The City of San Francisco is proposing a $5 million reparations package for residents who identify as black, and the reason this advisory panel got to this number is hilarious. Liz shines a light on the underlying Marxist tones of this new initiative and breaks down what’s wrong with the committee’s thinking. Plus, Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot is ousted from office by voters. This is The Liz Wheeler Show.
This transcript was generated automatically and may contain typos, mistakes, and/or incomplete information.
Happy Wednesday to everyone except Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot, who has been ousted by Chicago voters in what might be the most surprising election results that we’ve seen in quite a long time. She didn’t even make the runoff. So in Chicago, how the mayoral elections work is you have to secure 50% of the votes to win outright. If you fail to secure 50% of the vote, then it goes to runoff. That’s what happened. Lori Lightfoot only secured 16% of the vote. 16, she was defeated by two other people. Paul Valis got 35% of the vote. Brandon Johnson got 20%, and then in third came Lori Lightfoot. So she’s out. We don’t know who the new mayor of Chicago will be yet until the Runout runoff. But Lori Lightfoot is gone. To say that I’m delighted, probably doesn’t even express the joy that Chicago residents are feeling right now.
The interesting part of this race, the very interesting part of this race, is that it’s centered on crime in Chicago. As the Biden administration basically ignores crime in our inner cities, as Democrats across the country tell us that, you know, people are safe, even though it’s more violent in our cities than we’ve seen in decades. This is actually what determined the outcome of this, of this race, this mayoral race. They made it about crime and the candidates challenging. Lori Lightfoot challenged her on her record on crime. She’s presided over Chicago that had a homicide rate during her tenure. That was the highest homicide rate in 25 years. That’s inexcusable, that’s unacceptable.
So this I think, is a bellwether of 2024. People care about crime. Doesn’t matter if you’re a Republican, doesn’t matter if you’re Democrat, as long as you’re not a Democrat elected official who is part of the elite ruling class who has taxpayer funded protection, who is insulated from the actual physical harm and danger that is caused by the policies that you’ve implemented in inner cities for the past 50 years.
Actual real democrat voters care about crime, and that’s the case in Chicago. So that’ll be fun to watch this whole thing unfold and to see, to see who Lori Lightfoot blames for her loss. what we’re gonna talk about today on the show is another very, very liberal city. The city of San Francisco. I don’t know if you guys saw this, but San Francisco is proposing a reparations package for black residents of their city or residents who identify as black. Can’t make this up.
We’re gonna walk through exactly what this verbiage is here, , because it’s pretty funny. 5 million per person is what this advisory panel for the city of San Francisco is proposing. $5 million. Can you even imagine for every single black person who qualifies in the city of San Francisco and this number, you might be thinking, okay, 5 million is an unfathomable amount of money for the government to just drop in your lap.
it’s really an unfathomable amount of money for most Americans. Most Americans won’t see $5 million in their entire lifetime, let alone have the government it to them in the form of reparations because of some wrongdoing that happened. Not to them, but to someone a long time ago. And not perpetuated by people living now, but by people who have been long dead.
The whole idea of reparations is crazy. But, but the hilarious part of this is this advisory panel on reparations in San Francisco was asked, well, how did you get to this number? How did you get to 5 million? Why pick 5 million? Why not, you know, a hundred thousand? Why not 1 million? Like, what, what did you use? What was your determining factors? What were your determining factors in choosing the number 5 million? This is what, this is what I said. I wanna read this to you. Exactly. So Eric McDonald, who is the committee chair for the African American Reparations Advisory Committee, this is what he said. He said, we didn’t use a math formula to arrive at this number. He said, this 5 million number, 5 million number was the result of a journey.
Cannot make this up. A journey. A journey. He said it was a journey for the committee towards what could represent a significant enough investment in families to put them on this path to economic wellbeing, growth and vitality. That slavery and all the policies that flowed from it destroyed. It was a journey. There was no math, no formula used in the calculation of this number. If that isn’t the most hilarious thing. And we’re, we’re gonna talk about, by the way, we’re gonna break down actually this whole advisory committee cuz there’s some behavior and some verbiage and everything about this committee that should be broken down.
And a lot of conservatives might be a little wary of talking about this because it involves race. It involves a legitimate wrongdoing that happened in our country, slavery that happened in our country. but we we’re gonna talk about this because this journey that Eric McDonald describes is a journey towards something and that something is not justice. That something is socialism and Marxism. And there’s proof of that in this advisory committee recommendation. So let’s break it down.
Okay, so there’s some funny things and then there’s some not funny things associated with this reparations package recommendation from the African-American Reparations Advisory Committee, which by the way, even the name is misleading because they say African-American Reparations Advisory Committee, but there is no requirement for the person who might qualify for this 5 million payout in the city of San Francisco. There’s no requirement that the black person actually be from Africa.
That there’s no requirement that this person be a descendant of a black person from Africa who was enslaved in the United States when slavery was legal. None of that. So this is actually the furthest that reparations proposals have gone, but it’s not surprising. This is what we predicted would happen because reparations were always, always a disguise for redistribution of wealth. And it was a disguise that counted on people. Maybe you and I being fearful to engage in this conversation because it’s a difficult conversation about race to talk about.
Well, yeah, we had slavery in this country and it was awful. And it certainly did have ramifications that were downstream ramifications. It wasn’t just the people who were enslaved whose rights were deprived. Of course, that has, that has effects. Like they were deprived of education. So, you know, even when they were freed, they weren’t allowed to work a lot of places. We had discriminatory laws, especially in the south in our country for years. For decades. Of course, there’s downstream effects of slavery. I don’t, I don’t think anybody on the conservative side is denying that, which is why the Democrats have chosen this in recent years as one of their as one of their pet topics. It’s not because they have what’s best for black people in our country in mind. It’s not because they actively are pursuing policies that will help black people achieve prosperity.
It’s not because they’re trying, Democrats are trying to propose solutions that would close this so-called income disparity between black people and white people in our country is not because of that. They’re doing this as a way of trying to sneak past us. The government seizing the power to redistribute goods and property in the name of justice, even though what they’re calling justice is not just, so what I wanna do is I wanna look at this recommendation package from the African American Reparations Advisory Committee. because 5 million, that’s a lot of money. 5 million. Who qualifies for this? If you live in San Francisco, how do you get your hands on $5 million? By the way, one of the funniest things there are, there are fi 50,000 black people that live in San Francisco. I do think this is pertinent. 35,000 of these black people in San Francisco.
Were above the age of 18. So one of the first qualifying factors is that you have to be 18 years old or above. And I can test this right from the beginning. It’s so funny what standards they put as qualifying factors in this, in this proposal for reparations. Because what makes an 18-year-old qualify for this 5 million reparations, but not a 17-year-old. If your pre, if your premise, if the premise of these reparations is that slavery notwithstanding just the policies the political policies that have existed in San Francisco for the past 60, 70 years have put black people out of disadvantage. Why would a 17-year-old not qualify, but an 18-year-old qualify? So even right here, like you can’t do a project like this, you can’t have a policy like this because there’s no way to actually do this fairly, there’s no way to actually do this justly.
But the purpose of this is to say that there’s 35,000 people, black people in San Francisco who are above the age of 18. You can do the math, 35,000 of them times, $5 million. There’s no way that San Francisco has the money to fund this. And there’s even been, there’s even been city officials in San Francisco who have said, we don’t have the money to fund this. And other officials that said, well, this is more of a symbolic gesture. We wanna establish that this is what we believe black people are owed. And then there’s been critics even on the Left who have said, but we don’t want a symbolic gesture. What about something more realistic that could actually happen?
So there’s criticism from all sides, and we are here today to add some more criticism of a little bit of a different nature. The first critique is also just, I just wanna sit here and laugh for a minute, because you would think if you are suggesting that the government owes people of a certain race, a certain amount of money for wrongdoing, the government perpetuated against these people because of their race that there would be some mathematical formula that you would use to calculate the number or the amount of money that the government owes these people.
But as I said, Eric McDonald, the chair of the African American Reparations Advisory Committee says there was not a math formula. He was on a journey. He says this was a journey for the committee to reach this number, which I find to be hysterical, absolutely hysterical. I wish that we could use that anytime we had a bill or something. That what if you get what if you get your energy bill that’s skyrocketed. Our energy bill, I was just talking about this with my husband yesterday. Our energy bill is like three times as much as it was two years ago because of Joe Biden’s policies like deliberate political action from Joe Biden has caused us to pay three times as much every month for our energy bill. I wish we could just look at that and be like, you know, I really think we should reject a mathematical formula and just go on a journey to see if this is how much we think should be paid to this energy company.
That would never work. No real person could ever operate under this premise. The only people that operate under this premise are delusional Democrats and they’re the ones in charge of this. So there is a, there is a proposition, I guess, of where they could get this money. There’s a cannabis tax in San Francisco that has not been enforced. It’s just suspended and then it gets res suspended right now, I think it’s suspended until 2025. But there’s been a proposal that they implement that tax and that they use that tax to pay for these reparations. But two problems with this. First of all, it would only generate like 10 million a year or something. It’s not even kind of close to enough to cover these reparations. But also, also it flies in the face of a very significant argument that this reparations committee has made when it comes to who qualifies for reparations.
So a couple of the qualifying factors, if you are a black person living in San Francisco, is you must be, I wanna read it directly, you must be born in San Francisco between the years 1940 and 1996 and you show proof of residency in San Francisco for at least 13 years. Because, you know, if you lived there for 12 years, then these institutionally racist political policies didn’t hurt you. But 13 years, yep, 5 million, 5 million for you. Or if you personally or are the direct descendant of someone who has been incarcerated by the failed war on drugs, then you qualify If you have identified as black on government documents for at least the last 10 years.
Let’s unpack that. Shall we first of all identify as black so you don’t have to actually be black? Like does Rachel Lazzo qualify for this? Because I have a feeling that 35,000 num the number of black people in San Francisco over the Avery age of 18, 35,000, suddenly that number is going to balloon. Suddenly this number is going to wildly grow at a wild pace. And you’re going to find that a lot of people have identified as black that didn’t previously identify as black. And there’s going to be they’re going to contest the idea that you had to, you had to identify as black for the past 10 years in order to qualify. This is not based in reality. This is based in delusion, delusion. You don’t identify as black. You either are black or are not black. But the reason, of course, that they are saying, well, if you identify as black is because they don’t wanna have any kind of test to see if you are a black person.
And the only reason that they would need some kind of test is because these black people that live in San Francisco were never slaves. They were never wronged by the sin of slavery that once long ago existed in the United States. They were never harmed by the people who would be paying them 5 million because slavery does not exist in our country, and it hasn’t for a long, long time. In fact, fun fact, slavery was never legal in San Francisco. This city that is proposing paying 5 million in reparations to black people was never a participant in slavery.
I’ll just leave you with that for a second. Okay, so let’s talk about what this is then. So if this is a Trojan horse, which it is, if this is a Trojan horse, let’s break down exactly what it looks like. So socialism, the idea of socialism is the redistribution of wealth, right? It’s the government having control of the means of economic distribution in a country, the means of production and distribution, which means that the socialist dictator at, at the helm of a socialist dictatorship decides who gets what and when. And the American people largely reject this idea, even though this is what the Left wants.
So the Left has to find a sneaky way to slide this past people without people realizing what it is. So they’ve decided to use reparations as this Trojan horse because they say, well, listen, if we do this under this fake idea of morality, meaning that white people owe black people, modern, white people owe modern black people for the sin of what white people did to black people hundreds of years ago then this will justify even in justify in the minds of people who were socialism, doubters, it’ll justify the redistribution of wealth.
So it’s a way of tricking people into thinking that socialism in this instance is moral. And once you’ve, once you’ve broken through that ice, well, what’s the limiting principle? What you’re just gonna find some other so-called moral reason to justify the government stealing from Peter to give to Paul in the name of some invented social justice warrior agenda item here, right? But it’s, it’s not just that like, that’s obvious, the obvious part of the socialist aspect of this, but it’s, it’s deeper than that. It’s not just socialists, it’s Marxists too. Because what Marxists want to do is they want to destabilize the cultural institutions, the civil institutions that are the underpinning of our country. It’s not just that we as the American people tend to be a moral people or a Christian people, at least historically. It’s not that we value these institutions because we are just in the habit of supporting them.
It’s that our system of government, this limited government that we have where people rely not on the government, but on their communities and their churches and their families, our limited government could not exist except for the fact that people rely on their families and their churches and their communities. Because if I didn’t rely on my husband and my husband didn’t rely on me, and our child didn’t rely on us as her parents, and we didn’t rely on our parents and our siblings and our church and our community, well, then we would have to rely on something because we are all, we are all interdependent. Humankind is interdependent. We are not, we are not individualized. What would we rely on? Well, the Marxists want us to rely on government. That would be the obvious thing to rely on. So they wanna destabilize our civil and cultural institutions here.
They also want to de-legitimize our legal system, which is sort of a hybrid between a governmental institution and a cultural institution. But there are laws on the books that you might not agree with. You might not agree that you shouldn’t be able to drink a beer until you are 21. You might think, well, if you can die for your country at 18, you should be able to drink a Bud Light when you’re 18. And you’d have every right to, to believe that you’d have every right to think that that law isn’t a good law. But if you looked at that law and you said, even though the American people have a representative government, meaning if, if enough of the American people pressured their representatives in Congress to say, we don’t, this law is right, we don’t think this law is just, we want it changed, then that should happen If the majority of the American people put that pressure on, and if our members of Congress are not compromised by outside interest, which yes, is a compounding factor here.
But the point of this, and it’s oversimplification in a sense. But to illustrate my point here, if this law has the opportunity for recourse, meaning if we have a way of overturning it, if we don’t like it, and yet we have an, as a nation have chosen not to overturn it, then it’s not inherently de illegitimate just because one political faction doesn’t like it. It might be if it violates natural law, but a law, for example, the federal ban on marijuana, it’s still a criminal offense to smoke marijuana at the federal level. A lot of states have legalized cannabis, have legalized marijuana, but at the federal level, it’s still illegal to participate in, in, in marijuana, right? It’s not enforced because the states have legalized it, but it’s still on the books. It’s still technically on the books. And what the Democrats are doing is they’re delegitimizing that law because they don’t like it.
Now you can, you can be an activist against it. You can say, I don’t like it, I don’t think it’s fair. I don’t want this. I want it overturned. But to de-legitimize it, because it doesn’t have a violation of natural law like slavery did, is to de-legitimize our system of government is to de-legitimize the entire rule of law. It’s to de-legitimize our representative republic itself. And this is the purpose of the people that are pushing reparations. Their intent is to use reparations to push their Marxist agenda to de-legitimize our entire society. They do this through the cultural institutions, and they do this through the governmental institutions. And you can see this is not, this is not speculation on my part, this is not conjecture, this is not inference. You can tell that this is not, that reparations are not in the interest of black people.
That Democrats pushing reparations are not doing this with prosperity for black people in mind because of how Democrats have behaved politically for the past 50 years. So the people to blame for the problems in the black community in our country are Democrats. It was Democrats who were the proponents of slavery. It was Democrats who were the proponents of Jim Crow laws. It was Democrats who were opposed to civil rights. It’s been Democrats who have completely obliterated the black family. It’s been Democrats who pushed the sexual revolution, promiscuity, sexual promiscuity, the birth control and abortion movement. It’s been Democrats who to this day commit a genocide against black babies in the womb. It’s been Democrats who encourage or who don’t discourage, which is encouraging black fathers to be absent. It’s been Democrats and liberals in Hollywood who have glorified gang life and violence and drugs.
It’s been Democrats who haven’t done, what’s the obvious step to take If you want to solve problems with income inequality, which is education levels. Democrats at every turn have promoted political policies which have actively harmed the black communities in our nation, period. It has not been Republicans, it has been Democrats as over the Democrats now to say, listen, we’re the party. That is the party fighting for black people. We are the solution to this. We wanna make this right, should cause everyone’s res flag, red flag to be like, well, hold on there. Wait a second. Are you sure about that? Because if you actually cared about the black community and you didn’t have an ulterior motive here, if you weren’t using black people as paws to achieve your socialist Marxist and communist political agenda, then why have you used your political power to harm Democrats for the past 50 years?
So what Democrats are doing is they’re gaslighting, they’re gaslighting us. They’re, they’re actually taking advantage and punishing voters by taking away voters and taxpayers, I should say, for things that the Democrats have done wrong. So even though the Democrats are the ones that have harmed black people, their Democrats are stealing from taxpayers to give to black people. And the Democrats are getting off SCO free. In fact, if this goes through, the Democrats win at every turn. Their political agenda is advanced. They’ve grabbed authoritarian power, they’ve redistributed wealth, they’ve rewritten history, they’ve pointed the finger at someone else, shifted the blame away from what they have done to harm black people and black communities all across the country. They win, win, win. And you know who loses? We lose. Taxpayers lose, the American people loses and the black community loses.
So why, if Democrats don’t care about black people, I mean, this is the obvious conclusion. If they don’t actually care about the wellbeing of black people and their actions show that they don’t, then why are they doing this? Well, they’re doing it because it helps them push their political agenda and they’re doing it because they’re counting on you and they’re counting on me not to fight back against this, not to push back against this because it’s a racial topic. It’s an uncomfortable topic. It’s a topic that has the sin of slavery, the stain of slavery at the forefront, even though slavery was never legal in San Francisco, and there’s no requirement that you prove that you were the descendant of a slave in America.
None of that. If you identify as black and you have been incarcerated for being a drug dealer in the war on drugs, well five, here you go. Let’s reward you for that because why? Because it destabilizes American society. That’s why there’s no mathematical formula. Of course, there’s no mathematical formula that brought this reparations committee to 5 million. It’s a journey, a journey that brought them there. And that journey’s end is called a Marxist utopia.
The whole thing in a sense, if it weren’t so, if it weren’t such a dark strategy, it’s almost funny to, the Democrats are so emboldened, they think that they can blatantly push this on people that they can just be like, I feel like everyone should gimme $5 million. And people are like, okay, we should. Let’s do it. Like what? What have we come to in this country? What have we come to that someone could even float an idea like this and that even one person would take them seriously. Unreal, unreal. And by the way, what is the limiting principle on this, right? Because there have been a lot of wrongs that our government has perpetuated against a lot of different demographics of people. It’s not just black people, Japanese people, Japanese American citizens were sent to internment camps during World War ii. Women were deprived the right to vote, the right to drive cars, the right to open bank accounts of their own. For the first half of the united, the existence of our country.
Gay people are famous for claiming that they have been discriminated against and and faced oppression in the United States. So where does this end? Do we have a constant, a constant revolving door of reparations to every person who claims that they’ve been harmed by the federal government or who had ancestors who were harmed by the federal government or who didn’t have ancestors, who were harmed by the federal government, who weren’t harmed by the federal government themselves, but who share an immutable characteristic with someone who was once harmed by the American federal government? The answer to that is, yes, there would be a revolving door because if this strategy works, the Democrats will recycle it. They will use it again.
Of course they will. They want to because what does it give them? It gives them the power to redistribute wealth, to steal from Peter, to give DePaul in the name of quote unquote justice in the name of quote unquote morality, which aren’t really real justice or real morality, but they think people won’t notice because they’ll be too afraid to engage in the conversations and it will ultimately allow them to rewrite history, redefine words, and take that authoritarian power away from us.
Okay, so the best political ad that Republicans should splash all over televisions across the United States is, was created by an organization called Citizens for Sanity. And the contrast, this is exactly how Republican marketing should be done. Take a look at this.
Have you ever boarded a plane in thought to yourself, I hope the pilot is a transgender refugee. Have you ever gone to the emergency room and said, I hope my medical team is incredibly diverse? Have you ever moved to a new city and said, I hope the police department hit its equity goals for the year? If your answer to these questions was no, if you just wanted the most qualified candidates for the job, then you are normal. But we have a lot of very not normal people running America these days. Left wing politicians believe skin color or gender identity should determine who gets the job. Democrats used to care about the middle class, now they just care about your race and your gender. And as long as Democrats stay in power, it will just keep getting worse. Stop the bigotry, stop the insanity paid for by citizens for sanity.
Is that the best? This is how political marketing should be. This is how Republican political marketing should be. None of that old school. Let me talk about my vision for America. No, no, I mean all that. I agree with that, just like you agree with that, I’m sure. But that’s not an effective way to campaign. That’s not an effective way to recruit voters. This is an effective way to recruit voters. Kudos to citizens for sanity. I hope they splash this everywhere in the upcoming presidential election cycle because this is a way to change minds. Nobody on the Left or the right except the fairy fringes of the radical left support that kind of vocalism. They don’t want it.
They don’t want their kids indoctrinated with it. They don’t wanna be touched by it. They don’t want their workplaces saturated in it. They hate it. They know it’s wrong. They know it’s evil. They know it’s bigotry. Re Democrats stand for it. Republicans stand against it. That’s all you need to do. And then the ad that you should play simultaneously, the ad the Republican party should play simultaneously is this video of Ukrainian president Zelensky. By the way, before we play this, I should warn you it’s a little tiny, tiny bit graphic, but you know, it needs to be watched. Here you go,
I’m actually not even sorry for playing that. I’m not even sorry that you’re scarred by that because that my friends, is Zelensky dancing naked with a bunch of men who appeared to be dressed in some sort of bondage gear. Well, not dressed, they’re not dressed or naked, be decked in some sort of bondage gear dancing sexually together is so disturbing, so disgusting, disgusting, so nauseating. This is what the Democrats have done to our country. This is who the Democrats give money to instead of spending money here in the United States to help our families to grow our prosperity, these two videos, I feel like are the most powerful videos to the most powerful advertisements Republicans can take advantage of in this upcoming presidential election cycle. I saw this video earlier, full disclosure, and I spent probably half an hour trying to figure out where to fit it in the show because I so desperately wanted to show it to you.
So decided to stick it here at the end, whether or not it fits, you can be the one to decide, but there you go. That’s the funniest thing that I’ve seen all day. What I want to do today though, is I wanna give you an idea of something that we do on a daily basis on the Liz Wheeler Show Community on Locals. This is a special feature of benefit for VIP subscribers, supporters at the Liz Wheeler Show community. It’s a great community. There’s tens of thousands of us who get together over there every day, and you get a, you get a ton of cool stuff, including additional segments of the show. So what I wanna do right now is share with you one of these additional extended segments that usually are reserved just for Liz Wheeler, show Community VIPs.
But if you like what you see, please join us over there. Go to liz wheeler show.com/locals and sign up. But this is, this is, this is an example of what you’ll find if you join us. Okay, just for Liz Wheeler, show Community VIPs right here on locals, the CDC has published a very interesting report, which is interesting in and of itself, but it’s also interesting because the narrative that is accompanying this new survey, this new report, is inherently political. So first I wanna share the data that the study presents, and then I wanna talk about why the narrative that’s accompanying this study is inaccurate and what the real explanation for the numbers in this study represent. So the study itself, not to be vague here, is about LGBQ plus high school students versus heterosexual high school students. You’ll notice that this acronym, the L plus is conspicuously missing the T.
So this study was not intended to include transgender students. This was supposed to be about sexual orientation, not gender identity, but just put a pin on that because I’m gonna circle back to that point in just a minute. It’s not actually excluding transgender students and it’s not actually excluding gender identity. It’s just appearing to do so. So I wanna read a couple of the statistics that were found in this survey. So it’s about mental health and about depression, sadness, hopelessness. And it found that among heterosexual students, 22% reported having a mental health problem just in the past month. This compare 22% of heterosexuals, so straight students, the number of LGBQ plus students who reported having a mental health issue in the last month is 52%. So almost triple between double and triple. The number of gay students are having mental health issues compared to street students. That’s pretty significant.
and I’m reading here from Breitbart who summarized the CDC study. Breitbart says, when asked if they experienced persistent feelings of sadness or hopelessness across the previously year, 35% of heterosexual students answered in the affirmative in contrast to 69% of L plus students. So twice as many gay students said that they had feelings of sadness or hopelessness. The percentage of heterosexual students stating that they had seriously considered attempting suicide during the previous year was 15%. Still, by the way, a shocking and whopping number with 45% of l plus students reporting the same. Nearly half of gay students said that they had seriously considered suicide. Breitbart says, more acutely, 12% of heterosexual high schoolers said that they had made a suicide plan during the past years, while 37% of their LGBQ plus counterparts said the same 6% of heterosexual students claim to have actually attempted suicide during the past 12 months against 22% of LGBQ plus students.
This is pretty serious. These are, these are bad numbers. Even taking the contrast between heterosexual students and l plus students. These are horrendous numbers. Clearly, our nation is failing. Our youth families have failed their children, our communities have failed, their children’s schools have failed our children. This is like nothing we’ve ever seen before in our country to see these rates of sadness, hopelessness, depression, suicidality, and suicide attempts. This is a crisis of epic proportions. That’s not going to go away. These teenagers aren’t going to grow out of this. This is, they’re just going to grow into an adult generation who are suffering serious mental health crises. If we don’t identify the root cause of what’s at play here, what’s, what’s causing this? What is prompting this and what is leading these children into feeling so hopeless that they feel that their only way out is to actually take their own life, to end their life?
This is where we get to the narrative. So the LGBQ plus conspicuously missing the for transgender is meant to make this about straight versus gay and not about gender identity, but by including q and plus, most children who suffer from gender disorders and Identify as transgender, identify with a gender identity call themselves queer. So it’s going this survey is going to include children who have bought into or fallen prey to the gender identity ideology. They’re just going to identify themselves as Q in this LGBQ, you don’t hear a lot of children who have fallen prey to queer theory, fallen prey to the transgender identity, who identify as a gender versus just being the gender that they were, the being the sex they were born to be. You don’t hear a lot of them saying, I’m straight. You hear them call themselves queer.
So they’re in this, they’re in this study, they’re in this survey. The C d C just doesn’t want you and I to sit here and be like, well, that’s because of the transgender ideology in schools leading children down. The path of delusion leads to this serious mental health issues. So they pretend to remove gender identity and transgenderism, but they really don’t. It’s really just hidden in that queue in LGBQ. So the narrative around this survey that the Left is propagating is that this unhappiness, the sadness, the hopelessness, the depression, the suicidality, the suicide attempts is because of a lack of tolerance in our country. A lack of equality, a lack of inclusion, bullying, transphobia, homophobia. This is what the Left tells us is the cause of children’s children who have a q plus identity or sexual orientation. This is what they tell us is the cause of this.
But this is not true. This is not true because we would actually see the opposite on, on, on a graph. If we’re looking at the trends of suicidality in gay people, for example, we would see a significant drop in depression and suicide attempts or consideration of taking one’s own life if that were the case. Because our culture has become more and more accepting of LGBQ people. So accepting in fact that our culture is virtually saturated with this. Both, like all of it from gender identity, sexual orientation, it’s saturated with this. And so you would think that that would lead to, okay, well I have a quality under the law. I’m accepted by a lot of people, the people that disagree with me, they have a right to disagree with me, but it doesn’t impact my opportunities in life. It doesn’t impact my ability to live my life.
It doesn’t impact the way that I dress or the way that I speak or who I choose to be in a romantic relationship with who I choose to live with, who I choose to commit my life with. So what is there to be depressed about? What is there to, to harm myself over? Since we see this opposite, this exponential growth in the su the depression, sadness, hopelessness, and suicidality of children who identify as l plus. Well, what’s the cause the root of this? What is prompting this increase? The answer to that is actually very simple. The answer to that is because as a culture, this saturation of culture that I mentioned, this saturation of culture is indulging the delusion of the q the queer students, the transgender students with gender ideology, telling them that a gender disorder is real. That you are what you feel, you not, you aren’t what you actually are.
This indulging of delusion leads to leads to a detachment, a disassociation with reality, which always causes hopelessness and sadness and depression because you aren’t anchored to well, objective truth, you aren’t anchored to reality. But it also pushes children along the gender affirming pathway, which is puberty blockers and process hormones, and then gender mutilation surgery, which is rife with regret and doesn’t solve the underlying gender disorder or any of the comorbidities, the mental health comorbidities that these young people suffer from. So that’s the root cause. At the same time, we have also as a culture, tried to remove morality from sex and reduce the morality of sex to simply consent. We’ve said there’s no proper context for se for context for sex. You don’t have to be married, doesn’t have to be between a man and a woman. It the only, the only way, the only morality inherent to sex, this is what culture is teaching children, is if the other person gives you their consent.
You can proposition anyone. You can have a hookup. You can have as many sexual partners as you want. Love and commitment has nothing to do with this marriage, has nothing to do with this as long as there’s consent. Now of course, this also, this is the more unpopular thing to say, but this also is a rejection of objective truth. You can pretend there’s no morality to sex. You can pretend that hookups are fine, as long as long as people are consenting. You can pretend that there’s no regret. You can pretend that it’s not harmful, especially to women, but to men too. You can pretend it’s not harmful to marriage, but it is, it still is. So our culture has led children, both children suffering from gender disorders into the path of delusion and bodily mutilation. And it’s also led children, even straight children.
But specifically this is prevalent I think in the gay culture led children into thinking promiscuity is the way to empowerment. Instead of telling children, actually there’s a proper moral order to sex. And if you, if you participate in sex in this proper moral order, then it’s fulfilling. It’s great, it’s holy, it’s fun. But if you abuse it, if you misuse it, then it leads to mental health issues. So this is what our culture has propagated for the past decades. Now since the sexual revolution. It’s a wonder that it has led to a skyrocketing mental health crisis. children’s sexual attraction is not to blame. There’s not inherent depression that comes with sexual attraction. What’s to blame? Is our culture leading children astray? Alright, guys, go over to Liz Wheeler show.com/logos and join us. We do this kind of stuff, this extended segment on a daily basis over there, and we would love for you to join us.
Thank you for watching today. Thank you for listening. I’m Liz Wheeler. This is the Liz Wheeler Show.