It is pointless to attack Matt Walsh as a person. Ad hominem is pretty worthless. We must attack his arguments; and, believe me, it can be done.

Whenever I am in the car at the same time his radio show is on, I make a point of listening to it. The hardest part of listening to Matt Walsh isn't his ideas; it's his smugness, his self-satisfaction, his assurance that he is right.

This leads into a particular irony. Today, I happened to catch some of his show; and one of his points was that people on our side don't want to debate or discuss. What's ironic about this is that Walsh is guilty of this, as well. He doesn't want to debate or discuss, either. He wants to rhapsodize, to engage in demagoguery, to pontificate.

Walsh can be confronted, and beaten, on the field of reason; and I'm reasonably confident he never will be, for two reasons: (a) it's not to his advantage to engage with someone who might beat him at his own game, and (b) virtually no one even tries to deal with his arguments, his reasoning.

I used to say that I would happily discuss trans matters with Walsh, if I had the opportunity. I don't say that anymore. I don't trust him. He doesn't really base his positions on reason; he bases them on his religious orientation. And I won't "debate" him, for the simple reason that what is today called "debate" isn't. The closest thing to real debate we have today is a court of law; and this is where many of these conflicts will be settled.

I would happily deal with Walsh's arguments. Put 'em on paper, and I'll address 'em. But I won't deal with the man, himself. I don't trust in his intellectual integrity.

Incidentally -- and this is a very important point -- it doesn't bother me that Walsh's views are based in religion. Not in the slightest. What bothers me is that he wants to impose his religious views on us.