In unhinged rant, BlazeTV host describes the LGBTQ community as “undesirables” and LGBTQ rights as “state-sanctioned debauchery”
Deace: “We can argue with whether having a red light district where certain people with -- that are undesirables and live in raincoats, okay, have a place where they can essentially go to purge, alright. And we can argue whether how far to prosecute that”
Published
Citation
From the June 30, 2023, edition of BlazeTV's The Steve Deace Show
STEVE DEACE (HOST): When Scalia is talking about how far do we pass on Miranda rights and habeas corpus to people who are obviously terrible people, and we're gonna maybe let them go because a -- because a higher principle was violated when we know they might do worse later on, that argument of conscience is happening within the framework of the Constitution's intent.
TODD ERZEN (CO-HOST): Yes.
DEACE: And if we're -- if we're arguing within the framework of the Constitution's intent, then yes. There will be times that you will not be comfortable with the rulings you will make in defense of that intent. We're not arguing that right now.
ERZEN: Right.
DEACE: Now we're arguing -- now we're arguing because young people vote Democrat and they have a lot of debt, I'm gonna -- I'm gonna pass that debt on to people that don't marry people that don't typically vote Democrat and do most of the living and dying in the country. That's not -- that's not an argument within the intent of the scheme of the Constitution. That's an attempt to unravel it. Right?
Because I want -- because I wanna make sodomy mainstream in America, I am going to force you against your own conscience to use your intellectual abilities and properties to promote my message when I would never demand that somebody Black show up and perform their gifts and skills for a group of white nationalists or a Klan meeting. That's not the intent of the Constitution. That's not, hey, man. In order for there to be a free society -- that's why what David French said about the blessing of liberty -- No. Okay?
The -- the public acknowledgment in a public building -- we can argue with whether having a red light district where certain people with -- that are undesirables and live in raincoats, okay, have a place where they can essentially go to purge, alright. And we can argue whether how far to prosecute that because -- and -- and what would be the backlash against that. What French was arguing was public buildings used as places to debauch our children is not that -- is not that -- is not that calculation. It's not. It -- that is state-sanctioned debauchery. That's something completely and totally different. And that's why you panned it and many others did, right? That's the stuff we're doing now.