Episode 112

We can all remember a time when we have solved all the world’s complex problems in our living rooms in general conversation with friends and family. Matt Walsh recently posted a video doing the same thing, asserting that the promotion of marriage will save the United States. It is no secret that marriage has been on the decline while divorce is at a staggering rate of over 50%. Young men are loathe to marry and young women are generally not marriage material. Is Matt Walsh right? Will promoting marriage save our fragmented society? Or is he, as a Catholic man, only addressing the fruits of a rotting tree and not addressing the roots of spiritual decay? Join us on this episode of the Removing Barriers podcast as we flesh out this potential solution to our country’s woes.

If we want the cultural victory and thus the political victory, our message should be get married, have kids, stay married.

Thank you for tuning in to the Removing Barriers podcast. I’m Jay and I’m NCG, attempting to remove barriers so we can all have a clear view of the cross. This is episode 112 of the Removing Barriers podcast, and in this episode we will be responding to Matt Walsh video titled Promoting Marriage Will Save Our Country.

Now, this response is not intended to bash Matt Walsh. I enjoy Matt Walsh’s commentary for most part and agree with most of his conservative views. But in this area, like many areas, conservatism comes up short. And this is a problem I see with not only the Daily Wire, but also with many other conservative news organizations and outlets. We will skip in the first couple of minutes of the video. In those minutes, Matt discuss why the counting of the vote is taking so long in some states, and discuss Montana referendum 131, where Montana’s vote to not requiring doctors and medical personnel to offer life saving support to a baby born alive after a failed abortion attempt. We’ll not be discussing abortion per se in this episode. We do have a series 102 to 105 all discussing abortion. However, Matt then used that premise to spring into why, in my words, the red wave did not happen. So, picking up midway into the conversation, here is the first area of Matt Walsh Clip would like to respond to.

There is definitely we cannot deny a candidate quality problem in the Republican Party, but there is also, I’m afraid to say, a voter quality problem.

So I do agree with Matt Walsh on this one, Jay, but I will also say that the same is true for the Democratic Party. Can we say John Fedderman? I think John Fedderman was a candidate quality and also it reflects on the voters that they will vote for someone like John Fedderman and put him in the Senate. Also, I think Dr. Oz was a bad candidate. I don’t think Dr. Oz is a Republican in terms of his views. I think he’s maybe center left. He’s not a John Fedderman. But at the same time, I don’t think that these two candidates were quality candidates. Quite honestly. If we go back to 2016, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump wasn’t quality candidates neither. So we will have four to quality issues and candidate quality issues in both parties. And that might be linked to the fact, of course, that we’re all sinners and they’re all going to be fault. I remember one preacher said that if we’re not voting for Jesus Christ, we are voting for evil. So candidate quality issues, yes, voter quality issues, yeah, but I think it’s in both parties.

Well, of course there’s going to be a candidate quality issue as well as a voter quality issue because the candidates come from the voter pool. So if the voter pool is questionable, the candidates are going to be as well. But he’s right. There’s a lack of quality in the voter pool. There’s a lack of quality voters. The majority of Americans are educated in a public school system that has been proven to be indoctrination camps. That’s not to say that there aren’t teachers and institutions out there trying to do the right thing. But for the most part, the educational system in the United States is abysmal in preparing the next generation to understand how their own country works to help pass down the values and the morals that would make a better voter pool from which the candidate pool can be drawn. And furthermore, the influence of the church in the United States has been so greatly undermined and marginalized and diminished that naturally it will show up and reflect in how the voters vote and how the candidates promote themselves or campaign to be selected. There was a time in this country when there was a general consensus of the Bible being the foundation, God being the ultimate king, the ultimate one to whom we defer, into whom we submit. But that’s no longer the consensus in the United States now. And the United States is almost literally really a secular country. And so naturally that’s going to show up as he’s the candidate pool and the voter pool. So the situation is to the point in this country where the people that we see speaking up against the far left agenda are Catholics, Orthodox, Jews, Agnostics. They are the leading voices that are countering some of the craziness we see in public discourse today. We discussed this with Brother Thal in the episode about Christians and conservatism Bible believing Christians who believe that the Bible is and ought to be our foundation and that Christ is king. Their voices have been for the most part excluded from public discourse. So that’s going to be a problem if we’re talking about voter quality or candidate quality.

Now, as far as the red wave not happening, there’s a lot that went into that not happening. But the issue about candidate quality is along those lines. Yeah, I do agree what you’re saying. I think also that one thing that happened and the Democrats do this a whole lot better than the Republicans regardless of the quality of the candidate or the quality of the voter, they are able to get their voters to turn out. And I think there might be two reasons for that. I think one of the reason is accessibility. And the second reason might be finances. Accessibility meaning that the larger Democratic voters tend to live in cities, so you can reach a lot of them very quickly. You can be more efficient with your outreach, exactly what they want to go and knock on doors or pass out flyers or whatever case maybe that is a lot faster and more accessible. Finances. Betting democrats raise millions and millions of dollars more than the Republicans. Why is that so? I didn’t dig that deep into figure out why Republicans cannot raise as much money as Democrats. I guess that could be a whole different topic. But I think those two issues are maybe some of the issues why, you see, maybe there’s a larger turnout for the Democratic Party as opposed to the Republican Party. And also, of course, they say the changing of voting laws and mailing ballots and whatever the case may be. I’m not accusing anyone of cheating, I don’t know. But I’m just simply saying when you can stay at home and shed in a square and drop it in the mail rather than to go standing online for how many minutes you have to stand before you can vote, they’re going to get a lot more people to vote. And because they’re more accessible to the voters, well, you don’t want to go to the polls, well, fill this out, sign and give it back to me, and I’ll drop it off for you. I think it was shown during the midterms that a lot of the Republicans actually vote in person, while a lot of the Democrats actually vote by mail. So I think that’s true. And the funny thing is, I think it’s somewhat similar, dare I say, to Evangelism. I remember I was talking to a young man who goes to a rural church, and I was telling him that in about an hour time, I can knock on 20 to 30 homes in my area. And he said in that same time, he will knock on about five doors because they have to drive from door to door because every property is five to ten acres, and they drive from one property, and they drive a mile or two to go to the other house. It’s way different. And those areas tend to be, as, well, heavily Republicans.

Here’s another thing, too, though, with Republicans for the most part, and I’m not saying Republicans exclusively, but generally people who are to the right of center, they just want to be left alone. They have those values of each person having their voting along the lines of their conscience. You vote your way, I’ll vote my way. There’s no need for us to get in each other’s faces. There’s no need for us to kind of come to blows or come to fist. This is just the Democratic process. Those are values that the right has. The right is content to just say, okay, I’m going to vote like this. You do you, I’ll do me. But the problem with the voters on the left is that their voting or their values are they include shutting up opposition or persecuting opposition. And so we see, for example, that you said people on the left, they can mobilize their base to get out and vote more, and they could mobilize their base to get out and demonstrate more as well. You’ll never see Republicans out there holding signs and demonstrating. They don’t do that sort of thing. They keep their heads down, they go to work, they come home. They’re not out there demonstrating or anything like that. For the most part. For the most part. January 6 we saw them demonstrating, but then they’ve been pushed, pushed and pushed far at that point. And they felt like they should say something or do something, but because it’s so hard to galvanize the base because they are less fair about these types of things as opposed to the left that will organize and demonstrate at the drop of a hat. And so all of those things kind of come together to make it a lot more difficult to show up at the ballot box. I’m not making any sense about that. It’s hard to get the right fired up to do anything. Yeah, I definitely agree with that. So candidate quality and voter quality.

Matt Walsh continues

the results of these referendums and of the races themselves can largely be explained by and blamed on, I suppose, to often overlapping groups, and that would be Gen Z and unmarried women. Now, it’s been widely discussed and comes as a no surprise to know when I assume, that Democrats won the Gen Z vote by about two to one. But the unmarried woman factor is, I think, most notable as a daily. While reports, quote, unmarried women voted Democrat in the 2022 midterm elections by a significant margin according to exit poll data, compared to married individuals favoring GOP candidates. This year, a CNN exit poll of 18 571 total respondents found 68% of single women mark their ballots for Democratic politicians, a 37 point margin over the Republican Party.

I found out to be interested, but I don’t want to dismiss the Gen Z, but I wonder how many of them voted just because they were told to vote for this person. Now, Gen Z are the people that were born in the 2000s after the millennials, I think the last millennial, isn’t that like the cutoff date to be considered? I think it’s like mid 90s, but I’m not quite sure. But whatever the case is, they had a generation now that’s after the millennials. But I wonder how many of them just voted just because they were told to vote for this person or because it’s so easy to vote by mail. Because usually it’s not a group of people that have a heavy turnout. Yeah, even by mail, they know what mail is. Or is it more like some organizer shows up to their doors and of course they’re in the cities and so they’re in the dorms. So you can just go down and they say, hey, did you vote? No, I haven’t voted yet. Hey, just fill this out, fill that like this, and I’ll take it down for you, or something like that. I’m not sure there I would imagine something on that. But it’s interesting here is that it was Winston Churchill who said, he who is not a socialist at 20 years old has no heart. He who is still a socialist at 40 has no brain. So you’re looking at folks that they don’t own anything per se, they don’t have a mortgage to pay, they don’t have kids to raise, they don’t have a household to manage, and they don’t really have anything in the bank. So why not share the wealth from others? As they get older and they say their brain probably get more mature, they probably will shift more towards at least fiscal conservatism in terms of I work hard for my money, I want to keep it. So, yeah, I think I can see Gen. Z going heavily for the Democrat because the Democrats, they are the socialists.

The single woman. This one kind of surprised me, but I think that the conservative news outlets widely report that abortion probably wasn’t going to be a big issue. And I think it became a bigger issue than the Republicans thought it would be. The overturn of Roe v. Wade became a bigger issue for this midterm compared that. If it did not happen, of course I’m not complaining that it happened. I’m glad that rule was overturned. But I think we are seeing now that there was a voter base that was mobilized because of it. That probably should have been known because look at all their threats against their Supreme Court justices life and protested their homes and all that stuff. So I don’t know why that was overlooked, but I think that was overlooked. Single women, of course, though they make up a majority of what we would call war culture. You could throw ginseng in there as well. But a lot of people who buy into woke ideology are these unmarried suburban I hate to say it like this, but suburban white women who college educated, they’ve gone through the indoctrination camps that we call colleges. Many of them believe the woke ideology, but because they’re unmarried, they don’t have this is probably an over generalization. So they’re not married. Let’s say they don’t have children, or they do have children and they’re bitter about how difficult it is to be a single mother. And so they vote along those lines. Or they never married, never have children. But that maternal instinct that has never gotten a chance to materialize that they would exercise over their own children. They feel like they have to exercise over other people’s children, perhaps. I’m not sure what the thought processes there’s a lot to look into.

There’s a lot of factors that perhaps we are overlooking. I’m probably going to sound like I have a tin foil hat on right now, but perhaps one thing to look at is the prevalence of the use of birth control among women. And this is a Pandora’s box that I haven’t even begun to open yet because I never used that stuff. But there are many studies and many professionals and scientists that have looked into the link between birth control and how it changes the female mind and what happens when you get off of it and how you change. Perhaps all of those things kind of come together to explain why single women think and behave and vote the way that they do. Being told your entire life that if you pursue your career aspirations and your educational aspirations that you’re going to be happy. And so these women pursue it and they get to the end of their they reach their goals but they have no family, they have no children, they realize that they’re not happy. That’s going to take an emotional toll on you and cause you to think and react a certain way. Or perhaps it’s looking around and seeing everything and feeling that it’s all men’s fault, which is what we hear them say about the patriarchy and all that sort of thing. All of these different things can coalesce together to create an environment or create a situation where a single woman would think that it’s a good idea to vote for someone on the left. I guess what I’m getting at is I don’t think you can point to one single thing as to why single women vote for these people that are running the country into the ground. Well, I didn’t look up the stats and this but something interesting we should point out as well because studies have shown that there are only three things that you need to do if you don’t want to be in poverty. The first one is finish high school, wait until you are at least in your 20s before you have your kid and get married before you have that kid and those three things are done. I think the statistic is well above 70%, I think is probably more closer to 90% that you will avoid poverty. Will avoid poverty. So I think some of the same things that apply to the gen z in terms of they may not be well off and stuff like that. And I think that’s Matt’s going to mentioned is no, they’re a single woman, that doesn’t mean they are childless woman and single parenthood can be tough being single again if you follow in those three steps. If they’re single and they have kids, I’m not saying all of them, but a lot of them might not be that well off. So again, you look to the government to provide what a stable nuclear family would have provided. So I think some of those things are involved there when it comes to the single woman.

And gently Matt Walsh continue and he talk about single men and married women.

Republicans gained 20% more votes from married men than Democrats while single men voted 7% more for GOP figures. We should also note importantly that Republicans won the married woman vote by 14 points. So Republicans win clear majorities of the married vote, and still a slim majority of the rather unmarried man vote. But unmarried women swing heavily to Democrats. Based on this, we can also assume that they are largely responsible for these ballot measures enshrining abortion and infanticide across the country. That’s why these measures passed or didn’t pass, as the case may be. So here you talked about the single men, married men and married women.

As I said earlier, I think that the abortion issue was a much bigger issue. The overturn of Roe was a big issue. But also, I don’t remember this, but in episode 102, Pastor Todd gave us a stat where he said 85% of abortions that took place in this country are by women out of wedlock. So that again points back to the fact that single women were more motivated than married men. Married women, of course, we know married women also have abortion, but it’s a much smaller percentage compared to the 85% of single women. I think that’s also worth mentioning because the Democratic Party tend to believe that if you’re married, you’re going to vote like your husband vote. So the married woman is rudely voting following the way her husband vote. Now, I wouldn’t say that’s a bad thing. Of course, a woman have a mind and she can vote the way the Holy Spirit is leading her, but also at the head of your household. I don’t see anything wrong if the man say, hey, this is the direction and this is the way I think we should vote. I personally don’t do that. I don’t think I’ve ever told you, hey, what party should vote for, whatever the case may be. Have you ever voted for a party of a candidate just because I was voting for that party or candidate?

You will never know. I’m kidding. No, you’ve never given that impression. You’ve never made that requirement. But like you say, especially in this particular climate that we’re in now, it wouldn’t be beyond the realm of the responsibility of the man or the wisdom of the man leading the House to say, okay, I don’t care who you vote for, but this is a general way that we’re going in terms of voting. In other words, we’re not voting for any leftists or anything like that. So, like, for example, if you wanted to vote for, I don’t know, say, Ron DeSantis, Margaret Taylor Green, who cares? We’re not actively going to support the platform of death that the Democratic Party seems to have become. Now, if a husband stands up and says that in his household, I don’t think that’s something that would be beyond his authority and maybe in some cases responsibility to do.

Yeah, and I think married men will probably lead more Republican just because obviously what I said before, right, they have a household to manage, they have a mortgage for most part, they have kids. So I can understand why they lean Republican. Also, he talks about the single men. They also lead Republican, and I think one of the reason for that is because I think they’re heavily marginalized. Yeah, the Democratic Party has demonized them, especially men who are white, straight and identify that way. They marginalize. And the Republican Party see more welcoming to them than the Democrats, to be honest. That’s why so many of them, you notice they started this online trend called Men Go Their Own Way and many of them cleave to people like Kevin Samuels or Andrew Tate. People wonder why these men have a platform. Well, it’s because they’re giving a voice to men that the entire country has seemed to trample on for just being white, cisgendered and all of these different weird words that we allow the country to use now. So yeah, naturally they’re going to vote for the party that doesn’t marginalize them as much. That would make sense. Yeah.

Alright, so much Walsh continue talking about kids in single parent home.

The good news for Democrats is that the number of unmarried women in the country continues to increase year over year in the middle of the previous century. So around 1940, 1950, a vast majority of the households in the country, 80% or so, were comprised of married couples and families. They were led by married couples or families. 80%. That number fell to around half by the end of the century. So around 20 we were about 50% of households were led by married couples. And within a decade after that, around 2010, it fell to less than half. So now a majority of households are not led by married couples. And this is a first in recorded history. And the trend continues rapidly in that direction every year. This is very bad news for children. And not just because unmarried people are more likely to vote to strip children of basic legal protections, but also because the children born to these unmarried people remember, we’re talking about unmarried people, not necessarily childless people, not exclusively childless. So any children born to these unmarried people by every conceivable measure, face greater obstacles. They’ll have a worse time of it, they will fare worse. Children born to single parents are far more likely to have behavior problems, far more likely to have academic problems, far more likely to drop out of school, far more likely to get expelled, far more likely to end up in prison. Far more likely to end up on drugs, far more likely to end up homeless, far more likely to fall victim to violent crime. On and on and on. It is extremely bad for children and for society to abandon marriage. That’s just the fact. But as is so often the case, what is bad for kids and bad for the culture is really good for the Democrats. The Democrat Party is a vulture. It feasts on the carcass of decaying civilizations.

So I have a lot to say here. I think that Matt was hit the nail on the head with some stuff. But I want to go back a little bit, because what is happening here? Well, first we have removal of the Bible and God, Jesus from the schools. Then there was the welfare state in the 60s. Like Larry Elder said, women, especially black women, were encouraged to divorce their husband and marry the state. Then there’s a lack of evangelism, and they’re resting on our lawyers by Christians. Then there arose a generation that did not know the Lord. That is a selfie trope that we are talking about the Christian church. Bible believe in Christians, allow the government to remove the Bible and God. And then we say God, I’m talking about Jesus Christ because many other gods are still allowed. Jesus is not from the schools. Then we have the wealthiest state where the Democratic Party started to destroy the family. Little were done about that. Divorce your husband, married the state. Then the lack of evangelism or the lack of the fact that realizing that the spiritual underpinning of the country’s changing, the culture is changing, and Christians still, well, I’m good. I am enjoying my freedom and the lack of evangelism. Then there was a generation that did not know the Lord. And the thing here is not that the Democratic Party do not know these stats, because here is former President Barack Obama talking about them and talking about the dangers of fatherless homes. They know it. They just decide that it’s not in their best interests.

Of all the rocks upon which we built our lives, we are most dependent on the family. The family is that most important foundation, and we are called to recognize and honor how critical every father is to that foundation. But if we’re honest with ourselves, we’ll admit that too many fathers are also missing. Too many fathers are mia. Too many fathers are a wall missing from too many lives in too many homes. They’ve abandoned their responsibilities. They’re acting like boys instead of men. And the foundations of our family have suffered because of it. We know the statistics that children who grow up on a father are five times more likely to live in poverty and commit crime. They’re nine times more likely to drop out of school, 20 times more likely to end up in prison. They’re more likely to have behavioral problems or run away from home or become teen parents because the father wasn’t in the home.

There you have it! Former President Barack Obama sound like he’s listing things that Republicans would be screaming from their hilltops about the importance of a father in the home, aka the importance of the nuclear family. According to the Family Research Council, children raised by their own mother and father in a committed marriage are happier, experienced better mental health, and are more prosperous. Before the welfare state in the 1960s, only 22% of black kids were born in a single parent home. Today, is about 77% today, when they include all races, is well below 50% for all people groups. It is also interesting to note that according to the Census Bureau, among the 130,000,000 household in the United States, only 17.8% feature unmarried parents with children, 130,000,000 households, and only 17% feature married parents with their children. And this is down from over 40% in the 1970s. This is direct attribute to a nation that has moved away from God and Godly principles. This is indicative of a culture that is becoming more and more and Acts Chapter 17 this is also indicative of the lack of reaching the culture of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. In other words, I believe this failure is not a cultural failure. This failure is a failure of Christians of reaching our culture. 17% of the Household in the US 17.8% of the household in the US featured married parents with children.

I have questions about how this came about because we seem to see a precipitous fall from the 1960s onward, and a lot of historiographers and historians would look back and say that was around the time of the 1960s. We’re talking sexual revolution and women’s rights, civil rights. All of that was a watershed moment in American history. But I think that many things had to have happened before that in order to set the blocks up for the dominoes to fall that way. Perhaps, and I don’t have the answers. I’m just thinking out loud, perhaps we need to take a more critical look at the women’s suffrage movement we definitely need to take a more critical look at the civil rights movement in the sense that there seems to be an unholy alliance, as it were, between people who were fighting legit injustice in the American system. But we’re also tying in elements of Marxism, socialism, communism, all that sort of thing in order to bring about their change. That’s something that needs to be looked at. I think there’s a lot more. I suppose what I’m saying is the 1960s didn’t just pop out of nowhere. The decades leading up to the 1960s are up for scrutiny as well. I think that the church has been derelict in its responsibilities to the culture, to the people for a very, very, very long time. And the failure of creating culture that the church can be accused of, is guilty of, has something to do with that as well. There was a time where if you wanted to experience beautiful art, beautiful music, fill in the blank, if not specifically the church, people in the church will have created that culture for people to enjoy. And now you have culture being created by people who don’t fear the Lord, people who don’t love the Lord, people who don’t care what they say at the Lord. And it has a polluting effect on the overarching culture of the nation. And people live and breathe culture, and so it comes out in how they. Live. It comes out in how they speak, how they vote, what they believe, how they behave themselves. And as a society, obviously, it has a detrimental effect, particularly after decades and decades of it just kind of rolling downhill. So there’s a whole lot to look at there. I don’t have the answers, but that’s definitely a whole lot. And like Matt Walsh said, he’s not the first one to discover this, but children being raised in these broken homes, these homes that don’t have Christ as the foundation, or these homes that are not secure, that are secular in their expression, they’re going to replace us in the future.

What does that mean for the country? Well, I agree what you’re saying, but in order to destroy society, you have to destroy the foundation of society. And the foundation of society, I would say argue is God. Or you can say, what do you believe in your worldview? And the argument can be made that the founding worldview of the United States is Christian. And the second one that you would have to destroy would be family. Because family, that’s the pillar of society. Everything comes out of the family. That’s where you raise your kids. That’s where you teach your kids the principles that you want them to have. If the state has taken that over and the state is destroying the family by incentivizing women to divorce their husband, I think that’s where it started. I’m sure there were ripples of it coming down before the 60s, but when in the 60s, when a lot of things happened in the 60s that we are seeing the fruits of today. You mentioned the sexual revolution. All that’s a part of it as well. So I think all that helps destroy what we had, and it’s not replacing it with whatever men thinking is hot, quite honestly, why do people say that the family is the foundational unit of a country or of a society? The reason I asked that is because perhaps we don’t quite realize what we’re saying when we say that. If we say that the family is the foundational unit of society, then that means when there’s a crime committed, you go after the family. You don’t go after the individual. Why don’t we say instead that, yes, God, the word of God, should be the bedrock of our society, but then each individual person must be all that they should be for God, all that they should be according to the scriptures, so that when they get married and they establish a family, that unit is strong. And from there, a bunch of families come together and build up society as we. You can’t get away from the family, though. No. And that’s the first thing got instituted, was the family. Yes, but if the individual is weak if the individual is weak, then it’s easy to pick the family apart. When the serpent picked apart the first family, he picked Eve off first and she brought Adam down with him. Like he didn’t go after.

I don’t think theology is right, dear. Remember, the Bible tells us that Eve was deceived, Adam wasn’t. There was a failure of leadership on adult part that caused what happened. So the family is still to be blamed. I do remember that. Of course, if someone committed a crime, no, you’re not going to punish your family because a 20 year old man or whatever, even if he was a five year old kid, you’re not going to say, dad, it depends. Yeah, you’re right. But the family is the foundation because that’s where you’re going to teach your kids. That way your kids learn. Remember, the Bible gives the family the responsibility to raise and teach the kids, not the state. So whatever principles and all these things that the kids are going to grow up with, the family’s going to do that. Of course, we have a sin for nature as well, so they’re going to at some point choose for themselves and make decisions for themselves. But that doesn’t remove the family as their pillar of society. That is absolutely needed if we’re going to maintain some level of Godliness in the society. Yeah, you’re right. You’re absolutely right. That’s how Christian values and even whatever moral precepts that you have, those things are passed down through family.

Yeah. So Matt Walsh continue. And he’s talked about the nuclear family.

Now, it’s easy to see why the Democratic Party is determined then to undermine marriage and destroy the nuclear family. You can see why the left is openly hostile to the nuclear family, why they have declared war against it. The nuclear family, led by a man and woman bonded in marriage, serves as a blockade, a fortress, standing against the left’s political and cultural aspirations. They know they can’t achieve their ultimate ends without blowing up the fortress, and that’s what they’ve set out to do. And they’re already having enormous success and they’re reaping enormous political rewards in the process.

Yes, as we were discussing just before this last step, the nuclear family is extremely important. I’m not surprised that it’s been attacked. And I believe, of course, in Genesis two, verse 24, he said, there, for shall a man leave his father and his mother and shall cleave unto his wife, and they shall be one flesh. The nuclear family was declared by God from the beginning and of course, as I mentioned earlier, it was corrupted by men. If you look in Matthew 19, verse 28, the Bible says the Pharisees also came on to him, tempting him and saying unto him, is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause? And he answered and said on to them, have you not read that he would make them at the beginning, made them male and female? That kind of destroyed the transgenderism issued right there and said, for this cause shall a man leave father and mother and shall cleave to his wife and their twin shall be one flesh. Therefore there no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God had joined together, let not man put asunder. They said unto him. Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement and put her away? He said unto them Moses, because of the hardness of your heart, suffer you to put away your wife. But from the beginning it was not so. We see that the nuclear family was declared by God, corrupted by men.

And also I think that the nuclear family is a powerful formula of a man and woman becoming one flesh as an example of Christ’s love for the church. What is the purpose of the nuclear family? To be a beautiful picture of Christ and the church to raise God’s fearing children.

And it is God recommended formula for a family unit. You cannot have a God recognized marriage, a God recognized family, if it is a gay family, gay, quote unquote marriage and all these things all these things are not only destroying the nuclear family, it’s destroying what God intended for what marriage is. And I think this is the aim of the political left, this is the aim of the LGBTQIA plus community is not to build something up or be added to. I think it’s to destroy what is there. And I definitely agree with Matt Walsh on this one.

This is the Removing Barriers podcast, we will be right back.

This episode of the Removing Barriers podcast is sponsored by SWAPP. If you are using paper maps for your outreach ministry, there is an easier way to create maps and follow up with contacts. Introducing the Soul-winning app or SWAPP for short. SWAPP allows your church to effectively set up an outreach area, digitally map that area and allow app users to easily show progress on that map. You can print maps, recorded prayer requests and follow up with contents. SWAPP is offering a 30 day free trial and money back guarantee. Go to theSoulwinningapp.com or theSWAPP.io to sign up today. SWAPP, the only outreach software designed specifically for soul-winning and Soul-winners.

Now, why do unmarried people, especially women, tend to favor Democrats? That’s obvious enough. Marriage and family life will tend to make you less selfish, tend to make you less obsessively focused on your own desires, tend to make you more invested in the future, more grounded, right? In a word, more conservative. Selfish, shallow. People will naturally find leftism more appealing, and they’re also more susceptible to manipulation. What’s more, when you’re single, you’re more vulnerable and that’s more likely to be dependent on the government. Democrats know this, which is one of the primary reasons they oppose a nuclear family. Nuclear families need less from the government, typically, and therefore harder to control. The more reliant you are on the government, the more you can be controlled, the easier it is for the democrats to extract your vote. Unmarried women in particular, if they’re sexually active, are going to be more likely the Democrats can get their vote, manipulate them, use emotional blackmail to get their vote with the abortion issue because they’re more vulnerable and because they’re not married. If they have a kid, they’re more likely to see it as a crisis because they’re not married. Now, when you’re married and there are still married couples that get abortions, which is hideously evil, of course, but if you’re married and you have a kid, you’re less likely to see it as a crisis because you’re married and you have a family and that’s what that’s what the marriage this is what that’s all about.

Yeah, I do agree with him. And I do notice I’m not going to add much, but I do notice even at work, the married folks in the office tends to be more ready to go home at the end of the day. Another sofwaret engineer, of course, most folks I work with within my age group and below some Jersey, at the end of the day, they’re talking about what happy hour they can go to, what they can do in the town or city or whatever it may be, when we’re going to the office. And the married folks are kind of like, okay, it’s 530. I’m heading out of here. They’re up. They’re ready to go. They tend to care less about happy hour meetups and all these other things because, at least for myself, I don’t think they find their happiness and their social outlet in their work community because they have families, right? Single folks tend to do that because single people don’t have families. And so their co workers and their friends are their comrades. That’s where they get their camaraderie. That’s where they get their social interaction. And because they don’t have families, they’re less likely well, just in general, they’re less likely to be churchgoers. They’re less likely to be in that realm of people who think in terms of familial ties and people who think in terms of community, their community or their coworkers or maybe perhaps even their social networks.

One thing, though, I want to push back a little bit against Matt Walsh on is the implication that people who are not married are selfish. They don’t see themselves as selfish. Like, if we were to try to convince them to see things from the conservative perspective, we wouldn’t get very far. If we try to paint them or try to get them to see that they are selfish because they feel like that they are being selfless just in a different way. They are selfless when it comes to they care for the planet, for example, or selfless in the sense that they are caring for what they feel are the forgotten people of society, the people who are not in a nuclear family structure. So perhaps implying that they are selfish or perhaps that they are not as selfless as someone who is married. Probably isn’t the best way to go. Birding of a bridge a little bit. I don’t know. I think what you were trying to imply, and I think you probably agree with this as well, is that I think marriage tend to force you to consider the needs of others more than singlehood. Especially with kids, they need to eat regardless of how you feel, whether or not you want to get about ten in the morning, you don’t want to get up. Eight if the kids are up, maybe you have to get up. But it depends on the age as well, of course. But I think that marriage kind of bring out a new, at least some giving of yourself. True that sinners may not because when you’re singing who do you have to deal with yourself. But that doesn’t necessarily mean that if you’re single, you’re selfish. That’s what I get what I’m trying to say I’m not trying to convey that. I’m trying to say. So if we say that marriage tends to make someone selfless because they have to consider the needs and the desires of people in their family, other people besides themselves, then we must also be willing to say that marriage increases your chances of becoming bitter because you keep having to put yourself on the back burner in order to care for the people that are within your family as well. I don’t think that’s accurate there the propensity for sin is still there is what I’m trying to get at. What I don’t want to fall into a trap of what Matt Walsh is doing. And I think the reason he’s doing this is because for him, he’s addressing the problem at the fruit and not at the root. And so for him the solution is actually a fruit and not a root addressing of the problem. So whether you’re single or whether you’re married, I’m trying to say you still have that propensity to send, you still have that drive towards selfishness. And if you’re not driven towards selfishness, you’re driven toward bitterness. If you’re not driven toward bitterness, you’re driven toward name the sin, fill in the blank here. That part of it is to remember the title of this video is Promotion of Forget. Promotion of marriage will solve. Promoted marriage will save our country. Which again, I can understand why he’s coming at it from this angle because he’s only addressing the fruit and not the root of the problem.

Yeah, but at the same time, I will say though that saying that marriage would increase bitterness, I don’t think that’s accurate. I don’t think that’s backed by data and statistics. Because if you’re in a happy marriage, being selfless for your family will not increase bitterness, it will actually increase joy from both sides. I’m saying with every opportunity to serve your family, you have a choice. You can be bitter because you have to put your needs on the back burner and you could serve them with, oh, well, here you go. Or you could serve them being grateful that you have little ones to care for, little faces to clean, that you have a mess to clean up. There are two ways you could look at it. You could be thankful to God for the mess that you have to clean up because that means that you have a family. Or it could mean or you could respond with bitterness and why don’t you people clean up around here whether or not you’re married? My point is you have the option to sin. You have the option to not sin. He’s making it sound like if you’re married, then somehow that you have more what is it? You have more sanctification than when you’re single. And I don’t think that’s true. I think he’s saying when you’re married, you usually quote unquote, happier. And I think that it’s proven by statistics. I think that’s at least partly what he’s saying. You’re more fulfilled if you are married. And in a healthy marriage, sure, but you aren’t necessarily holier. That’s what he was implying, that you are more selfless. You are more all the things that he listed as a result of being married than when you’re single.

It’s very nuanced. But I just want to push back against the idea because see, then we go into the issue. We have that problem in the church where the singles sometimes pick any church in the USA, the singles group. They tend to feel like they’re in this sort of like their lives are on hold until they can be married. And sometimes many of them, if you speak to them, they will tell you that people in the church make them feel that way. Like somehow the singles are just kind of in a waiting pool, almost like in a almost like a purgatory as you wait to get married and then all of a sudden, okay, now you’re married, your life can start. Well, we have to be careful. I know that’s not what he’s trying to say, but because of how he expressed it, that same attitude, that same subconscious sort of mentality could be presented, could come across. And perhaps it’s just nuance, but I don’t want anyone to get the impression that somehow being married makes you somehow holier or more set apart or more sanctified just because you’re having to deal with your children or your husband as opposed to a single person who doesn’t have those things. Does that make sense? Yes, I can see some of that anyways. And perhaps it didn’t even matter, but I just wanted to point that out because the way he made that sound but anyway,

yeah, here’s Matt Walsh solution to the entire issues.

So what does this mean? It means, of course, that our political problem is first a cultural problem and there is no solving the former without addressing the ladder. And there is no addressing the ladder if we’re going to neglect marriage and the family. For decades, conservatives have looked for ways to win the political game without winning the cultural game. And they’re looking for ways to win the culture then without defending and encouraging marriage in the family. And it just doesn’t work. It can’t. It never will. If we want the cultural victory, and thus the political victory, our message should be get married, have kids, stay married, get married, have kids, stay married. In that order. That’s the three step process. Get married, have kids, stay married. More people follow that. Yes, Republicans will win many more elections. If we were still at 80% married households, then Republicans would never lose a national election again. But more importantly, we will have saved our culture from annihilation. And more important still, people will be living purposeful, joyful lives, which ultimately is the end result of Democrats are most desperate to avoid.

So this is where I most strongly disagree with Matt Walsh. I don’t think necessarily we have a political problem. Sure, we see some fruits that maybe we can call a political problem, but I think that the problem is a spiritual problem, not a cultural one. And I think that’s where Christians again, I’m speaking to Christians here that’s where we fall short as well, because we tend to think that the problem is a political problem. Let’s vote in the people we want. And again, voting is very important. Go out there and vote. But the problem is not a political problem. The problem is not a culture problem. I think first and foremost, it is a spiritual problem. They said that politics is downstream of culture, but also culture is downstream of the spiritual state of the country. Before we experience a political problem or a cultural problem, we would have failed spiritually. First, america as a country has moved away from its founding principles years ago. As I said before, the problem is Christians are still living like this country is still under the founding principles. This country is no longer under the founding principles of the founding fathers. We have long removed from that. And Christians still evangelize. They still live their life as if we still have those principles, and we don’t. Because of the erosion of the spiritual principles of this country, removing Jesus Christ from the school prayer, lack of evangelist and Christians, that created a culture problem, which at the end of the day, create a political problem. The issue is not politics. Issue is a spiritual problem. But let’s say I even concede to Matt Walton say the solution is to get married, have kids, stay married. How do we get people to do that? How do we get people to get married, have kids and stay married? Marriage is highly a religious activity. According to the Bible. Marriage is a covenant. That’s why, again, we reject gay marriage because what God covenant what God ordained or what God joined together was a man and a woman in Genesis. So my question for Martin Wales would be how do we get folks to get married, have kids, stay married? Again? This will not happen unless we turn to the root of the issue, which is a rejection of the gospel of Jesus Christ. If we as Christians would obey the Great Commission and start to rate our Jerusalem with the gospel of Jesus Christ and see folks save by repentant faith in Jesus Christ, then and only then will we save our country. We as Christians obeying the Great Commission, saturating our Jerusalem with the gospel of Jesus Christ. We’ll see folks saved by repentant faith. Then and only then, we will save our country. And guess what? If that happened, we will restore the moral fabric of our society. And folks will now see marriage as essential and want to get married, have kids and stay married. But we cannot solve the issue with conservatism. We cannot solve the issue with politics. We cannot vote the culture away, but we sure can pray and obey the last command given by Christ. Share the gospel, share the gospel. Share the gospel. See folks turn to Christ and be saved. And then, and only then, we’ll save our country. Because they’re not going to return to marriage because they don’t believe in it. They’re not going to stay married because that’s not the example set by their parents. And they’re not going to have kids because culture already telling their kids are burdened. So what can we do? Share the gospel, share the gospel, share the gospel. See folk, save. And then, and only then, we’ll save our country.

Hi, this is Jay MCG and I would like for you to help us remove barriers by going to Removingbarriers.net and subscribing to receive all things Removing barriers. If you’d like to take your efforts a bit further and help us keep the mics on, consider donating at removingbarriers.net/donate. Removing Barriers, a Clear View of the Cross.

Thank you for listening. To get a hold of us, to support this podcast, or to learn more about Removing Barriers, go to Removingbarriers.net. This has been the Removing Barriers podcast. We attempted to remove barriers so that we all can have a clear view of the cross.