Joe Rogan Experience
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 26 июн 2024
- Matt Walsh is a political commentator, author, filmmaker, and host of "The Matt Walsh Podcast." Stream his new documentary "What is a Woman?" at www.dailywire.com. www.dailywire.com/author/matt-walsh
Please Matt, we need a sequel "What is a baby?"
Yes!
Cool. Let’s test that. What’s a baby?
@@thinkitthrough8000 Human offspring.
@@thinkitthrough8000 a baby is a stage of animal development in which the animal is highly dependent upon its parent or parents for survival.
@@Consconservative so a baby puppy?
My Psychiatrist said that she went form ZERO cases where kids thought they were meant to be the opposite sex to 8/10 children she sees. We are putting this in our kids heads. These are things that should be dealt with organically
Strange thing, Jessica - I am a white South African, and honestly the only places here where this is becoming prevalent, is in Liberal white communities. Most black people would think you are crazy if you mention such a thing. It is interesting how Africans are liberal/leftist when it comes to economics, but extremely conservative on topics such as family.
It’s sick. Our kids are being brainwashed by a communist party in the US. I live in ND which is super red and I also live out in the boonies and there’s a kid in our children’s small school that claims to be “trans.” This nonsense has spread everywhere. I don’t care what anyone does as an adult but, I draw a line at kids and I cannot believe we are not all in agreement on this.
My therapist said the same. 100% social contagion.
That’s terrible but not surprising. It’s all about attention now. Btw, WE aren’t doing this, THEY are.
Becky Weiss did a great video on IG where she says if she was a few years younger she might have gotten sucked into the trans ideology . She’s always been a tomboy and if someone had said to her ‘you’re really a boy’ at a vulnerable time in her development , she might have believed it. It’s so unfortunate that young girls are now questioning their gender just because they don’t fit into the stereotype of Barbie loving girls.
Marriage has never been looked upon in any society throughout history as merely a construct of Man, it has always been seen as a creation of God and Nature and merely recognized as such by Man.
This is so fundamental it defies any disagreement.
It is because man and woman alone carry the procreative potential that marriage has been seen as the building block of society.
It is a new thing to say now Marriage is a lifestyle choice based on individual feelings.
A formal acknowledgement of a gay union might be a good thing, but it can never replace the purpose of Marriage for society.
This is a fundamental change in the way society has been ordered since recorded time.
We will, as Matt suggests, see in time what this change has yielded for society and our civilization.
The whole second half of this podcast really put on display how joe is only able to see reality through a hedonic lens.. from devorce, to the choìce of childless union, to people prefering same sex relations... everything he said was on wants and feels... total hedonism. Marriage is duty not choice. Sex for pleasure is an immoral selfish act. No one is born gay, some kids just never have their narcissism checked by a strong father and a loving mother in a proper marriage and so they come up with warped perceptions of sexuality and self to societies detriment.
Once it gets to that point though, the source of degradation will likely be skewed and/or ignored completely by the majority. Not trying to be a negative nelly, it's been a pattern of human history to twist said history for one's own personal gains
Conservatives were laughed at/derided for saying the legalization of gay marriage was the beginning of a slippery slope. And here we are. Once gay people achieved their goal, they had to figure out where to turn their attention and funds. They chose trans rights, although many gays are either unaware of that or furiously backpedaling away from that.
Its not that clear cut. The idea of marriage that we have today came in through christianity. Roman law, greek law, asian law, ancient egyptian law -- they were all different. Marriage in roman and greek terms had nothing to do with love. In fact, up until the middle-ages the very idea that you married for love was regarded as absurd. Your parents picked for you, often in a strategic way to join families and obtain wealth. So the idea of romantic or "love" based marriage is a relatively new notion. Christianity did not care about the love aspect either until the age of the chivalry. People really need to read history, including the darker aspects
@@CipherDiazindeed. That is the individual level it affects. The societal is less children. We are living that out heavily at this point. The west is well below replacement level at this point. The need in a society to at minimum keep replacement rate cannot be understated. This is why couples that marry and don’t have children actually do hurt other people. The economy suffers, the social programs become more burdened, the next generation of workers disappear and on and on. Then amplify those problems even further by saying anyone can get married and it doesn’t matter at all. The two same sex cannot naturally have children and that won’t help. Then if they do decide they want children they will have to use surrogacy or something. In this method they are intentionally depriving the child of either the actual mother or father. In some cases both. (This is especially egregious as a child has a right to be raised by their biological mother and father. Does that always play out, unfortunately not. In cases where the parents did something to lose those rights for the safety of the child or something. However as a society we shouldn’t start with that.) And that is all to fulfill their desire to have kids. A good thing in it itself but done in the most selfish way possible. Certainly marriage as it has historically been defined is better for everyone it impacts.
I love how intelligent and pragmatic MEN speak with eachother. There is a certain type of respect and accountability that makes the conversations blossom and become very contemplative. Each participant is evolving mentaly right in front of your eyes
That’s what I was just thinking. I sent this to my son as an example of good conversation.
❤
Men remain civilized with other men because with every interaction there is a threat of violence, so typically they will both maintain their composure
Except when Joe expects Matt to answer for an entire religion. He have never treated a Muslim this way on the show.
@@lisareiter5368great idea 🙏🏻
They need to redo this interview in the current political climate. It has only gotten crazier.
Totally!
What is a Banana?
Obama Identifies as a black man even though he is half white. Who says you cannot self identify your race? Rachel Dolezal got beef for it and she had to be cancelled
Isn't this episode 11 days old?
@@brettmuir5679 na, it is an old one uploaded to the library. Look at the show number versus his current show number.
The original air date should be in the description
I clicked “more” and scrolled down to the bottom and saw the release date of nov 6, 2022
total control
This is still incredibly relevant.
It is. Maybe it's time to put the m3th pipe down.
I think it's some hack reposting these podcasts to RUclips off Spotify... They do it to Mr Ballen as well ..
I left this on when i ran to the store and now my cat is a conservative and has been telling me the benefits of converting to Christianity for the last hour.
So your cat has a brain 😂
Haha 😂
Smart cat
What is a cat?
Please stop lying. We all know that your cat doesn't even like you and would never spend an entire hour talking to you.
Statute of limitations for medical malpractice in most states is 2 years. The high being 5 years. If the statute of limitations was raised. Especially for minors so they have a solid decade after they turn 18… and absolutely NO doctors would do hormones, puberty blockers, or surgery on minors.
The problem is that it isn't "malpractice" to do a transition surgery or medications. These are procedures that are fully legal for the doctor to do, and as long as the end results are technically correct, then it isn't "malpractice." If the puberty blockers blocked puberty exactly as intended, if the surgery went as expected and was performed correctly, then it isn't "malpractice." From a legal standpoint, that is.
From a moral standpoint, it is evil, ritual mutilation in the name of Satan, and should absolutely be stopped, not just in minors but in adults as well!!
I said what I said. 🤨
THIS!
@@ericsmith1508 let’s make it malpractice then 😎
Matt Walsh is a true inspiration and love his work with the Daily Wire. Fantastic episode!
It’s damaging to the institution, not the individual. Civil Unions and Marriage - 2 different things that can coexist
Joe gets hung up on that topic in an attempt to be compassionate. Someone like Matt Walsh or myself see marriage as exclusively a sacrament between one man and one woman. Someone may be attracted to or love another of the same sex, but no bond between them is a Holy Sacrament of Marriage.
This 'thing' wasn't shut down fast enough. Now we struggle with the monster.
The lesson; Speak up people.
Same with all the Covid craziness.
Godless society.
I think Joe doesn’t really buy that the family unit is the basic building block for society to be good. Having a high quality society is not valued these days maybe because we have not experienced it recently.
On marriage I don't get why Joe keeps going back to "well it's their choice." Matt's whole point is "it's not good for society." There are a whole lot of personal choices that everyone can make which will lead society to absolute ruin, and the vast majority of them would not effect you personally in the immediate.
Gay marriave will lead t0 "societal ruin"? 🙄
Because it’s their choice. You have no actual proof that is bad for society. Most marriages could be argued as bad for society. So should the government evaluate each and every single potential marriage to see whether we will be harmful and be the ones to decide whether it can happen? Why do you want more government oversight and tyranny?
No, I don't have a problem with gay marriage, but I do believe that's where the slippery slope began and that there wasn't a line drawn ever since.
100% agree jow ruined the conversation on the topic
That's the beauty of your personal political beliefs. I"m a centrist, libertarian but right leaning libertarian and while I think it's wrong to teach this gendered confusion to children, if you are an adult in a same sex relationship, and want to get married, then you should be able to get married. I"m all for people being treated respectfully and equally unless they give me, or society as a whole a reason not to treat them respectfully or equally.
For anyone wondering why this got uploaded now? this is an old episode? Etc.
They are uploading the great majority of the back-catalog on RUclips again.
Prob has to do with signing the new Spotify deal Joe did several months ago.
ok thanks. This is what i was thinking.
Spotify exclusivity is over. It's that simple.
Thanks
Yes Spotify wouldn't upload the more "controversial" episodes. More censorship.
Good that they release the episodes. But I think it should be clear in the title that this was from years ago.
This was such a DEEP AND POWERFUL conversation. I love Matt Walsh and Joe Rogan. I am a Catholic Convert ex feminist
Matt is 100% correct about the marriage issue. Joe is clueless like usual
@@TommyGunz327 is not Catholic yet but I did include him in my Rosary Prayer today with Father Rocky on Relevant Radio❤️🙏 I am asking Our Lady’s Intercession for his conversion. He is a good hearted man and seems just on the edge of realizing that he has a desire for a Faith Life. God changes hearts…I WAS a liberal and in my conversion to Catholicism I truly understand the disorder a mysogyny underneath homosexuality (I was bisexual and through conversion as well as Jungian type work I totally have been healed of same sex attraction)…see Mario Bergner’s book “Setting Love in Order” and Leanne Paynes book “The Broken Image”. Gay men were either molested/ or absent father/ overbearing mother…there is always a deep family of origin issue or molestation (even with Lesbians). In Lesbians there is some mother hunger absence of maternal love absence of father too.
@@TommyGunz327really? How so?
Based. I'm a Baptist but I agree with that.
@@TommyGunz327 Joe took the pride month to heart 🤣
What Joe calls marriage and what Matt calls marriage are two different things.
I understand both sides. Matt is explaining the reason marriage exists while Joe is explaining why people want to marry. Both correct in their own way.
Joe Is NOT a Texan.
That's because the true definition of marriage isn't clear. Unless you're speaking of the legal aspects
@@edjackson4389 No it is perfectly clear. It is just people outside of the religious context in which it should remain, don't believe the sacramental value of it.
Have your civil unions, I have nothing against that, but to call them marriage... is pushing it.
@@mitchc3569I was slamming my head against the wall listening to Joe explain what he thinks marriage is
Glad to see that they are uploading all of these back onto RUclips.
Back? they were never here.
@@nik07nik Yes they were. Before the Spotify deal. Maybe not this specific one, and there are several that were done while Joe was only really on Spotify but all you could usually find on RUclips were things on the clips channel. It is nice to see Joe's podcasts back on RUclips.
@@mynamejeff4883This one was originally on RUclips. I've reached a point at hour and a 1/2 in realizing I heard this before and I can't believe I stumbled upon your conversation here By the way, I just googled it a little while ago and yes, this was from 2022.
Sweet baby gang come on!
GAAAYYY…
@@jflesh8673how … dare you… insult thy sweet baby gang!? We will find you. 😢
We aren't popular here bro 😂 Sweet Daddy isn't for everyone 😢
@@agnostistnihilist it’s the gayest thing you can refer to yourself as and it’s Matt Walsh..
😆is Matt the sweet daddy? Who came up with that? I’m not here to tease anyone but that’s awfully gay
Thank you Matt for graciously standing firm.
Matt: "Marriage has been between a man and a woman in every society ever, until now."
Joe: "So is this a Christian thing?"
🙄
It most definitely is a Christian thing. Gotta love the irony of when many Christians themselves exclaim that marriage is a Christian concept.
My favorite episode. Matt Walsh speaks the truth. Every parent in Portland needs to watch "what is a woman"
How do you know what he's saying is "truth"? Because you agree with him?
Yes
Especially those parents than don't understand that Portlandia is intended as a comedy.
@@TheFloridaBroit's biological fact. How do you know you're human?
@@johnv6806 I understand the principle, but there is more of a social element to how people choose to present themselves. There is such thing as a biological woman, and there is such thing as a trans woman. Trans species might not be too far behind, depending on how technology/biological sciences advance.
The more sense that Matt makes, the deeper Joe has to spin some hypothetical that represents a tiny insignificant minority. This is the most obnoxiously bleeding heart Joe has ever been. I’m shocked he didn’t start crying.
no, I don’t see this happening at all.
You have to remember Joe is a Progressive, a huge Bernie Saunders supporter.
Now draw the parallels to te COVID vaccines - no long term studies, don’t ask questions, you’re either on the right side or the wrong side
Great interview! “six genders and no personality” 😂
I started crying
society is deteriorating fast
At least people can talk about it now without immediately being called a bigot, things may be looking up
@@hansofaxalia I agree, I see a lot of hope especially if Trump gets elected with large Black support. What will be telling is how much protest there will be when it's official. If there is little to none that is a great sign. That means even young people are overall sick of the left.
under attack
WRONG
In the US, you should add. In much of the rest of the world this bullshit gender conversation is non-existent.
As sinister as it sounds, I truly believe it is motivated by money. This movement will allow for lifetime pharmaceuticals to deal with transition movement.
That's definitely the motivation for hospitals. They are on video talking about what a money maker it is for the hospital.
Money is secondary. It’s about destabilizing the society
Great conversation. I like how half-way through Joe busts out the cigars and they just keep on chillin' and keep on chatting away.
Saying you are 5 when you are 38 is less crazy than a man saying he is a woman. At least sometime he was 5 and knows what being 5 feels like. You can’t say you feel you are a woman’s because you like the color pink and fashion shows. I don’t understand women who are in favor of this.
Doing this only serves to demean and diminish the real significance of being a woman to frivolous, material ideas.
1:15:13: The only time Matt Walsh has been captured laughing on video.
😁
Hate to see Joe using ‘she/her’ for a man. Matt has it right.
5000 views in 10 days. Nice suppression YT
I appreciate it's an old drop. Other old drops from the same day are pushing 500k already
Maybe no one feels like throwing up their last meal.
No, this is purposeful, the current administration has weaponized the FBI and the DOJ to police and censor free speech - there was a senate hearing in which it was made evident that at one point there were not only ex FBI members working for Twitter, the FBI was spending a staggering amount of time in their offices. Why? It wasn’t for a field trip that’s for sure.
@@TheFloridaBroChrist is king
@@user-bj1mx2ip1c maybe, but a dead one.
@user-bj1mx2ip1c lol who deleted my comment? Yall get your feelings hurt when people challenge your opinions? Let's try it nicer for your tummy. He can be a king all day, but it doesn't matter if he isn't alive anymore.
1.3k 7 days. They are trying to withhold this gem from the masses
It doesn't show up at the top of the page. I had to search for It.
It's because youtube unbanned a bunch of these older videos and put them back online.
@@michael5432 and u have the facts for that?
like can we stop repeat this...be glad its on YT and spotify
@@d3m0bst3r_swe what?
Matt exposing this issue absolutely helped me snap out of the Bay Area/LA liberal brainwashing. I came back to Conservatism thanks to this nonsense. God bless.
They did the exact same thing with sexual dysphoria 100 years ago in Germany - The books they burned were deviant sex books aimed at children.
Is this true? That might’ve explained some of the hatred and chaos that fueled the Nazi movement. Hope we can prevent civil war here.
Look up who coined the term "racism"
Matt didn’t do a great job on the marriage argument. I agree with him but think the piece he’s danced around that form his opinion is the Bible. I think there are two separate and fundamentally different definitions of marriage. One is legal and one is spiritual/Biblical. To mash the two up is possibly more theocratical. Again, I agree with Matt but he tried to dance around his religious views and I think you cannot in that particular argument.
He might have done that because he was talking to someone who was going to take any religious argument as something subjective and devoid of merit.
@@claucemicro1080I agree. That’s exactly what he did but Joe was clearly talking legal union while he was riding this line of legal and spiritual union. You can’t argue the principles of the spiritual union in a conversation about a legal union. I agree with Matt. I believe marriage was authored by God but like many other things, men have hijacked and tried to redefine it. At this point there are two distinct definitions, one is owned by God and the other by man. You can’t ignore God’s definition as a believer. Joe could have dismissed Matt’s view based on religion but that’s all he could have done. He couldn’t have made it non-sensical. Joe would have been the one unable to argue…. Dismiss? Yes. Argue? No.
@mmckinney525 Yes, he did so because involving morality in the conversation ultimately brings a Christian to the Bible, whereas Rogan just doesn’t agree with the Bible. So Matt was trying to find a way to speak on rogans plain, which is always difficult when the answers to morality for a Christian is “dude, it’s the Bible.”
💯 percent correct
He dances around this because of that pesky idea of separation of church and state. Any argument that relies on the Bible has no place in political discussions.
I know they always switch around, but the Matt Walsh ARMS AGAPE is the greatest thumbnail EVER
Very interesting commentary on marriage. Thanks Joe for having the courage to host these type of discussions. Props to Matt for being able to so clearly explain his position.
Shame his arguments didn’t follow logic and joe exposed the gaping holes in his backwards, religiously dogmatic thinking
Loved seeing you two together talking like adults.
7:21 How much you want to bet the foster father was SAing the foster kids.
A lot of foster kids were abused in their previous homes and never adjust to a stable home.
This was my first thought too
to control the speech is to control the mind
Someone should write a book about that... They could call it, Speechless: Controlling Words Controlling Minds
@@samanthajardim there are many books that cover the subject, it's quite simple the way it works. Sort of like the elephant and the string, if you are familiar.
@@imjustadrummer I was being silly, Michael Knowles wrote a book about it called Speechless: Controlling Words Controlling Minds and he mentions it regularly on his show.
@@samanthajardim huh, I've seen a few of his shows and I had no clue! woosh! lmao!
@@samanthajardim🛎️
We need another documentary, what is a man
Not Joe
I can’t wait for the follow up after that, “What does it mean to ask reductionist questions about complex topics?”
You need to know the spiritual world to understand this even better. There’s a goal and that’s what Joe can’t see yet. There’s no such thing as middle ground. You are either working for the evil or for the good.
Matt walsh is great!
Matt Walsh one of the most censored in YT, I had to look for this episode because I heard it was uploaded, otherwise I would have never known it was here.
Yea, Google hates facts and logic 😅
YT recommended it to me. Otherwise i probably would never have watched it.
All his stuff shows up in my feed regulary.
I rarely watch Joe's stuff yet YT recommended it to me. Also what else did you expect by not subscribing!!?
@@beach2787 I am subscribed to JR and MW I got to this particular episode by looking for it specifically and that's my point.
The 50% failed marriage stat is wrong and total BS. People who get divorced once are more likely to divorce again. Those multiple divorce stats are included in the 50% stat. The actual percentage is closer to about 33%. Which is still high, but it's not 50%. That matters and the stat was propagated for the purpose of tearing down traditional marriage to make a way for non-trad marriages.
Your stat is wrong and total BS. The actual percentage is the actual percentage.
Either way, marriage should be a religious type of union between you and your Significant other. The state should have no business in it.
@@ExpertContrarian
What an intelligent retort. What the commenter said is 100% true.
@@xymos7807 no, what they did is cherry pick for their propaganda
@@ExpertContrarian
You can't even properly dispute it. This data has been known for a while. 50% divorce rate is a myth.
A lot of good points from Matt. However, Joe's stance on marriage is much better. Matt pauses and stumbles much more in this part of the conversation than anywhere else.
I love how honest matt walsh is
It’s so refreshing
Just a few minutes in and I love that he calls him Bruce.
@@bradgilbert6718did Matt call Joe Bruce, or the other way around? I didn’t catch that.
@@celebritarianhe called caytlin Jenner Bruce 😂
@@AlexStein-q3dbased Matt
50k views in 11 days? YT is surpressing this video clearly.
Probably because it shows JR arguing for gay marriage. They love the narrative that he’s a bigot.
Lo, no, we have all seen it on Spotify 2 years ago!
@@nik07nik And yet…here you are again
@@adamblackman6660 LMAO. How did you think that was worth pointing out? Do you know your IQ? Please answer both questions genius.
@@adamblackman6660 Yes, here i am. How on earth did you think that was worth posting? No one has ever accused you of being a thinker, that much is clear!
I loved this so much! An intelligent, civilized conversation just like back in the good old days.
Dude I'm getting chills listening to this... So glad we have people like Matt big fan had to catch this episode.
I understand Joe's role here in playing devil's advocate, but some of his questions make him sound less intelligent than we know he is. "What about infertile people? Should they not be allowed to marry?!".... really Joe?... really?.. nobody is saying that.. stop w/the anecdotal examples, we/Matt speaks in generalities.
“Don’t bring up counter arguments that make my argument sound dumb!” Lmao
@@ExpertContrarianif a woman can’t have babies she isn’t a woman? Of course not, the argument is stupid because it is easily refuted.
I don’t see that as a dumb question. If somebody says that the reason to do X is because of Y, and not doing Y is going against the very concept of X, asking if a person’s not being able to do Y bars them from X is reasonable. Speaking in generalities or not. Actually, that question is even more valid in the context of gay marriage. If it is just a general statement, then gay marriage is fine, right?
A marriage is a RELIGIOUS thing and should be done in a church WITHOUT government involvement. There should be NO license to get, no lawyer when you get "divorced". Hire a lawyer if you have kids and cannot settle things when you split. Why do gay people want a religious ceremony?
@networth00 EXACTLY!!!
It's coercion and appropriation. "He who controls the language, controls the Masses".
Based! If a pastor wants to marry a gay couple no one is stopping them.
@TotalViolence-sw1bo which according to doctrine, is immoral. A priest makes an oath to God. If that God says, "no man (woman) may lay together as man (woman) than that pastor/priest is NOT honoring their oath. Outside of forcing a church to preform these acts.... it's nobody's business whom you marry.
No, it isn't. The history of marriage extends far beyond religious ceremony.
Sadly, the trans social contagion consumed our niece, with the help of my wife’s sister. They moved across the country to get away from family who disagreed with what she did. She was a lovely young lady. Unfortunately, there are other family members who were feeding into this insanity. It’s all very sad.
I went into my local supermarket. I asked. "What is a shopping cart?" The other shoppers became triggered and started screaming at me. I had to leave. The shopping carts in the parking lot started chasing after me. I have been stalked by shopping carts ever since. Thanks, Matt Walsh.
Marriage is between one man and one woman. Anything else is a civil union
I’ve been telling my liberal friends that for a decade and they don’t like that term but it’s true that a man can’t have a husband. Go ahead and have your civil union but your NOT married
Not according to the law...
@@fredricks8701 the "law" or government should NOT be involved in The Holy Sacrament of Marriage!!
@ellenwelch8267 too late. It already is. You didn't have a problem before, so no one cares you have a problem now.
@fredricks8701 That’s such a stupid thing to say and I’m sure can be applied to half the stupid things you said through your entire life. Terrible logic, not to mention you’re assuming this person didn’t have a problem in the first place. Low iq take.
I'm on Matt Walsh's side.
Marriage, as an institution, was desecrated the moment we allowed divorce for anything other than abuse and adultery. Any subsequent debates have become convoluted.
That marriage debate was about as frustrating as it gets. I feel like Joe understands more than he’s letting on. Like he has to keep fighting so he doesn’t feel like a BiGoT.
Joe and Matt are two of my favorites! ❤
2:47:00 i think I get what Matt is saying here: he's not explicitly saying Gay people and Gay marriage is evil and bad; its just that if you are a Christian, you must hold these values because that is effectively what the Religion calls for. If Religion and marriage weren't so closely tied, I don't think itd be such a big deal.
I also don't think that if a different religion had their own form of marriage that there'd be much contention either.
Kids and humans have never before in history had so much access to " mental health care".. and yet it's getting worse. This should scream volumes
Stop dancing around the question. Joe is right.
We all know that a child is way better off if their parent is in their life. One of your parents being gay or bi doesn't change that. It's still far superior to being in the foster system
It's released in 2022 but I see this now for some reason.
These are podcasts that were only available on Spotify at the time. Rogans now uploading them all to YT now his Spotify deal is over.
Comments like this being upvoted says all you need to know about the guys fans. Not the brightest bunch
@@ExpertContrarian you won't understand the comment probably because you are a fan of individuals who do not get banned from RUclips.
@@user-tn6lx4tr8c says the person who didn't understand my comment lmao
@@ExpertContrarian Well said
best calm debate ever. tone was perfect 👌
I watched a conversation between 2 people. The debates over Joe.
They agree.
Noah Webster's 1884 dictionary defines marriage as "the act of uniting a man and woman for life; wedlock; the legal union of a man and woman for life." It emphasizes the legal and lifelong union between a man and woman.
People who choose not to have children DO benefit from those who do as those children will have to pay for their care in old age. Their must be a motivating factor in society to have children, otherwise narcisism will take over. That motivating factor is mariage and the advantages given by this union by the state/community.
You shouldn’t need to be incentivised to have children. You should have them because you want them, and for that reason alone. Any other reason is perverse
43:07. He said a Parental Fact when stated to "protect them from themselves"if have mutual children or special needs 💯
So glad to see Matt on the biggest podcast on earth!
Matt Walsh, The RUclips algorithm is keeping this from people.
RUclips has never turned people away from right-wing content. It objectively turns them to it. Since right wing ideologies are degenerate, they need preferential treatment from algorithms or they would disappear.
Along with many other channels with a conservative perspective. Hint: it’s not ‘RUclips’ it’s the people paying RUclips and the current administration weaponizing the FBI to censor people’s free speech. The amount of ‘shadow bans’ on conservative channels is staggering. You’ll notice radical, left leaning social media posts tend to have far more views and likes than more conservative posts and it’s not because people agree more with the left.
No surprise.
No its not
This video was originally published years ago, but Joe removed most of the episodes when he moved to Spotify. Since that particular deal ended, he is now able to put these back in RUclips. This video was in my recommendations. So much for your conspiracy theory.
I think Matt didn't articulate his point clear enough for Joe. I think marriage by design was meant for two people (male and female) for the purpose of continuing the family construct. That the title of marriage should be reserved for that path.
I also agree with Joe when it comes to gay couples. I think that their union should be titled something different and recognized with the same respect but seen different definitionally because by definition it is different. Not lesser, or more just different.
It would distinguish immediately who is participating in what type of relationship.
All institutional benefits under either title should be equal.
In the spirit of today's society of everyone trying to have their own slice of their own pie, I feel like this would solve a lot of issues.
We do not govern based on confounding variables.
Usually Joe (and Matt for that matter) are smart and spot on with mainstream issues, they both argued this incorrectly. Marriage (to society) has nothing to do with feelings or a loving bond or the definition of the word or the "freedom" to get married. Shapiro would have crushed this question and answered it like this:
Marriage is subsidized and incentivized by the government, this is to convince Man + Woman couples to have kids. Kids are necessary for the continuation of the species and the country, therefore a reward and incentive structure exists to ensure men and women get married to produce offspring; that is all.
The argument that non man+woman couples can adopt was correctly combatted by Walsh, there is a huge line of straight couples waiting for kids first and that combination should take precedence as it is biologically more conducive to proper child rearing.
Marriage is to keep track of inheritance and also genetic diseases and traits. Even a long time ago people could figure out that traits were passed off to kids. Bastards, born out of wedlock, were not granted titles. Nothing proved you were his son. If was much harder to survive back then so having both side of your family recognize you as being theirs was of greater value. If only sons could inherited, in a son less family the sisters were overlooked for next closest related male. Females did make out when it was a bastard. It was more about linage tracing, before DNA tests.
While, yes, incentives by the government through benefits, those benefits aren’t exclusive to couples with kids. If couples who choose not to have kids are allowed to have them, than couples who can’t at all should be too. This extends to those with infertility issues, not just gay couples. Your junk about “continuation of the species” is irrelevant when infertile couples are allowed to marry too. Should they be barred simply because they aren’t allowed to have kids? That being said, I find your entire premise of “marriage is just a reward system” deeply impersonal and quite removed from how many others see it.
Your last paragraph is also blatantly contradicted by the dozens of studies showing that kids raised by same-sex couples are just as functional as kids raised by opposite-sex couples. It doesn’t matter what you think, that’s the proven reality. There’s no good reason they can’t adopt children, period.
It seems as if you have this view that “man + woman” is inherently superior, and yet your reasons why are flimsy and inconsistent with reality. Just admit it, you have no evidence. You just think so.
Marriage's origin is a spiritual concept. a Covenant is made between a husband and wife and god. a 3 fold chord (Ecclesiastes 4:12). Society has perverted that definition.
I thought the same thing! Shapiro makes the argument so well
That would not be a great answer because it is also wrong. There is no reward. It is only a control mechanism.
Amazing conversation and glad RUclips added this back onto the site, the people need to see this
My husband and I have been married for 15+ years. We don't have children. It's okay Matt. Having a child in our union doesn't make us more or less married.
There is also the aspect of physical and spiritual love. You feel spiritual love for your families you do not have intercourse with.
One of my favorite JRE episodes.
Matt has really grown in the last 5 years. I now appreciate him so much. Joe, I believe that you are an important PLATFORM, and I thank you so much.
The definition of "marriage" that Joe proposes here is actually the definition of "Civil Union." The two are not interchangeable because they have different origins and purposes. Matt is 100% correct on this - even if he couldn't quite articulate it in this session.
Marriage is the recognition of spiritual AND legal union - coupled with the expectation and opportunity to form a new family unit.
A civil union is the recognition of two individuals who love eachother and want to dedicate themselves legally to that coupling.
There is a REASON that gay people want "mariage" and not "civil union" - and that's the connotation that the term brings -- To set out on a journey of building a family together and becoming parents for the next generation is such a big deal to human beings (since time immemorial) that we have always gone out of the way to celebrate these unions in a big way.
A civil union doesn't get the same treatment societally because it is, literally, just designed for the happiness of those involved. It brings with it no such glorification, because it's not a proclamation of one's willingness to further the species and/or participate in societal customs. It's just two people saying "this one's mine."
The problem, as Matt tried to explain, is that modern society has completely lost touch with this fact - and is treating them interchangeably. The result is that marriage as an institution has been degraded of all of it's value and is treated identically to civil unions - The only noteable difference now is that mariage comes with a few extra legal benefits.
More and more young people are so disillusioned / removed from greater society and no longer see the value of marriage. Young men especially, since signing those papers essentially gives the women absolute control over their lives - with the opportunity to ruin them entirely and walk away scot-free.
When marriage is degraded to "just a legal document" that "says you love eachother," more and more young people are asking "well...why is that needed then? Why sign my life away unnecessarily?"
This is a fundamental in articulation of what is considered American Rights. The founding structure and intent never guaranteed ambiguous rights built on paradox.
Matt has made it to the big time
On the foster-care conversation; having been a foster parent and having adopted multiple children from foster care; there are lots of couples that would be great parents raising a baby that are ill-equipped to deal with the challenges that come with the adoption of an older child.
24:10 What gets me is the outright hatred of self. The touted line is that this movement is about embracing yourself, but in practice what we’ve seen is the utter objection to oneself to the point of lifelong pain & suffering. As if outward projection is a cure all for suffering that began inside. As if we as humans are not our ((entire)) organism, but just a culmination of ideas. It truly is madness and while I lean towards compassion, I refuse to enable this self hatred.
I work in healthcare. Hospital setting. And as soon as I made my decision that men and women are physically and emotionally separate. I caught myself in a situation with my employer. They drummed up some bs and had me fired. Blackballed from working anywhere. It’s real. The hate and the acrimonious feelings towards me. Expressed through using political clout to demean me
You got fired for being inappropriate to patients....good.
Colin, I say this in love, please wake up to the idea that truth is what it is, regardless of you making a decision about whether you want to accept it or not.
You seem to be someone with deep empathy and also someone whose silence over the years has contributed in some small amount to the situation that we are in at a society level.
You got fired for being real, men and women are different in every way. Anybody trying to tell you differently is just lying to themselves and/or a slave to a political ideology. May not seem like it but they did you a favor. Hope you get back on your feet soon.
The native 2 spirit claim is highly exaggerated. The overwhelming majority of tribes did not have this respected distinction. Yes there are some in North America, Mexico and maybe elswhere where it existed. But the bottom line is they were never considered actual women; they had their own special distinction.
It was obviously a term for girly men to stop them getting bullied.
@@chairmanmeow8388 That's a good way to put it. Probably some truth to that. But the ones in Oaxaca, Mexico wear dresses and make up, and are loosely thought of as 'third gender,' but not 'two-spirit' or women.
Mexico IS North America
They were trained to be the Shaman or Medicine Man in the tribe.
It's just leftwing white women APPROPRIATING native culture without any understanding of it.
Wow. I thought this was a second interview. But I’m glad it’s back up!
Amazing podcast. I love how Joe and Matt were able to have a challenging yet respectful conversation about a topic where they clearly disagree on. Joe did an AMAZING job, he was completely rational and based. He is open minded and empathetic while also having common sense and rationality. That’s why he is able to agree with both conservatives and liberals depending on the subject at hand.
Homosexuals had the chance to have Civil Unions that would give them all the rights to inherit , power of attorney etc but they refused that. That's how you know they wanted to change the fundamental definition of marriage.
Conservatives fought against civil unions and used every trick in the book to try to be able to legally discriminate against thrm. Thats why the word marriage was important. Blame your own pprejudice.
Anyways im enjoying my legal gay marriage.
Reminder that on average marriages between men are more successful than between a man and a woman
@@fredricks8701Congrats!
Gad sad has a video where he did some work in regards to aggressive men. In a point of fact men are more aggressive when the children under them are not their own.
Men are generally more aggressive. Full stop. Don’t hate the player; hate the game! (Oh theses are just statistics; hormones and chromosomes are real, people!!)
They did not just say it. It's not just a legal document. It is an actual spiritual union. A union that is physically present in the form of children. No child. No sign of that union. Intentional denial of children is a rejection of the one flesh union.
One of the main jobs of a parent is to be guard rails for your children as they navigate the mountainous highway of life!
Joe with the endless pushback gets pretty tiresome. Matt actually outlines his position fairly well but instead of exploring that space (the decline in society and its ties to increasing secularism) joe wants to spend hours gloating about how inclusivity trumps all else.
There is no decline in society.
He really didn't, though, and he did a terrible job defending it.
Also it's not fair for Joe to make up hypotheticals for Matt to answer yet won't allow an understanding to try and see Matt's direct question and instead go back into hypothetical new things and make it societal but is personal one off's
This is a great conversation by two thoughtful people and no hatred. Thank you both.
Walsh is a bit edgy, but he added some comedic irony ... he tries as best he can to get to the logic of people’s statements. Hoping he can continue to get the message out. I noticed a few “this interview is over” moments as well.
Matt Walshes documentary should be put into school systems
It was better than I thought it would be. Funny, tragic, scary
The argument is rather simple, marriage was defined and established by God in the Bible. Gay marriage should not be called marriage.
The real epidemic is people marrying those they shouldn't, for whatever reason. It's a lack of understanding the consequences of your actions.
I don’t agree with Walsh in all subjects, but he is a great man fighting for a great cause! He speaks for all the people who can’t for fear of losing one’s livelihood
Matt is pretty smart on most topics…except for saying fat people are gluttons and food can’t be addictive. I have seen too many RUclips videos of people who lost weight once they gave up carbs.
Man... RUclips really buried this episode way down deep in the algorithm
word its super important to argue over pronouns and for us to watch it 😆
not really. This episode is ole as hell. But youtube had all the rights pulled from his full show content when spotify got him. His new contract with them isnt exclusive tho so they are re-uploading them all little by little again.
Then how did you magically find it? lol..Every fan has seen it on Spotify 2 years ago genius.
15k views in 10 days and it doesn't even show up in his videos when you go to look for it. Shadowbanned undoubtedly
Try again. Joe’s channel organization is a mess if you’d be willing to scroll through it. It seems as if these uploads are being organized on his channel as if they were posted the day he made them
For example, if Joe made an episode, say, on Jan 1st, and he released it now, his channel would place it in his videos section as if it were uploaded on Jan 1st. You can find the Matt Walsh episode on his channel, and it’s right next to the “disagree over gay marriage” video uploaded right after that show happened, despite this video being uploaded 11 days ago.
The reality is that due to the way Joe chose to upload them, RUclips thinks these videos were made ages ago and aren’t recommending them because of it
They should allow these "doctors" to be held liable. I'll bet they all disappear if they can be sued by any of these people that change their mind later in life and are angry with the people that coerced and mutilated them.
When Joe said "You smoke cigars Matt?", that killed me. It must be so cool to be chillin with Joe.