Latest / The Lila Rose Show / E36: Vivek Ramaswamy on Life and Family

Transcript

E36: Vivek Ramaswamy on Life and Family · The Lila Rose Show

0:00
We're so hungry for purpose and meaning and identity that when
0:04
the things that used to fill that void, from faith to
0:07
patriotism to hard work to family, when those things
0:10
disappear, that leaves a moral vacuum in its way.
0:14
I, I think, like you, Lila, believe that abortion is a form
0:18
of murder. I think that we need to treat it
0:21
accordingly. Vivek Ramaswami, entrepreneur
0:27
and now presidential candidate for the 2024 election, thanks so
0:30
much for coming on the podcast. It's good to be on Lala, how you
0:33
doing? I'm good.
0:35
I'm good. You, I'm sure you're super busy.
0:36
You're you're, you're running a presidential campaign.
0:39
Running around, that's for sure, yeah.
0:41
Exciting. We're having fun.
0:44
Awesome. Well, I'm excited to talk about
0:46
life and family because a lot of our listeners and a lot of folks
0:49
in general are interested in the culture battle.
0:51
But it's also obviously has huge political ramifications, how we
0:54
treat children, how we treat family.
0:57
What is the future of America look like?
0:58
So I wanted just to start with something that's been in the
1:01
news a lot lately. As of 2020, the replacement rate
1:05
is we're below replacement rate as a population.
1:08
So your average woman is having, I think it's 1.6 something
1:12
children, which is below the 2.1 replacement rate.
1:15
And they call this demographic decline could be a crisis.
1:18
We're not replacing ourselves as a population.
1:20
What's your take on why this is happening to kick us off the VAC
1:23
and what is the solution, especially the government's role
1:26
in confronting this? So I think the replacement rate
1:31
issue is a. It's probably the greatest
1:34
underappreciated issue of our time.
1:37
Actually, I think there are other issues that we appreciate
1:40
is big issues that we have to address.
1:41
This is a big issue that we have not yet taken seriously, both on
1:46
just the demographics of it, but also what it says about our
1:49
culture. I think that one of the root
1:52
causes of it, Lila, is actually our loss of self-confidence,
1:57
weirdly enough. I think that in order to bring
2:00
children into the world, you have to be confident in yourself
2:04
and in the world and in the country that you're bringing
2:07
them into. And so I think a big part of
2:10
when we've seen the rise of this crisis of self-confidence
2:13
manifest in the epidemic of depression or anxiety or
2:18
whatever, raging across our country, by the way, up to fold
2:21
just over the last three years alone.
2:24
I don't think those things are unrelated.
2:26
In fact, I think they're deeply related to the reluctance that
2:31
many adults, especially young adults, now have towards the
2:34
idea of having children or bringing new children into this
2:37
world. And so in many ways, much of
2:39
what I talk about in the campaign is that we're suffering
2:43
from the a national identity crisis today where people
2:47
outrage. I'm a millennial.
2:48
You're maybe millennial, Lila. Is that fair to?
2:50
Characterize you as I'm in the camp squarely.
2:53
Yep, you're in the camp, right? So people in our generation,
2:56
we're so hungry for purpose and meaning and identity that when
3:01
the things that used to fill that void, from faith to
3:04
patriotism to hard work to family, when those things
3:07
disappear, that leaves a moral vacuum in its wake.
3:12
And when you have a vacuum that runs that deep, that's when
3:16
poison begins to fill the void. And in a certain way, that's the
3:21
root cause of the symptoms of our willingness to latch on to
3:25
the secular religion of the day, whatever it might be, Woke ISM,
3:29
gender ideology, climatism, and so on.
3:33
But I think that that moral vacuum is also at the root cause
3:38
of a crisis of self-confidence in our country.
3:41
And I think that lack of self-confidence is part of what
3:44
accounts for the unwillingness or even lack of openness to
3:52
bringing a greater number of children into the world.
3:54
I I've views there's a big second part of your question is
3:57
what should we do about it? We can talk about that, but I do
4:00
think that seeing the root cause with clear eyes is probably the
4:04
most important first step towards a solution.
4:08
I think you're spot on to that and I will get to solution in in
4:11
a moment. You mentioned woke ISM gender
4:13
ideology. I think climatism, you said, you
4:16
know, I, I see, in addition to those ideologies, which are kind
4:19
of wreaking havoc on self-confidence and really what
4:21
it means to be human today and what life is all about, what's
4:24
the purpose of humanity. In addition, you know, we had
4:27
the sexual revolution happen mid century, this last century in
4:30
the Western world, particularly in the United States.
4:33
And so we have what I call three other ideologies.
4:35
We have contraceptive ideology, which is this idea that sex
4:38
should be totally divorced from children.
4:40
You know, it's an accident when you have sex and you get
4:42
pregnant as instead of it is the logical conclusion of a sexual
4:45
act. You know, when both adults are
4:47
fertile, it's the right time that you can get pregnant.
4:49
Divorce ideology. So marriage is just broken down.
4:52
People don't even want to get married anymore.
4:54
They're divorcing. And then the last one is in
4:57
addition to just like you said, it is gender ideology.
4:59
It's what is even a man anymore? What is a woman?
5:02
And so you have this swirling sea of ideologies and people no
5:06
longer even want to have children or they they do have
5:09
children. They get pregnant and then they
5:11
have abortions. And that's the other thing, you
5:13
know, 2500 abortions are happening every day in this
5:17
country. So it's the leading cause of
5:19
death for a human being is abortion.
5:21
It it eclipses death by guns, guns, death by cancer, death by
5:27
accidents. Abortion kills 2500 preborn
5:31
humans every day in this country.
5:32
Legal abortion. So before getting to the
5:35
government solution, what's your take on that?
5:38
We see it's contributing to the decline in our population
5:41
significantly, but it's also a human rights abuse that's
5:44
happening. And of course, pro-life
5:46
Americans are extremely passionate about stopping us and
5:49
saving these lives. Yes, so you know, I I love
5:53
something out of my initial response, but when you bring
5:54
abortion into this, in this startling statistics, can you
5:58
just tell just for my benefit, Lila is how many deaths you said
6:01
per day? 2500 children are killed on
6:05
average every single day in America by by abortion daily
6:09
death toll. And he says that makes the
6:12
leading cause of death. It is it.
6:14
It eclipses heart disease, cancer, and even eclipsed COVID
6:18
for for most of COVID, for most of the pandemic.
6:21
And yet no one talks about it because we pretend we live in
6:24
this pretend world where these aren't human lives, even though
6:27
at least we know you know when a woman has a miscarriage, we
6:29
mourn the loss of loss of a baby.
6:31
We know these are humans. We just don't treat them like
6:33
human. Beings, I mean, I mean, there's
6:34
there's a, we could come up with countless examples to vindicate
6:38
that intuition. I mean, you think about what
6:41
Clarence Thomas said from the bench in the Dobbs case, and I
6:46
think he was referring to a a real world example of a pregnant
6:49
woman walking down the street and is assaulted by a criminal
6:54
and the unborn child dies as a result.
6:57
I don't think you could find a person in America who said that
6:59
that person doesn't deserve liability for that death, right?
7:04
So I do think that more Americans share our pro-life
7:08
instincts than are willing to admit it.
7:12
That's a separate point that it relates to reframing the debate
7:16
as you did, I think quite aptly to be about human rights rather
7:19
than this superficial notion of women's rights.
7:22
It's not about a men versus women issue.
7:24
It's a human rights issue. But but it but it takes me back
7:27
to the uncompleted part of my first response to Lila, which is
7:31
I talked a little bit about the loss of self-confidence.
7:35
I think that then leads to an unwillingness to make sacrifice
7:41
in the moment that we live in, right?
7:44
So I think you can make a sacrifice if you know what
7:46
you're sacrificing for. And I think our unwillingness to
7:51
make a sacrifice, it permeates so many different parts of our
7:57
modern malaise. I can, I'm going to go somewhere
8:01
really far away, but then I'm going to bring it back to the
8:03
issue we're talking about. I think our inability to declare
8:06
independence from China is actually grounded in our basic
8:11
unwillingness to make a civic sacrifice in this country.
8:14
Because if we're really to declare independence from our
8:17
enemy, I think they are our lead enemy.
8:19
We never depended on the USSR for our shoes on our feet or the
8:22
phones in our pockets. We do depend on Communist China
8:24
today for the for the same we would involve.
8:29
We have to make some short run sacrifice to get there.
8:31
There'll be some inconvenience, but to do the right thing for
8:33
the long run, That's a whole separate and unrelated topic we
8:36
can talk about another day. But I think it's deeply related
8:40
to something my parents taught me growing up, which is that the
8:43
good things in life usually involve some sacrifice.
8:46
Entering a marriage, you hit on this theme before entering a
8:50
marriage involves A sacrifice. You're giving something up by
8:53
entering a marriage, but you can make that sacrifice if you know
8:56
what you're sacrificing for. Bringing children into this
9:00
world and raising them as your children, or at least even the
9:03
act of bringing children into this world involves some level
9:07
of sacrifice. But again, we can make these
9:11
sacrifices if we know what we're sacrificing for.
9:14
And I think in order to make a sacrifice, you need to 1st know
9:17
who you are and understand that once you have an understanding
9:21
for yourself of who you really are, then you can actually make
9:24
a sacrifice for that actual value set that defines who you
9:28
are. Which me it goes back to this
9:30
root cause, which is our hunger for purpose and meaning that's
9:34
itself left unfulfilled. That causes us to lose our sense
9:38
of who we are. Once we lose our sense of who we
9:40
are, we lose our sense of self-confidence.
9:42
Once you lose yourself and some self-confidence, you lose any
9:45
ability to make a sacrifice of what matters over the arc of
9:50
history. Talk about geopolitics or even
9:53
the arc of your life for the short run of what you think
9:56
you're benefiting from getting back as a benefit tomorrow.
10:00
You lose your ability to actually make the sacrifice for
10:03
what you might gain tomorrow for what actually is the thing that
10:06
matters over the course of your life.
10:08
And, and I just think that's at the heart of the epidemic of
10:11
abortion in our country is the unwillingness or inability of
10:16
people to say that, hey, I know that bringing a child into this
10:20
world, just like entering a marriage, those things do
10:22
involve, we have to be honest about it.
10:24
They involve some short run trade-offs that you have this
10:27
thing, you don't have the other thing, but you can't make a
10:29
sacrifice if you don't even know what you're sacrificing for.
10:32
And I think that that unwillingness to sacrifice be a
10:36
citizen of a nation, have a civic duty.
10:38
We see your 25% recruitment deficit in the US military.
10:43
What is the Declaration of Independence from China or my
10:45
record, the recruitment deficit in the military last year have
10:48
to do with abortion or the OR the fertility rate in our
10:53
country? You know, maybe I'm a crazy man
10:55
and talking about all of these things and blabbering and
10:58
rambling in the same breath about different topics.
11:01
But my point is, I don't think so.
11:03
I think that these are actually more deeply related to a loss of
11:07
social and self-confidence in our country.
11:09
And these are really just the symptoms of that loss of self,
11:13
of who we really are. I, I think you're right.
11:15
I mean that sense of an identity, a moral identity as a
11:19
people of what it means to be human.
11:21
And what's the purpose of the government and what's the
11:23
purpose of the individual? Is it about service of others
11:26
and seeing others as are equally made in in the image of God?
11:30
Or are we, you know, fight basically living for ourselves
11:33
and our own purpose and our own pleasure and instead of service
11:36
of others? That that I think is a, a
11:38
confusion today. But, you know, obviously, I know
11:41
you're running for office because you know the power of
11:44
the law, you know, the power of the executive branch, you know,
11:46
the power that it has to influence the country for good
11:49
and to influence culture. You know, they say culture,
11:52
politics is downstream from culture.
11:53
Yes. But laws are great teachers.
11:55
You know, we people put on their seatbelts now because there's a
11:59
law to put on your seat belt. You know, several decades ago,
12:02
no one wore seatbelts because no one really thought twice about
12:04
it. And then there's a law that says
12:05
wear your seat belt. So the law does make a big
12:08
impact. So what's your position and
12:11
using the executive branch, you know, if you were president,
12:14
what would you do about, you know, both what you're
12:16
describing as this, you know, this identity crisis, basically,
12:20
you know, crisis of purpose, but also specifically about the
12:24
death toll, you know, that that's directly feeding that
12:26
replacement rate. But in and of itself, it's a
12:28
it's, it's the bloodshed of our most innocent members of
12:31
society, preborn boys and girls in the womb.
12:34
And it's being done in the name of empowerment when it's
12:36
anything but. What what?
12:37
What are you? What's your take on that?
12:39
Yeah. So I think that I'll answer the
12:41
first part of the question first, then I'll go to the
12:43
second part. Second, I think this national
12:45
identity crisis, I think part of reviving our national character
12:49
comes from the tone of leadership that we set at the
12:52
top, too. I think it's underappreciated
12:54
uniquely in the role of the presidency.
12:56
I don't think it matters as much in the US Congress or the US
12:59
Senate. I think it, you know, matters
13:01
everywhere, but it's a critical part of what a president
13:05
actually contributes to the country is not just the
13:07
legislative proposals that he sends to Congress.
13:10
But as Reagan said in 1989, in January of 1989, when he left
13:14
office, his speech, his last speech as U.S.
13:17
President from the Oval Office before he left, was maybe his
13:20
most remarkable one, where he reflected on what he was most
13:24
proud of in his eight years in the presidency.
13:26
And The funny thing is, it wasn't any of the policy
13:28
accomplishments. Wasn't effectively bringing
13:32
Russia to its knees by the what was by then the very end of the
13:34
Cold War. It wasn't combating inflation
13:38
and regrowing the economy or any of that stuff, although all that
13:41
stuff is really important, he said.
13:42
It was the revival of a sort of national character that we
13:46
lacked in 1979, in the year that he was actually running for
13:50
office. And if you look back and says,
13:52
here's the one thing that I did, it was the revival of that
13:55
national character, which wasn't really done through legislation,
13:59
though I think there was a lot of policy.
14:01
I, I believe what you said, Lila, there was such a thing as
14:03
habituation that's real. That was your seat belt analogy.
14:06
I think there's truth to that, but I think it's part of the
14:08
story. It's part of a broader revival
14:11
of national character where, you know, we preach about maybe you
14:14
and I, folks like you and I at least preach about family values
14:17
or the importance of reviving the nuclear family in our
14:20
country, reviving faith in our country, reviving faith in a
14:26
nation. We call that patriotism in our
14:27
country. But I think that it's been a
14:31
long time. Probably Reagan was the last
14:33
president where, you know, you have children.
14:35
I have children. I want to be able to look my two
14:38
sons in the eye and tell them in good conscience that I want you
14:41
to grow up and be like him. And I think the last president
14:47
who I could say that honestly about without holding my nose or
14:51
wincing or feeling like I was being dishonest in telling my
14:56
two sons that was probably Reagan.
14:58
And, and so I'm going to, I'll get to policy, I promise you.
15:01
But I do think that we shouldn't skip one of the more important
15:07
parts, maybe the most important parts of being a president that
15:11
doesn't just preach about family values and about checking the
15:15
box of saying God enough times, the minimal number of times you
15:18
have to say it in order to secure a Republican nomination
15:20
and then exhale again. But to actually live your life
15:25
and lead in a manner that reflects that We don't.
15:28
We're not just against race, gender, sexuality, climate, but
15:31
we stand for the individual, the value of each individual,
15:34
including the unborn child, the value of the individual, the
15:37
value of the family. That we're not just against big
15:40
government, but we stand for the best known form of governance to
15:44
mankind. That is the nuclear family.
15:46
That we do believe in the nation, that it means something
15:49
to be a citizen of a nation. That you're not just a person
15:53
dwelling in a nation, but you're citizen of a nation.
15:56
That that comes with civic duties and that we as we are a
15:58
nation under God. I think it's setting that tone
16:01
of national character matters not now in policy.
16:05
I think you know what Hungary is doing.
16:06
I think it's pretty interesting actually.
16:09
I had a conversation with a member of the Hungarian
16:11
government to learn a little bit more about what is pro family
16:14
policy mean. And we pay people.
16:17
We have seen in the context of the debt ceiling negotiations
16:20
now unforeseen amounts of money to do the very, to do the very
16:26
kinds of things that we should not want them to do.
16:30
If we're living in a virtuous, well cultured society.
16:34
We want people to enter marriages, to have a nuclear
16:37
family structure with two parents in the home that bring
16:40
children into the world. We're literally paying people to
16:43
do the opposite of those things, right?
16:46
Many women in the inner city, frankly.
16:48
Well, you know, I visited the South Side of Chicago a couple
16:51
weeks ago. Lyndon Johnson's Great Society
16:55
that we set into motion supposedly to help black
16:57
families in America created the financial incentives for women
17:03
not to be married, to have one parent in the house rather than
17:07
two. Why?
17:08
Because she's going to make more money that way.
17:10
And so is it any surprise that he actually had a higher rate of
17:17
in this case? I'm going to, I'm, I'm only
17:19
phrasing it in racial terms here because it was intended in
17:22
racial terms in the Great Society that Lyndon Johnson said
17:25
an emotion was supposedly about empowering black America.
17:28
Well, let's revisit how successful that's been when back
17:32
in the 60s, over 70% of black kids were born into families
17:36
with two parents in the house. Now it's reverse, less than 30%
17:42
in the other direction. I want to get the exact numbers
17:46
right. And so plus or minus, you know,
17:48
look up the statistics here back after the show.
17:51
But but directionally, that's about right.
17:54
And that's the direct product of government policy.
17:57
Yeah, just on that front totally.
17:59
I, I, I see that, I see that it's, it's commonly talked about
18:02
as a, as one of the disadvantages, you know, of this
18:05
increase in the lack of marriage and, and, and stable households
18:09
in the black community. But would you, would you support
18:12
as president as an example of pro family policy?
18:14
And these have been floated by both Democrats and Republicans,
18:17
quite frankly, which is encouraging.
18:18
But a child's tax credit where if you're, especially if you're
18:21
a married couple, you get money back every year for every child
18:25
that you have. Yeah, I do.
18:28
I mean, I might be more aggressive than I might.
18:30
I might be more aggressive than that.
18:31
I might be more aggressive than that for a tactical reason That
18:35
has nothing to do with your reason of asking it, which is
18:37
that tax benefits are complicated and it takes people
18:43
a while to digest what that means.
18:46
Many people who stand to benefit from them don't even know that
18:49
they're benefiting from them. And the tax code has about
18:52
6,000,000 words in it, whereas under my version of it, I think
18:54
we have probably fewer than 10,000 that we need.
18:57
But the spirit of it is what I favor given somebody a tax free
19:01
check if they're part of a married household with at least
19:08
one of those leaders of the household working and they have
19:13
more than three kids, Yes, I think that's a very reasonable
19:17
conversation to have. And is that involve more
19:20
government spending? No, it involves less because I'm
19:22
going to take that money from the money we're paying out to
19:27
people to incentivize them to do the opposite.
19:30
And in fact, it's going to be net saving for the government
19:32
because many of those families are able to stand on their own 2
19:34
feet anyway. So that's what Hungary does, by
19:36
the way. And I think that that's actually
19:38
smart policy. And I think it's been great for
19:40
the nation of Hungary. I think it could be good for our
19:41
country too. Would you support a cash
19:44
benefit, though for families? And, and this is a, you know,
19:46
there's the Romney plan and then there's AI think a, a competing
19:50
version from another senator. But would you support a cash
19:54
benefit for families of, you know, even if they have one, but
19:57
they get more with two more with three more with four, regardless
20:00
of whatever reforms we may or may not be able to make to the
20:02
welfare system, because, you know, single mothers do struggle
20:04
too. You know, they, they, they are
20:06
some of the most heroic people. In many ways in our culture and
20:10
they, they really struggle to make ends meet and many are
20:12
single, not by choice as well. So would you support that cash
20:16
benefit for families even if they, you know, we're not
20:19
cutting welfare and even if it's one child and then more for 234
20:23
and onwards? Yeah, I've been looking at it in
20:26
the context of two or more, in part because I share your
20:29
concern that one of the reasons that people don't bring more
20:33
than two children into the world, even in the context of a
20:35
married household is because of concerns relating to economic
20:39
security, which I don't think are good for our country.
20:42
In the context of an alternative to that that's not been a you
20:46
know, I mean, I would say that it would, it would depend
20:48
heavily in the context of trading that off vis A vis
20:53
reform in other parts of you know, I've said I've shut down
20:56
the US Department of Education. That's $90 billion of savings
20:58
right there. I'm shutting down most of the
21:00
4th branch of government. And so failing to add to
21:04
government spending or stopping sort of adding to net government
21:07
spending is part of the way that I'll govern.
21:08
But reallocating that to the places where we should be
21:12
supporting families versus incentivizing the kinds of
21:16
behaviors that we kind of I've often over the last 60 years,
21:20
gotten what we paid for. I think you and I are on the
21:22
same page there. So what you're describing is
21:24
what I'm looking at for akin to Hungary's policy, two children
21:28
or more or more than two children.
21:30
We should have an incentive structure that allows people to
21:34
bring and encourages people to bring more kids into the world
21:37
than they are now in the context of a stable married home where
21:40
there's already someone working. Absolutely incentivize people to
21:43
work, to get married, to have kids.
21:46
We need more of that, not less of that in our country.
21:49
On the implementation of it, you know, we could get into their
21:51
tax code. If it's not one child, it's not.
21:53
But directionally, pro family policy I think is a good thing
21:56
in our country. And would you cut, I mean, if
21:58
you're going to depart, cut the Department of Education, I
22:00
imagine you would cut Planned Parenthood's funding, which is
22:03
the biggest portion chain and and fully cut their funding.
22:07
Of course, I mean this is this is no questions asked kind.
22:10
Of stuff, no question. Excellent.
22:11
And then when it comes to federal protections for the pre
22:14
born, you know, Texas has done this amazing thing where they're
22:17
protecting virtually all children in their state.
22:20
Governor DeSantis signed the heartbeat law banning most
22:22
abortions in his state. What would be your tack if you
22:26
were president on protecting children's lives?
22:30
Yes. So first of all, there's a lot
22:33
of ways in which the federal government already tilts the
22:36
scales towards. We're not going to call it
22:38
pro-choice. We're going to call it what it
22:40
is, pro abortion position funding for Planned Parenthood.
22:44
Unconscionable. I think we need to roll that
22:45
back. I, I think like you, Lila,
22:49
believe that abortion is a form of murder.
22:52
I think that we need to treat it accordingly.
22:56
I think this, some of those state bills that you described
23:00
are good laws in the wake of the correct overturning of Roe
23:06
versus Wade with Dobbs, which I fully agree with and have been a
23:10
vocal advocate for for a long time.
23:13
That's what allows those laws in states across this country to
23:17
become the law of the land where I land, is that I think we go
23:22
further and accomplish more if we're doing it based on 1st
23:26
principles and moral authority, not just reactionary politics.
23:32
And so for a number of reasons, I do believe that because most
23:38
murder laws, all murder laws are governed at the level of the
23:42
state, if we believe, as I think you and I do, that abortion is a
23:46
form of murder, that that should be governed in the same way as
23:51
murder laws as well. It's very refreshing.
23:54
It's very refreshing to hear that because I think you're
23:57
morally correct. And it's truly, I think it's
23:59
also the the just and loving response because if we pretend
24:03
like abortion isn't homicide, we don't just hurt the children who
24:07
are being killed. We hurt all of society and we
24:09
hurt women and and men and then the future because we are lying
24:13
to ourselves. And I think it breaks down the
24:15
social fabric. And I think most people, while
24:18
here's where I'm optimistic about this, I think most people
24:21
share pro-life instincts in common.
24:24
As I gave you the example from Clarence Thomas earlier, I think
24:28
we need to give them permission to get to the place where their
24:35
heart often already is by having the conversation is I think
24:39
you're courageous enough to do maybe defecting from some
24:42
conservative orthodox years to hear about childcare about
24:45
making yes a realistic option for women who otherwise view
24:51
themselves as economically incentivized or pressured into
24:56
terminating a pregnancy. Have an open conversation about
24:59
adoption. Yes.
25:00
I do think it is important to have the self-confidence to
25:05
bring children into this world and the moral footing to say
25:09
that is a good thing the nuclear family.
25:11
But if we're trading that off versus loss of life to say that
25:16
no, absolutely adoption is a reasonable option and an
25:21
alternative to abortion, that we need to embrace that as a an
25:25
absolutely legitimate next best alternative, even though that's
25:28
not technically in the part of the pro family vision.
25:32
I think that we need to have a conversation.
25:35
I certainly do all the time and I support it.
25:38
Willing to say we're walking the walk when it comes to sexual
25:41
responsibility for men. What do I mean by that?
25:44
In an era of paternity tests, in an era of reliable genetic
25:48
tests, that we are able to frankly say that if you have a
25:54
man and you're, if you're the man and you're responsible, the
25:56
genetically confirmed father of that child, that you will have
26:02
financial, greater financial liability attached than today.
26:05
And more than financial responsibility, that you have
26:08
real responsibilities that relate to bringing that child up
26:12
in this world. We live in an era where tests
26:16
and genetic testing make that possible.
26:18
I for one, as a conservative would be in favor of state laws
26:23
that ascribed more responsibility to men to say
26:27
then that takes. And it's not just I'm not doing
26:29
this as a troll to to sort of take the legs out from the other
26:32
side. I'm really not.
26:34
I think it's to stand for what we mean walking the walk of
26:36
being pro-life to say that we are all in this together and
26:40
therefore it's not a women's rights issue or a women's versus
26:43
men's issue. It is a human rights issue and
26:45
we're all in this together. So.
26:48
So that's where I land on that. We've got just a couple more
26:51
minutes, but I have two more questions.
26:53
And especially for folks listening who are passionately
26:55
pro-life and looking at the, you know, the field and saying what
26:58
is the candidate that can help lead us here?
27:00
One thing a lot of people are interested about, in fact, I've
27:03
had many, many people comment and asked me to ask presidential
27:06
candidates this question. You know, President Trump has
27:09
said many times that he supports what are called exceptions.
27:12
So if there's a baby conceived in rape or if the baby is sick,
27:15
it's OK to kill that baby. What's your take on that?
27:19
Yeah, say, say the last the exceptions that he supported
27:22
just so I can respond to. Them he supports what he calls
27:24
exceptions to pro-life law that says if the baby is sick, if the
27:28
baby is ill or disabled or if the baby is conceived in sexual
27:32
violence. So the baby's father was a
27:34
rapist, then it's acceptable to kill that baby.
27:38
That's the the unfortunately the position of of President Trump.
27:40
What's your take on that? Yeah.
27:42
So I'll give you my personal perspective on it and then I'll
27:45
give you my perspective on where we are as a legal matter in the
27:49
country. OK.
27:51
On a personal note, that's not a decision that I would ever
27:58
endorse making in good conscience, either in our life
28:01
or even in the life of making a moral judgment.
28:04
I think we, we, we ought to be willing to make a moral judgment
28:08
and say so. I think it is wrong.
28:11
It is morally wrong to make a value judgment on life based on
28:17
some sort of preordained playing God of deciding what kind of
28:23
life we do or don't bring into the world.
28:27
I think that that is God's judgment to make, not man's
28:30
judgment to make. And I think that, you know, I
28:33
mean, as the expression goes, I, I, I believe it to be true.
28:37
Life is God's to give, not man's to take.
28:40
So that's where I'm at on that. What does that mean for policy?
28:45
So as I said, because I believe that and you know this, I don't
28:50
know if you and I, you know, agree on this or not, but
28:52
because abortion is a form of murder, I think it belongs with
28:58
the states. And I'm running for president of
29:02
the United States. And I think there are other
29:04
candidates who have supported, and I understand where they're
29:08
coming from on this of minimal federal ban on abortion.
29:14
I come down on the side of making sure that we stand on
29:18
constitutional principle in leaving this as an issue for the
29:22
States and the reason. Why?
29:25
If the state, just to clarify, if the state's violating its
29:28
constitutional rights, the constitutional rights of its
29:30
citizens, you know, California is putting to death people
29:32
without any due, any trial right, any due process.
29:35
So they're violating the 14th Amendment constitutional rights
29:38
of their citizens by permitting abortion, you know, putting
29:41
children in the womb to death, allowing lethal power to be
29:44
franchised against those children.
29:46
Does the federal government have a role?
29:48
I think has, I mean, the federal government as minimally has a
29:51
role not to fund any of this to step outside of as we were doing
29:53
today. I mean, let's just talk about
29:54
what the status quo is. My concern and now this gets
29:57
into you both have to have the vision and how you translate the
30:01
vision into reality. I worry, Lila, that once we open
30:07
the door to the argument that, and maybe this is personal to me
30:10
because I've made this argument on constitutional grounds for a
30:12
very long time, that there is no federal authority in Article one
30:16
of the Constitution or anywhere to have invented out of thin air
30:21
some sort of so-called right to privacy, which was translated
30:25
and construed into a right for a woman to choose.
30:28
That we're on the right side of this constitutionally.
30:30
This is something the federal government never had, either
30:32
through the Supreme Court or otherwise, the power to ordain
30:36
that. Once we open that door, and you
30:38
know this probably, well, there's a whole slew of the next
30:41
time a Democrat comes into power, then statutorily actually
30:46
setting the minimums and permanently saying that a state
30:50
cannot adopt A more restrictive measure than X.
30:53
And they'll invoke the supremacy clause of the Constitution, the
30:56
federal supremacy clause, to codify that.
30:58
So that's a practical political reality.
31:00
And I think it goes to the same reasons, Lila, why some states
31:05
don't have the murder laws that I think they need to have
31:08
either, right? And so I think that that for
31:12
similarly constitutional grounds, you could make the same
31:14
argument. And so I think we have to, and I
31:17
understand we have reasonable minds can differ in our movement
31:21
towards the same goal. And the question is just how we
31:23
get there. Where I land, as I think we go
31:26
further, if we're doing it based on constitutional principle,
31:30
including what's delegated to the federal government versus
31:33
the states, or else we will live to regret it in our Republic,
31:37
where what we say is we believe that abortion is a form of
31:41
murder. We treat it accordingly.
31:43
We get the federal government out of the business of
31:45
subsidizing it, which is absolutely happening today.
31:49
And then we win this battle at the state level across the
31:53
country because as I said earlier, Lila, you and I share
31:57
pro-life instincts in common. I think most of us in this
31:59
country do by talking about an adoption, by talking about
32:03
childcare, pro family policy, by talking about greater sexual
32:06
responsibility for the men in a relationship of conceiving a
32:10
child, by putting legal teeth into that at the state level.
32:13
That's how I think we went over the long run and do so on
32:17
principled, legal, constitutional and moral
32:20
footing. So that's where I land on.
32:22
And I know we're, you know, running, running a little bit,
32:25
you know, to the end of what's been a great conversation here.
32:28
But this is the conversation I think we need to be having on
32:30
the right, not shying away from it and, you know, prudishly, you
32:36
know, talk about this as minimally as possible and then
32:38
check the box and move on because we worry about
32:40
electability that you hear this, I hear this argument from
32:43
political consultants sometimes. No, I think we actually unify
32:45
the country by standing unapologetically based on
32:48
principle, first principles and moral authority.
32:51
And that's the way that I'm aiming to certainly run this
32:54
campaign and to govern accordingly if we get there.
32:57
Right, I, I hear you. I think the federal, the federal
33:00
government's role, I think that's a important discussion
33:02
worth having and, and having into the future.
33:04
I know we're going to wrap here, but you know, the federal
33:07
government has a role in Interstate trafficking of
33:10
children and, and victims. And there's a lot that the
33:12
government, the federal government does legislate on.
33:15
And certainly with abortion, this is a, a constitutional
33:18
right that we have to live to life.
33:20
So it is a right that the government has a responsibility
33:23
at the federal level to protect, you know, what's the, what's
33:26
the, what's the good of a federal government if it's not
33:28
protecting its citizens basic right to live?
33:31
And obviously the states can help enforce that.
33:33
But should the states get to kill innocent people is, is the
33:36
question at hand. But I'm looking forward to
33:39
continuing the conversation in the future.
33:41
I know we've both got to run and you've got your next thing to go
33:44
to, But I'm looking forward to hearing more from the campaign.
33:46
And I know pro-life America is really interested in your
33:49
campaign and what you have to say.
33:50
So any last words for for pro-life America?
33:53
Why they should support your candidacy?
33:55
Yeah, look, I think that we're a nation grounded and built on the
34:01
idea that we value every individual.
34:05
OK, it's a much of what I've say.
34:08
Written my books about woke culture, group identity,
34:13
identity politics, victimhood culture, seemingly issues that
34:16
have nothing to do with my pro-life views actually are
34:20
deeply linked where all of all of what we see today in the rise
34:25
of group identity. It's also part of a symptom of a
34:29
culture that no longer values each individual as an individual
34:35
as, as we say, growing up in whom God resides in each of us.
34:38
As you may say, you know, it's made in the image of God.
34:42
We're saying the same thing. And I think the thing we're
34:45
saying is that every individual life actually matters.
34:48
And so in some ways, the kinds of issues that I've been talking
34:51
about for the last three years are deeply linked to why I think
34:55
all of us are pro-life is that we're not just pro-life in the
34:59
abstract sense. We're pro-life in the sense of
35:02
each and every individual life actually mattering.
35:06
And I think once we revive that conviction, this issue isn't
35:11
just about abortion, right? This issue is about reviving
35:15
conviction in the sanctity and inherent worthiness of each
35:20
individual life period. And I think once we get over
35:23
that that hump, not only are we there in the promised land of
35:28
how we deal with the abortion issue, but I think we actually
35:30
unite the country around a vision of what it means to
35:34
actually value every individual. And so I guess it's a long way
35:38
of saying I'd let maybe any on an optimistic note, I don't
35:41
think this issue has to be as divisive as it's made out to be
35:47
because most of us share the common instinct and commitment
35:51
and principles in common. And one of the things that we
35:54
need to do in our movement, and Lila that you do so well, and I
35:58
want to thank you for doing, to encourage you to continue to
36:01
keep doing, is to talk about this issue in a way that's
36:04
grounded not just in vengeance and grievance, but actually
36:07
grounded in those principles that make us American in the 1st
36:11
place. And I think what we'll define,
36:13
what we'll discover, is that we citizens and human beings aren't
36:17
just automatons and votes that we count as part of some
36:19
political analysis, but are actually people who can believe
36:23
in those ideals and be persuaded by them.
36:25
And so I think that skate to where the puck is going, not
36:29
where it is. I think where you are is where
36:31
the puck is going. Where we are is where the puck
36:33
is going. And I think that we have to
36:35
maintain our unabiding belief in that rather than to be taught.
36:38
The way we get to national unity is through compromise.
36:41
I don't think so. I think we have to be
36:43
uncompromising about the ideals that make us who we are, and
36:46
that's actually how we'll faster get to national unity.
36:50
So that's what I believe in, and I'm grateful for the
36:53
conversation. I'm glad this is long overdue.
36:54
I'm glad we're able to finally do it.
36:56
Thank you, Vivek. It's great to talk with you.
36:58
Looking forward to seeing how the campaign goes.
37:00
Thank you. Thank you.
37:01
Appreciate it. So we just chatted with Vivek
37:04
Ramaswamy, really great, great millennial.
37:08
It's exciting to have such a young millennial running for
37:11
office. I think he's all of 37 years
37:13
old, so just a few years older than me.
37:15
And yeah, it was a it was a good conversation.
37:17
I like some of his messaging. I think he does a really good
37:20
job of telling the story of the identity crisis we're in today.
37:24
I mean, he uses the words that I think talks about self doubt and
37:27
a lack of purpose. And he talks about how people
37:30
are not willing to sacrifice because they have lost sort of
37:33
their, their compass and their meaning.
37:35
And so I, I think it's, there's some really good stuff there.
37:38
I really appreciate it how Vivek was very unapologetic about
37:43
saying this is a form of murder. Abortion is homicide is a form
37:46
of murder and it should be criminalized as such.
37:51
I mean, he effectively said that he'd he didn't go as far as
37:54
saying the federal government has a role in get getting
37:58
involved at the state is failing to criminalize abortion.
38:02
So that was interesting. So he certainly supports
38:04
criminalizing abortion. He even said he's against
38:07
exception. So these cases where they're
38:09
saying the child can be killed just because the child's
38:11
disabled or something like this, obviously it's horrible.
38:14
The child deserves to live no matter what.
38:16
And abortion's always wrong. It's always the intentional
38:19
killing of a child and it's always wrong.
38:20
We didn't go into the details too much.
38:22
We had limited time. But he did say he was at least
38:25
personally against that. OK, personal is good, but you
38:28
were running for president. You know, this isn't just like
38:32
your personal opinion and you work at a bank like you want to
38:34
be the president of the United States.
38:36
And I think he knows that. So what's your what's your role?
38:39
If you were president, what would be your role in protecting
38:42
these children? And so he said some good things.
38:44
He said, well, I'd certainly defund Planned Parenthood.
38:45
He said that I would, you know, advocate for life as a leader.
38:51
Just saying, I'm I'm very pro-life as a leader.
38:53
Set that example. He supports the states that ban
38:56
abortion. The part that was a little
38:58
squishy, and I kind of told him this after we talked that I, I
39:01
want to hear more from the campaign from him is OK.
39:04
What does it look like as a federal government when you have
39:08
states like California that are killing babies through all nine
39:10
months of pregnancy? You know, what does the federal
39:13
government do? This is the argument for a
39:15
federal ban on abortion because if you have states that are so
39:19
pro abortion, they're still killing children and they're
39:22
weaponizing the power of the medical community against
39:26
children. You know, they're franchising
39:28
doctors to go be hit men to kill babies and to be paid for that.
39:32
The federal government certainly has a role.
39:34
And, you know, that's a whole idea.
39:35
Well, the federal government doesn't get involved.
39:37
Federal government absolutely gets involved in so many fights.
39:41
The federal government is against, you know, trafficking
39:44
and enforces. It's a federal crime to traffic
39:48
human beings. It's a federal crime to
39:51
distribute child pornography. It's a federal crime to traffic
39:55
drugs between states. There's a lot of federal crimes.
39:58
But the question is when does the Fed, when do the feds get
40:01
involved? Will they get involved?
40:04
If a citizen's constitutional rights aren't being protected in
40:07
their state, then that individual.
40:10
Can appeal to the federal government saying my rights are
40:12
not being protected and the child in the womb has a right to
40:15
life equal to yours or mine and we have equal protection under
40:18
the law guaranteed by the 14th Amendment in our US
40:21
Constitution. The 14th Amendment has this
40:23
equal protection clause that says that and all persons have
40:27
the right to equal treatment under the law basically, you
40:31
know, and you're not allowed to be killed without, you know,
40:33
you're not allowed to receive any punishment without due
40:36
process and be deprived of, I think it's life, liberty or
40:39
property without due process. So child in the womb has no due
40:43
process. There's no trial that says, oh,
40:45
the child in the womb killed somebody and so therefore could
40:46
be given the death penalty by abortion.
40:48
Now, that's ridiculous, obviously.
40:50
So all this to say, the federal government absolutely has a role
40:54
to play in protecting children in the womb 1000%, especially
40:57
when states aren't doing their job like California.
41:01
And so I think that can look like a lot of things.
41:02
They absolutely can look like a federal abortion.
41:04
Ban it. I mean, I think abortion should
41:07
be a federal crime. It's committed.
41:09
So it's committed so frequently in so many places, I think it
41:15
can look like the federal government banning the sale of
41:17
abortion drugs. That's a federal, I think it's
41:21
easily a federal job for, you know, a job for the government,
41:25
for the executive branch even to make an executive order against
41:29
the abortion pill. The Food and Drug Administration
41:32
is a part of the executive branch, part of the
41:35
administration, and they are the ones that mainstreamed.
41:39
They licensed the abortion pill. They made it possible to sell
41:42
the abortion pill under President Clinton.
41:46
So you can just ban the abortion pill.
41:48
FBFDA bans it says it cannot be sold.
41:51
So there's a lot that the federal government can do.
41:53
So I would have liked to have here more on that.
41:55
You know, he's a new candidate. He's new to the political scene.
41:57
We'll be watching his campaign. We'll be in conversations with
42:00
his campaign on my personal capacity.
42:02
But yeah, looking forward to seeing what comes to that.
42:04
I, I'd like to see more strength and passion on exactly what we
42:08
do at the federal level, 'cause that's what the president's job
42:11
is. It's federal work, but I did
42:13
like a lot of what he said and I think he's he's definitely an
42:15
interesting candidate that will be watching carefully.
42:18
Let me know what you think of the comments and looking forward
42:20
to interviewing more candidates.