All Episodes
Previous Next
Feb. 14, 2018 - Louder with Crowder
55:29
#282 FEMINISM VS MANHOOD! (Dennis Prager Uncut) | Louder With Crowder
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
["Strange Animals Theme Song"]
["Strange Animals Theme Song"]
You're a strange animal that's what I know You're a strange animal I got to follow, I'm a disabilitist.
Alright, glad to have our next guest.
We only have a handful of guests who we can do long-form interviews with.
I should say this. We'll have a handful of guests with whom we can do long-form interviews, and it'd still be interesting.
Yeah, but we don't hide our lives by hour three.
Dr. Peterson.
And now you just said hour three.
He's panicking. No, we're not going to do three hours.
And of course, I think more than anyone, this next gentleman is Dennis Prager.
You can follow him on the Twitter, at Dennis Prager, I believe.
Yeah, at Dennis Prager. Sometimes there's an underscore in there.
And Prager, you guy does unbelievable work.
Mr. Prager, thank you for being back, sir.
You know what I loved about what you did?
It's very impressive.
You corrected yourself to be even more precise.
There are very few people we could do a long interview with.
No, no, that's not true.
A long interview with and still be interesting!
That was good. I love that.
I do the same thing.
But it shows you are monitoring yourself Thank you.
And I always say, you'll never be thought a fool if you speak simply and effectively.
You see so many people misuse words or try to use sort of colloquialisms, they don't even understand.
I said, so if you don't, just stay away from it, and no one's going to call you on it.
It's like Joey Chiriani with a thesaurus.
Yes, exactly. Did you learn that at an early age?
I knew at a very early...
I started speaking at 21, and oddly enough, a very odd life.
I was sent to the Soviet Union to learn things, and I came back to America.
And they said, oh, a young man who speaks Russian just got back from the Soviet Union.
So I had a lot of speeches at a very, very early age.
But I knew immediately...
That the more I spoke real, that's my favorite word, by the way, real.
The more I spoke real, the more people listened.
And when I hear talk show hosts often, who are just starting out or even just mid-career, And they have a different way of speaking on the radio than in real life.
And I tune out.
It's not interesting to me.
Well, I'm there for you now.
This is Dennis Prager.
It's talking on the radio.
But nobody talks like that.
That's why people say when they meet me, wow, you're just the same as on the radio.
And that's the greatest compliment I can get.
They are right. It's the exact same guy.
That's true. You're taller than I expected.
I remember when I first met you. That's a shock to people.
You're right. Yes. You know what I think it is?
It's probably a shock to people looking at me now.
I'm 6'4", but looking at me now, I could be 4'3".
It's true. We have no idea.
That's right. You know what it is?
I think it's because you're proportional.
And a lot of people think, they're going, wow, you're a lot taller than I expected.
You know, people like, if you think of Sean Hannity or a lot of these newscasters or Anderson Cooper, they have these big square heads.
Josh Brolin. Yeah, they have heads like refrigerators, and then they're tiny guys.
They're not big guys, whereas you have a head like a normal person.
I'm not saying you have a shrunken head.
You have a normal head, and so in comparison to short guys with a big head, the camera, it's a total facade.
People don't realize it's not an accurate representation of who you are.
That's correct. Yeah. Yeah.
That's the first thing I get.
Yeah. Well, you don't have to worry about it because you do a lot of radio, but still, you know, you got your hair and it's going well for you.
Let me ask you this.
It's funny. You just said real. I was just watching this film, All Eyes on Me, with Tupac.
This is true. And I'm watching it.
And they gloss over his 10 arrests.
And they gloss over that he just so happened to be in the room where a rape occurred with his manager.
And they gloss over that he just so happened to always be wrong place, wrong time when he shot people who happened to be undercover cops.
But it was always, you know, keep it real.
And he talked about how much he loved his mom and keep it real, respect our women.
But all he did was disrespect women.
It's become this colloquial keep it real when people couldn't be keeping it more fake.
I wonder if that's the appeal with you.
I mean, I'm not saying you're an old-timer, but you're older than me.
But you have a very young audience.
I think it's authenticity.
Not all. That's a very interesting subject you raised in general.
Because I have this odd life of having done the same thing at 21 that I'm doing today, which is publicly speaking, I can tell you a fascinating thing that I never would have predicted.
When I go to colleges, which I do regularly to speak...
I obviously know my audience, as you know your audience.
A good speaker knows their audience.
Young people take me more seriously the older I get.
With all of the stuff about society's youth mania and youth worship, the fascinating truth is, Bernie Sanders was an example, the fascinating truth is that A lot of people get more credibility with young people as they get older.
I think some of that is because I think we're finding ourselves more and more amidst generations who don't have those father-son, father-daughter talks.
I think there's a draw to you because there's a hunger in a market for people who like...
There's a Dennis Prager-shaped hole in their hearts.
Yeah, exactly. Speak some wisdom into people's lives.
You know, seriously, I get a lot of attacks and I get a lot of compliments.
And one of the compliments that really does mean a lot to me is especially when a guy calls up and says, you're like a father figure to me.
And I always say, I'm happy for you and I'm happy for me.
Because every guy needs a father figure, either in his own father or in addition to his own father.
Yeah, it's true. And every woman needs a father figure unless you want to install a stripper pole in the trailer park.
That is very, very important.
That's right. Sometimes we have great prices.
That's exactly right.
Well, let me ask you this, because this transitions to what we were about to talk about.
Prager University. This teaches a lot of people.
And I will say, by the way, the age thing is true.
I've always said it's not about age.
It's about relevancy. And I don't necessarily even think it's because you're older.
I think it's that you maintain relevancy, and I think you've become more and more relevant in this age of identity politics and populism, some form of consistency that people can use as a reference point.
When I was on Fox News and I was the youngest contributor, I made sure I said, don't ever use my age, because I never wanted to be the young guy who came out, just either my ideas are good or they're not.
And I think yours are good.
And it's about relevancy. Do you think that's why?
I know you guys have a lawsuit, maybe clarify for people who don't know, from PragerU with YouTube.
These videos are so family friendly.
They're so benign, I guess, as far as the hate speech guidelines.
But almost all of them are restricted.
Do you think some of that targeting is because you're relevant, because you reach people?
There's no other possible explanation.
For those of your viewers who don't know, I'll be very brief.
We put out five-minute videos every week.
We have about 300 out.
The people who present these videos are some of the finest minds in the world, whether MIT, Stanford, Harvard, the usual gang, four Pulitzer Prize winners.
You... We'll edit that.
No, no, you're a fine mind.
I mean, we wouldn't have had you for any other reason.
You're a perfect example.
You have something relevant to say.
Well, I appreciate that.
In any event...
We put out stuff like, you know, Victor Davis Hanson, who was as mild-mannered a human as I have ever met, five minutes on the Korean War.
Why is that on the restricted list?
I'll tell you why. Because it paints America positively.
Wherever we have a video that paints America or Israel positively, YouTube has put it on the restricted list.
Which means that if a family filters out pornography, it can't get that video.
Libraries, by definition, can't get it.
And schools, by definition, can't get it.
Now, you've seen our stuff.
It is the antithesis of pornography.
I mean, give me a break.
It's intellectual pornography.
One could make the case. What pornography?
It's intellectual pornography.
Intellectual pornography, that's right.
Yeah, no, no, I agree with you, by the way.
I'm getting high on everything, except drugs.
I'm not into drugs.
But the intellect should get you high.
I agree with you on that.
In any event, it's purely political.
They don't want an effective conservative voice, and we're very effective.
We had 600 million views last year, and most of them were under 35 years of age.
Yeah. Well, we talked about this, Forward Publishing and PragerU people.
We went out with YouTube in New York.
I've talked about this on the Joe Rogan Show.
And your people and the Forward Publishing, Daily Wire people, were the only other people in that room who stood up.
Everyone was sitting there quietly, kind of nodding, and they gave us a nice lunch and the cheese spread and talked about the new guidelines.
Fantastic hummus. It was fantastic hummus.
It was world-class. World-class. Google spared no expense.
But then I remember I stood up and said, hold on a second.
We're all here because we're losing our ability to make a living on a platform that you actually advertised to us.
You advertised to us your platform for us to use your platform exclusively to make our living.
Can we talk about this?
And some conservatives think tanks were, oh, hush, don't rock the boat.
They wanted to be there and mingle.
Play game. The PragerU people, the Daily Wire people, Ford Publishing and us.
We were the only ones who seemed to be really trying to laser in on it.
I know afterwards, that's when we heard about the lawsuit, and I said it makes sense.
We're not playing around.
I know you aren't playing around, or you're playing for keeps, rather.
What is the status of this?
Is it a lawsuit, exactly?
Is it a petition for information?
I don't want to misspeak.
No, no, it is a lawsuit.
It's a breach of contract.
They claim that they will allow anything that is not pornographic or the like or incites violence on their platform.
So they either have to change their platform and say, we are open to all views left of center.
Not to views right of center, or they have to, in fact, allow our videos up.
I mean, so it's really, it's a lawsuit, not only because it's a lawsuit, but it's an attempt to get them to say the truth.
And the truth at this moment, Is that YouTube, owned by Google, is political.
How have they acknowledged your complaints?
Have they responded at all? What's their justification?
They had to respond, and the response is fairly weak cheese.
Oh, well, we're a private enterprise.
We can do what we want.
All of a sudden, they're big on private enterprise.
But believe me, if a baker doesn't want to bake a cake for a same-sex wedding, They're not for private enterprise.
I didn't know this because I assume all of our stuff, it just gets demonetized or restricted because they find it offensive.
Fine, you know, painting Muhammad as Bob Ross.
I get it. I don't agree with it, but I understand it.
But PragerU videos, like you said, you have some of the best minds.
You said anything that's pro-America.
I understand Israel. Because of these sort of, I guess you would say, Jewish secularists in Silicon Valley who have some sort of fascination with Palestine.
I don't know what it is. Palestinian feminists.
It's a big movement. Palestinian feminists.
They're very anti-Israel. I've known that for a long time.
But pro-America videos, you notice, get dinged?
Oh, of course.
That's why the Korean War one, or one named...
This is hilarious.
We have one called America Must Lead.
Some left-wing site also has a video called America Must Lead.
Theirs is on and ours is restricted.
And so wherever people should look at the list, they go to PragerU.com, they could read the whole lawsuit, they could see what's on the list of the 40 that are restricted.
And again, if it shows America in a favorable light, the chances are it will be restricted.
When you say you understand the Israel part, not the American part, they're very related.
One of my books is called Why the Jews?
It's in third edition with Simon& Schuster, and it's an explanation of anti-Semitism.
But the interesting thing is, That in the third edition, I showed that anti-Americanism is a variant of anti-Semitism.
For the exact same reason Jews have been hated, America is hated.
And so they do go hand in hand.
I don't know anybody, for example, who loves Israel and doesn't love America, or loves America and doesn't love it.
It's very rare.
They almost always, or hates one, but not the other.
That is It's true. They almost go hand in hand.
It's kind of, for example, you know, Joe Rogan was accused of being an alt-right Nazi because he had an American flag behind him.
Well, to them, that's basically, it might as well be the flag of the Third Reich.
They see the American flag. They see you with a flag pin.
They see patriotic symbolism.
The left assumes you're an enemy.
And just as surely, if I see someone who's patriotic, I go, oh, he's probably at the very least moderate or slightly right of center.
Yeah. That's right. Well, the giveaway was when Donald Trump gave his speech in Warsaw last year, And said we need to protect Western civilization.
The New York Times said it was a white supremacist dog whistle.
Right. Yeah. It was a dog whistle.
Yeah. Western civilization.
Western civilization.
Right. Don't tell that to the black and Asian-Americans who've pulled themselves out of poverty in record numbers in comparison to any other civilization in the history of humanity.
That is interesting.
That is, by the way, Why the Jews from Dennis Prager, not to be confused with Why It's the Jews by Mel Gibson.
Totally different book. Different direction.
Sorry, Mr. Prager, I know you're...
Both critically acclaimed. Both critically acclaimed for different reasons.
You know, it's funny that you mention that. The Winter Olympics are underway.
And I've noticed this. Certainly a lot of the American athletes and a lot of these competitors worldwide, when they're interviewed, when they win their medals, they talk about their experience or, you know, my journey.
And not so much their country, and obviously competing this pride of country,
or certainly not as it used to be, that America is the greatest force for good.
I mean, if you look back in the 40s and 50s and 60s, there was a lot of pride.
You were competing for your country.
Have you noticed that stark contrast between, I guess, sort of the post-event interviews today
and those of your?
I haven't watched them as much as I should to answer you properly,
but I've noticed it over the course of time.
Look, the left hates nationalism, except for one.
There's one nationalism on earth they're in love with, Palestinian.
But outside of Palestinian nationalism, since Marx, remember, the Communist Manifesto ends, proletariat of the world unite.
You have nothing to lose but your chains.
They divided the world between worker and owner.
Not between American and German and French and English.
They wanted to abolish national identity from Marx to today's Democratic Party.
That has been inconsistent.
They have no interest, they have contempt for national identity.
And that's why they're for open borders.
They don't care.
Ask a leftist, what if 50 million people came in tomorrow and American identity were thereby simply diluted?
They'd go, so what?
American identity is fascist anyway.
Which is... Couple of ironies there.
Palestine, not a nation.
Also, the fact that you, as you mentioned, like, listen, okay, here, all the stuff you wanted, we have gay marriage now, the trans people can, you know, they can hop on up to any urinal they want.
Isn't that a national identity you're proud of compared to people who have enforced abortions in North Korean internment camps?
You're saying that Kim Jong's sister stole the show at the ceremony.
How about just relating to the national identity that you've helped create here, modern progressives?
It really is crazy to me.
Modern America is something they fought for, too.
They should be happy with. Well, liberals forth forth.
The left has always been opposed.
It's a daily statement of mine on my radio show that liberalism and leftism have almost nothing in common.
The problem is liberals don't know it.
There are a few liberals, like Harvard professor, what's his name?
Alan Dershowitz.
Yeah. The Harvard Law professor, who is a big liberal, a big supporter of Hillary Clinton.
He said to me, and it's on camera, it's coming out in our movie, No Safe Spaces, later this year, the one I'm doing with Adam Carolla.
Right. And he said...
The left is a much greater threat to liberalism than the right.
Yeah. Here's one thing, though.
He can say that all he wants, and I agree with him.
But at a certain point, people like Dershowitz, they do have to say, hold on a second.
There is no official representation whatsoever of my point of view in today's Democratic Party.
It doesn't exist. That's correct. It's a left-wing party.
It is no longer a liberal party.
Franklin D. Roosevelt, the liberal's hero.
Franklin D. Roosevelt regularly spoke about the need to defend not only Western civilization, but Christian civilization.
If a president said that today, there would be impeachment, a movement for impeachment.
Yeah. No, that's an important point to make.
By the way, also the guy who did the internment camp.
We were just talking about that. Leftist folk hero, FDR. I'm like, do you guys remember this?
This wasn't a guy who was necessarily soft on foreign policy.
Kind of went a little too far, some people argue, in that direction.
Yeah. But, you know, this is one difference I see from the right and the left.
They talk about how closed-minded the right is.
And I talked about this, I think, with Rubin and Rogan, who's like, they say, man, it's political tribalism.
I go, hold on a second. The right, you can have someone like Dennis Prager.
You can have Stephen Crowder. You can have Ben Shapiro.
You can have Milo Yiannopoulos. You can have Andrew Klavan.
You can have libertarians who want to smoke pot and talk about Bitcoin, but they also want a limited government.
There are so many different kinds of people who just aren't on the far left.
Mm-hmm. Including people who hold office, by the way.
But if you look at the DNC, there is no one on the left who strays from it.
For example, if Donald Trump comes out and says something that's embarrassing, we have no problem saying, ah, listen, okay, I like his reversal of Mexico City policy, but this was kind of embarrassing.
I don't see, you know, for example, Mr.
Dershowitz endorsing Hillary Clinton.
You don't see them come out and say, well, this is the only option we have.
But it really is embarrassing that we are down to Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton, people who don't support freedom of speech, people who don't support the basic right to self-preservation with the Second Amendment.
I really am ashamed that there is no one in the Democratic Party.
They should be at this point.
They require a third party to be represented, whereas the right doesn't.
There's enough of a spectrum.
It's a very good point.
I have been in three dialogues around the country with Dershowitz, and I've asked them exactly that.
For him now to acknowledge the moral failure of liberalism in America, I think it would be too painful.
But you know what?
But seriously, you know what?
He's of much greater value to us continuing to identify as a liberal than if he were to
say, you know what, the truth is I'm a conservative.
And I don't believe he's a conservative, but it doesn't matter.
Right.
He's value.
He attacking the left from a liberal standpoint is what we need more liberals to do.
But liberals have been brainwashed into thinking their enemy is the right.
Right.
But their enemy is not the right.
Their enemy is the left.
Yeah, that's a good point.
And I guess, you know, we're using this terminology like liberal, left, right, but put it this way, with the Republican Party, the right wing, listen, I get it.
The Republican Party, no one in the Republican Party fully represents me, right?
People always, but the two-party system, man, here's the deal.
I come from Canada where it's a parliamentary system.
That really sucks because you can have someone who gets 30-something percent of the vote, doesn't represent even close to a plurality of the nation, and all of a sudden they're running the country.
So the two-party system, it's like the 10-point must system in mixed martial arts.
It It's about as close to something that works as we've had.
That's why you have the primaries. Yeah, that's why you have the primaries.
But that's a big difference between the right and the left, right?
I would not be able to, let's say we just got down to a candidate who was a Republican or conservative and say, yeah, I endorse this person wholeheartedly if they were against the Second Amendment, if they were against freedom of speech, if they were pro-funding abortions overseas.
I would have to part ways.
So when you have these people who are classical liberals who disagree with everything the DNC stands for but they get in line, I just can't relate to it because I wouldn't Right.
I agree with you. I don't have great respect for liberals, but they're not my ideological enemy.
ideological enemy.
Yes.
That's the difference.
They don't understand that I'm their friend.
Right.
You and I are protecting liberal values infinitely more than the left is.
That's true.
And I think you're a good example too of a lot of these people, they sort of,
it's this false virtue of finding common ground.
And I always say, well, hold on a second.
You don't necessarily need to find common ground.
You can be civil and disagree with someone.
You don't have to find common ground.
You can disagree in a civil way in not finding common ground.
You do that very effectively.
Yeah.
I, almost every day I make the announcement that the differences between the left and right
are unbridgeable.
There is no middle ground.
You name the subject.
What's the middle ground?
This is a subject people aren't talking about much today, so I'll use it, because it's not a hot-button issue.
What's the middle ground between pro-capital punishment and anti-capital punishment?
What's the middle ground?
Will execute people slowly?
I mean, think about it.
It's such a stupid comment.
A middle ground.
What's the middle ground?
I'll flip the switch to neutral.
I'll let you handle the rest.
I'm just, you know, turn a blind eye.
Liberals don't want to be a middle ground either because they're the first to eviscerate any black guy who steps out of line of their thinking.
Look at the Democratic Party, people running through the primaries.
It's like they all were right in step with each other.
No, that's a great point.
Can you think of other issues? Wait, is that the voice of God?
It could be. Let's go with that.
That's right. That disembodied voice.
Is that God? Can you show him yourself?
There you go. No, it's not good. Look, he looks like he has anemia.
He's very pale, Mr. Prager.
That's why he hides himself from you.
He's like in the garden of Eden. Wait, God is not pale?
No, no. I don't know.
Not that pale. I picture God with a more defined jawline.
You know, that's interesting.
I wonder if there's another... Well, I talk about this all the time.
There are other issues. For example, amnesty.
I can understand the idea of dreamers, right?
People who are anchor babies. Think about this.
It's a horrible act for parents to come here and just have a baby so they can stay here and skirt the law.
But I also understand, of course I'm empathetic to that kid or that young adult who didn't do anything wrong and now they might be facing some form of deportation, something along those lines.
But then you go, okay, so maybe here we could find some kind of common ground.
But then you realize the left is against deporting felons from San Francisco and sanctuary cities where we're just saying they're overcrowding our prisons.
Let's send them back to be tried in their homeland.
They say, no, no, no, that's racist.
Well, you don't want to find common ground because we just gave you that one.
Right. No, the bridge, it's really...
People don't like to face harsh realities.
The harsh reality here is that the differences are unbridgeable.
If the left wins, America loses.
That is my belief. It is one or the other.
It's not a matter of compromise.
The left needs to be defeated.
Almost no liberal other than Dershowitz, maybe one or two others, knows that.
And most conservatives don't even want to recognize that.
They really don't understand it.
I talk to Republican congressmen often, privately, dinners, etc., And I say, please, if you don't make the case that the Left is destroying the West and America, we have no future, we Republicans. They should teach, if you're running for dog catcher in Missouri, you should be telling people how the Left is destroying everything.
The Left is telling teachers not to call kids boys and girls.
Because they can't impose a gender identity.
That is child abuse.
Yeah. What's the middle ground?
It's funny you mention that dog catcher.
My father-in-law won the title of constable in Leelanau County in northern Michigan several decades ago.
He was the only one with a ticket.
He ran for it. It was in a local parade.
He said, oh, I won constable.
He said, what is that? You're basically a dog catcher on call.
He just never showed up.
It was unpaid. I was thinking, constable?
That's not a dog catcher, but that was just the title in Leelanau County.
So, learn something new every day.
That's what I heard COP stands for.
Constable on patrol. I think constable was more like...
I don't know the exact term.
I think when people say, oh, there goes constable so-and-so, they usually mean someone who's kind of a snitch, a narc.
So, they think of it as someone who reports...
Really? That's how they used to use it in Canada, but they're silly people.
Oh. Well, yes.
Well, you elected you, not you, I take that back.
Canadians elected Justin Trudeau.
Justin Trudeau, you know, if I didn't care about Western civilization, I would thank the Canadians for electing him.
That guy has given me more talk stuff from my talk show than any other current leader outside of Donald Trump for other reasons.
I mean, to correct?
And then he says it was a joke.
I know. That was mind-blowing.
Oh, I didn't mean it when I told the woman, we in Canada, we say peoplehood, not people kind.
People kind. Yeah, not mankind.
He was joking? I know.
We might have bought it if you weren't the person who said in a national address, gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, pansexual, and two-spirited.
If you didn't say that with a straight face, maybe we would have believed that this was a joke.
Even... I talk about this.
You could find the most angry, blue-haired feminist in the United States of America and say, you know, LGBTQAIP. And if you were to go to them and say, what about the number two?
And the feminist would say, what are you talking about?
You'd say, two-spirited. The angry, blue-haired feminist would say, don't be a dick.
Like, it's that silly, and that prime minister used it with a straight face and a national address and tears.
You know, his popularity, according to polls, is well under that of Donald Trump in America.
But nobody tells you that.
No, no one in the Canadian media tells you that.
That is also fascinating.
Interesting. When people talk about government-run media, in Quebec, that's basically all we had.
We had CBC and Radio Canada, which was, you know, it'd be like having PBS, but only PBS. There was no privately funded news.
When people say, the corporate news, man, I go, hold on a second.
I understand there are problems, but I understand news is soundbite city and selling self-subricating pocket catheters, and it's obnoxious, but what's the alternative?
Government media? Hey, thank you.
That's exactly right.
Otherwise, there would be no talk radio.
And only America has that.
By the way, did you hear the interchange that provoked Trudeau's comment?
Did you hear what the woman said?
About maternal love will change the world?
Yes. I thought that was even stupider than what Trudeau said.
Yeah. That woman, and everybody loved it.
Everybody thought it was a beautiful comment.
That woman doesn't understand maternal love is universal.
She doesn't think that mothers in Nazi Germany love their children?
Maternal love is the answer to evil, to the world's problems?
She lives in a make-believe world.
She must have gone to graduate school.
Yeah. I guess if Hitler's mom had breastfed a little bit longer...
That's it.
That would have done it. Yep.
Nope. Not to mention...
Bottles make Nazis.
Yes! He didn't get enough folic acid.
He needed the bitty. You know, and not only that, they wouldn't like to hear this.
Statistically, actually, it's the father figure that has a bigger impact on young developers.
I do, exactly.
Father standards does more than maternal love to make a good world.
Right. Sorry. That's a good point.
Sorry. And you talk about that and the difference in male-female hour.
So I know we've talked about the statistics on this quite a bit on this show.
Why do you think that is?
So now we're getting to the realm of philosophy.
Why do you think it's such a stark contrast that if a dad isn't in a household, it affects everything?
Everything from graduation rate, likelihood to end up in prison, in a way that is not really comparable to if a mom isn't necessarily around.
Right. My theory on that, and it's my theory, I don't have data to prove this, but I've lived a long time and talked to a lot of people.
My theory is that boys are lost without a same-sex model.
That's what it is.
Boys need men to show them how to be men.
Right. If the man isn't there, he doesn't have a clue how to be a man.
Girls become women almost automatically.
But boys do not become men automatically.
They stay boys.
Do you think that girls become women automatically?
That's interesting. Do you think that's maybe more because they're more communicative?
So they just communicate with other women, whether it's a mom or a friend?
Yeah. Well, partially, they have much more dramatic changes in their body.
We grow hair, but that's about it.
There are massive signs in their body that tell them, I am now a woman, that we don't have.
It just doesn't happen. I don't think that's the whole story.
And by the way, girls becoming women doesn't mean that they become mature or become good or decent or smart or wise.
They need models too.
But more dramatically, the male figure And that's why, by the way, that is why, and this is so politically incorrect, that is why God is painted as a he and not a she in the Bible.
Because if God is compassionate and kind and cares about the orphan and the widow, then a male says, oh, it's masculine to take care of orphans and widows.
But if it's a goddess who's doing it, That it's not masculine.
Right. Count me out.
Yeah, that's a good point. And it's sort of, women tend to, I mean, a mother is naturally compassionate with her children.
It is, I don't want to say a forced behavior.
Women are nurturing. Right.
But nurturing alone doesn't make a good world.
No. You need standards.
And that's, males are for standards.
Right. Right. Women are for nurturing.
We need both sexes.
Well, I think God is also nurturing.
And so when you look at that, nurturing, if it was just the nature, it wouldn't really be a decision.
So it's virtuous because God chooses to as well be nurturing along with setting standards.
Right. But again, being masculine and nurturing means nurturing is kosher for men.
Exactly. Yeah. And that's important because it's not natural to a lot of men.
It's not something that comes... That's right.
Yes. It's natural for me to...
To punch the guy.
I remember when my kids, I met two boys.
Boys would come to the door and they would immediately tackle each other.
Right. It's not a nurturing response.
It's how can I beat you up?
Yes, exactly. It's like two wolf pups.
Oh, no, they're happening again.
We're going to have to replace the drywall.
Well, you know, it's interesting that you bring that up because I wanted to get to your book Exodus that I know you're working on.
It's going to be a multi-part series.
But this is something that I talk about a lot with atheists in the show.
We have atheists sort of liberals in the show.
And this argument is often used, well, if I need a God to tell me not to kill or not to steal, then I'm just a horrible person.
I say, well, hold on a second. First off, there are some societies where that's okay, but here's the deal.
You may need a God to tell you to be loyal.
You may need a God to tell you to be nurturing.
You know, we don't necessarily need a God to tell us what we know are the worst parts of us in humanity, but you do need a God to actually bridle some of these instincts because it's not consistent across societies.
Right. Well, let me tell you, on April 2nd, the biggest work of my life is coming out.
I thank you for mentioning it.
It's called The Rational Bible.
Yes. 500 pages, and it's very easily readable because it's many, many, many, many, many, many essays and chapters and thoughts on life based on the book of Exodus, the second book of the Bible.
And it's meant for atheists and believers.
Because it doesn't ask for any leap of faith.
But I open up my introduction with exactly your point.
And this is my story.
When I was in my early 20s, I had problems with my parents, which is not exactly novel.
And nevertheless, though I moved from their house when I was 21, there wasn't a week in my life that I did not call my parents wherever I was.
The reason I did so was not out of love.
I did it because I believed God commanded me to honor my father and my mother in the Ten Commandments.
That is the only reason I called them every week when I had problems with them.
So the people who say you don't need God or a Bible to tell you not to murder, maybe that's true, although it wasn't true 3,000 years ago.
Maybe it's true today.
But what about that one?
Do you need a God to tell you to honor your parents, even if you're having problems with them?
Yes, you do. Exactly.
It's a very important point.
I was speaking with someone recently who said, I remember he said, man, I didn't go to India.
I didn't visit India because I was afraid I would never come back.
I said, what do you mean? He said, I'm infatuated.
I said, so you haven't been there.
You notice there aren't many wealthy people who go to India and never return.
They don't set up shop there.
And I talked about how...
There are more flights coming out of India.
Yeah. Yes, more flights coming out of India.
How uncharitable, actually, if you look at a lot of people from Eastern religions are.
And he was talking about how all religions were started by war.
I said, well, hold on. You look at about 100 million people killed under a distinctly atheist set of ideals, you know, communist regimes.
My point there was, I said, we don't need...
A religion. We don't need a God to tell us to kill or to be bad to each other.
But we do need someone to tell us to be charitable.
We do need someone to tell us to be merciful, which, by the way, was not even a virtue.
For a very long time, it was considered a weakness.
So for the left, I'd love to use the word nuance.
These nuances matter.
People are naturally bad.
We don't need a God to tell us to be bad.
That's the great left-right divide.
It's the great secular-religious divide.
That issue, that was the first thing I realized doing radio.
One night on my earliest years of doing radio, I was on at night in the beginning, I had a caller and we were debating about what's the cause of violent crime in America.
And he was saying racism and poverty.
And I said, no, no, human nature.
And then, anyway, we were arguing and arguing, and then I realized, sir, wait, can I just ask you a question?
And he said, of course.
I said, do you think people are basically good?
He said, yes. I said, so, sir, we just wasted 10 minutes.
And that was the truth.
We wasted 10 minutes.
That's... Because he believed people are basically good, he couldn't blame people for rape and murder and burglary.
Instead, he blamed outside forces, racism and poverty.
I don't blame racism and poverty for crime in America.
I blame people who commit the crimes.
Because I know that human nature is the issue.
And I know it for the same reason you know it.
Because we are Judeo-Christian based.
Yeah, this is the byproduct of human nature.
Speaking of voice of God, yeah.
There we go. Did you ever see the article by Ford.com that went viral this weekend, titled, The First Case in the Bible Was the First Case of Hashtag Me Too?
Oh yeah, I'm reading that to my audience tomorrow.
It is insane. It is clearly the dumbest piece of writing.
I'm not young.
I've read a lot of dumb things.
It's so preposterous that Eve was harassed by God.
It's so beyond belief.
I can't even repeat it.
I have it in front of me.
What's the premise? I haven't read it yet.
Oh, you've got to read it.
It's in a left-wing Jewish newspaper called The Forward.
A female rabbi.
Here it is. The first story in the Bible was the first case of Me Too.
It's written by this 47-year-old woman who says she's a rabbi, which is very possible, I'm sorry to say.
It's like, look, if the Pope is Pope, then she could be a rabbi.
Here is a young, beautiful, intelligent, naked woman living in a state of grace.
She's hungry, so she does the most natural thing in the world and eats a piece of fruit.
Now, first of all, she wasn't hungry.
It's an idiotic point.
She didn't eat from that tree because she was hungry.
She had every tree in the garden to eat from.
Right. By the way, for me, I haven't read this yet, but my first reaction is she was harassed?
It was his garden! She was on his property!
And he gave some rules. Like, listen, you can do anything you want on my property.
Whatever you want. Just don't.
Just don't. It's like, listen. Just don't turn on the hot tub when I have people who are at my house.
Because it doesn't work. It leads into the pool.
Just don't do that one thing. And they do it.
And I go, why would you do that? So now you're going to harass me?
It's my hot tub! But it basically proves the point that liberals think people are basically good.
They think Eve was basically good.
And maybe she was before the fall, but this really screwed things up.
And then she goes on to say, for following her instincts, trusting herself, and nourishing her body, she's punished.
Her punishment, she will never again feel safe in her nakedness.
She will never again love her body.
She will never again know her body is a place of sacred sovereignty.
And basically to go on to describe God as an aggressive violator.
When I read this stuff, I always have the same reaction.
I don't know this woman from Eve.
But I am certain, I would bet my house she went to graduate school.
You have to go to graduate school to be that stupid.
It's learned. I mean it.
No, I'm not being cute or facetious.
You learn to be stupid.
Right. Well, what's so funny is now they often use the term reductive as an insult.
Well, hold on a second. What are we really talking about?
Reducing, boiling it down to its simplest term here, right?
Sometimes it's very useful.
Sometimes reductive reasoning can be the only tool that is required when you're at an impasse.
So right here, I can tell you if I'm being reductive, I can tell you exactly what the problem is with that rabbi.
She sees Eve as God.
Eve's body as God.
It's just exactly what we talked about after the fall.
It's idolatry. Who is God to tell her what she can and can't do with her body?
He is God. He created the body and said, these are the rules.
You broke it. Even if you just see this as allegorical, it should be pretty straightforward.
Yeah, that's right.
They don't... The idea...
Well, look. To the left...
A big factor on the left is the hatred of moral authority above themselves.
It's not just God.
It could be the police.
They hate the police.
They hate parental authority.
If you're six years old now, you're a boy and you say you're a girl, You can say you're a girl.
The school will call you by a girl's name.
If you're six, I'm talking about, not 16.
No, exactly. And you don't have to, and the school does not have to tell the parents.
Yeah. Where's the common ground there?
Yeah, exactly. Where's the middle ground?
You know, it's like, okay, hold on a second.
How about the common ground?
Don't pump kids full of puberty blockers.
Hate speech. We're not going to find a middle ground here.
Just a little bit of puberty blockers.
Well, we did that undercover in...
Child abuse. That really is child abuse.
Puberty blockers in a child is child abuse.
It would be just like pumping your child full of, I don't know, some other mind-altering drug.
These same people are really against the over-prescribing of ADHD drugs in children, which I also fully understand.
I fully understand it's over-diagnosed.
Kids are over-medicated.
They're against that. When it comes to stopping their balls from beginning to function, however, all of a sudden we're a little bit fuzzy on the rulebook.
And I think that's why people are leaving the left.
We were in Vermont. I don't know if you saw that video.
We were undercover. And it was What the Health Care?
Transgender Town Hall. And they were just saying, you know, it's just don't believe the propaganda, the hate speech out there.
If the child then decides they want to go the other way by meaning the other way, meaning they just want to be their actual biological sex, you stop the puberty blockers and there's no evidence of ill effects.
So the propaganda from Johns Hopkins, the propaganda from liberal surgeons out there, there is nothing but evidence that puberty blockers are harmful in the developmental stage.
They don't care. How could it not be?
I mean, it's absurd.
No, no, I mean, just common sense tells that.
You mentioned Johns Hopkins.
You follow your stuff.
Johns Hopkins pioneered transsexual surgery, and the guy who pioneered it no longer does it.
Right. No, see, that's an important point, because when I've talked about it, they say, well, they're notable anti-trans, if you look at Johns Hopkins, and you look at what they support.
I go, hold on a second. No, actually, there was pioneering going on.
They were early on it. There were early adopters, and a lot of these early adopters have abandoned it.
Yeah, that's correct.
Well, you know, so that comes...
That's interesting.
There are some issues where I cannot fathom the left's moral reasoning there.
What would you say it is in a situation like that, where we're talking about puberty?
Okay. All right.
So here's my theory on this.
Okay. The Judeo-Christian world, rooted in the Bible, the Bible, which I know has...
The left has effectively trivialized and even demonized.
But it is the most important book in history, whether you love it, hate it, or don't know anything about it.
That's just a fact. It's not an opinion.
Historically, it's not even close. Right.
It is rooted in a concept called distinctiveness.
There are five distinctions that are at the core of the biblical worldview.
The difference between man and God.
The difference between man and animal, the difference between man and woman, the difference between good and evil, the difference between holy and profane.
Those are the five, and the left has sought and successfully demolished all five of those distinctions.
There's no difference between man and animal.
There's no difference between man and God.
We are all, as you said it, we are all gods.
Now there is no difference between man and woman.
And that is what they are doing.
Because distinctions mean there's order.
Order means there's an orderer.
Yeah, that's important to, that's the same reason a lot of people don't like the term intelligent design, because it means that there's a designer.
That's right, a designer.
An architect. You know, you were early on this.
I know we've talked about this, but I think it's more important probably now than ever to revisit when there was, I think, was it Cary Prejean?
It was after the Miss USA or Miss America pageant.
You were debating Perez Hilton.
And, oh gosh, that guy.
Anyway, you talked about back then how the reason same-sex marriage is an issue that at least is worthy of discussion and it's not simply hate speech is because—and you differentiated it.
You said, I don't believe it's comparable to an interracial relationship because I believe a black mother can provide everything that a white mother can to a child.
Same thing for a black father or white father or Asian father.
You said, I do not believe that two fathers can provide everything to a child that two mothers can.
You said the danger here is declaring that women are fundamentally interchangeable.
Right. That's right.
I've been saying that for 25 years.
I knew the biggest reason I opposed same-sex marriage was because of their argument that That gender doesn't matter.
That's the core of the argument.
Love matters, not gender.
The moment you say gender doesn't matter, it's over.
That means there is no male and there is no female.
And my prediction has taken place, it just went faster than I could have ever imagined.
Where you can't call kids who are five years old boys and girls.
The New York subway no longer has announcements that begin ladies and gentlemen.
The London Tube dropped ladies and gentlemen.
We are all undifferentiated creatures.
Just like there's no differentiation among nations.
The topic I talked to you about earlier.
They hate distinctions.
There's no American and German and French.
We are just all mankind.
You know, Superman gave up his American citizenship.
You know that. Right, yeah, I know.
Well, yeah, very, very silly.
Captain America also became a commie for a portion in those comic books.
It is incredible.
You know, that was my next question.
I think you answered it. I was going to ask if when you said, I just, I don't believe that men and women are fundamentally interchangeable, that was always your reasoning and your opposition to same-sex marriage.
I was going to ask if you saw it coming down the pike that the transgenderism was going to become as catastrophic.
Yes, I wrote it. I... I mean, I'm not bragging, but you asked me, yes.
Twenty-five years ago, I wrote.
One doesn't have to take my word for it.
It's in writing. I wrote about those five distinctions, and I said, the left is obliterating the male-female distinction.
And people read it, and I remember it.
Nobody took it seriously, and I don't blame them.
But I saw it.
It was as obvious to me as the sun shining.
That's the way it is and that's exactly what's happening.
And you know what's sad? Asai, forget God or all of that stuff.
It's just plain sad.
It is one of the great joys of life to be distinct from a female as a male.
For a woman to celebrate the feminine and not the masculine in herself.
We all have all sides.
We're all aware of that, but it doesn't matter.
But to deprive a generation of that joy, the tension between the sexes, It's to deprive them of one of the most meaningful things.
I read today, I just ended my show.
I have my notes in front of me because I'm still in my radio studio.
There was an article in the Daily Mail about how British youth think that big business and right-wing pundits are more dangerous to the world than communists.
It's mind-blowing. Yeah, the people who murdered 100 million non-combatants in the 20th century.
Okay? But Tootsie Roll is more dangerous.
Anyway, so listen to this.
So they quote a law student in Britain.
She's at a very prestigious school, the School of Oriental and African Studies in London.
So she said, listen to this.
I may even write my column on it.
She said, let's see, yeah.
For young people today, we live in a time in which we basically have no future.
Why would a young person, privileged enough to be at a prestigious graduate school in London, say, I have no future?
The left has deprived them of so much of the joys of life Including meaning, because secularism doesn't provide meaning.
I mean, it provides a great, great government.
I'm for secular government, but it provides no meaning.
If there is no God, and there is no religion, and there is no Bible, and there is no transcendent, and there is no design, and there is no purpose, then there is no meaning.
And so, yes, she's right.
That's what she believes.
They have no future. The left has deprived them of a future.
It's deprived them of a present.
They don't even have a present.
How do you, because I know this book, you're saying the rational Bible, how do atheists respond to that?
Because usually they'll just say, well, I find meaning in the simple pleasures of life, in my family, in these issues that matter to me.
It's subjective to everyone. That's where they find meaning.
Yes, that's right. And I'm glad they do.
Otherwise, they kill themselves.
And I don't mean that sarcastically.
However, No serious philosopher has denied that if there is no God, there is no ultimate meaning.
You can find meaning, you can construct meaning to keep yourself sane, but that's all they're doing.
They're constructing temporary meaning For this tiny blip that we are in the universe, for this tiny blip of time that we're here.
But the truth is, we don't have any more ultimate meaning than a pebble.
It's just we need to delude ourselves into meaning, because we'll go crazy if we don't have it.
But there really isn't any.
And that lends itself... We are just an accident.
Right. And that lends itself so well to pseudo-intellectualism and this existentialism, like Jim Carrey now is saying, my name isn't Jim.
This is all a construction, man.
This is an illusion. You're in basically a computer program because they feel as though it sounds intelligent, but it's them trying to give themselves meaning.
And of course, that leaves you open and vulnerable to charlatans, to intellectual charlatans.
And I think that's what we've seen full circle.
Oh! Well, that was another thing I covered in the last month, that there is more belief in voodoo and Africans and astrology among young people today than ever in American history.
That's a good point.
That's okay. The Bible?
That's fairy tales.
Right. Yeah, exactly. Are you talking about the Bible?
Are you talking about some imaginary spaghetti monster?
I'm going to go blame all of my problems on gluten.
I don't know what it is, but I'm pretty sure that's our downfall.
It is absolutely insane.
Whether it's what you're talking about in college, intellectually, whether it's dietary, whether it's fitness, whatever it comes down to, there is more bull crap out there today that people buy.
And smart people. You don't have to be dumb to be vulnerable to this.
And you're seeing smart people now.
Oh, the smart are much more vulnerable.
Oh, no. That's why I said this woman would never have written such nonsense if she hadn't gone to graduate school.
Yeah. I meant that literally.
I do believe... I now, by the way, I tell parents, and I swear before God that I mean this seriously, unless your child needs to study mathematics or physics, chemistry, etc., they would do better to go to Prager University for free than to go to Princeton.
Yep, that's actually, it's very true.
And I said that one time to a young boy whose parents wanted him to meet me and said, you know, can you give him some advice?
I said, sure, what is it, you know, what is it you want to do?
He said, you know, I don't really know.
I said, okay, here's one thing.
If you don't know what you want to do, take some time, figure it out.
Don't go to college.
And the parents were horrified.
Now, I wouldn't have said that if he said, I want to be an engineer.
But he said, I don't know. Telling young people, you don't know?
Figure it out in university is the worst advice.
Right. That's correct.
It's like popping a DVD in to babysit, only it's a feminist women's studies underwater basket-weaving professor.
That one's going to, she's going to turn out to be a gem.
Okay, it is at Dennis Prager on Twitter.
We have to get going. This always passes by so quickly.
The Rational Bible Exodus.
When can people look for that?
Now, they can get it now at Amazon.
The Rational Bible.
I promise it will change your life if you read it.
I promise. Yes.
And by the way, for people who are listening, we have a lot of listeners who are kind of left.
We don't really have far leftists, but classical liberals, atheists.
It is... I've listened to...
Mr. Prager, please come back and keep us updated.
Have someone come in and keep us updated on the lawsuit with YouTube.
I will. Anyways, it's a joy just for me to come on your show.
Oh, well, it's a joy to have you on our show.
We must go, though, and then we will not be back because we're gone.
We're gone for a little bit.
▲
Export Selection