Skip to main content

An Interview with Johnson N. Masters - Conclusion

Submitted by Ken Watts on Wed, 02/15/2012 - 13:10

The conclusion of the exclusive daily mull interview with Johnson N. Masters, which began here, follows:

JNM: On the other hand, the Bible says almost nothing about a glimpse of a breast, or the use of four-letter words, or abortion, or gays, and yet those issues will mobilize the troops on a moments notice.

TDM: And this told you?

JNM: It was our first decent estimate of the epicenter. What do all of those issues have in common?

TDM: They're against sex?

JNM: That's what we thought at first too. But it turned out to be something else. Banning talk about sex, making people hide their bodies, actually encourages interest in sex. So their positions on those issues didn't really make any practical sense from that angle.

TDM: I hadn't thought of that.

JNM: But then we noticed a trend. Gay sex doesn't produce pregnacy. Abortions stop pregnacy. The whole pro-life thing took on a new perspective.

TDM: You mean they were pro-babies.

JNM: Well, not so much babies as viable fetuses. Any government intervention to take care of babies after birth was pretty much a liberal agenda, but government intervention up to the point of birth was definitely right-wing.

TDM: So you're saying they worship the idea of a viable fetus?

JNM: Look at the progression in terms of where the line is drawn: Your most moderate conservatives draw the line at late-term abortions. As you move to the right, it's mid-term, then early abortions—and some wouldn't even make an exception for rape or incest or to save a mother's life.

TDM: And this all leads in the direction of the "epicenter"?

JNM: The next step is a ban on contraception. This is when we realized that they aren't anti-sex, just anti unproductive sex. It's also where the agenda of the two bases meet—lots of babies but no programs to take care of them means a large, poor, labor force.

TDM: And that's the epicenter?

JNM: No. The epicenter is what's coming next.

TDM: I can't wait to hear it.

JNM: First, a late abortion is wrong. Then, an early abortion is wrong. Then the line is drawn at a fertilized egg—some even argue that this is because you are depriving a potential person of their life. Then, it's illegal to use a contraceptive: once again, a potential person may be deprived of life. The final step is obvious.

TDM: I really don't see where...

JNM: The next conservative position is going to be that it is immoral to ever pass up an opportunity to fertilize an egg.

TDM: So you're saying that married couples will be morally obliged to...

JNM: Not just married couples, and not just morally. Legally, as well.

TDM: I find that hard to believe.

JNM: Remember, the epicenter is beneath the surface.

TDM: You mean this agenda is unconscious? Still...

JNM: Just think it through. Every step in this process has been based on making it illegal to put up any barrier to the conception or development of a viable fetus. Some are now calling for a legal end to contraception, which means they've already extended the right to life to potential fetuses. What's the final barrier to any potential fertilization.

TDM: Marriage?

JNM: Oh no. Nothing will turn conservatives against marriage. But sexual fidelity...

TDM: You've got to be kidding.

JNM: There are already signs. Look at the nominees. Why is Gingrich so popular with the religious right? A man who's notorious for affairs and multiple marriages?

TDM: But Romney...

JNM: A Mormon. I rest my case.

TDM: If you mean what I think you mean, the Mormon church hasn't endorsed polygamy for a hundred years.

JNM: Try telling that to a member of the religious right.

TDM: So you're saying we're headed for free love. Back to the sixties?

JNM: Not free. It will be the law. The sixties were for pleasure. This is out of respect for life. And out of patriotism.

TDM: No American egg shall go unfertilized?

JNM: It's a sacrifice, but think of all those cheap workers. China and India won't stand a chance.