Matt Walsh is a political commentator, author, filmmaker, and host of "The Matt Walsh Podcast." Stream his new documentary "What is a Woman?" at www.dailywire.com. www.dailywire.com/author/matt-walsh
My Psychiatrist said that she went form ZERO cases where kids thought they were meant to be the opposite sex to 8/10 children she sees. We are putting this in our kids heads. These are things that should be dealt with organically
Strange thing, Jessica - I am a white South African, and honestly the only places here where this is becoming prevalent, is in Liberal white communities. Most black people would think you are crazy if you mention such a thing. It is interesting how Africans are liberal/leftist when it comes to economics, but extremely conservative on topics such as family.
It’s sick. Our kids are being brainwashed by a communist party in the US. I live in ND which is super red and I also live out in the boonies and there’s a kid in our children’s small school that claims to be “trans.” This nonsense has spread everywhere. I don’t care what anyone does as an adult but, I draw a line at kids and I cannot believe we are not all in agreement on this.
Becky Weiss did a great video on IG where she says if she was a few years younger she might have gotten sucked into the trans ideology . She’s always been a tomboy and if someone had said to her ‘you’re really a boy’ at a vulnerable time in her development , she might have believed it. It’s so unfortunate that young girls are now questioning their gender just because they don’t fit into the stereotype of Barbie loving girls.
To think there are people in this world who would argue that an 18 year old didn't understand student loans and can't possibly be trusted with a beer, but a 5 year old can determine their gender.
My personal opinion is that it's a cult of people who have been brainwashed by pedophiles and other kinds of sexual predators. I believe it's people doing the devil's work intentionally or unintentionally, either way it's evil. They've taken advantage of weak-minded people and it slowly affected the intelligent ones over a few decades until this point. There's a lot more I'd like to say about it but I don't want to make too long of a comment. Again it's just my personal opinion.
I feel less uncomfortable hearing that a child is being put on medication or is smoking cigarettes than I do about a child choosing their gender through medical intervention.
Great conversation about marriage. I converted to Catholicism to be married in my fiance's church. 15 years and 3 children later, he wanted a divorce. We got pregnant by choice, and one of the reasons for that choice is that we could afford 3 children with both of us raising them, and we could parent them together. When he divorced me, he left me to raise those 3 children alone. All 3 children are now grown and have mental health issues, both from their abandonment by their father, and because I needed to leave them home alone to work because my income was now all we had to pay housing costs, food, clothing, etc. It was too much for me to provide for them alone. I never wanted the divorce, but was forced to accept this life he chose for me when he decided to leave us. I 100% agree with Matt that divorce is too easy. Both parties should want it. If he was going to have to be unhappy in our marriage, maybe his unhappiness would have been much better than the damage done to these children who had to be raised in a single family household with the economic struggles and lack of supervision that single parent families have.
Well, a according to Jesus. Divorce is not recognized. So if your ex sleeps with anyone else he's an adulterer. He can't marry again either. However YOU can marry again because he broke the covenant of Marriage which frees you.
Afford lol Having children should not be about what you can afford. This is "boss girl" mentality and exactly why we are declining in replacement rate.
This is why Joe is the king. They agree for 70% of the interview and disagree on 30% yet the conversation goes on. People get to listen and decide for themselves.
They were really dancing around the conversation. Matt's position was marriage is a religious union to create offspring and people who want to be together and 1 arent man and woman or/and 2 dont want kids can have that same legal union without calling it marriage. Law stole the name marriage.
Did you check the video after the 2 hour mark? Joe spends a good half hour building a straw man on Matt Walsh's conservative view on marriage vs gay marriage. It's pathetic. Joe can't argue for shit without relying on logical fallacies or exceptional hypotheticals for a general argument; it's like listening to a 90s teenager point of view. I don't think Joe has challenged his views since then, it's embarrassing to hear a grown man like him argue purely from emotional outrage. Dude is a Karen for any liberal views he holds.
meh... he kept cutting off Matt. Marriage is between a man and a woman. Gay marriage isn't marriage. It's something else, but it's not marriage. What does the state have to do with marriage at all?? Does it make you more in love? What rights? No one is stopping gay people from doing anything. We just don't care.
Obama Identifies as a black man even though he is half white. Who says you cannot self identify your race? Rachel Dolezal got beef for it and she had to be cancelled
Matt exposing this issue absolutely helped me snap out of the Bay Area/LA liberal brainwashing. I came back to Conservatism thanks to this nonsense. God bless.
@@tippsish Well, if it was that simple, why would gay people exiat ? Let alone trans ans everything that is "abnormal" ? And the fact that they exist is fine by me, and not by Matt. Why ? Because of the Bible
I was put on lupron as a kid for precocious puberty, I’m fighting my second rare cancer diagnosis in the last 16 years. I’m not likely to survive this time around and partly blame the lupron for my current situation. I really wish I could scream it from the rooftops and talk to people about this risk, I vividly remember how that drug made me feel, it made me feel so terrible both physically and emotionally. Please if you are a parent who has a kid who’s transgender and is considering “treatment” I beg you to consider what the drug can do to your child in the future.
We need more people speaking up like Mr Walsh. You should be proud of the work you’ve done sir and your family should be too. Keep fighting the good fight. God fearing, hard working, law abiding citizens are on your side. Period
Matt should stick to what he knows, which is politics and religion, and leave psychology and psychiatry alone. He doesn't really believe in either and that's just dumb. Even catholic church exorcists believe in mental illness.
@@Cannibalizee You don't need to understand psychology to understand reality. Also, the reality is, no one understands psychology, even the pharma companies don't fully understand how their medications like anti-depressants work. Don't allow credentialism to rule your thought patterns.
If you have to fear your God you should rethink what you are praying to ... Fear evil, fear humans, fear your destructive potential. God isn't a human God doesn't have human emotions nor expectations....
I left this on when i ran to the store and now my cat is a conservative and has been telling me the benefits of converting to Christianity for the last hour.
OMG! Joe Rogan, giving new meaning to the word obtuse. I don’t even agree with Matt Walsh on this issue, but how can you not see that he is talking about the cultural impact, not how it affects his own marriage?!?!
Yea obviously, but Rogan is arguing the point that not everyone has to see everything the same.. because how how people that get married but cannot conceive.. so their marriage then also becomes pointless? Even Abraham in the bible had a hard time conceiving with his wife.. but their marriage wasn’t irrelevant…
Rogan is looking at MICRO level, making up some hypothetical "what if cases", that represent 0.0000001% of society, when Walsh is talking about fundamentals at MACRO level. Redefining fundamentals (like marriage), which are foundational for, clearly decaying society, because of that, by pondering to some miniscule population of sexual deviants is clear sign of shallow and hedonically dogmatic blindness.
Well can’t you see that Joe rogan is talking about impact on individual because of how there sexuality and love is being denied through ultra conservative values
Matt is refusing to bring the fundamental truth about marriage to the table: Marriage is wholly a religious institution as it is a contract with God. Legal marriage is a bastardizatiin that shouldn't exist. Common law union is not the same thing as marriage.
I think joe is speaking about individual people. Matt is speaking for the society as a whole. Individuals are allow to not have children. But for society not having children is a detriment to society.
We actually need to start having more kids otherwise our societies are going to collapse. Replacement rate has went down all over the world and some think part of the open border crap is to ensure we still hit replacement rate but idk it seems like a lot more than that.
@casmatori it's what we need. This is why we are fighting for resources, why there's so much crime, and so on. To many people to keep any type of control of.
You mean when Matt Walsh pulled a random number out of his ass and Jamie had to correct millions down to a few thousand? If you are that far off with basic facts, you have zero business being anywhere close to this conversation. What a fucking dunce.
@jasonpopielarczyk7511 did you love when Matt thought that millions had been on therapy when it was thousands? He did a documentary and was off by many orders of magnitude. You failed your sanity check.
@@TheFloridaBro BRO (my b) i dont think the average joe checks the numbers, why do u think people say shit with so much confidence lmao. they just hope they are right.
@@scesfizia One does not negate the other. A marriage confers benefits. The reason for those benefits was an assumption that the marriage would result in a family (when nearly all had families if they could). If that is not now the assumption, why are we conferring benefits? Because people are in love: so people not in love should be punished..? So I get it. It's a status that the church and state allow marriage for the benefit of the children. Easy divorce does devalue marriage: no-one goes in thinking they are in this for life anymore and will jump ship when it becomes not worth it. So it has been eroded from all sides.
@@scesfizia "in the name of"? what does that even mean? Oh, right.... it means you can throw an infinite chain of blame at something or someone you have a bone to pick with, because somehow or some way there's a connection that can bemade with literally any 2 entities, organizations, names, institutions, or ideas. Like all white people were born "in the name of" slavery? Or all mice are killed "in the name of" Sylvester the cat. The funnest ones though are whenever good intentions go awry, [as they always do sooner or later] then Christianity - a set of general beliefs that revolutionized society & brought us out of the dark ages, and is the foundation of modern legal philosophy - is to blame. How do you blame a vast set of ideas, though? Are all the doncrines of Christianity to blame for marriage problems? Would it be better to not have marriage in the first place, no families, just let all women who get pregnant abort their kids or fend for themselves? Which brings us to the final and inevitable question: If Christianity is to blame for X problem, do you have a better solution? Can you teach us your solution, so that the situation you're blaming on Christianity, can be eradicated and prevented from happening? Have you thought out your solution sufficiently, so that it is actually practical and works consistently, without causing other problems that are even worse? Like, have you tested it out, and proved it's efficiency in both solving the problem, and not creating other, more severe problems?
@@nik07nik Yes they were. Before the Spotify deal. Maybe not this specific one, and there are several that were done while Joe was only really on Spotify but all you could usually find on RU-vid were things on the clips channel. It is nice to see Joe's podcasts back on RU-vid.
@@mynamejeff4883This one was originally on RU-vid. I've reached a point at hour and a 1/2 in realizing I heard this before and I can't believe I stumbled upon your conversation here By the way, I just googled it a little while ago and yes, this was from 2022.
The definition of "marriage" that Joe proposes here is actually the definition of "Civil Union." The two are not interchangeable because they have different origins and purposes. Matt is 100% correct on this - even if he couldn't quite articulate it in this session. Marriage is the recognition of spiritual AND legal union - coupled with the expectation and opportunity to form a new family unit. A civil union is the recognition of two individuals who love eachother and want to dedicate themselves legally to that coupling. There is a REASON that gay people want "mariage" and not "civil union" - and that's the connotation that the term brings -- To set out on a journey of building a family together and becoming parents for the next generation is such a big deal to human beings (since time immemorial) that we have always gone out of the way to celebrate these unions in a big way. A civil union doesn't get the same treatment societally because it is, literally, just designed for the happiness of those involved. It brings with it no such glorification, because it's not a proclamation of one's willingness to further the species and/or participate in societal customs. It's just two people saying "this one's mine." The problem, as Matt tried to explain, is that modern society has completely lost touch with this fact - and is treating them interchangeably. The result is that marriage as an institution has been degraded of all of it's value and is treated identically to civil unions - The only noteable difference now is that mariage comes with a few extra legal benefits. More and more young people are so disillusioned / removed from greater society and no longer see the value of marriage. Young men especially, since signing those papers essentially gives the women absolute control over their lives - with the opportunity to ruin them entirely and walk away scot-free. When marriage is degraded to "just a legal document" that "says you love eachother," more and more young people are asking "well...why is that needed then? Why sign my life away unnecessarily?"
You articulated this very well! I agreed with Matt Walsh on every point he made but it seemed like there was a bigger point that he was trying to get across that he just couldn’t find the words for.
Wow! That last part was a little rough. I was married for 16 years, was narcissistically abused, and when I finally escaped, left 3 business that we had built together, a new house on an acreage, boat, cars, trucks, RV's, etc. I got no cash, no alimony, no child support. Our daughter and I were homeless for two years while I dug us out of the hole. So no, marriage is not a contract that allows a woman to ruin a man and take all his stuff.
Very interesting commentary on marriage. Thanks Joe for having the courage to host these type of discussions. Props to Matt for being able to so clearly explain his position.
They seem to have a disagreement on what the fundamental purpose of marriage is. Joe seems to think it's about individual happiness and matt seems to think it's about the way individual relationships and society interact to make a stable environment to raise kids. Both are right in their own sense
@@aaronflynndevereux1832it’s the liberal worldview (individual Liberty, personal happiness) vs the conservative worldview (societal stability and cohesion, tradition and connection).
@@aaronflynndevereux1832 agree, it's the order in which they view it. Joe thinks a marriage solidifies a loving bond between 2 people, who are then in a position to have a baby. Matt thinks you decide to reproduce and so get married to provide a stable environment in which to raise a baby. Joe doesn't regard the desire for baby-producing as a pre-requisite for marriage.
What I think Matt failed to say: marriage was initially intended to be within the confines of the Church. The government adopted it legally to monopolize and incentivize with tax breaks. More government intervention. As far as everything else, moral relativism leads to a “freedom” of chaos and hedonism.
Actually it was religious in general. The first Christians were converted pagans who were married under their pagan religion and then had a second Christian marriage to the same people once they converted to Christianity.
Well unfortunately the govt has 💩 all over marriage and incentivized single motherhood. The more children you have out of wedlock the more taxpayer funded benefits you can receive......but NOT if you are married
I was surprised by Matt not hitting that home. To me that’s an unforced error on his part in the dialogue. He’s too smart to leave that out-maybe there’s another reason, like an agreement with Rogan?? The Biblical framework/covenant for marriage and family is, to me, irrefutably the best design, but flawed humans mess it up through sin, selfishness, abuse, etc. When God is left out of the marriage, and divorce becomes rampant, you end up with the trainwreck American society faces today.
@@athenametzger9269 Matt didn't push the Christian perspective on the subject because he knew in Joe's eyes that would immediately discredit his argument in it's entirety. While marriage is an extremely important tenant of Christianity, it is not JUST a Christian and/or religious issue. Marriage exists in virtually every culture and religion on Earth. Focusing solely on the Christian point of view would lead to Joe, and thousands of others who hold his same perspective, not even considering the points Matt was trying to articulate about the importance of traditional marriage to society as a whole. Coming from a Christian Conservative, we have to learn to argue on subjects such as this without even bringing theology into it. In the eyes of many people who are on the fence about certain hot topic issues such as abortion, the moment we bring our personal religious beliefs into it they feel that we aren't thinking logically, and are simply spouting religious rhetoric at them.
I don’t agree with Walsh in all subjects, but he is a great man fighting for a great cause! He speaks for all the people who can’t for fear of losing one’s livelihood
Matt is pretty smart on most topics…except for saying fat people are gluttons and food can’t be addictive. I have seen too many RU-vid videos of people who lost weight once they gave up carbs.
Matt should have shifted the conversation when Joe repeatedly could not comprehend his clear argumentation that "gay marriage" undermines: two of the 3 pillars pillars of marriage. Nameley: reproductive, the union of male+woman, minus the commitment aspect, which has been abolished already. You agree to disagree and move on, this got sour and stalled.
Rogan is looking at MICRO level, making up some hypothetical "what if cases", that represent 0.0000001% of society, when Walsh is talking about fundamentals at MACRO level. Redefining fundamentals (like marriage), which are foundational for, clearly decaying society, because of that, by pondering to some miniscule population of sexual deviants is clear sign of shallow and hedonically dogmatic blindness.
@@Comrade_Akimov Marriage is a religious ceremony from the bible where a man and woman unite before God. Marriage is a religious ceremony and man's law chose to recognize this union as legally binding. The solution is that all couples must have a legal contract and let religious people have a marriage ceremony in addition to their legal contract.
@roseypeach8363 a lot of it is they want the power of imitating this beautiful union so they still want to be called the same thing. And the ease of divorce is damaging and shouldn't be happening
does that matter actually? i think this was a good conversation on its own and good points are made. maybe judge the video on that fact instead of a winner/loser situation. @goon6932
@@goon6932 i actually don't have a bias. I'm a longtime Matt Walsh fan and although I agree with lots of his opinions, i also agreed with Joe most of the time here so. There's no winner, just a really good podcast
One day youll be surrounded by your loved ones over the holiday and notice a few of them are missing. Those that are missing will be the gentlemen and the ladies that cannot stand your foolishness. I applaud those loved ones.
I find it weird to hang around with awful people who won't treat me as an equal. no deep relationship is worth staying in if you can't reach mutual respect and love, including between grown adults and their parents. I respect and love my parents. I don't love my awful uncles and aunts.
For anyone wondering why this got uploaded now? this is an old episode? Etc. They are uploading the great majority of the back-catalog on RU-vid again. Prob has to do with signing the new Spotify deal Joe did several months ago.
Marriage is not primarily for the couple's personal fulfillment (as Joe seems to believe). It's to maintain a stable family of a father and mother for their offspring. In other words, it's about the kids.
Those on the left try to muddy the water by stating not everybody is fertile or want to have children in a marriage; the key issue with a man and woman joining in marriage is that there is the potential for children; this potential is of course impossible with gay unions.
Yes! Thank you! It's about creating a safe space for children where both partners are required to put in the effort necessary to sustain and maintain the family.
What are you about. You don't need marriage for two consenting adult who made the baby to give it a stable family. Neither that being married is going to provide that stable family for sure. Marriage is just a man made invention, a word.
Do you really think that your father and mother married to fulfill a duty ,, they didn’t even knew that you will be a duty that they would have to first produce and then raise ,,
Marriage exists for tax reasons. Dont be ridiculous. Actually loving somebody and marriage can be two separate things, otherwise protestants and divorce wouldnt exist. Being gay and in love at the same time is possible, depsite all the rhetoric and hate matt walsh and his type spread.
Marriage has never been looked upon in any society throughout history as merely a construct of Man, it has always been seen as a creation of God and Nature and merely recognized as such by Man. This is so fundamental it defies any disagreement. It is because man and woman alone carry the procreative potential that marriage has been seen as the building block of society. It is a new thing to say now Marriage is a lifestyle choice based on individual feelings. A formal acknowledgement of a gay union might be a good thing, but it can never replace the purpose of Marriage for society. This is a fundamental change in the way society has been ordered since recorded time. We will, as Matt suggests, see in time what this change has yielded for society and our civilization.
The whole second half of this podcast really put on display how joe is only able to see reality through a hedonic lens.. from devorce, to the choìce of childless union, to people prefering same sex relations... everything he said was on wants and feels... total hedonism. Marriage is duty not choice. Sex for pleasure is an immoral selfish act. No one is born gay, some kids just never have their narcissism checked by a strong father and a loving mother in a proper marriage and so they come up with warped perceptions of sexuality and self to societies detriment.
Once it gets to that point though, the source of degradation will likely be skewed and/or ignored completely by the majority. Not trying to be a negative nelly, it's been a pattern of human history to twist said history for one's own personal gains
Conservatives were laughed at/derided for saying the legalization of gay marriage was the beginning of a slippery slope. And here we are. Once gay people achieved their goal, they had to figure out where to turn their attention and funds. They chose trans rights, although many gays are either unaware of that or furiously backpedaling away from that.
Its not that clear cut. The idea of marriage that we have today came in through christianity. Roman law, greek law, asian law, ancient egyptian law -- they were all different. Marriage in roman and greek terms had nothing to do with love. In fact, up until the middle-ages the very idea that you married for love was regarded as absurd. Your parents picked for you, often in a strategic way to join families and obtain wealth. So the idea of romantic or "love" based marriage is a relatively new notion. Christianity did not care about the love aspect either until the age of the chivalry. People really need to read history, including the darker aspects
@@CipherDiazindeed. That is the individual level it affects. The societal is less children. We are living that out heavily at this point. The west is well below replacement level at this point. The need in a society to at minimum keep replacement rate cannot be understated. This is why couples that marry and don’t have children actually do hurt other people. The economy suffers, the social programs become more burdened, the next generation of workers disappear and on and on. Then amplify those problems even further by saying anyone can get married and it doesn’t matter at all. The two same sex cannot naturally have children and that won’t help. Then if they do decide they want children they will have to use surrogacy or something. In this method they are intentionally depriving the child of either the actual mother or father. In some cases both. (This is especially egregious as a child has a right to be raised by their biological mother and father. Does that always play out, unfortunately not. In cases where the parents did something to lose those rights for the safety of the child or something. However as a society we shouldn’t start with that.) And that is all to fulfill their desire to have kids. A good thing in it itself but done in the most selfish way possible. Certainly marriage as it has historically been defined is better for everyone it impacts.
Official Rogan quote “people shouldn’t be expected to stay married for life” lol Joe, that’s what he’s talking about.. Marriage doesn’t matter anymore, he’s explaining why that’s happened.. And yea, if you make a contracted commitment to a marriage, it should be hard to get out of..
It used to be hard to get out of as recently as the 50s and 60s. You were shunned by your close society. It caused misery for everyone involved - those who stayed in loveless cohabitation, kids growing up with parents who hate each other or live in fear of their parent, and those who were ostracised by their church and village/society. We changed divorce laws for the better
Gay marriage has only been legal in the US for less than 20 years so explain the increasing divorce rate and other things they discussed before it was legalized. Marriage may not mean as much as it used to but I highly doubt gay marriage caused as much of that problem as Matt is saying. Realistically it’s the lack of thought before actually getting married and then the easiness of modern day divorce.
@@gurugru5958 I don't know why people say this like it's some kind of own. Most hardcore stay-married-for-life advocates acknowledge the "Three As" as acceptable reasons for divorce: abuse, addiction, adultery. What is being criticized is no-fault divorce, where neither of the above are present.
I think Joe doesn’t really buy that the family unit is the basic building block for society to be good. Having a high quality society is not valued these days maybe because we have not experienced it recently.
The family is the fundamental building block of the society. Society is the larger family. If the society is not a single family, it is low-quality. A fractured society is a larger, fractured family. Families are a form of social embedding as old as evolution itself. Social embedding is a prerequisite for a high-quality society of any lifeform we are familiar with. Unfortunately, the enemies of all-human potentiation figured out a simple trick: convince children their parents are ignorant perpetually by embedding subtext in family-focused media (cartoons, children's edutainment films, holiday films, social dramas, etc.), by redirecting their interests away from the norm perpetually by funding novel socio-political constructs (feudalism, industrialism, communism, capitalism, techno-feudalism, etc.) The modes of governance are shifted generationally and intentionally to perpetuate the permanent disabling of families emerging from poverty or providing legitimate socio-economic instruction across generations. It is an old technique, as old as society itself, but the majority are too plugged in to the constructs to figure the totality of the system out.
Joe I’ve been a nurse and NP for over 40 years. Among the saddest times I have seen are childless couples that lose their spouse. It is heartbreaking! I am now a widow and so thankful for my children and grandchildren. It is the way of nature
@@TommyGunz327 is not Catholic yet but I did include him in my Rosary Prayer today with Father Rocky on Relevant Radio❤️🙏 I am asking Our Lady’s Intercession for his conversion. He is a good hearted man and seems just on the edge of realizing that he has a desire for a Faith Life. God changes hearts…I WAS a liberal and in my conversion to Catholicism I truly understand the disorder a mysogyny underneath homosexuality (I was bisexual and through conversion as well as Jungian type work I totally have been healed of same sex attraction)…see Mario Bergner’s book “Setting Love in Order” and Leanne Paynes book “The Broken Image”. Gay men were either molested/ or absent father/ overbearing mother…there is always a deep family of origin issue or molestation (even with Lesbians). In Lesbians there is some mother hunger absence of maternal love absence of father too.
@@crunchywashere3513 No, I don't always agree with him. But, he is very serious about his convictions and for the most part they are based on sound reason and data. Clown is the last descriptor you could append to such a person.
@@crunchywashere3513yes, when I think of clown I think calm, rational person with consistent values who can articulate them well in an even tone of voice
Quite interestingly EVERYTHING Joe Rogan said to defend homosexuality is what Trans advocates use to defend transgenderism. It’s quite remarkable that each generation is swept up by something new with the EXACT SAME SENTIMENT, P3dophilia 🔜
@@johnv6806 I understand the principle, but there is more of a social element to how people choose to present themselves. There is such thing as a biological woman, and there is such thing as a trans woman. Trans species might not be too far behind, depending on how technology/biological sciences advance.
I love how intelligent and pragmatic MEN speak with eachother. There is a certain type of respect and accountability that makes the conversations blossom and become very contemplative. Each participant is evolving mentaly right in front of your eyes
On marriage I don't get why Joe keeps going back to "well it's their choice." Matt's whole point is "it's not good for society." There are a whole lot of personal choices that everyone can make which will lead society to absolute ruin, and the vast majority of them would not effect you personally in the immediate.
Because it’s their choice. You have no actual proof that is bad for society. Most marriages could be argued as bad for society. So should the government evaluate each and every single potential marriage to see whether we will be harmful and be the ones to decide whether it can happen? Why do you want more government oversight and tyranny?
That's the beauty of your personal political beliefs. I"m a centrist, libertarian but right leaning libertarian and while I think it's wrong to teach this gendered confusion to children, if you are an adult in a same sex relationship, and want to get married, then you should be able to get married. I"m all for people being treated respectfully and equally unless they give me, or society as a whole a reason not to treat them respectfully or equally.
Noah Webster's 1884 dictionary defines marriage as "the act of uniting a man and woman for life; wedlock; the legal union of a man and woman for life." It emphasizes the legal and lifelong union between a man and woman.
@@TheFloridaBro There is no justification for changing it now, and no authority to do so. Unlike the approach taken today where a cabal of ideological nitwits changes the definitions of words in online dictionaries on a whim, to suite their ideological predilections, the original compilers of dictionaries worked diligently to clarify definitions that expressed the observable and documented meaning of the word as used in society. They took their role seriously.
@mepatton an appeal to definition for a cultural construct like marriage is the lowest form of argument you could make, if it can even be called an argument. That was the definition in 1884 for those particular, very serious men. Their definition doesn't extend to the infinite future.
@@TheFloridaBro You're entirely wrong. The definition laid down in 1884 was mostly definitely NOT "the defition for those particular, very serious men," it was the OBSERVABLE RECOGNIZED DEFINITION of society as far back as they could document it. You demonstrate no comprehension of how dictionaries came to be, and no awareness that the English speaking world is not the only society which has recognized what marriage is. You will not find any significant different in the understanding of what marriage is in any society in the history of the world, regardless of the language they spoke. Marriage isn't a "cutural construct" as you #RegressiveleftistDipshits use the term. It is an observed action ("to marry") and an observed state of being ("marriage"). No one sat down one day and made up what they thought it should be at the time; both the act and the state of being predate written history and are present in all civilizations.
I absolutely love that there was a debate on a sensitive topic and both men remained gentmanly (not a word) and cordial. This is something we need to see more of in the political and professional arenas. Great work!
My father would always tell me “silence can make a man speak” just nod and listen when someone talks and they will tell you a lot, maybe more than they intend
Joe keeps asking "what's the damage to a straight relationship because of a gay relationship" Matt Keeps answering "the damage I'm talking about is to society and the safe and best environment for child rearing NOT to my existing marriage or any other individual relationship" then Joe obviously doesn't listen and just asks the same question again...
@@ThePossumone Exactly and if you look at countries and cultures doing better than America they are all traditional, homogenous, and in so many ways, if not completely, culturally opposite of America. And as America has become more secular and progressive we have declined. The irony is every country progressives point to as superior to America, their cultures are the exact opposite of America and often Catholic. And they love brown and/or Muslim cultures that are radically traditional, which is what they despise about America. Their cognitive dissonance is epic.
@@ThePossumone It proves how easy it is to brainwash people. I’m 58 years old. People I went to college with back in the 80s would never ever have been on board with today’s radical agenda back then. But now whatever the Democrats tell them to think they rabidly defend. They love to mock conservatives and libertarians as being brainwashed, but we actually believe in objective truth, science, reality, data, science. They are the ones that believe things that are objectively false. We can prove what they believe is factually incorrect. But they still will not change their mind. It’s literally 1984 and precisely as Yuri Bezmenov described. During pride I I got into fights on Instagram with very radical & privileged very attractive white women in their 20s and 30s. They loved saying go away old white man. And of course they arrogantly thought they were being funny and profound. I would immediately point out that they have a soft privileged life thanks to old white men. Everything they use and enjoy daily and take for granted was invented by an old white man. They have the right to vote because of old white men. They have freedom thanks to old white men. The reason they can even have a pride parade and the rights enjoyed by homosexuals today is because of old white men. So show some respect & appreciation. The combination of the media selling out to the far left and the radicalization of the public school system by way of teachers union is what got us to where we are today.
Saying you are 5 when you are 38 is less crazy than a man saying he is a woman. At least sometime he was 5 and knows what being 5 feels like. You can’t say you feel you are a woman’s because you like the color pink and fashion shows. I don’t understand women who are in favor of this. Doing this only serves to demean and diminish the real significance of being a woman to frivolous, material ideas.
This is SUCH a good point. At some point all these males had a moment where they though “well I feel this way which is different than some of the guys I’ve observed, women must feel this way too therefore I am a woman” SMH
Got to give Joe and Matt credit for being able to have a reasonable discussion on points that they very firmly disagrees with and be able to come out at the end disagree and be civil about it, the world needs more of this we're allowed to disagree and still be civil!
Matt handled all of the marriage arguments very very very well. As a faithful Catholic, I can say he did a great job. But man was it frustrating listening to Joe go on and on about it. He just doesn’t get it.
Matts not in the business of informing people. He's in the business of making money by talking about things that he is entirely unqualified to talk about.
My oldest daughter starts Kindergarten this month and I’m absolutely terrified about the brain washing she might get. I’m thinking we should have opted for private school.
@@user-mi5dt1js6fthey won’t LET you in the classroom today. They used COVID and then obsessed about gun control and now parents have never re-entered the schools…….
Yep. I’m terrified. My child is older now (still not in middle school) but I’m highly suspicious and we’ve have multiple conversations about him hearing key words and immediately telling me. They’re actively keeping us parents out of the schools and out of the class rooms…. #1 career that donates to democrats I believe
I understand both sides. Matt is explaining the reason marriage exists while Joe is explaining why people want to marry. Both correct in their own way.
@@edjackson4389 No it is perfectly clear. It is just people outside of the religious context in which it should remain, don't believe the sacramental value of it. Have your civil unions, I have nothing against that, but to call them marriage... is pushing it.
Marriage has become more of a legal status for taxes and protections under the law than a sacred union between two people. Society is slowly devolving.
@@ShimonFrankelThe usual stuff of course. UFOs, conspiracies and cults etc... it would be great to see Matt and Joe discuss the legitimacy of Bigfoot identifying as non binary.
Homosexuals had the chance to have Civil Unions that would give them all the rights to inherit , power of attorney etc but they refused that. That's how you know they wanted to change the fundamental definition of marriage.
Conservatives fought against civil unions and used every trick in the book to try to be able to legally discriminate against thrm. Thats why the word marriage was important. Blame your own pprejudice. Anyways im enjoying my legal gay marriage.
Statute of limitations for medical malpractice in most states is 2 years. The high being 5 years. If the statute of limitations was raised. Especially for minors so they have a solid decade after they turn 18… and absolutely NO doctors would do hormones, puberty blockers, or surgery on minors.
The problem is that it isn't "malpractice" to do a transition surgery or medications. These are procedures that are fully legal for the doctor to do, and as long as the end results are technically correct, then it isn't "malpractice." If the puberty blockers blocked puberty exactly as intended, if the surgery went as expected and was performed correctly, then it isn't "malpractice." From a legal standpoint, that is. From a moral standpoint, it is evil, ritual mutilation in the name of Satan, and should absolutely be stopped, not just in minors but in adults as well!! I said what I said. 🤨
@@ericsmith1508That is factually incorrect. When treating a patient you have to have to determine: the right patient, right medication/procedure, the right dose, the right time right route. This is typically used for medication administration but is true for any aspect of the medical system. Deviation from it does constitute malpractice. You can't suggest that A: a child can consent to any of this, or B: that a practitioner is not liable for their actions that have long term harm so long as they did their buchery well.
This is why i love JR podcast ! It is very clear that Joe disagrees with Matt on the subject of gay marriage. And i do too. But instead of insulting Matt.... he is asking questions, laying out his point of view and just trying to understand why Matt is thinking the way he does. To have a civil conversation with someone that has a different point of view, is a trade that is getting lost with this generation
I went into my local supermarket. I asked. "What is a shopping cart?" The other shoppers became triggered and started screaming at me. I had to leave. The shopping carts in the parking lot started chasing after me. I have been stalked by shopping carts ever since. Thanks, Matt Walsh.
The more sense that Matt makes, the deeper Joe has to spin some hypothetical that represents a tiny insignificant minority. This is the most obnoxiously bleeding heart Joe has ever been. I’m shocked he didn’t start crying.
Matt Walsh one of the most censored in YT, I had to look for this episode because I heard it was uploaded, otherwise I would have never known it was here.
@@samanthajardim there are many books that cover the subject, it's quite simple the way it works. Sort of like the elephant and the string, if you are familiar.
@@imjustadrummer I was being silly, Michael Knowles wrote a book about it called Speechless: Controlling Words Controlling Minds and he mentions it regularly on his show.
This is why many on the left love to play games with the language. The more we tear down definitions, the easier it is for them to make the words mean whatever they want.
Sadly, the trans social contagion consumed our niece, with the help of my wife’s sister. They moved across the country to get away from family who disagreed with what she did. She was a lovely young lady. Unfortunately, there are other family members who were feeding into this insanity. It’s all very sad.
I didn't know only Christians knew that men have penises and women have vaginas. I thought atheists, Hindus, Muslims, Sheiks, etc could comprehend that. Actually, every one in the world except for those in the "developed nations" clearly know what a man and a woman are. 😢@@crunchywashere3513
The debate on marriage was really good. Its one of the rare debates where even though I may agree a little more with one side, both Joe and Matt articulated their arguments well.
@@hansofaxalia I agree, I see a lot of hope especially if Trump gets elected with large Black support. What will be telling is how much protest there will be when it's official. If there is little to none that is a great sign. That means even young people are overall sick of the left.
I truly appreciate when a conversation can be exactly that, a conversation even when the views are different. No one is screaming. Open to a variety dialog. This is how people should discuss issues. If only.
A lot of people don't get his humor. Like the time he off-handedly and hyperbolically called anime 'satanic' all kinds of news outlets were railing against him over this obvious joke. And it's Matt, so once they started attacking him on it, he doubled and tripled down.
Joe gets hung up on that topic in an attempt to be compassionate. Someone like Matt Walsh or myself see marriage as exclusively a sacrament between one man and one woman. Someone may be attracted to or love another of the same sex, but no bond between them is a Holy Sacrament of Marriage.
@@shyloevans9241Changing the definition of marriage to assuage sodomites is a semantic argument. Sexual deviants can and could file government paperwork for civil unions. Hijacking marriage as an institution was the point. Look around you, the same fluid, subjective thought process has rotted other normal institutions. I refer you back to the initial discussion on gender.
Marriage, as an institution, was desecrated the moment we allowed divorce for anything other than abuse and adultery. Any subsequent debates have become convoluted.
A disconnection from God is a disconnection from the ideal because He was the first to demonstrate the nature of true love of which marriage is but a symbol.
I don’t get why Matt didn’t push back on the definition of marriage. God created marriage, not the government. The question isn’t why can’t gay people be married, the question is why do people who reject Christianity want to participate in a Christian ritual? (If he says that later then I’m not to that point yet, but they’ve been going on and on about this for a long time now and Matt hasn’t said that. He just keeps saying how he’s talking about it on a societal level and not a personal level.)
@@daryle2402Christmas was originally Christian doesnt mean only Christians celebrate it now well technically it was taken from the pagans but that's besides the point
I always enjoy JRE content, and while this episode wasn't the most exciting guest for me, I cannot express how impressive it is to watch two people with starkly different ideals on a very controversial subject have an open and calm debate. This was a masterclass on how more people should behave within differences.
Joe: A gay marriage doesn’t hurt a straight marriage or straight marriages. It hurts society at large. Marriage expanded to people of the same sex then opens marriage up to whatever anyone wants. And a critical, historical institution loses its foundational purpose. The institution is a whole different thing.
