now whether they call it progressive or otherwise is their business, but it is basically wrong to come with a culture and practice and impose it on people.

Dr. Morse

So, are there people, a substantial number of people from within Kenya who agree with these people? Or is it a very small minority? Who are they? Who are their local advocates, or the people who are really carrying water for this program locally?

Dr. Ngare

Main ones would just be the NGOs that they sponsor. So, if I went to a non-government-organization that is say Family Options, that is sponsored by ITPF, you’ll find a few individuals whose livelihood is dependent on the employment and resources. But when you go to the Kenyan people —The last time the Kenya Christian Professional forum did a survey, over 90% of the people said they do not want abortion legalized. And almost the same percentage did not want Homosexuality legalized. So, the Kenyans on the ground are very clear what they want.

 

Ngare Interview 30:00

Dr. Morse

Are there a substantial number of people within Kenya who agree with these people? Or is it a very small minority? Who are they? Who are their local advocates? Or the people hwo are really carrying water for this program.

Dr. Ngare

The main ones would just be the NGOs that they sponsor. So it is a non governmental organization that is like, that is sponsored, say, by the IPPF, you’ll find that few Kenyans who are dependent on their employment on these facilities. Well, when you go to the Kenyan people, the last time the Kenyan Christian Forum did a survey, over 90% of the people said they do not want abortion legalized, and almost a similar percentage said they do not want homosexuality legalized. So, they Kenyans on the ground are very clear on what they want. And the people who are pushing this agenda, don’t need to convince the Kenyan people, all they need is one or two corrupt people in certain key ministries, and then, you know, in the local schools agree to take some little money and do the ground work.

Dr. Morse

Yes, and so what you really have is foreign interference in elections.

Dr. Ngare

Actually, the whole concept is foreign interference. We see…let me give you some little contradictions. There is a practice that is called female circumcision that used to be practice in some cultures in this country, where there is a physical cut in the genital area. And the religion and the western world came and told us this practice is not good, it is hurting the women. And basically, that practice is dying and people believe that it is not a good practice. So it is not that we don’t take from the West what is good, but now the same West is telling us, a man can tell me that he is trapped in a woman’s body and come and ask for surgery to transform into a woman. Now whereas the other one is called female genital mutilation, what is the difference, if you are going to cut of the genital organs of a man, and implant breasts in him and inject him with hormones so that he can look like a woman, that is being described as “transgendersim.”

Dr. Morse

Right! But that is genital mutilation! It is genital mutilation!

Dr. Ngare:

It is gross mutilation because we do not have a woman, what you have is a severely mutilated man.

Dr. Morse

And so the ideology of the West is coming in to your country and imposing itself from the top down and it really is foreign interference with elections. And I want to emphasize that point to especially American viewers, because we’ve had so much talk in the United States on whether Russia is interfering with our elections or whether China is interfering with our elections, and here we have really a long standing practice of the international, so called, community, of the international agencies interfering in the domestic affairs of countries around the world. And I know this is not unique to Kenya, but I’m happy that we have you to explain this, because I know it went on in the Philippines and it’s going on in Uganda. I visited Uganda not too long ago and I was shocked by the amount of propaganda that I saw everywhere; on the billboards, on the TV, TV commercials, I even saw people wearing T shirts that obviously someone had given them, you know? Just promoting this message that modern birth control is a good thing, and it is safe and, you know, just these buzzwords, that obviously were not invented in Uganda. I mean, you could just tell, it was, it came in from, it was parachuted in to the culture, by the UN agencies and so on and so forth, in exchange for lots and lots of aid money. And so, I think, I would like to go there, if you don’t mind, Dr. I’d like for you to talk a little bit about the way in which aid money is used as bribery to try to change the culture of this sovereign state, let’s say it. Kenya is a sovereign nation and they have a right to rule themselves. How is aid money being used to corrupt your processes, your self-determination processes.

Dr. Ngare,

Well, one of them is basically our elections attract a lot of foreign interest. And especially, at least, in funding. We have seen the same kind of infiltration in our schools. We have seen professors in the medical schools, being part of this reproductive health and rights advocacy system, and they, right from their post-graduate studies, and research work, and all of these are basically sponsored by these same bodies. We’ve also seen the same kind of infiltration of schools of law, where we have a lot of, again, people, lecturers, who have taken on these kind of attitudes. Then you go to the judiciary, and you’ll find that the research department receives large funding from, again, the same NGOs, large fundings with support for technical expertise. Then you come to ministries, like Health, and you find monies given to the Ministry of Health, towards, say, developing policies and the policies allow for giving contraceptives to children, then they will come and provide technical expertise and money to start having adolescent clinics pop up all over the place. We have a body that is called the NCPD – The National Council for Population and Development. Every time they develop policies, you find those sneaked in, and they’re pushing the same language, and then come back with the UN document, saying, “The UN Passed this, and now you need to effect it.” And so its, very deep rooted, and you find that almost every sector of government including the educational sector.

Dr. Morse

We could really call this “Cultural Colonialism” or

Dr. Ngare

Yes, yes, Cultural Colonialism for sure, with a very clear agenda. If we take up abortion, or if we take up contraceptives, especially for the teenagers, if we allow homosexuality to come through, we allow prostitution we legalize, then basically this experiment has worked before in the Netherlands. The Netherlands has reproductive or fertility rate of 0.6 something. They are getting less than one child per married couple. And their fertility rate is not even going to allow them to replace themselves. This has been proven to be very effective in population reduction. And that is the reason why Africa is being pushed to take out those things.

Dr. Morse

Yes, it is very interesting. We’ve done these experiments in the United States also. And here at the Ruth Institute, we track the human misery that is caused by these experiments. So, just to take one of the things that you mentioned. If you allow contraception for unmarried minors, you know, children, teenagers, what you have to back that up with removing the parents from the picture so the children have their own rights to see the doctor without their parents interfering. So you undermine the relationship between the parent and the child. And you know, there are many reasons why parents and children need each other, but you’ve now undermined that whole relationship in a very substantial way. And we’ve seen the way that undermines the family itself and so on and so forth. The other thing that I want to comment on is that what you’re describing is the systematic corruption of the professions in your country. And I want you and your colleagues to be aware that in the United States, pretty much every profession has been corrupted by the Sexual Revolution, all the way down to the school teachers and the librarians and the social workers. Everybody’s on board to push this agenda, you know? And it is, you are very, very wise to resist it. And I just want you to know that there are plenty of Americans that agree with you guys, you know? That’s part of why I wanted you on the show so you could know that we are not all on board with the crazy stuff that our government is so repsonbile for in so many ways. And then when you talk about the ministries of health and the different, the education ministries, and the way in which that’s all separated from electoral politics. You can’t vote those guys out. Once the Ministry of Health puts something in place, that’s going to outlast any administration. And in the United States, we have now come to call that the “Deep State”, the “Administrative State” – it is immune to any kind of public oversight. And so, again, you guys are very wise, to be putting the brakes on all of that, because it is not going to do you any good. And I will say, as an American, I apologize for what our country has done to your country in this area. It is not right.

Dr. Ngare

Well, I think when you look at humanity, as just humanity without the borders and colors, I think we all have a moral responsibility, because none of this would happen if everybody stood up for what was right. And you find the Ministry of Health, they’ll probably be dealing with two or three people out of very many employees. But for those two people to be able to do what they’re doing, they have very many people who are quiet. They call themselves good people, but they will not speak out, they will not condemn these things happening. I think all of us must take it very seriously, that this is not a fight of one or two people. It is a fight for the survival of the human race. And if you don’t see it that way, then there is a risk of laxity, which is the only thing they need for them to continue to progress.

Dr. Morse

So, That’s a great place for us to turn the conversation back to your organization, the Kenyan Catholic Doctor’s Association. And I think you’re also involved in another professional organization, isn’t that right? The Christian, I forget what its called.

Dr. Ngare

It’s called the Kenya Christian Professionals Forum

Dr. Morse

That’s it. That’s what I’m thinking of. So, tell us a little bit about how your organization and perhaps the Catholic Church, has tried to resist some of these things.

Dr. Ngare

The Kenyan Catholic Doctor’s Association keeps its eyes and ears open for any stuff that is likely to interfere with life or to interfere with family, and especially in the field of medicine. One of the biggest fights we had with the government, is in 2014, when the World Health Organization was running a program for eradication of neonatal tetanus, and in this country, they came and asked that all women in child bearing age, from the age of 14 to the age of 49, should be given two injections of the tetanus vaccine. That caused a bit of a concern. Number one, we were already immunizing all pregnant women with two injections of tetanus given during the pregnancy. Now, they come and tell us that even the ones who are not pregnant from the age of 14, all the way to 49, whether you’re pregnant or not. The second was that the injections were to be given every six months. And they were to be given four or give doses. Now the problem was, as the Kenyan Catholic Doctors Association, we were aware that such vaccines had been given in South American in 1992. And there was concern that there were fertility regulating tetanus vaccines.

Dr. Morse

So hold on right there. Just so people understand what you’re saying. Neonatal Tetanus is a disease that sometimes babies have in unsanitary conditions, they might have tetanus, and if they get tetanus it is deadly. It is bad. So you guys had a program in place for immunizing the pregnant mothers to deal with that problem. And then along comes somebody with a new plan with a vaccine that you are suspicious of, that it may have a sterilization or fertility reducing additive included along with the tetanus vaccine. Is that…am I getting that right?

Dr. Ngare

Yes. And we managed to get a few of those vials and test them for the human chorionic gonadotropin, and we found some to be positive.

Dr. Morse

So it was a substance that would prevent the baby from implanting in the womb properly. Is that what it amounted to?

Dr. Ngare

Yes. What happens is immediately the baby implants, the forming placenta tissue produces hCG that tells the ovary to produce progesterone, which is the pregnancy hormone. Now if you make sure that the antibodies destroy all the hCG, the babies produce, then what happens is that the signal to the mother that she is pregnant is interfered with. The minute that she doesn’t make the progesterone then she loses her pregnancy. And the antibodies are high enough, even her cycle doesn’t change. She continues to get normal periods; she doesn’t even know there is a baby implanted in her.

Dr. Morse

So what you all were concerned about in 2014, was this basically anti-fertility drug was being snuck in to the tetanus vaccination, and non-pregnant women, and this is why it is significant that they’re doing it to everybody, that they’re doing it without their knowledge, are going to be essentially sterilized.

Dr. Ngare

Yes, the thing is that when we tested and found it was the one we were able to confirm, this information was taken to the Catholic Bishops, who had allowed us to do this study. We gave them the reports, and the Ministry of Health declined to get involved, until much later. But you see the idea here is, if somebody can sponsor a program like that, where women can be vaccinated that will limit their fertility without knowledge and even believing what was done is good for them, the only thing that we can say about such is that it is evil. There is exactly no other way to describe it. This is not medicine, it is witchcraft.

Dr. Morse

Right, right, and so in that instance in 2014, did, were you guys able to stop the program? It seems to me that I remember reading about this program. Didn’t the Bishops tell people “Don’t take this vaccine?”

Dr. Ngare

Yes. The bishops advised people not to take the vaccine. The Kenya Catholic Doctor’s Association advised people to not take the vaccine. And that brought in a lot of issues. In fact, Dr. Karange and I were summoned to the medical board, which is the board that treaties the doctors, telling us that they would take disciplinary action against us. And once we presented the same evidence and they could see what we were talking about. So, what eventually happened is that they chose to stop the vaccination campaigns. And I think in 2017 they declared that the country was now free of neonatal tetanus.

Dr. Morse

What? Wait a minute! So they came in with this big campaign, and you guys caught them, and they took their campaign away, and then all of a sudden, there is no more neonatal tetanus?

Dr. Ngare

Nope. All of a sudden, now the country is cured of neonatal tetanus and we don’t need the extra vaccinations anymore and we are back to the practice that we had before.

Dr. Morse

Well, so first of all, Good for you guys that you stood up to them! And you got them to back down. You know, I mean, good for you, that ou did it. If you guys hadn’t been there, demanding to test those vials, and if you hadn’t had the Bishops backing you up, they probably would have been going on to this day, huh?

Dr. Ngare

Yes, and that is why it is important for everybody to engage. It can’t be the fight for just a few people. The more people stand up against this kind of imperialism, the better for everybody in the world. It is not just in Kenya, the globalists everywhere, they have their agenda, it is very clear in their mind. People need to stand out and just do what is right, otherwise, we’ll have no humanity left.

Dr. Morse

Well, I appreciate what you guys did. Now let me ask you guys about another question, and you might not want to answer this, so if you don’t want to answer this on the air or you want to take it out, we can do that. So, let me just ask you. In Kenya, what is going on with the Coronavirus and the mitigation of it?

Dr. Ngare

Well, the Coronavirus is a very normal virus. Whether it is created or natural is another story. But the idea is that we are having cases of coronavirus infection and measures have been put in place like everybody else: wash your hands, wear masks. There was initially a lockdown that was put in place. In medicine we generally give hope. Assume my patient has a cancer and it is and all signs point to it as the fact that only 10% of the people survive beyond five years, it means that the risk of death is 90%. As a doctor, I have two ways I could break the ways to my client. I could tell my client that the chance that she will survive is 10% and we are going to do everything in our power to try and make sure you are going to survive this kind of cancer. Or I could go ahead and tell her that all the chances of death are 90% and there is no hope here and just prepare for death. Now the statistics remain exactly the same, but one keeps hope and gives a person energy to fight back. The other one destroys hope literally. It is therefore incredible that once a week, we have to have the government announcing how many new cases of coronavirus have been reported and how many people have died, how many are in the ICU, and this is repeated every week like clockwork, in fact it is daily. It is daily, I think 3:00 in the afternoon is the report of how many people have died. Now if you look at number of people who have died from COVID-19 and assuming those numbers are correct, there is still fewer than the number of road accidents in this country. They are fewer than the number that die of HIV in this country. They are fewer than the number of people that die of malaria in this country. So, there is fear that is being generated in people. There is, you know, people are being made to fear to a point where if the Minister of Transport every day woke up and told us how many people die of road accidents, no body would drive a car. So you can see there is an agenda of inducing fear and there is the acceleration of things being produced all over the place, and the question then it begs is, what are we being prepared for? It just looks like, feels like, we are all being prepared for vaccination. Nothing will go back to normal until we go back to vaccination. You can see an agenda being laid there. The last thing about coronavirus is there is now enough information for us to be able to reduce the death rates we know vitamin D deficiency is a major problem. We know the onset of anti-coagulant prevention is very important. We know that the secretions in the lungs are an issue. So there are many interventions using drugs that are already available, that can actually help us reduce the death rates if only we are allowed to use the first principles of medicine and the understanding of medicine to make interventions work. That, I find, is lacking. The medical interventions that people have described that we can try and save life.

Dr. Morse

And it is almost, we have come full circle, to where we began with the Hippocratic oath of first do no harm and how to preserve the life of the patient. And this is an oath. It is a sacred calling. And in a way, you guys are more Western than we are. You have embraced the good part of the Western tradition and are taking it more to heart than some of us are.

Dr. Ngare

I think it is good to be open to what is good. But I think it is wrong to put it all in one jacket and say one size fits all. And if you don’t do what we do on this side, you aren’t good or you won’t get aid. There is mischief in that.

Dr. Morse

Well, I think this is a good place to stop. Dr. Wahome is there any place people can reach you? If our followers are interested in what you’re doing, is there a website where they can learn more about the activities where they can learn more about the activities of the Kenyan Catholic Doctors Association?

Dr. Ngare

Yes, we have a website, but is not very active and I’m sure it could look much better than it does.

Dr. Morse

Oh, well, let’s, I’ll make you a promise, if you keep me informed of what you’re doing, I’ll make sure people know what you’re doing, because I know a lot of people are going to be blessed by this conversation. Dr. Wahome Nagare, thank you so much for being my guest on the Dr. J. show.

Dr. Ngare

Thank you very much for having me, and have a good day.

Dr. Morse

Thank you.




Landmark Legal Decision! Therapists Can Help Same-Sex Attracted Youth!

Is it legal to restrict licensed individuals from pursuing their client's therapy goals?

Mat Staver is Founder of Liberty Counsel, which defends religious freedom in cases across the nation. He is also Chairman of the National Pro-life Center, Freedom Federation, Salt & Light Council, and the National House of Hope. He serves as Vice President of the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference, and was Vice President of Liberty University, as well as a former Dean and law professor.

This episode is also available as an audio podcast. More resources and readings after the cut.


Mat has over 300 published legal opinions. He authored eight scholarly law review publications, and many books and publications. He is a frequent guest on many international and national television and radio programs and has been interviewed for thousands of media sources.

Mat has filed numerous briefs and argued in many federal and state courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court. He has argued two landmark cases before SCOTUS: Madsen v. Women's Health Center, and, McCreary County v. ACLU of Kentucky.

Prior to law school, Mat pastored several churches.

In Otto v. City of Boca Raton, therapist Robert Otto sued the city for the right to talk with clients about their feelings of sexual attraction, the impact of those feelings, and strategies for improving the quality of their lives. The City of Boca Raton had passed an ordinance criminalizing “conversion therapy,” or “reparative therapy,” or, Sexual Orientation Change Efforts.

It is simply not true that sexual orientation is an immutable trait. There is no "gay gene." But if the Sexual Revolutionaries can convince people that gay is like being black, then they can apply anti-discrimination law to sexual behavior.

The scientific fact is that there are numerous ways into an LGBT lifestyle, and there are numerous ways out. The Dr J Show has featured many people who left the "gay" lifestyle, happily.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit agreed with Mat Staver that this particular form of speech must not be banned.

Topics discussed in this episode include:

  • California's "Reproductive FACT Act" made it criminal for counselors to help clients with unwanted same-sex attraction or gender dysphoria.
  • Anti-reparative therapy bans are LGBTQIA+ propaganda to keep hurting people imprisoned in their conflict.
  • Anti-reparative therapy laws are viewpoint-based, where the State determines which views are allowed and which views are criminal.
  • There is no evidence that reparative therapy harms clients.
  • In many cases, the State has admitted they need more research, which only proves they have no evidence to criminalize therapy.
  • the significance of Trump-appointed, originalist/constitutionalist judges
  • conflict of interest among judges in the liberal courts
  • 99.1% of Californians are not allowed corporate worship -- under threat of huge fines and jail time.
  • The State of California has decreed that 99.1% of Christians cannot:
    • worship corporately
    • have a home Bible Study with a pastor
    • have a deacon come pray for them
  • ALL these cases denying religious freedom have in common pro-abortion, pro-sodomy Democrat politicians and judges.
  • There's no evidence that minors are helped longterm by transgender treatments.
  • Many people --including politicians and even judges-- believe the lie that reparative counseling involves torture.
  • Just as the Sexual State doesn't want women in unplanned pregnancies to know they have options, so the Sexual State doesn't want those suffering from unwanted same-sex attractions to know that they have hope of normalcy.
  • Thousands of former "gays" HAVE changed, very happily.
  • The liberal courts created a category limiting free speech for pro-life centers & Christian counselors, and called it "professional speech."
  • The U.S. Supreme Court rejected California's argument that linked reparative therapy ban-reasoning with forcing pro-life centers to advertise abortion because licensed therapists & centers do not have free speech.

Readings & Resources

Tags

Support the Ruth Institute