Mandeville, LA – Exclusive Transcript – My buddy Steve Cunningham sent me this story last night. I didn’t get a chance to read it yesterday eve but I read it this morning. The title of the story is “’Marriage Equality’ or ‘Marriage Extinction’? Next: equal rights for incest and bestiality”. I don’t see the bestiality thing. I do see the incest. I do see the bigamy and I do see the polyamory in what it is that’s being talked about here and what some people aspire to. Check out today’s transcript for the rest…
Begin Mike Church Show Transcript
Mike: This woman’s name is Masha Gessen. To tell the story earlier, I’ve been talking this week and last week about same-sex marriage, about how there is a traditional way to look at this and there are traditional things that are at stake here. It’s not always just okay and cool to do away with traditions. I know it seems like it’s fun and all the cool kids with the pumped up kicks are doing it. Now we have members of the United States Senate that are running and sprinting as fast as they can to jump on that bandwagon, which is picking up speed. [mocking] “Me, me, I want to be on it! I’m gay marriage friendly, too. I’m Mark Kirk of Illinois. Let me on! Let me on!” It is now a mad dash for social media acceptance. You’re willing to just trash and ignore and refute thousands of years of Judeo-Christian heritage, history, tradition, and sacredness so that you can score some points on Twitter or Facebook? Wow, Senator Kirk, you’re such a brave man, and so are the rest of them.
I’d just like to give you a little window into what it is that some of these activists are talking about. Rod Dreher had posted something about this about four or five weeks ago, and I had read it on the air. He had found a couple disturbing blog posts from a transgendered blogger, who was a big advocate and promoter of SSM, same-sex marriage. That blogger had said: Our goal here is not acceptance, not equality; it is to open the way for polyamory, bigamy, and incest. I talked to Kevin Gutzman about this last week and Kevin told me: Mike, I don’t buy the bestiality stuff right now, but I do think incest and bigamy are next on their agenda. People say, [mocking] “Come on, you crazed right-wingers, you’re just making that stuff up so it sounds fantastical and people get scared.” When you start bailing on tradition, people ought to be scared. Things become traditional because they produce desired results, not because they produce calamity, but because they produce goodness.
My buddy Steve Cunningham sent me this story last night. I didn’t get a chance to read it yesterday eve but I read it this morning. The title of the story is “’Marriage Equality’ or ‘Marriage Extinction’? Next: equal rights for incest and bestiality”. I don’t see the bestiality thing. I do see the incest. I do see the bigamy and I do see the polyamory in what it is that’s being talked about here and what some people aspire to. There’s a line in this story, written by Matt Barber, and I’ll read it to you.
Here’s the bottom line: Homosexual activists don’t want the white picket fence. They want to burn down the white picket fence. The endgame is not to achieve so-called “marriage equality,” but, rather, to render marriage reality meaningless.
In a recent column headlined, “The Revolt of Intelligence Against ‘Marriage Equality,” former Human Events Managing Editor Rick Pearcey addressed one prominent “gay” activist’s admission that the destruction of natural marriage signifies the left’s ultimate cultural coup de grâce.
“Masha Gessen, a lesbian and a journalist, spoke frankly about this at a conference in Sydney, Australia,” he wrote. “‘It’s a no-brainer that we should have the right to marry,’ she said. ‘But I also think equally that it’s a no-brainer that the institution of marriage should not exist. … ‘Marriage equality’ becomes ‘marriage elasticity,’ with the ultimate goal of ‘marriage extinction.’ ”
Mike: I read that and I went: All right, that sounds really far out. I, being your most generous and concerned and honorable host, do not just take a quotation like that and bring it to air and pronounce it gospel. Let me see if I can find the source. I started clicking around, looking for the source. After about 20 minutes of clicking, I found the source. Not only did I find the source, I found the audio. What he left out is even more shocking. I would like to play for you about 2:40 worth of Ms. Masha Gessen waxing on about what needs to happen to the institution of marriage. I will leave it to your fertile, virtuous imaginations to conclude what it is that Ms. Gessen’s objective is and whether or not she is representative or not. The fact that she was invited to this conference, and the conference and the broadcasting of it was made public in the Australian version of National Public Radio, which is where I found the audio, ought to tell you that her appearance on this panel was giving a full public airing, and a welcome public airing. You’ll hear the audience clap when she talks about extinction of marriage. I’m going to play this audio for you because I think the entire discussion – listen to the pyramid of the nontraditional family Ms. Gessen and her partners have created. Remember, keep the incest word in your mind as you listen to this.
[start audio clip]
Masha Gessen: Then if you think of marriage as expensive, try divorce. I agree, it’s a no-brainer that we should have the right to marry, but I also think equally that it’s a no-brainer that the institution of marriage should not exist. [applause] That causes my brain some trouble. Part of it, why it causes me trouble, is because fighting for gay marriage generally involves lying about what we’re going to do with marriage when we get there. We lie that the institution of marriage is not going to change. That is a lie. The institution of marriage is going to change and it should change. Again, I don’t think it should exist. I don’t like taking part in creating fictions about my life. That’s sort of not what I had in mind when I came out 30 years ago. I have three kids who have five parents, more or less. I don’t see why they shouldn’t have five parents legally. I don’t see why we should choose two of those parents and make them into a sanctioned couple. Between those five parents, we have two groups with two different….
Female: You might need to take us through that because we’re getting a bit confused with the five parents.
Gessen: It would take a long time.
Gessen: I got married in Massachusetts to my partner who is Russian, my ex-partner. By that time we had two kids, one of whom was adopted and one of whom I gave birth to. We broke up a couple years after that. A couple years after that, I met my new partner. She has just had a baby. That baby’s biological father is my brother. My daughter’s biological father is a man who lives in Russia. My adopted son also considers him his father. So the five parents break down into two groups of three who have two different…. [laughter] Really, I would like to live in a legal system that is capable of reflecting that reality. And I don’t think that’s compatible with the institution of marriage.
[end audio clip]
Mike: Your partner was impregnated by your brother? I think the clip speaks for itself. I don’t think it needs my commentary to make it any less repulsive and shocking. I do think it bears being aired again. I’ve asked Captain Picard to go to today’s Pile of Prep — I have taken the time out of my schedule to isolate that particular part of it. There’s 60 minutes of this, by the way. I didn’t get a chance to screen it all. I’m going to do it again and I’ll have more for you tomorrow. I’ve asked Picard to put the clip on today’s Pile of Prep so you can easily access it. If you want to forward it to friends of yours that are in the denial business and are out there saying [mocking] “I’m down with all this. I’m with Mark Kirk and all the rest of them. These people are harmless. They just want what we have. They just want access to this.”
I believe, as Barber writes here, that there are some in this same-sex marriage movement that do want to burn the picket fence down. It is a reordering of society itself. I did screen about 15 minutes of it. She drones on about the inequity of being shackled to one person to start with. There’s a gay gentleman there who talked about: one of the other things we’re not honest about is the gay male is not a monogamous creature. For us to get married is just to be able to get certain tax benefits. We have no intention of remaining monogamous because gay males are not. I’m listening to this going: I think I’ve heard these things before. When someone else brings this up as a criticism, they’re told that’s not the case. [mocking] “You don’t know what you’re talking about.” So there’s the audio. I’m going to say something simple and cliché, but it’s the truth. It is what it is. It does not require my analysis or yours to understand. I think it’s pretty straightforward.
End Mike Church Show Transcript