knowing the policies of guitar, 7 years before when the country was 1st pick and knowing they were very unlikely to change. there were still demonstrations and protest at the lack of rights for the homosexual residents of the country. now the golf country's being air muslim nations are very well known as being anti, what they call the gay agenda. according to them, it is against their culture and religion, and they do not legally tolerate it in any of their countries. but weeks later, no changes have been made to the policies regarding homosexuals who live in guitar . but this has not been the only time the subject as homosexual rights has actually been used to create public discourse. and most often, the issue only becomes problematic for countries which seem to not embrace the agenda of the wes. so is this a coincidence? well, joining me now discusses tim gordon. other of several books, including the case where patriarchy and catholic youtube are in podcast are welcome

. tim. thanks a 1000000. great to be ok. there is a lot of mainstream detraction of those who criticize the gay agenda or the global homo, as it can be called as some of the stronger critics like to call gay agenda. so let's start from the basics. in your view, is there a gay agenda or a global homo agenda that is pushing specific policies, both in the west and more traditional countries? without a doubt, without a doubt, global homo is a real phenomenon. and it's expressed in every single expression that we see worldwide of globalism in all of the, the globalist entities, whether you're talking the un, the e, u, the w e f. there are many, many more subsidiaries of all of these. but if you look to agenda 2030 of the united nations, which i'll be citing at least a few times and i'll talk you today. the 17 sustainable development goals include

several references to l, g, b, t, and the exportation of it from the west to, than on western countries. that is to say, the only hold outs, those countries that cling to either christianity or islam depending on their location, need to be converted. and that's, that's precisely what it turns out. the goals of agenda 2030 are, is conversion of hold outs in the west isolation of christians or muslims in the west or in the east economic isolation and alienation, ostracize zation of them. that's goal number one. goal number 2 is to convert and to condition aid as the means of that conversion. those non developed countries that are either christian or muslim. so it's an absolutely explicitly codified set of goals, set of parameters that are not incidental to globalism but seem to

be at or near the center of globalism. and hopefully we could talk some about the animating principles for such expressions of globalism today. but it's definitely codified. yes. and it's definitely an agenda why it's interesting. i want to look at something is obvious that the arab countries are actually, i think, very united and standing against it be keeping up the term christian. i think this is something that many people, if you are a christian, you riser, as a divide amongst christianity right now, the united states is a huge number one religion. the u. s. is still christian, yet obviously they're one of the more proponents of a global gay agenda. what is that divide? looked like amongst the christian that the people have faith because like i said, very few countries that are actually christians, the dominant is actually sticking to it. they're the ones pushing a part of the agenda on to more air of nations right now. well, i can speak most explicitly to roman catholicism, which is not to put too fine

a point on it. the most doctrinally, unilaterally lasting li, anti gay, a christian denomination of them all, and i'm not using anti case, the slur. i'm using it as a compliment. and so what we see those of us commentators within the catholic tradition is a decisive attempted shift that reverses the by millennial catholic tradition of strong of catholic moral theology, the catholic intellectual tradition of moral theology to reverse that in the name of this most recent pope we just had our beloved benedict, the 16th pass, and beginning immediately after francis's election, ending in 2013 hempstead, a decisive shift that can't happen because in roman catholicism it's

a government really of laws not, not pope's. there is nothing he can do this. this is a deep de feed. a matter comes from scripture, it comes from tradition. there can't be a reversal in the christian orthodox. it's basically the same thing. you don't have the popes, but you have the strong bi millennial tradition which, which basses itself on a lot of the same scriptural and patristic fathers. and they all say one thing, they speak in one direction against homosexuality. it's one of the 7 sins that cries out to heaven for vengeance. just like it's really clear in islam protestantism, they are roughly 39000 different denominations of protestant. and that is, as all questions and protestantism really pastor centered the question of whether or not a given protestant denomination will be open, open to change on the l g b t q. question. and generally speaking evangelicals or not. whereas

mainline protestants have proven themselves over the last 15 years to be sadly open to it. so, so there is some distinction to be made within the broad heading of christianity. but there's not a distinction to be made amongst those that hold to by millennial doctrine. the teachings of the early church fathers, patristic scholastics, there is no 2nd opinion. it is decisively anti. just as scripture itself is decisively anti l g b t q as it's come to because i want to make sure that is clarified. i also want to point out, so to our audience, so we're not just talking, we're not talking about the lifestyle. we're not talking about the choices, the more personal expense. we're actually talking about. the policies that are being pushed on the gay policies we're pushing. this has nothing to do with the live sound, the choices i want our audience understand. this is having to do with the government's mandated policies that are being pushed into certain countries who

might not protect those pauses because of their religious spaces. and that's where i think we need to have the discussion in the world right now. somehow that lines become blurred, but we're talking about policies and laws being enacted here. so who do you think is actually behind this agenda? do you think it's western governments or do you think that certain individuals or factions inside these governments can read you some of the agenda, 2030 caught a 5 points that are on point that has been shown to be super, a national entity that are more important and determinative of what certain western democracy, liberal democracies seem, seemed to be inclining toward with regard to the l g. b t q agenda. but it is as a matter of import export, it has been a few countries i'm, i'm sad to say the united states is one of the primary ex borders of the l g b t q agenda. but, but also the e u and the u. n. countries have been really,

really aggressive. nato has been really, really aggressive in conditioning aid to 3rd world countries like africa, some in south america, upon the acceptance of what, what, what a roman catholic like me would call an in anti life agenda, which is inclusive of contraception. abortion and l g b t q. in 2015, for example, or i'll read to you something that i found in my research. the un general assembly adopted agenda 2030, which outlines 17 sustainable development goals to guide international development for the next decade. the s t g 's build off the previous set of global goals. these come from agenda 21. they're called the millennium development goals, and they identify $169.00 specific targets focused on creating an economically socially and environmentally sustainable world. what this means is creating

a world that is unilaterally pro secular liberalism and a key piece of establishing an order of post christian secular liberalism is pushing l g b t q. really hard. yes, yes. in the law fair, i agree with you, but also in the culture. well, and that's the question i don't think and maybe i'm over sorry. banner for i myself . i don't think anybody should ever be killed for a choice like that. i don't think that's the place that any bay should stand and some of these governments do take that position, that is different. i think from overall what we're talking about here. i do think that that is something that could be worked on. not necessarily the pushing of the agenda within the education system, the social system, those sorts of things, which makes me wonder, what did these western countries think they stand again, from pushing this agenda? do you really think they're in it just to save people's lives? so those that might be actually being, being victims in these countries,

they're being brutalized or is it really what they claim it to be? do you think they support the rights of marginalized people who identify as homosexual or you think there's a bigger reason, as we've seen time and time again, this is just being used as an excuse. certainly it's being used as an excuse that you're certainly right, scotty to distinguish between christian nations and islamic nations where that it's in previous christian law affair, even in this country, prior to a case called lawrence versus texas in 2003 the individual state. we have a robust tradition of states rights in this christian nation where, what, what justice scalia called the, the individual states, the labs are forums of experimentation. we're allowed to develop moral laws that were to be developed not by the congress, but by state legislatures. and therefore you had more or less 2 kinds of states,

red and blue. and prior to 2003, it was left to that. the moral legislation to be against pro gay law affair was left up to individual read states. after 2003. you have a force set an illegal i zation of bands on sodomy after 2015 in this country. there is a forced illegal i zation of individual state bands on gay marriage, much as you had a movement to illegal eyes, illegal ising certain vices from the perspective. the decisive perspective of the christian tradition on issue such as contraception, abortion pornography, those were all individual cases that rose before the supreme court under the warren court. 1965 contraception in in griswold versus connecticut. they made it

illegal for individual conservative states to illegal ice contraception. 4 years later, in 1969, a case called stanley versus georgia. they made it illegal. they the supreme court to illegal eyes, even if you're a conservative christian stay pornography 3. we all know they made it illegal to illegal eyes, abortion. and they did so in 2003 with regard to sodomy in lawrence versus taxes. and they did so with regard to individual conservative states, ah, that would ill legalize gay marriage in 2015 under o. burger fell versus hodges. so $11.00 important american distinction that ought to be made is this country stands for the proposition of states rights. that the federal congress should really only be making last of resort legislation that is not moral in character. that's codified him or 10th amendment or 10th amendment, codified something called the general police powers, the powers to regulate help safety welfare morals and security. and that means that

with the individual, 50 state legislatures resides the power to moralize. there should basically be 2 kinds red states and blue states. but the supreme court, starting in the 60s, made it illegal for the conservative states to legislate in one direction, which would be against porn contraception, sodomy, gay marriage, et cetera. and that's what we have to reverse in this. well, and tim gordon, let's continue this conversation. grandma talked about the idea that marriage is something that goes across state lines and how that argument was used to push for a federal and at federal acceptance of the law. when we come back, we will continue to look at how authentic he west purse for homosexual rights in foreign countries really is going with our guest. him gordon, stating ah huh . ah

ah. ah lou to no one. no, sir, no, no, admiral hook, no, no. what door? more shrill than what they should of unit 731 was a unique organization in the history of the world. what they were trying to do was to simply do nothing short and build the most powerful and most deadly

biological weapons program that the world had ever known. real and you know, took production with it. so again, sure, sure good. did that they're not killed when you saw new rochelle keep on more more general motor thought is meant new at the moment i got to learn much sale. i got your name . i go on monday. i wish to know about joy. oh, new. i know you didn't oh gosh, more or less to know jr. let's i had to put the discount on whether or not but a bill could you could help us out. oh boy, that's good to go. what is your oh, and what on this? wow, she my and new other. i'm all,

i can send more on all said mom. good. so you don't the you know a lot on or put them out. thank you bye. ah, ah, welcome back. we're talking about the global, queer gender, with author of the case for patriarchy and catholic youtube podcast, or tim gordon. welcome back to now, before the break, we were talking about marriage and obviously, before we get to the global issues, that's very, very important. the one case it was said, marriage cross state party lines. that's how they were able to get around the kid amendment and states rights. what was your answer back on that and why gay marriage was allowed the us? well that would be able to do something called an accommodate clause provision, and that's not actually how was argued inno burger fell, it like all of the other so called substantive due process cases. i've listed all of the progeny cases of substantive due process, which are inclusive of griswold versus connecticut. stanley versus georgia roe vs

wade. lawrence versus texas. they simply argued that of all of these issues, contraception, porn, sodomy of gay marriage, unmistakable vices from the decisive perspective of the christian tradition. our natural rights are natural rights that cannot be reached by law, even state law, which is supposed to be sovereign in the realm of moralizing legislation in this country. they said, look, these rights are so important that they are what we call what they receive fundamental rights protection. which is nonsense because in cases like 2005 q over city of new london, they're taking away the fundamental right of private property. they're taking away the fundamental right to life, which is actually a natural right along with property it by roe vs wade. one of the cited cases that's allegedly stands for the proposition of fundamental right to abort, right?

so there is a fundamentally caught a fire war at the heart of what constitutes a fundamental right. ok so, so i want to stop you there because i said, i want to run out of time without us talking about global issues. and this is what kind of brought this conversation today, because i know you watched all the protests in these public displays against guitar, regarding their lack of rights for homosexuals in their countries. nothing new. this is been with him for hundreds of years. what was your impression of the situation and did that is protesting actually think they were going to be able to change something that was rooted in religious law, not just government law. well, it's interesting isn't it? because in islamic nations, the problem of amick ability, or accommodation of liberal western democratic tolerance

is globally speaking at its lowest. so there's not a lot of risk in these islamic countries of capitulation to the aggressive world wide l g b t q agenda. and you'd pointed out, well in, in some countries and identified those as the islamic ones, instead of making it illegal merely, they are actually punishing with death, homosexual acts and things like that that isn't the tradition in christian countries in christian countries. we have accommodated the l g agenda and we were slowly over the you know, since the, from the french revolution to now christian countries have been infiltrated is the best word. and it's because we had a, not necessarily a softer stance, but a more lenient penalty for the such vices as sodomy, gay, marriage contraception, pornography than in those islamic countries. we were

a softer target. and i think that's, that's the best way to make begin to make the explanation that the christian countries were the west who lost their faith, lost their religion and sold out to the one world globalist l g, b, t q, agenda. and i mean, i think, i think you're acting as much in this interview, is there an agenda? if so, what drives it? that seems to be a little bit of a mystery, but there is one and it was the civic. i think that's the bigger question is, why does it always feel like, especially like the current bite administration in united states? are they fair when they're advocating for homosexual rights in one country and saying, look, you're not doing this so therefore we're not going to give you aid. but they're ignoring the lack of another's based, basically on which country is considered a friend or foe. saudi arabia versus iran side area versus the united versus dubai. it's amazing how they somehow don't ever think about those same

rights and they're dealing with a country they considered to be an ally. sure, i mean, all i can say with certitude is that there's the question is closed. the if you, if you look to the, the sustainable development goals of agenda 2030 they, they make provision time after time after time. that countries that aren't developed to use their term if they want to join the rest of the world aid the way most western countries give their resistance. the gay agenda off being its own platitude of tolerance, right in the 90s, in the early 2, thousands left. this was most often heard intoning the platitude. you know, agree to disagree, that's gone the way of the dodo and the last couple of decades. they don't, they don't say, agree to disagree any more as they gain power, particularly as the l g b t q. agenda game power, but yes, if a like a good leftist or number one goal was in saving hungry peoples of the 3rd

world, then of course they would it, would it be conditioning 8 meals to actually starving individuals upon accepting some idiot, logical premise, especially if the ideological premise is not a matter of life and death. so outside of the islamic country, of it would set aside the islamic countries, where i think they exaggerate largely the degree to which it's a matter of life and death for gay people. but there's at least a nugget of truth to it. set those aside in places like christian nations in northern africa. why would they have to jettison their most deadly held belief in order to get free meals, food or whatever it is unesco pennies. if, if they truly believed it was a matter of life and death, they don't. and it's a relatively c through vale of that saturday. well,

timothy always great to chat with you. thank you so much for joining us. thanks a 1000000 for ab me years on homosexual marriage have been changing over the last 2 decades with the increasing acceptance. this is a change which is happening based on the opinions of people, mainly not necessarily being forced on them by a government. it is very hard for a government to scream a quality when they are only finding it convenient, based on their agenda when to push for this acceptance. this is where the cries for fairness become exposed as not being authentic. rather, they are just a vehicle used to create chaos or trouble for country, which happens to be at odds with the west. now favorite nations or an alliance by the west means not only do you receive positive benefits, but you avoid the potential of disruption in your st. and the name of social justice and humanity. a blind eye will be given to a country's actions against its own people,

as long as their policies favor and coincide with the west. and whether it be a large sporting event, entertainment, or social media push, or small situation, which possibly staged turns into a demonstration. and chaos outrage will be flamed as long as it can capture the public's attention and create pressure on that government a public caving on whatever the issue is not the goal. rather, it's behind the scenes submission by the government all to the west control. often this means a replacement of those in power to wind guaranteed to be less resist it. meanwhile, social issues like home sexual rights will be placed to the wayside. no longer needed as an excuse with those in powers knowing rules. and their regard will never be changed because of policies in their regard are deeply rooted in the only thing which has more power than the government. and that is their religion. i'm scale

here and it has been your 360 view. thanks a lot. ah ah, to nations may be able to turn a blind eye to atrocities. another comes the united states of america is different wherever people long to be free, they will find a friend in the united states. ah, with the human beings. little bit about it evolved. anybody basie sincerely sitting p, draw you look at the book they incentives of each cigarette. team color revolutions is one among several means to reach the goal of conquering foreign lands and

bringing them on to the helm of usaa weston, economic interests. people in sadie, i didn't that he did not grow valley democraix. yeah. new trinity coral activate sol, suite best, se loader soft power memory care. and the final goal of these thing revolutions is to ensure that there are no independent players in the world anymore. ah, what if i told you that the key to understanding the universe was a tiny particles, which is nearly impossible to detect so much so that they are even called ghost particles. they do exist and they're called neutrinos. this brings us here to the caucasus mountains. here in cub dino berkadia, where we're going to visit the unique bucks on that, you know a verbal story. and it might surprise you. we're not going to find it out here in the open, but instead we have to go about to go ometer deep underneath. there's nothing right?

[000:00:00;00] a layer matthew with greater finland to the rules. the nazi theory of racial superiority, finished style for years of caribbean ss, occupation, 14 concentration camps, 30 full prisoner of war, labor camps. 10 prisons, a little stone level. she's the media and you're still not seeing it, but need in the chest, leading it all and i could, elephants been listening. it was going to city approximately 25000 people went through the audio kind of go finish camps according to official figures. his bush.