When Big Tech Upholds the Sexual State

This article was originally published in the National Catholic Register by Jennifer Roback Morse.

My organization, the Ruth Institute, has been inducted into the ranks of the censored. YouTube removed three episodes of The Dr. J Show, our weekly interview podcast. 

But I don’t want you to feel sorry for me. Other individuals and organizations have suffered much more at the hands of Big Tech than we have. I want two things from you. First, I want you to understand exactly what this incident reveals about The Sexual State, the political/sexual/social regime under which we all now live. Second, I want you to take this opportunity to evangelize people in your lives who may now be more receptive to learning about the Catholic Church’s humane teaching on human sexuality. 

First, the bare facts. YouTube removed three episodes of The Dr. J Show. In its notification of removal, YouTube stated it “does not allow content about abortion that contradicts expert consensus from local health authorities or the World Health Organization (WHO) and poses a serious risk of bodily harm or death.” (You can view these episodes on our Rumble site, an alternative to Google-owned YouTube.) The first interview with breast cancer surgeon Dr. Angela Lanfranchi was originally posted in January 2021. The second interview with Dr. Lanfranchi, and an interview with biologist Dr. Joel Brind were posted in October 2021. Dr. Angela Lanfranchi explained the medical pathways by which an induced abortion increases the risk of breast cancer. 

These interviews raised nary an eyebrow until just now. I suppose, all things considered, that this increasingly aggressive censorship is the result of the overturn of Roe v. Wade in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health decision. It is hard to know for sure, of course. It looks as if some gnome in the bowels of YouTube reset some setting for their “bots” to go look for offending materials. I cannot believe anyone watched every one of our videos, and carefully targeted these three! (Besides, judging from the clunky wording of our shutdown notices, robots may have composed them!)

Anyhow, losing three videos is a long way from having the entire channel shut down, as has happened to numerous good people. So don’t you dare waste a moment feeling sorry for me. 

What I really want you to feel is anger. Righteous anger. One of the censored videos revealed the corrupt process by which the Sexual State and its allies create the illusion of “scientific consensus.” Biologist Dr. Joel Brind has compiled years of statistical studies from around the world documenting the strong correlation between the increased risk of breast cancer following abortion. Back in the early 2000s, his research was gaining traction. There was talk of a congressional investigation into the question. 

I interviewed Brind last October for Breast Cancer Awareness Month, precisely because I wanted to get his testimony about this issue on the record. He described the 2003 National Cancer Institute meeting, which is regarded as providing the definitive conclusion that there is no abortion-breast cancer connection. He explained how the “scientific consensus” was formed: The meeting systematically excluded anyone who disagreed with the pre-determined outcome that abortion poses no risks of breast cancer. No one with competing views was allowed to present a paper or even ask a question from the floor.

Brind tried to enlist some of his scientific peers to join him in preparing a minority report. One of his colleagues told him, “Look, I have to live with these people every day. They have to sign off on my grants.” When he told me this in the interview, it took my breath away. When “scientific truth” is whatever the guy with the checkbook says it is, it is not science any more. 

Please note: YouTube did not censor our opinion. They did not censor our religious beliefs. They censored science. Their conduct, no doubt unintentionally, provides strong support for the point of the interviews. The claim that abortion is perfectly safe is an ideological commitment that cannot withstand scientific scrutiny. 

Let’s put this in the larger geopolitical context of the Sexual Revolution. YouTube cited standards set by the World Health Organization (WHO). The WHO is a long-time supporter of abortion. They even endorsed China’s notorious One-Child policy, which resulted in millions of forced abortions. For YouTube to put WHO, which many view as an adjunct of Beijing, in charge of censorship is both repulsive and absurd. Big Tech might as well put censorship of pro-life views in the hands of the International Planned Parenthood Federation or the National Abortion Rights Action League.

The pro-abortion forces are running scared. They can’t take the risk of women stumbling on to our little channel with 5,000 subscribers and learning the truth. (Whatever happened to “trust women”?)

This brings me to my second point: We now have an opportunity to reach out to people who may not be inclined to agree with us about the Church’s teaching on human sexuality. Those of us who have been involved in pro-life, pro-family advocacy have been aware for decades that the Public Health Establishment has been systematically misleading the public about the health risks of abortion. 

Perhaps you know someone who has recently become skeptical of claims of scientific objectivity from public authorities. Perhaps this is an opportune time to encourage them to take a fresh look at the scientific evidence of the abortion-breast cancer link. Many people across the political and religious spectrum have become disgusted by the heavy-handed and frankly totalitarian tactics on display from the “experts” in handling recent infectious diseases. After all, you might tell your friends, if YouTube doesn’t want you to know something, perhaps you should look into it. 

By the way, do you see how we’ve learned to use circuitous language to avoid the key words that trigger roving censorship bots? Maybe we will have to do that with respect to some of the hot-button abortion-related issues too. For now, though, let me just recklessly blurt out the offending key words: This article is about the link between abortion and breast cancer!! Come get me, you mindless drones and robots!

In the meantime, whenever you hear people express mistrust of public health authorities, you can say, “Welcome to my world! They’ve been misrepresenting science relating to the pro-life position for a long time.”  

About the Ruth Institute

The Ruth Institute is a global non-profit organization, leading an international interfaith coalition to defend the family and build a civilization of love.

Jennifer Roback Morse has a Ph.D. in economics and has taught at Yale and George Mason University. She is the author of The Sexual State and Love and Economics – It Takes a Family to Raise a Village.

To get more information or schedule an interview with Dr. Morse, contact media@ruthinstitute.org.

Join us on Locals for exclusive content*!

*Censorship free!

Get all of our video content on Rumble*

*Also censorship free