Politics For Happy People
A podcast about politics for happy people!
Politics For Happy People
When Convictions Collide With Culture
Use Left/Right to seek, Home/End to jump to start or end. Hold shift to jump forward or backward.
The culture keeps asking people to ignore uncomfortable truths—but what happens when someone refuses? Joseph and Ashley discuss the growing number of female athletes speaking out against men competing in women’s sports and the backlash that can follow. They also unpack a troubling surrogacy case in Florida that raises serious questions about the commercialization of children and whether adult desires are being prioritized over children’s well-being. Finally, the conversation turns to a North Carolina wedding venue facing criticism for declining to host a same-sex wedding, including a firsthand account from a Christian venue owner who faced a similar controversy. Through it all, Joseph and Ashley examine what it means to stand by your convictions when doing so comes with a cost.
Welcome to Politics for Happy People. I'm Joseph. She's Ashley. We're so glad that you are with us. We have conversations about serious things, but uh try to keep our eyes on the prize. That, of course, is eternity, which is why we keep our joy around here today. What we're gonna cover is an update on the war over women's sports. Why in the world can't the men play? We'll talk about it. And we also have an update on a surrogacy contract gone wrong. Surrogacy contracts, uh problematic all the way around. We'll talk about why. Also, a North Carolina wedding venue has declined to host a same-sex wedding. It's an old kind of familiar story, is this religious freedom or discrimination? We should all be horrified by. We'll tell you about it. But actually, our first story today is an update on the latest war over women's sports. I think last week we talked about Sophie Can Sophie Cunningham. Did we cover that? And her do we know who Sophie Cunningham is? Yeah. To catch us up. I don't think we have covered this. Okay. Well, Sophie Cunningham plays in the WNBA. And um, I know this is maybe mean to say, but most people don't watch the WNBA. Do we know this? Do you watch the MBW NBA?
SPEAKER_04No, Joseph. Have you ever?
SPEAKER_02Well, I mean, you're the woman, right? So I it would be sexist of me to assume.
SPEAKER_04I don't discriminate between men's and men and women's sports. I just don't watch any of those.
SPEAKER_02You are a universal discriminator against all gendered sports. Sure. Okay, so Sophie Cunningham is a uh is a basketball player, a professional basketball player in the WNBA. And she recently made headlines by saying men should not play in the WNBA. And of course, this was outrageous because saying out true things is outrageous. They had a game in Seattle, my hometown, and there is a WNBA team up there. And some 16, 17-year-old girls, high school girls showed up at this game, sat courtside with these signs, basically saying, Thank you, Sophie, for standing up for women's sports. One of the owners of the W of the Seattle Storm, which is the women's team in Seattle, so the home team in that game, basically berated these girls sitting courtside, insulting them, calling them all sorts of names, for basically being there to publicly support Sophie. Why do adults do stuff like that?
SPEAKER_04Uh something's something's awry in their mind. I mean, I have you ever yelled at a kid?
SPEAKER_02I mean, kids, right? I mean, you have kids, we've heard kids say things that we don't know. Have you ever like gotten into it with a child because of their like political beliefs?
SPEAKER_04Definitely not. That's not appropriate. I mean, they're it's not appropriate to get into it with a child over anything. I mean, you're I mean, adults are kind of intrinsically in authority positions over.
SPEAKER_02Initiating the conflict.
SPEAKER_04Yeah, over younger people, you know, and yeah, that's not not only was the message wrong, but the way in which this was gone about was wrong.
SPEAKER_02So that happened, and there there is, you know, the this larger there's just something about the left's ability, and again, the left. I use that term, you know, painting with a broad brush. Not everybody who is is politically on the left initiates conflict with children because of their beliefs, but it seems to be not that uncommon. And I do I think there's this sentiment that confrontation with people you disagree with is basically a way to put down the revolution, therefore it's virtuous. So when people express ideas that you disagree with that you think are part of the patriarchy and the capitalist system and you know, Western oppression, all of those things, that you are somehow doing something virtuous.
SPEAKER_04Well, they do. That's very clear that this was he uh this owner believes that.
SPEAKER_02This is a woman, by the way, the owner. This is this is a woman who did this to high school girls, yes.
SPEAKER_04Okay, I missed that part. Sorry, thank you. It's okay. So this this owner clearly felt that she um is is in the in the right, that she knows she knows what's right and wrong. They don't. She's gonna instruct them. This is also probably in to some degree her kind of virtue signal signaling to others, right? Maybe. I mean, letting others know, not on my watch, you know, not on my watch. Are you gonna be hateful, you know, to boys that want to play in girls' sports? Do you I mean that's what it feels like to me.
SPEAKER_02Because there's a moment here, right? We're all adults, we've been around for a while, and we've all experienced other people who have beliefs. And and we've all been like, you know, in a city, we're just like in a place, and somebody is holding a sign that says something we don't like, or they're like marching for a cause that we don't like, we're there coincidentally, we didn't intend to be part of this or encounter them, but we are encountering them. Like, and most of us just move on by, right? We're we're at a we're at a sporting event, a public place, or at a mall, somebody has a shirt, you know, for a candidate we don't like, for a cause we don't like. I mean, we and we just move on, right? That's what most of us do. What is happening in that situation where we see children expressing a position that we don't like? They're not our kids. We didn't come there with them. We don't know who they are. What's happening in somebody's mind, in the mind of an adult? And if you're a co-owner of a mate of a professional sports team, I assume that you've had like some level of success in life. Right. What provokes them, do you think, to then say, this is unacceptable. This is so important that I have to go. I already said it.
SPEAKER_04It's a not on my watch kind of a thing. This is my team, these are my values. I will not allow this because I think, you know, she believes that she is right and they are wrong.
SPEAKER_02So it's not a lack of self-control. It's not somebody who loses their temperature, temper. It's somebody who's consciously like, this is so wrong, it needs to be confronted. Or is it just, I'm so angry, I am compelled. And maybe if I was less emotional, I would understand that this is bad judgment, but right now I don't care because I'm so mad at you. Is that what's going on? Or is this conscious?
SPEAKER_04Like, I would I would speculate that it's conscious, but we are speculating. We don't know. Like, yeah, no, we don't know, but but this is a real thing. When they do something like that.
SPEAKER_02I'm inclined to think it's a lack of self-control that they they just get so angry. And and I think in this in this particular case, like that idea, I don't know anything about this owner, but I'm I'm gonna assume she's just generally in on the you know, the LGBT thing. And I think there's this movement when lies are confronted with the truth, they feel convicted and something inside of them just rages. That's what I think happens in so many of these cases, which is why she doesn't know those girls. But I think they cannot abide because there's on some level, they would never describe it as conviction, but on some level it's conviction. There's the standard of truth that I feel convicted by.
SPEAKER_04So you're saying she got triggered.
SPEAKER_02100% triggered. Yes. Yeah. 100% triggered.
SPEAKER_04Which is the whole thing behind safe spaces and you can't say things that I don't like in my presence and stuff like that.
SPEAKER_02The good news in is in all of this, Sophie Cunningham is not the only one. Um, she wasn't, of course, the only one. It seems to be coming more popular. Arina Sabolenka, do you watch tennis? Do you watch the tennis?
SPEAKER_04Oh, I do like tennis.
SPEAKER_02You do watch the tennis, you don't watch the basketball, but the tennis. She is the currently the number one rated women's tennis player in the world. Uh, she's from Belarus, so she is Belarusian, and they do not probably have the same like Seattle sensibilities in Belarus, I'm guessing. And she was asked about this, and she basically, quite confidently and without any kind of timidity, basically said, as a matter of fairness, men should not be playing tennis with women. And again, saying true things, but it makes a headline because she's the number one rated women's uh tennis player in the world following the selfie Sophie Cunningham. There's you know, there's growing uh degree of comfortableness, it seems to me.
SPEAKER_04Well, I'm I mean, I'm proud of those girls. I'm proud of these these women athletes for standing up for themselves. Certainly several years ago, what Riley Gaines did and and some others who were sort of on the on the front end of this, uh coming and speaking out about men and women's sports, uh, they have received so much blowback. I mean, they, you know, I think of Brooks Lusser, um, who's who's spoken with us about her experience on her college volleyball team, uh, living with a man unbeknownst to her at first, and and playing with um a lot. She did not know that her teammate and roommate was actually a man at first. And and she has since then uh stood up for herself and and spoken out about uh how hard that experience was and how she felt deceived by the authority figures in her life and all of that. But it was a really hard experience for her in her school, in the media. Um similarly, Riley Gaines has has had a really hard uh she's just had faced a lot of criticism and opposition. Of course, she's also had a lot of support, but it's hard to do that as a young woman. It's these, it's the same thing as the private spaces issues. We're we're in a place now where girls are having to stand up for themselves and and get the blowback for doing so. Um, and and so, anyways, I'm I'm very proud of these women for standing up for themselves because it's not an easy thing to do.
SPEAKER_02It's not universal, of course. And because of what Sophie said, her coach, Indiana Fever Coach, um, her name is not even being published where I'm reading this at the moment. So I'm sure it's Googla Bull, the coach of the Indiana Fever. But basically, when asked whether men should be allowed to play in the WNBA, because that's the context in which Sophie Cunningham was coming at this, she said that, quote, I wouldn't really say that I'm educated enough from a scientific standpoint. I don't ever believe that exclusion is the answer, end quote. So um the first question.
SPEAKER_04I love these non-answer answers, as if you can get away with not answering that kind of a question.
SPEAKER_02Is it a scientific question about whether men should be able to compete with women? And I think the answer is obviously no.
SPEAKER_04Well, some people are trying to convince her that it is.
SPEAKER_02Yes, but the her her second part of this, I don't believe that exclusion is ever the answer, was her statement, which is kind of a virtue signal. But this woman cuts players from her basketball team every single year, because that's the nature of competitive sports. It's a meritocracy. The good survive, the the less good don't survive, and they get eliminated from the team. So she does believe that exclusion is occasionally the answer. She just is not willing. She does not, at this point, have the courage to say men should not be able to compete with women. And on the heels of that uh statement by this WNBA coach, uh Clay Travis is the host of the Clay and Buck Show, which was the um they took over for Rush Linbaugh on his network when he died. And Clay Travis has recently offered to have a WNBA expansion team in Nashville. He wants to refer to them as the Nashville Balls, and he wants the entire team to be made of trans-identifying men claiming to be women. And he Are you gonna try out? Uh you know, I don't even know that I don't think honestly, I think that would be a very good team. I I I I think you uh I and actually, didn't Daily Signal just do a movie basically about that, about uh uh an all-male personality. I remember seeing that. I remember seeing that. Oh, the Daily Wire made it. Okay, thank you, Turner. In my ear correcting me for that. But that movie was made, right? But he he has also Clay Travis has also made an offer for the uh it's the Las Vegas Aces, I believe, is the reigning WNBA champion. And he has offered $10 million if they can beat the high school boys state champion of his choosing in a matchup, if they will play that game. How do you think that would go?
SPEAKER_04It's so funny because we were actually just having this debate in my family the other day. Yeah. Um my son was asking his dad if the best if a W if a WNBA team could beat um any college team. And like college men. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Like the best WMBA team, can they beat any of the college men's teams? Um, like even the worst ones.
SPEAKER_02And what did he say?
SPEAKER_04My husband was like, no, they would get absolutely destroyed. Like, no.
SPEAKER_02It's also true of the high school teams.
SPEAKER_04Yeah. The high school, that actually does surprise me. That you you that the W a WNBA team can't beat a high school.
SPEAKER_02Well, the high school state champion of his choosing.
SPEAKER_04So what he's laid out is still though, that that one's kind of I mean You think they could.
SPEAKER_02You think they could beat.
SPEAKER_04I would love to see the game. To be that is one that is one game I would watch.
SPEAKER_02You would watch that game.
SPEAKER_04No, I don't do sports betting, Joseph. Did you say I would bet money on it?
SPEAKER_02Well, no, no, no. I didn't say you would bet.
SPEAKER_04Oh, I thought you had to if I would bet on it.
SPEAKER_02No, you that that game to me, I mean, if you most high school boys' teams would beat any WNBA team.
SPEAKER_04Uh if they're like, you know, there are like I don't disagree with small teams, but that one's more of a head scratcher to me than the college teams.
SPEAKER_02If it if they are a state champion at a like big school level, anywhere in America. Okay, yeah, I see that. They could almost shut out the girls' teams. I mean, the the the the women's teams, if the if the if the high if the boys were trying, if they were really exerting real effort, like defensively, the explosiveness, speed, agility Delta is so big athletically that they would they would struggle to get the ball near the basket. Um you could almost throw a shutout. So and I think on some level they know this. I don't know if you remember a handful of years ago, um the US women's soccer team played a 15U boys' soccer team in Dallas and lost five to two. Right? So that is a um we remember this story. It was an elite soccer team for 15-year-olds playing the women's Olympic team and 5-2 in soccer is pretty much a blowout, right? Yeah, so again, three daughters who have all played sports, my wife played sports, we love women's sports, but the athletic difference is is so dramatic that the inability of the WNBA coach to say, of course, men should not be playing with women, that really goes to kind of the you know the social conditioning and the brainwashing to me.
SPEAKER_04Well, of course we love women's sports, that's why we want to keep them women's sports.
SPEAKER_02Correct. No, that that's exactly the whole point. So that's the latest. Um, more people, it seems, are being will are willing to say true things, but certainly not everyone. Uh, next story surrogacy contracts gone wrong. Ashley, tell us about it.
SPEAKER_04So this is a recent story coming out of Florida. Kyla Simpson was a gestational surrogate. Uh, and this is in St. Augustine, Florida, and she has now started to fight for custody of the two surviving boys that she carried after the intended parent, who is the um genetic father of uh the three babies, one of whom passed away. Uh, he did not claim the babies for nearly 20 months. So um this story is kind of amazing and it touches on a lot of the issues that we have with the surrogacy industry um and the commercialization of birth.
SPEAKER_02Let's make sure people know what a surrogacy contract is, right? Because uh a surrogacy contract, I mean, a surrogate is someone who carries a child for somebody else, and there's altruistic surrogacy where some women are unable to carry a child and they're like go to their sister, and their sister will carry a child for them so that they can have a baby, even though that they they are for whatever reason not capable of of doing that. And that's kind of an altruistic situation.
SPEAKER_04It's like I like no money is exchanged for the children. No money is exchanged.
SPEAKER_02Yeah, commercial surrogacy is the situation that you're describing here where you basically drop a contract and someone rents the womb of a woman and says, You're gonna carry this child. It may or may not be biologically connected to you, but you are gonna again give that child to me under the terms of this contract. And so, in general terms, that's what a surrogacy contract is. The facts of this case begin to illustrate why that's a problem.
SPEAKER_04Why that's a problem. Yeah. So let's get more into the facts. So, okay, Simpson gave birth to triplets who were uh genetically uh children of the intended parent who was a single man living in China, a Chinese citizen.
SPEAKER_02Yeah, and let's just start there, right? The fact that he's a single man, he just has a bunch of money. Like everybody knows the the goal here is to make sure we have ch children without a mother, which is kind of your first human rights violation against these children. Children have a right to their mother, even like places like the UN have have acknowledged that. But this surrogacy contract intends for these children that result not to have mom.
SPEAKER_04That's right. It was a donor egg that was uh used to conceive these babies. One of the babies later passed away. Um, part of the story is that this surrogate gave birth unexpectedly, prematurely, and that resulted in the babies being in the neonatal intensive care unit for some time.
SPEAKER_02Because there were three of them, and that's not unusual with triplets.
SPEAKER_04That's right. Part of the deal was he wanted her, he wanted two babies, and so part of the contract was that she would carry twins. One of the eggs unexpectedly divided, resulting in triplets.
SPEAKER_02Okay. So um I mean I mean, but one of them died. So that's not under suspicious causes, but it begs the question what's gonna happen to the surplus child? He only contracted for two, now there's three. What do we do with the extra, right? That's just, I mean, in this case they didn't have to deal with it because one of them died, but it's a question we should never have to answer.
SPEAKER_04That's true. I didn't think about that. So so the so the babies were in the NICU for weeks, and during that time the surrogate, Simpson, uh, was traveling back and forth to the hospital to be with them, to care for them. Uh, she was breastfeeding the babies, and all the while she was communicated with the intended father who was not present in the country at the time of the birth, and he was telling Simpson that he was applying for a visa, he was working on coming to the United States to collect the babies. Um, and and could she continue to care for them and look after them in his absence? Now, fast forward, the babies are discharged from the hospital, they're healthy enough to go home. All three babies were discharged from the hospital, and she ended up, he he does it, the intended parent designated her as the the caregiver for these children. So then they went home with her. Okay. And so she then cared for them. She was the prime, she and her husband were the primary caregivers for these babies for some time after that. 20 months, right? They up until 20 months. Uh so the intended father, he he lives in China. He's still in China. The babies have been around for 20 months. He has reportedly paid over $300,000 for this whole arrangement. And that there are lots of intermediaries in this situation. There's a fertility clinic, there's the the uh surrogacy agency that matched him with her. Uh, there are attorneys. Um, so he's put out a large sum of money at this point. Um, but he's never arrived. He has never come to the United States to to pick up the children. And they're so okay, so fast forward. This has become a dispute between the surrogate and the intended parent. She in May of 2026 began legal steps to terminate the intended father's parental rights so that she could formally adopt the boys that she has been raising up until they're almost two years old. He says that she, he is uh alleging that she always planned to keep the babies and that she uh is, you know, is this some evil, nefarious plot by her? He says he sent his, he did send an agent, quote, an agent to collect the babies on his behalf since for some reason he wasn't able to come. No one, no one knows why he actually hasn't come. And uh the uh Kaylee Simpson or Kyla Simpson said, No, I'm not gonna send these babies who now she's gonna be able to do it. With some rando that you just sent to me. Yeah, yeah, yeah. So um I I honestly I just want to pause right here and I want to play this clip because a local news station covered this story, and Kyla is in the clip a little bit talking about how she's cared for these babies. Can we play that?
SPEAKER_03Basically stated that I have physical custody of them and that I'm able to make um, you know, decisions on behalf of them, you know, in lieu of his absence.
SPEAKER_00Simpson gave birth about a month before her due date on November 4th, 2024. She tells me the boys stayed in the NICU for about two months while they grew stronger. She says the intended parent told her he was in the process of getting a visa to visit the U.S. and pick up his children. According to their gestational surrogacy hospital plan, Simpson was given physical custody until he arrived at the hospital. But he never arrived before the babies were allowed to go home.
SPEAKER_03Every day I came to the hospital. And if it was a day where I'm just super exhausted and I couldn't make it, I'm up there calling, I'm calling all throughout the day.
SPEAKER_04So that reviewed a little bit of the information that we've been talking about. But the I wanted, I wanted you all to see or hear, whether whether you're watching this or or listening to this, uh, from this woman, because for me, seeing her really humanized the whole story um in a in a in a way that uh resonated even deeper for me. Here's a woman who carried these babies. And I'm a mom and I know what that's like to carry a child. Um obviously it's one of the most uh intimate and personal things that you can do. And and so she's carried these babies and then she has visited them in the NICU day after day. I I worked in a NICU and I'll tell you one thing, after you've given birth to make that trek into a hospital day after day to visit your babies, it really is exhausting. Like it really is hard for women. You don't do that for for children that you don't care about. And and then and she's breastfeeding them and she's and she's cared for them up until they're almost two. I mean, for her, in her mind and her heart, they live with her, right? These are yeah, yeah, these are her babies. Like she, I mean, she had two years is plenty of time to bond with a baby. Oh my goodness gracious.
SPEAKER_02Everybody who's a parent, I mean, it two days is enough time to bond with a baby. That that they've been at your house for two years almost, and you've you've done everything that that a mother does for a child, and then because of the circumstances, some you know, some random representative is gonna come take them away. That that's like 1984 dystopia horror stories.
SPEAKER_04I completely understand why she uh didn't want to hand the babies over to someone who uh uh uh has no connection to them, who she did not uh know. Um so we need to fast forward. So this intended and and kind of complete the story. The intended father uh responded to her uh uh Simpson's attempt to she to basically adopt the boys. She began the legal steps to terminate the intended father's parental rights since he never came so that she could formally adopt them. And then he responded through a U.S. attorney with an emergency motion seeking uh custody and a removal of the children from her home in June of 2026. Um, a St. John's County judge ordered the boys transferred. Simpson had to hand the babies over to the father's lawyer at the sheriff's office, and they were placed in temporary foster care. Their location is unknown. So at this time, these babies have been removed from her home, and evidently it was a very tearful, well, yeah, traumatic um moment when she had to surrender her babies.
SPEAKER_02And that is a situation, you know, and we're you know, the context here, of course, is is surrogacy contracts. And that is a situation that should never happen, where babies are removed from the only people who have ever known them and loved them in their ha in their lives to be placed with an attorney who will put them in some kind of foster care system because the law says this is a contract matter. Somebody paid for those babies, therefore they get those babies. The you know the the there's competing legal interests. The reality is these I think these boys are biologically related to this man in China. That's relevant. All of them are.
SPEAKER_04Well, I just said she had to surrender her babies, surrender her babies, and it's like for all intents and purposes. Are they her babies? In one way, yes, and one way no.
SPEAKER_02But that's the question that should never be asked. And in in the premise here is we just need to understand how problematic this entire landscape of surrogacy contracts is, where the only thing you need to have is money so that you can rent wombs, and two years later, you can enforce the contract to get the child, even though the only adults that have ever c cared for or loved these children uh will be removed from their lives. And and these are the the rights of children and people should never be determined based under contract law, which is what this judge is doing here. Well, he paid for them, they belong to you. People are not possessions, kids are not commodities, we should not be thinking about this this way. But this is the brave new world where you know it's like, oh, because technology exists to do it and people have enough money and it's going to make them happy to have these babies. Of course, they should we should build the legal framework so that they can purchase babies this way. It's it is totally against nature and the way God intended children to become come into this world. And this is just one of the myriad ways, and and this is a sad story, but there are so many like it. In some cases, intended parents, we discover later, the the mom discovers, oh, they're actually pedophiles. Didn't know that before, now I know it, but guess what? They paid for it, and the law says the children go to live with the pedophiles. Those kind of situations are actually.
SPEAKER_04Well, even if you agree with the premise of we can create a contract and it's morally acceptable to create a surrogacy contract, even if you agree with that premise, as a practical matter, no contract can come up with some kind of a contingency for every situation that arises. And these are our complex human situations uh that, you know, where people get into disputes and things change and unforeseen things happen. Um it is problematic. And, you know, the I mean, as parts of these contracts though, they they sometimes can include uh what's uh misnamed uh euphemistically as a selective reduction, uh which means compelling an abortion. Like it's a you know, it's not the right gender, or or there are issues that that we've agreed ahead of time that as the surrogate you would uh have an abortion.
SPEAKER_02You will have an abortion as soon as we tell you to have an abortion. That's part of the terms of these. And I I've seen a recent case where the the baby was found to have a cleft palate, and so the intended parents have s have ordered the surrogate to abort the baby. And that is wild.
SPEAKER_04Yeah. Well, that's a cleft palate is like a minor. I mean, even if our majority is a very good idea. But that is it's a product.
SPEAKER_02That's the children are a product that are being purchased by the wealthy adults, and if there's a defect in the product, of course you return the product. That's and and and of course, we're thinking about it in entirely the wrong way, which is the point. We have to think about it differently. Children are not an accessory that wealthy parents can purchase when they want. Children always have mom and dad, and the law should always recognize um their right to their mother and father. And if that situation cannot produce the children, well, the adults get to suck it up because their emotional needs are not the purpose of children. Children do not exist to serve the emotional needs of adults. I'm glad you want children. Get married, have children. If you can't biologically have them, there's adopted there's kids that need to be adopted. Do that. Otherwise, it's just, you know, I can be sad for you, but you do not have a right to have children at the expense of the children.
SPEAKER_04This is a theme and a drum that we need to beat over and over and over again. Um, children's rights come before adult desires. We have to get that right. We have to understand that it is morally reprehensible to uh to harm children and to make intentional decisions that result in uh situations that are not healthy for children, uh, raising them in contexts where we know that they're not gonna get what they need. They're not, they don't have a mom and a dad intentionally. We are depriving them of a mother or a father. Um, we we we need to beat this drum again and again and again because um that this is how it's kind of like it's a whole continuum. Like you you start by devaluing the ch devaluing the children and not creating healthy contacts for them to grow and mature. And then they have trauma and they have emotional issues and they're unhealthy, and then they get on these. Um that's how you get on the transgender track, you know, like it's we have to take care of our children. Sorry.
SPEAKER_02We we uh get sucked into this because it seems pro-life. Uh-huh. Right. And that and that's the and that is the you know, babies are good, babies are good. So people want babies, shouldn't we celebrate that? Well yes. But we have to understand the the creation order realities, and there is a there is a design and a purpose. And the design and and when we honor the design, that's when things go well. And nature is designed in such a way that children are brought into the world in the context of a relationship between a man and a woman. And when that honor when that design is honored, that's when it goes well for the children. And you know, there's a brokenness in the world, and we can understand why it would be sad for somebody who can't have a child in that way. But once we decide to take matters into our own hands, because that's what's going to make us happy, that's when we see all this pain. So um, it's good to have children, but it's really, really good to honor God's design for humanity and for the world and for all of us. And and that's when it goes better for everybody. So surrogacy contracts, problematic, inherently exhibit number 1,400 and whatever. Okay. Last story today. A North Carolina wedding venue declines to host a same-sex wedding. This is not the first time we've heard something about this. It seems like a new story, though. Uh last week um, through a TikTok post, it's Eliza and Brooke. Uh-huh. They'd apparently always wanted to get married in North Carolina and said they generally had a positive experience in this day until horror of all horrors, they went to a wedding venue that said they were faith-based, they're Christians, therefore they cannot host an event that is uh that celebrates something that that God cannot celebrate. Um the couple said that it was a slap in the face. It's of course hateful.
SPEAKER_04Um I'm sure it did feel like a slap in the face. I mean in their defense. I'm just saying, I'm sure this was embarrassing and upsetting. Of course, they did. Well, you've got someone telling you that one of the biggest and most personal decisions that you can make in your life is wrong. People don't want to hear that. The truth can sting, Joseph.
SPEAKER_02But you everybody know. No, but I mean, irrespective of like the can everybody knows there's people who disagree with you, right? If you're in a same sector relationship, it's not news to you that there are people in the world who have a different perspective on this. So are you really like shocked and outraged and so surprised that there's somebody who has a different opinion about you? You you know, you don't walk into like the Jewish deli and order ham. And are no, is it a slap in the face when they say, sorry, we don't sell ham sandwiches? Because we're a Jewish deli. Right?
SPEAKER_04I do I I bet this did feel like a slap in the face, but I agree with what you're saying.
SPEAKER_02Aaron Powell Is that is that a mature response, or is that just like the way they've been brainwashed into thinking everybody who doesn't do exactly what you want is a terrible person?
SPEAKER_04Aaron Powell I will say they are the ones bringing attention to the situation now. So I mean if they were embarrassed, you know, they're Yeah.
SPEAKER_02I I guess I'm taking issue with the idea that they're they're saying it was a slap in the face. I'm not saying that they didn't feel that way. I'm just saying that is an unreasonable, immature response to to an adult world.
SPEAKER_04We all know by this point, you know, it's not news to anyone that Christians believe in the Bible. There are lots of Christians out there, and we we can't affirm same-sex marriage.
SPEAKER_02How should the Christian be should we be apologetic for that? Because when you oh, they're gonna feel like this is a slap in the face, that's you know, should we?
SPEAKER_04I think we can have compassion and realize that the truth stings sometimes, and we should be. I mean, it says in the Bible we we should be gentle if we have to deliver a rebuke. Do I think that means that we back down or we don't say it or we hide? No, not at all.
SPEAKER_02We actually have some personal experience with this on the team. Turner, are you with us? Our invisible behind the scenes producer today, Turner. I think he is. Okay. Turner. We can hear you. It's good. Okay. Um, you've been through something like this? Question mark?
SPEAKER_01I have. Um, yeah, I'm actually sitting in my wedding venue right now. I think it was three years ago. It was uh July 4th weekend. My wife and I were coming home from visiting her family, and uh I had a tour guy. She was a lady working for me at the time, um, and she had accidentally well, not accidentally, she had toured a same-sex couple, she didn't know who, you know, who's a she thought it was a a bride and her maid of honor and ended up being uh a same-sex couple, and she called me and she was like, hey, she's freaking out. And I said, it's fine. I was like, I uh I think uh let's kind of listen to the point she was making. Um I think as Christians are whether it be a slap in the face or not, I don't know if that's the best terminology. I think um the most loving thing I could possibly do is to in every way I can uh cut them off from or at least put myself in the way of them making a decision that will lead to their destruction. Right? Like I think that's what I think that's the that's the definition in Romans 1 is it's this imperative of the reason that man goes for man and woman goes for woman is is that they are evidently destructive, you know, like uh there there is no form of reproduction, their life will just come to an end. And it's a it's a really sad thing. And so I I think that um as Christians, it's not just that we stand against same-sex marriage, it's that uh we are for a greater life. We are for a life that flourishes and multiplies and all these things. And so um how do you how did you handle things you stand against those things?
SPEAKER_02How did how did you handle that in in that situation?
SPEAKER_01Yeah, uh I sent them a text message, kind of really thought out, kind of explaining to them like, hey, look, I don't think it's uh I'm sure you can find the text message online. It went it went very viral. Uh we got tons of uh one-star reviews at the time and all kinds of them from all across the world. We got canceled. Uh we we fortunately made it through. It was a three-day event, basically. We got I got probably a hundred some phone calls. I didn't respond to any uh text messages or any posts or anything. Um, I just answered any phone call that came in because it could have been a potential bride or something. So I said I'll also answer phone calls. I had many debates, or not debates, I'm gonna call them debates, just conversations of people who wanted to cuss me out and fuss at me. And uh I had people tell me, we know where you live, and uh we're gonna go to your house. And I did own a rental house and they went to go see my renter, and she was an elderly black lady, a very sweet lady, and I said, I just called her and said, Hey, uh I'm sorry. And she said, Well, I won't tell them anything where you're I'm not gonna tell them anything about you, sugar. You just leave me alone. I'll deal with them. And I was like, Thank you so much. Um it was an interesting, it was an interesting time. Uh but I sent them a text, basically, hey, look, I think this is the most loving thing I can do. Um I and I think there's a reality of when somebody has become so set in their way, it's kind of like a child, right? A child feels like something's a slap in their face when they've never been corrected their whole life and no one's ever actually shown them what is good. And so when you show them what's good, it doesn't feel good because it's like someone who uh eats terribly all the time. You tell them it's time to get in shape. It's a slap in the face. And I'm saying that more to myself, but it's like, yeah, you're right. I do this lifestyle and leading is destructive, but I don't care to believe that it's destructive. And I think that's kind of why it hurts so bad is because someone finally steps in and says, There's something better for you, and you're like, I don't really want that better thing. And uh I think that's just the nature of dealing with the situation.
SPEAKER_02What did you learn from that?
SPEAKER_01I think uh when Jesus says uh my yoke is easy and my burden is light, um, my wife was very stressed. I don't blame her. We just took on $1.5 million of debt and uh we were it only been open for about six months, and she was really worried we were just gonna go fully uh broke. And there's a really strong chance for that. And it was uh I'm much more uh I don't mind the pressure kind of stuff. But I think learning uh my yoke is easy, my burden is light. So when you're subservient to what God tells you to do and you are both loving the person, seeking their good, and you're pursuing the Lord, uh, there is a lot of peace, like truly. And you don't know if you're actually a person who can have that peace until the pressure comes, and then uh kind of having that kind of peace. And I I got friends around me who uh were shocked that I wasn't more stressed out. Um and there and there was a piece of me that kind of wanted to be stressed because I feel like I should have been. But I think this reality too of obedience to the Lord does lead to peace.
SPEAKER_04And that's your greater treasure.
SPEAKER_01I don't know who these venue owners are hundreds of yeah, yeah. I mean that's uh that is what is truly life. So I'd rather this venue go under than be uh uh give into the world.
SPEAKER_02So as a practical matter, how you how you negotiated that situation in a you know in a in a practical sense, the nature of your interactions, text messages or you know, would you handle it exactly the same way? Is there anything that you do differently?
SPEAKER_01Yeah, I a lot of people would tell me next time don't put it in text. Well, I actually disagree with them because if I had done a phone call. Your lawyer would tell you that for sure. It was their word. Well, that's fine. I don't always listen to lawyers very well. Well, that's why it doesn't resonate. Yes. For a uh for a uh purpose of actually loving the person, I don't want my words to be misconstrued. And if I'm doing a phone call with them, yeah, I'm gonna phone call them too. But if I'm gonna do a phone call with them, I didn't want to be my word versus theirs and they could go online and misconstrue everything I said. I wanted to have a proof of they could show my text. And um I I think if you don't like what I'm saying, that then there's nothing I can do about what you hear. I can hear I can say what needs to be said, how you respond to it I can't control. And so, but I didn't want what I said to be able to be misconstrued and they changed my words. So I would I would send a text again. And I've done it a couple times now where we've had to deal with other people, and uh, I just take my time. I am very thorough. It's a very long text typically, and uh usually it's so long they can't screenshot it probably in one text. Um but uh I just typed it out very thoroughly and I just let them know it's like I mean there's a strategy to everything, just if you know you're a lawyer. Um but uh I think I think there's a reality too. Having my words typed out is very helpful. Uh and so I think that's actually why Paul wrote letters a lot of times because he didn't want anybody to misconstrue what he was saying if he just tried. To pass it on by word.
SPEAKER_02Yeah. So I mean that part is true. I mean anybody in your situation in a public accommodation who consults a lawyer in those cases. I mean, there there are easier ways to navigate it. But I mean, to your credit, I I mean ease is clearly not your your primary goal. There are there's a way to uh you know kind of dodge potential conflicts like this, uh if you're so inclined. But but yeah, you are yeah, I mean if if the goal is to say true things and have those heard, I think uh I think I think you're right about that. But you know, I just you know, and and Turner, we're gonna let you go, but thank you so much for you know for that insight in in how you've done this, because I think, you know, the way we deal with this culturally, Ashley, is you know, is religious freedom discrimination? And on some level, the answer to that is yes, because whether you're the, you know, whether you're the kosher deli or the you know the Muslim deli or the Christian bakery or the Christian wedding venue, right? Everybody has convictions. And the and and religious freedom was the is the freedom that we have built a civilization on, is that we have this constitutional right to to live our lives in a way that's consistent with our conscience before God as we understand that. Um, and then this but this idea of discrimination has has intervened and said, oh, but if you live your convictions, that might hurt my feelings. And the constitutional answer to that is who cares if that hurts your feelings.
SPEAKER_04You're saying that anti-discrimination laws are sometimes inherently in conflict with the First Amendment.
SPEAKER_02Yes, yes. Non-discrimination laws, which prize feelings. What what is a non-discrimination? You must sell me that thing because if you don't, then I'm gonna be sad. Well, go get it from somebody else. I mean, you know, if you want to communicate that message about the NRA or about the LGBT cause or about abortion or about anti-abortion, you're free to do though. That the constitution protects your right to say those things. The constitution doesn't protect your right to make me do that, right? That's that's the difference. And if you don't like the fact that I don't want to join your cause with you, that's fine. But you don't have a constitutional right to force me to join your cause. And that's that's the difference here, right? Religious freedom is you have the right to do the thing that you think is right, consistent with your conscience, and the non-discrimination law says, no, you don't. You have to do the thing that makes the person across the table from you happy. And that is those are irreconcilable ultimately, which is why we've had this long conflict. But of course, constitutionally and just like from a maturity standpoint, we have to get to the point where real diversity and a real respect for differences says I don't get to force you to do something that you don't want to do. And that's what the constitution has set up to do. And the left, with its embrace of the current version of non-discrimination law, says, I can force you to do it if you're not doing it makes me sad. And that's not an adult world, and it's not a world of the world. So um, yeah, we can be kind and we have to be. And we have to actually just recognize the Imago Day, but do not be manipulated should you own a wedding venue, as Turner clearly was not. So, yeah, we're gonna hear more stories about this. That's a good guy. I appreciate it. Yeah, but it it's just good to have the um legal freedom still in a place like North Carolina. And there were efforts to make the decision of that wedding venue illegal, but they didn't do it. So, in any event, folks, um thanks for joining us today on Politics for Happy People. So glad that you're with us. Hope you've learned something. If you have, share it with a friend. Reminder new episodes every Tuesday and Friday. Like and subscribe where you have found us. We will see you then.
unknownThanks.