If you are not in a position where you feel like you should conceive a child,
f conceiving a child would be disastrous for
you, you believe, then do not participate in
activities that literally billions of times in
the past have resulted in the conception of a child.
If reproduction, or maybe I'll phrase it this way,
cuz I really wanna make it very simple for these people.
They have difficulty understanding complex concepts.
We're gonna dumb it down as much as possible.
If reproduction would be a disaster for you, you believe,
then do not participate in the reproductive act.
>> All right, so that is Matt Walsh, hosted the Daily Wire in a recent
episode of his podcast, and hey, these ideologues who love freedom,
now want you to not have sex unless you want a child.
Matt Walsh says we need to be abstinent, all right?
So can you picture just being intimate with the partner and just saying,
you know what, Matt Walsh said that we shouldn't so I can't do do this.
Yeah, alternatively we could say,
as a queer woman whenever I have sex with another woman, that's never a concern.
So maybe Matt Walsh's solution is everyone do gay sex.
I think we should tweet that out.
That, that's what Matt Walsh wants us to do.
And and he just won't stop calling it the reproductive act.
He will not call it sex, he will not be a normal human being.
He keeps saying, the reproductive act,
let's roll a clip of him saying that again.
>> If you're able to reproduce and yet reproduction would be a catastrophe,
then do not participate in the reproductive act.
>> The reproductive- >> Act
>> Imagine your friends telling a story
and they're like, and then we did the reproductive act.
[LAUGH] I'd be like, eew, was stop it, you weirdo.
It's just so weird.
The reproductive act, like, the Ohio State University, really throws the B in there.
I don't like it, I think it's creepy.
Yeah, what do you think about the reproductive act?
>> I think a lot of people might agree with you that it's a bit creepy.
I'm not sure that he's actually worried about that.
So that that's Matt Walsh, when they cranked out Ben Shapiro then they did
a couple of clones of it and each of them has gone in a different direction.
Some have tried to make their name by spending a lot of time with Ted Cruz,
it's a weird way to go in terms of popularity.
He decided to make a couple of changes to get the success they saw
Ben Shapiro having.
One, he decided to cover up as much of his face as possible,
I think that was a good call.
And the other was that he decided his shtick was going to be open fascism.
So Ben Shapiro will imply that, you should listen to him and
you should believe what he says, because he's the intellectual,
he's the logical guy, he can make an argument.
Matt Walsh doesn't pretend to be able to produce logical arguments.
And in fact, if you look, he calls himself a fascist on Twitter.
He believes that power is the only things that should matter.
So when he is saying, if you don't want to have a child,
you will be forced by government law, effectively, to be abstinent,
he's not making an intellectual case, he's not making a legal philosophical case.
He's not even really there making a religious case.
What he's saying is, we made it happen, we can force you to do what we want.
He believes that Christians are better than non Christians,
men are better than women, white people are better than non white people,
straight people are better than anyone else's, cis people better than trans.
And that is the way it's going to be based on the power of government and
the threat of being locked up.
Look, I think it's honestly pretty cutting edge.
I think other Republican pundits will get there at some point.
This idea that, we have the power, not the numbers, people don't agree with them,
most people find him as repugnant as me and Jessica do.
But it's gonna be the way,
we want, because we believe in supremacy and we've got the majority.
Structurally, the system is so rigged, that people born in unpopular positions
as we have, can still maintain supremacy in the Supreme Court if nowhere else.
And that's it.
He doesn't try to hide it.
And to some extent, while I find him to be a disgusting human being,
I do respect the honesty, to some extent, at least.
>> Yeah, the fascism, you're right, it's so blatant here.
Because think about who has the money and resources,
who is set up well in their lives to reproduce, to take on another life and
provide for, it is people who have privilege in our society.
He's essentially saying that people who should reproduce are the people who have
privilege in our society.
And he says everyone else should resist their compulsions,
because we're human beings and not beasts.
Let's watch that clip.
>> Because if you are able to reproduce, no matter what else you do,
you can make it this, quote unquote, safest kind of sex you want.
There's always still gonna be a chance that you reproduce.
And if that chance would be like plunging off of a cliff,
level of catastrophe in your life,
then don't participate in the act, control yourself, right?
We're human beings, we should be able to exercise some self control, right?
We're not beasts in the jungle that are unable to control
our our compulsions, at least we shouldn't be.
One of the defining features of human beings, one of the things that's supposed
to set us apart from beasts, is that we are able to have a compulsion to do
something, we wanna do something and yet we choose not to do it.
>> Interesting theories from Matt Walsh,
human beings are the best because we don't bone unless we wanna make babies.
No shagging unless you want children.
That's what makes human beings great, thank you, Matt Walsh, so much for
that contribution.
Listen, I think what he's doing here is just setting the tone, right?
There are members of the far right who plant the seeds, then they're watered and
sown by all of the other members of right wing media.
And listen, they harvest those crops when the time comes and what he's
planning the seeds for, is the eventual overturning of Griswold v Connecticut.
And we already had Clarence Thomas in the majority opinion hint that this is exactly
what they plan to do.
This is the Supreme Court case that guaranteed our right to contraceptives.
Because he's not saying, if you don't wanna have a baby, if you don't wanna have
an abortion, use condoms, used birth control, he's saying abstain from sex.
Because they're absolutely trying to next, outlaw contraceptives.
Clarence Thomas directly said in future cases,
we should reconsider all of this, quote, substantive due process precedents,
including Griswald Lawrence, and Obergfell.
He's asking for these cases to be brought before the court.
So the way the court usually should go, is there are some cases where people believe
their rights have been violated and
the court picks a few cases out of hundreds that they get every single year.
Now he's asking specifically, can we get some cases so
we can overturn these precedents?
Really great functioning democracy we have here.
>> 100%.
Yeah, 100%.
Also, I guess all of the people who are raped should have
exercised more impulse control.
That ten year old in Ohio, she really should have controlled her impulses.
So it's perfectly acceptable for them to not be able to have abortions.
Texas woman who had to carry a dead fetus for
two weeks should have exercised more impulse control.
How about you exercise some impulse control?
The impulse to, when you are living a life where you are so small, so broken as
a man, that you feel you have to tightly control everything that a woman does.
How about you exercise some control over that impulse?