The Matt Walsh Show - Ep 301 - Twitter Protects Predators

00:00:00.000 Today on the Matt Wall Show, we're going to talk about the impotence of the outrage mob.

00:00:04.300 What is the best way to deal with the outrage mob? Well, it's not to surrender and collapse

00:00:08.460 into a puddle and give them everything they want. I think it's to ignore them. We're going to talk

00:00:11.720 about that. Also, we will discuss the most egregious thing Twitter has ever done, the most

00:00:17.040 egregious example of bias that I think a lot of people are ignoring, but we should discuss.

00:00:23.180 We'll do that today. And finally, Cory Booker fantasizes publicly on camera about punching

00:00:29.720 Donald Trump in the face. Just more love and tolerance from the loving and tolerant left.

00:00:34.480 We'll discuss that today also on the Matt Wall Show.

00:00:40.320 Well, I love this story because it perfectly emphasizes a point that I've been making for

00:00:45.920 years. And I love it when I'm proven right, which happens from time to time. A woman by the name of 0.98

00:00:52.340 Allie Ward visited a Macy's in New York a couple of days ago, and she found these gimmicky little

00:00:59.400 plates that have been that have these concentric circles on them with the outer circle saying mom

00:01:06.080 jeans. And then the next circle in says favorite jeans. And then the next circle in the smallest

00:01:11.840 circle says skinny jeans. And the joke being that if your food makes it out to the mom jeans circle,

00:01:17.960 then you've got too much food because you're going to be fat. So you want to, you know, if you want the

00:01:22.020 skinny jeans, you got to have that little circle in the middle there. Obviously, it's a joke.

00:01:27.560 You know, I don't think it's meant to be taken all that seriously, but for some reason,

00:01:32.120 this was offensive. For some inconceivable reason, it's offensive to have these circles on a plate.

00:01:38.700 And so Ward tweeted a picture of the plates and then said that she wants to have the plates banned 0.73

00:01:44.020 in all 50 states. Now, I'm sure the banned thing was, well, I would hope the comment about having

00:01:51.260 them banned was hyperbolic, not meant to be taken totally literally. But the point is she was upset

00:01:57.000 about the plates. She didn't like the plates. They're bad plates, not good plates. Okay.

00:02:03.020 Well, within four hours of that tweet being sent out, four hours, just one person,

00:02:11.560 one person complained. And that complaint had less than a thousand retweets.

00:02:16.880 Okay. So it was not, it was not like this thing had gone viral or something and 40,000 people had

00:02:23.620 retweeted it, just less than a thousand retweets. Just that one complaint, which that hardly anyone

00:02:29.920 had noticed. And Macy's responded by saying they were going to remove the product.

00:02:34.920 It only took one complaint. Now, on one hand, it's just plates. So who cares? Right. I,

00:02:42.460 you know, and I, I, I kind of understand you, you can understand on one level when a company says

00:02:48.600 they get a complaint about a product and they say, all right, like, it's not worth the trouble.

00:02:53.420 It's just plates. I, you know, I didn't feel like dealing with this. Uh, so we'll just get rid of the

00:02:58.120 place. You know, when, when companies act like pushover, um, parents who end up with spoiled

00:03:04.800 bratty kids, where they, the every, they just don't feel like fighting about anything or taking

00:03:09.400 a stand ever because everything, everything in and of itself seems too petty. So you're just like,

00:03:14.500 yeah, whatever you do, do what you want, do what you want. Now as parents, we all do that sometimes.

00:03:20.060 And so I understand sometimes when companies do that, where you just, you, you had a long day,

00:03:24.720 you're tired. You don't feel like dealing with it. Uh, you know, they want a snack. You said, no,

00:03:30.040 they start crying. You're like, fine. Just take the frigging snack, take the snack. Um,

00:03:35.940 but the point is, if you do that all the time, you're going to end up with horrible kids.

00:03:40.620 And when companies do that all the time, which they do now, companies are so absurdly pathologically

00:03:48.140 unreasonably risk averse that any complaint will bring them to their knees and surrender.

00:03:53.060 And when they do that, it has the unfortunate, uh, side effect of empowering these whiny morons

00:04:00.120 who get offended by plates. And it's probably, I think there's a connection here actually,

00:04:03.720 because the kids who grow up with parents who are always saying, fine, whatever you want,

00:04:09.660 turn into the kinds of adults who get offended over plates. And they still get the fine,

00:04:15.500 whatever you want response. I mean, at a certain point, just on principle,

00:04:20.000 someone has to stand up and say, you know what? No, I, whatever. I don't care what you want.

00:04:25.020 Yeah. It's just plates who just deal with it. I don't care if you don't like the plates.

00:04:28.520 You know what? We're going to sell more of these plates. We're going to put these circles on every

00:04:32.160 plate just because you complain. How do you like that? But here's what Macy's now, if it was me and

00:04:39.120 I was the head of Macy's, that's probably how I would have responded, which is probably why I'm not

00:04:42.840 the head of a major corporation and never will be. That's probably what I would do. If I get a

00:04:48.600 complaint, I was like, okay, I'm going to do more of that now. How do you like it now? In fact,

00:04:53.360 our whole business now is just going to be selling those plates. But no, here's what Macy could have 1.00

00:05:00.760 done probably more reasonably is they could have just done nothing. Nothing. Ignore it.

00:05:07.440 And you know what the consequences would have been? Nothing. There would have been no consequences,

00:05:13.480 not the slightest bit of consequence. The tweet would have got a few more retweets. People would

00:05:17.780 have complained. Oh, the plates. I don't like them. It's body shaming. And within like 12 hours,

00:05:23.040 24 tops, everybody's moved on. Nobody remembers. Nobody cares. You just do nothing. You ignore these

00:05:30.100 whiners and nothing happens. And that's the case with the vast majority of complaints and outrages

00:05:36.820 these days. I would say 99% of the time when a company or a person is the target of mass outrage,

00:05:44.980 99% of the time, they could simply ignore it and nothing would happen. It won't amount to anything.

00:05:55.800 You could just pretend it's not happening. People are outraged about 47 things a day. They don't have

00:06:01.460 time to stay focused on just you. They've got another outrage scheduled for two o'clock and they don't want

00:06:05.900 to be late. They got to get to it. So just ignore them. You can yawn in their face. Oh, you're upset

00:06:12.140 about that? Okay. No apology. No nothing. Just, all right. Okay. I mean, you could be offended.

00:06:20.620 That's fine. If you want to be. I'm not going to stop you. All right. Nothing happens. Do you know

00:06:28.940 how many times I have trended on Twitter because people are mad at me about something I said? It

00:06:35.240 happens all the time. Okay. It happens on a, on a, on a monthly basis at least. And you know what?

00:06:40.000 It's never mattered. It's never amounted to anything. I've never apologized. I've never

00:06:45.120 backtracked. I've never groveled. I, I honestly, I never have. Even at, even when times, even in times

00:06:51.880 when I tweet something and there's a huge outrage and then I go back and I look at it, I say, yeah,

00:06:55.860 you know, maybe I, I could have just not said that maybe, but you know what? On principle,

00:07:01.740 I'm not going to apologize. I'm just not going to, I don't care. I mean, even if I was wrong,

00:07:06.000 I'm not going to apologize because I, because you people, you outraged whiners, you don't deserve

00:07:12.660 to hear it. If I owe an apology, I will apologize. I'll apologize into a, I'll say it into a shoebox

00:07:18.680 and I'll put a, I'll put a lid on it and I'll just keep that apology in the, in the corner for

00:07:23.060 myself because you don't deserve, well, just because you're upset, I have to apologize to you.

00:07:28.300 No, yeah. You weren't hurt by it. You're not the, you're not the hurt party. Now, if I've really

00:07:32.900 hurt something, if I have hurt a particular person, if I've done damage to a particular person, then yes,

00:07:37.440 I should apologize. But just because you happen to be upset about something when you're not even

00:07:42.380 really upset, it's just your, it's performative. And I'm going to come out and say, I'm so sorry,

00:07:47.500 please. No, I don't care. No, I'm not going to never. That's what companies should do.

00:07:57.300 I maybe have more to say about this. And there's a lot to talk about today, actually, but before I

00:08:01.820 do, I can't forget, I have to mention very important. Noom, you know, Noom is great because

00:08:08.820 the whole task of being healthy, eating healthy, staying in shape. Well, maybe those plates could

00:08:15.000 help you actually, but Macy's took them away now. So now we're all going to get fat,

00:08:19.300 if not for Noom. Because, you know, that whole task can seem very overwhelming. There are so many

00:08:25.420 elements, so many things it seems you have to keep track of and so many things you have to count and

00:08:31.520 everything. And that's what it is for me when I started thinking about, okay, I want to get healthy.

00:08:35.000 I want to do all that. But then it's just, it seems overwhelming. Well, Noom puts it all together,

00:08:42.040 makes it easy, so easy that even someone like myself can do it. So imagine, what if you could

00:08:46.280 use one program for all your health and weight loss needs? No more hunting for training, for

00:08:50.960 training apps, workouts, calorie trackers, meal plans, where you got to, you know, put all this

00:08:55.360 stuff together. No more of that. Plus, you know, you add a goal specialist, community members to keep

00:09:02.060 you motivated and accountable, and you also have a workout partner. It's all kind of rolled into one.

00:09:06.500 You have this all in one place. You know, for me, I know that my goals, partly it's just to eat

00:09:12.020 better, to be healthier. Because if I'm not on top of it, if I don't have someone holding me

00:09:18.220 accountable, I'm going to slip into just the worst diet you could possibly imagine. It's a miracle that

00:09:24.860 at this point, I don't weigh 650 pounds. I don't know how I don't. I'm kind of expecting one day, I kind

00:09:30.440 of think that all the weight is just lodged in my body someday, somewhere, and then one day I'm going to

00:09:35.880 wake up and I'm just going to, you know, it's all going to come out. So I've gotten lucky so far,

00:09:41.120 but I want to stay healthy. And that's part of what Noom does for me, especially with, and the

00:09:45.860 other thing is keeping your energy up, especially with three kids. I got fourth on the way, want to

00:09:49.500 stay energetic, want to have all that energy. And Noom is great for that as well. Noom is a habit

00:09:53.960 changing solution that helps users to learn, to develop a new relationship with food through

00:09:58.940 personalized courses. Based in psychology, Noom teaches you why you do the things you do and it arms you

00:10:03.980 with the tools to break bad habits and replace them with better ones. You don't have to change

00:10:08.060 it all in one day. Okay. This is baby step type of thing. Small steps make, make a lot of progress.

00:10:13.280 Sign up for your trial today at Noom, N-O-O-M.com slash Walsh. What do you have to lose aside from all

00:10:20.380 the weight? Visit Noom.com slash Walsh to start your trial today. That's Noom.com slash Walsh,

00:10:26.460 the last weight program you're ever going to need. All right. Uh, just fixing my collar here. All right.

00:10:32.720 Professional operation. Okay. Um, I will, I think I made my point on the outrage thing. Maybe we'll

00:10:40.820 move on for that. But, uh, I just, I do think that it's, it's so, it's, I just wish people would

00:10:47.780 understand this, that most of the time you can just ignore one of my, one thing I'll never forget. I

00:10:53.820 remember the time when, uh, I tweeted something and it, it, people were upset about it. I don't even

00:11:02.180 remember what it was, but people were outraged. And, but then I went on a kind of a mini vacation.

00:11:07.900 And so I didn't check my phone for three days when I came back. Um, and I went online, I saw sort of

00:11:15.640 the remnants of a past outrage that had since passed, that long since passed, you know, it went

00:11:21.560 on for a day or two and people moved on. So the great thing was I said this thing, people were crying

00:11:28.420 about it yet. I was out fishing completely oblivious to it. And, uh, I come back and they've all moved

00:11:34.400 on. And so I see it and I say, Oh, okay. All right. Well, so that happened. It's just, think about

00:11:41.220 all these people wasting their time being upset at you, mad at you while you just don't care.

00:11:49.000 You know, powerful, you know, empowering that is. You want to talk about empowering. That's empowering.

00:11:52.720 People are so used to when people, you know, someone gets upset, you start cowering, you

00:11:57.600 surrender. It's actually an opportunity for you to feel, to be empowered. When you have all,

00:12:06.100 it seems like everyone is so upset and they're crying and you just don't care. You have no power

00:12:11.700 over me. You've none. Your, your outrage amounts to nothing. How does that feel? Cry about it some more.

00:12:19.360 All right. Um, let me say, I don't want to, I don't want to, here's a topic we talked about last

00:12:25.620 yesterday. Um, I don't want to leave it just yet because I think it's important and it may be a

00:12:34.140 threshold kind of story where as a society, we either draw a line finally and retreat back into

00:12:42.520 some semblance of sanity, or we cross the line, we cross the threshold and we give ourselves up

00:12:46.920 irretrievably irrevocably to full-fledged insanity. Um, I think this issue is, is, is that maybe,

00:12:55.200 and this is the issue of the man who goes by the name, Jessica, you need, identifies as a woman,

00:13:00.760 um, allegedly. And I'm not even sure if I believe actually that he, I think there are a lot of

00:13:06.920 transgender people, um, men who identify as women and are confused. You know, they have a mental 1.00

00:13:13.660 illness. Um, and so of course they're not really women, but they might actually think it because 0.98

00:13:19.600 they, they suffer from a delusion. I also think inevitably you're going to have some men who,

00:13:27.520 who aren't even confused. I mean, they know what they are. They're just pretending to be confused.

00:13:32.780 They're pretending to identify as something that they don't identify as in any way, shape, or form.

00:13:37.540 I think potentially that's what's happening here with Jessica, you need based on, uh, what we found

00:13:44.020 out about this gentleman. So, but this is the guy that's in Canada. He's, he's, as we talked about

00:13:49.500 yesterday, he's suing, uh, various salons in Canada for, for refusing to wax his testicles.

00:13:54.900 These salons only do Brazilians for women. Doing it for a man is a totally different procedure, 0.92

00:14:01.080 different thing, different wax, different, different equipment. They don't do it for men, 0.82

00:14:06.360 but he insists that they do it for him because he claims to be a woman, even though he's not one.

00:14:11.240 He's trying to use the power of the state essentially to force their hands down his pants,

00:14:15.920 which is sexual assault, no matter how you slice it. And that's why this guy, before we even get

00:14:21.460 into the specifics about him, uh, we know this guy's a predator because he is trying to legally

00:14:27.720 sexually assault women, which is self-evidently ridiculous. Of course, um, nobody has a moral

00:14:35.420 right to anyone else's labor. Least of all, do you have the moral right to the labor of a professional

00:14:40.840 genital waxer? And even less than that, do you have the right to the labor of a professional

00:14:45.840 genital, genital waxer who specializes in waxing the genitals of the opposite sex?

00:14:50.340 Um, as I mentioned yesterday, the post-millennial, uh, publication in Canada has done a, has been on

00:14:57.640 top of this. They've, they've done a deep dive into you need social media postings and leaked text

00:15:04.400 messages and chat room, uh, messages and so on. And what they discovered is revolting predictably.

00:15:11.720 So, uh, you need is a, for one thing is a proud bigot where he's complained about dirty immigrants who

00:15:18.040 are liars and they make things miserable. He said, that's one of the reasons he joined a female gym 1.00

00:15:22.540 is because there are too many immigrants at the male gym. Now that's kind of interesting, isn't it? 1.00

00:15:25.980 Because he says that he's a woman. And so if you're really a woman, then you don't need to cite your

00:15:29.600 anti-immigrant beliefs as a reason to join a woman's gym. You think you would just join it because you're 1.00

00:15:33.980 a woman, but no, he, his reason, at least part of his reason is that he wants to avoid the dirty 0.94

00:15:38.280 immigrants according to him. Um, so he clearly has ulterior motives for joining a women's gym,

00:15:44.040 which he admits to what are his ulterior motives for wanting to be in women's bathrooms and locker

00:15:49.020 rooms. Well, um, I outlined some of this yesterday and the post-millennial should shed some light on

00:15:54.420 it. You need in posts and messages has, uh, has I think made it clear what his ulterior motives are.

00:16:02.040 And there's too many for me to read them all. Um, you know, he's, he's talked about, he's,

00:16:07.800 he's wondered about how many, um, naked women he's going to get to see. He's, he's, he's asked people

00:16:12.700 about this basically like how many, you know, how many, um, uh, breasts using a different phrase is 0.98

00:16:19.920 he, is he going to be able to see he's talked about, he's shown this weird preoccupation with

00:16:25.120 girls on their periods, wondering if he's ever going to have the chance to help a girl with her

00:16:29.300 tampon. Um, all kinds of stuff like that. He is trying to organize. Um, oh, nothing. I don't think

00:16:41.840 I mentioned yesterday. He showed up at a hotel where a bunch of young girls had arrived for a 0.94

00:16:46.280 beauty pageant. They're doing a beauty pageant for young girls. This dude shows up and starts taking

00:16:50.420 pictures of the girls. And this was so disturbing that the organizer of the event, a woman by the 0.75

00:16:55.080 name of Charlotte Millington, uh, she was so frightened by his behavior and his presence that

00:17:00.440 she threatened to call the cops if he ever showed up there again. And his response to that on Twitter

00:17:04.580 was LOL. He laughed at her. Um, he's also trying to set up in a, a, um, an event at a local pool

00:17:12.700 for LGBTQ youths, 12 and over. And he specified two things that at this event, the 12 and over

00:17:22.420 children can go topless. And second, that no parents will be allowed. So this is a grown man

00:17:29.020 who wants to gather with children, with, with half nude children at a pool without their parents 0.90

00:17:35.000 present. I mean, what else do you need to know? That is just his motivations are blatantly clear.

00:17:45.000 He could not be clearer about it. So to put it bluntly, Yaniv is a disgusting creep, um, and a

00:17:51.340 predator and just a monstrous. I, I, well, just a monster. We'll leave it there. We went, we went over

00:18:02.360 most of that yesterday. Here's the thing I want to focus on today because attached to this story, I

00:18:09.180 think is by far the most egregious thing Twitter has ever done. Now we know about the biases of, of

00:18:18.860 these social media giants. We know about the things that Facebook has done. Twitter has done

00:18:22.480 to, um, discriminate against conservatives and all of that. This I think is the worst example,

00:18:28.880 by far the worst example. And, uh, Twitter has not gotten nearly as much backlash over this as they

00:18:35.540 should because Twitter is going out of its way to protect someone who is clearly a predator and likely

00:18:42.840 a danger to children. Two women, Megan Murphy and Lindsay Shepard have been banned permanently from

00:18:50.360 Twitter for standing up to this guy, Yaniv. Two women have been shut down, silenced for the sake of this

00:18:56.900 pervert. It's incredible. The first was Megan Murphy. Now months ago, Megan Murphy, back in the fall of

00:19:02.980 2018, Murphy was calling attention to the fact that Yaniv is a disgusting predatory, predatory, a pervert

00:19:09.460 talking about these messages and his behavior and everything. Um, she correctly labeled him a man

00:19:15.620 while doing so. And so she was banned. Murphy, by the way, is a feminist and she and I probably 1.00

00:19:22.500 disagree on every conceivable issue except for this one, but she is brave enough and lucid enough to see

00:19:29.540 the truth with this transgender stuff and to say so. And so she was silenced for it. Now I, you know, 1.00

00:19:34.940 this is something I've been saying for a while that, um, feminists generally, I mean, the transgender 1.00

00:19:41.940 agenda is an intensely inherently anti-feminist agenda. Everything feminists have worked for is being undone 1.00

00:19:51.460 by these men in dresses, uh, claiming to be women. Some feminists are realizing that and are saying, now,

00:19:59.060 hold on a second, we were really, we're going to, we're going to just forfeit everything we've worked

00:20:03.900 for all this time. All of our arguments, we're going to toss them out the window because a small

00:20:09.120 percentage of confused men want to wear dresses and enter the women's room. We're really going to

00:20:13.220 give it all up for them. Some feminists have said that, uh, Megan, um, Murphy being one of them, but, 1.00

00:20:20.140 but the reason why more don't say it. And I think almost all of them know the truth. I mean,

00:20:25.160 almost all of them feel in their, in their hearts and probably say to each other in private,

00:20:29.720 how crazy this is. But the reason more of them don't say it publicly is because of this. Megan

00:20:34.100 Murphy was her, her platform was taken from her permanently. Even that is not egregious as what

00:20:39.740 happened last week. Lindsay Shepard, free speech activist, um, obviously a woman, real woman.

00:20:47.800 Uh, she got into a back and forth with Ghaniv over all this stuff and she was calling him out.

00:20:52.440 He came back by mocking her and accusing her of having a quote, quoting from him,

00:20:58.040 loose vagina. Um, and, and then he said that, uh, that, that he, he, he claimed that, that his, 0.82

00:21:05.880 he talked about, he referred to his own genitalia, um, claiming to have female genitalia,

00:21:10.540 which of course he doesn't and said that, uh, his was not loose. Okay. I'm trying not to be

00:21:15.880 graphic, but I, I, I need you to understand what this guy, how disgusting this guy is and what he

00:21:21.540 actually said to this woman. So that, that was his first comment. She responds. His next response

00:21:28.180 is making fun of her for a condition that Shepard has called a, uh, septate, uh, or septate uterus,

00:21:35.480 which causes, which is a, it's, it causes a sort of a separation of the uterus. It's a,

00:21:40.200 a lining in the uterus, uh, that kind of separates it. Um, and it causes miscarriages and other problems. 0.99

00:21:48.520 Well, you need mocked her again in a sexually degrading way for this condition and said that 1.00

00:21:55.340 Trump built a wall in her uterus, uh, uh, referring to this condition she has. So Shepard responded by

00:22:02.580 saying, well, at least I have a uterus, you ugly fat man. Okay. Well, her comments are completely

00:22:08.100 accurate. He is in fact an ugly fat man. Um, and as I said, a monstrous predatory pervert,

00:22:13.400 um, but also importantly, she is responding to sexually degrading, explicit sexist insults from 0.99

00:22:23.260 a male predator. I think about this. He, he, he, he, he crawled, he, uh, checked every box here with

00:22:29.160 this, with this comment. It's ableist in that he's making fun of her for a condition for a disability.

00:22:35.200 Essentially it's sexist because he is making fun of her in a sexually degrading way. Um, it is,

00:22:41.620 it's, it's, uh, you know, harassing. It's everything. I mean, this is everything that

00:22:46.900 Twitter says you're not supposed to do. And what happens? She gets banned permanently and he's still

00:22:55.220 on Twitter. Not only is he on Twitter, but he's on Twitter advocating for things like, um, half nude

00:23:03.240 swim events without parents, uh, uh, for children and himself. I mean, he is using his platform to,

00:23:10.520 to prey on people, not to mention harass and, and, uh, insult women. Twitter bans the women who stand

00:23:19.360 up to him, silences them. And, uh, and in order to keep this guy on, I mean, it's, this is

00:23:29.380 for the third time, I think is the worst example of, of bias by Twitter. It is so

00:23:38.280 absolutely indefensible. There is just no defense for this. I mean, the most,

00:23:46.020 the most you could defend would be banning both of them. Now I, if it were up to me,

00:23:50.820 I would ban this predator and I would definitely keep both of those women around, uh, uh, because 1.00

00:23:56.300 they're defending themselves and standing up to a bully, which they have every right to do.

00:24:02.720 I mean, you know, honestly with this guy, with the way he's acting, with the way he's talking to women,

00:24:07.640 Lindsay Shepard's response to him, totally appropriate, totally right. Like you ugly fat man,

00:24:13.580 shut up. You're not, you're not one of us. I'm a, I'm actually a woman. You're not you poser.

00:24:21.680 That is exactly the appropriate response. Exactly. And they were shut down. I mean,

00:24:27.980 Twitter has to answer for this at least they, and they haven't, but they need to provide some

00:24:33.340 give, give us an explanation, explain to us, Twitter, why that woman is gone, but this guy's 1.00

00:24:41.220 allowed to stay given the things that he's been saying, explain that to us. They couldn't possibly

00:24:47.020 do it. Um, and look, if you know, I, I'm, I'm, as I said, I know this guy's a predator based simply

00:24:56.360 already on the fact that he's trying to force women to touch his genitals by law. That makes

00:25:00.320 him a predator in my book. Um, we've seen some of his, uh, messages and harassing, and the harassing

00:25:06.740 that he's done that makes him a predator, whether or not he's actually done anything in the real world

00:25:14.560 illegal. I don't know, but I'll put it this way. I wouldn't let my children within 50 yards of this

00:25:21.920 guy. And, uh, if my daughter was in the bathroom and this dude walked in to that bathroom, we're 0.94

00:25:29.480 going to have serious problems. But the point is, you know, if anything ever were to happen

00:25:36.440 or does happen or has happened and Twitter has been protecting this guy and giving him a platform

00:25:42.620 and, and, and not only that, but shutting down people who call attention to it. I think Twitter

00:25:47.900 has put itself in, uh, not just moral hot water, but legal hot water. So this is something that I

00:25:54.440 think we, we need to be talking about. And when we talk about bias in social media, this should be

00:25:58.580 our first example. And we should continue talking about it until at the very minimum Twitter provides

00:26:04.700 us, uh, with a justification. All right, let's see. Um, Corey Booker was on, uh, was on, um,

00:26:19.520 I even forget the guy's name. This guy is, is, is just so devoid of, of personality and so humorless

00:26:26.600 that I can't even, the late night guy. Uh, the one that's, I think after Fallon, Seth,

00:26:32.520 what's his name? I really can't remember his name. Seth, uh, not McFarlane. No, Seth, not green.

00:26:40.880 Seth, what is it? Now it's going to bug me. Anyway, I mean, but this, this guy, I honestly,

00:26:45.360 I don't understand how this guy has a late night show. I've tried a few times to watch it and this

00:26:48.780 isn't a political thing. It's not just that he complains about Trump all the time. That bothers me. I

00:26:52.400 don't care if people complain about Trump personally, but he just, he's never done anything

00:26:56.760 funny or said anything funny. I mean, it's just, there's nothing funny about this guy and he's got

00:27:01.240 a late night show anyway. Um, so Booker went on with this, uh, with this Seth, one of the Seths

00:27:09.140 and watch, watch what Booker had to say. In all seriousness, insofar as, as we talk about politeness,

00:27:15.860 which will be an interesting thing in this campaign going forward, uh, you talk about civic grace

00:27:20.260 and you talk about courageous empathy. Can you speak a little bit to what you mean by those ideas

00:27:24.620 and also the difficulty in expressing those in practicing those at a time where the opponent

00:27:31.880 will likely not. Yeah. I mean, look, I was running on a Iowa stage and we were so psyched hundreds of

00:27:38.640 people there. I'm about to jump up and this guy sees me, the former tight end from Sanford university.

00:27:42.780 He's a big guy. He puts his arm around me and he goes, dude, I want you to punch Donald Trump in

00:27:47.700 the face and I stop in my tracks and I go, dude, that's a felony, man. And, and, you know,

00:27:54.360 the, the, the, this, Donald Trump is a guy who you understand he hurts you and you, and my

00:27:59.520 testosterone sometimes makes me want to, uh, feel like punching him and, uh, which would be bad for

00:28:06.060 this elderly out of shape man that he is. I did that. Um, uh, physically, physically weak 0.99

00:28:13.400 but you see what I'm talking there. Even that that's his tactics and you don't beat a bully

00:28:20.980 like him fighting him on his tactics, on his terms, using his turf. He's the body shamer. 0.90

00:28:26.040 He's the guy that shows, tries to drag people in the gutter. And I, this is a moral moment in America.

00:28:32.180 And to me, what we need from our next leader, especially after the time of moral vandalism that

00:28:38.520 we're in right now is we need a leader. That's not going to call us to the worst of who we are,

00:28:42.620 but call us to the best of who we are. Seth Meyers. Okay. That's what I just, I looked it up

00:28:47.500 while that was blank. So Seth Meyers on Seth Meyers. Now I, I love that clip because it's just so phony.

00:28:55.900 You see the, the phoniness of it where, I mean, in, in the span of like 60 seconds,

00:29:03.320 booker transitions from body shaming Donald Trump by calling him elderly and out of shape and a weak

00:29:11.720 specimen. I mean, if that, if that's not body shaming, then there, then body shaming doesn't

00:29:16.320 exist. That's body. So he goes from body shaming the guy and saying he wants to punch him to like

00:29:23.040 10 seconds later saying that Donald Trump is the only one who body shames. Uh, that's his thing.

00:29:29.360 You know, we're not gonna, it's like, I want to punch him in the face. This, uh, this, this old

00:29:36.800 fat man. I want to, I want to punch this old fat man in the place in the face. Uh, but I'm not going

00:29:41.140 to because, you know, he's the one who body shames and is violent. I would never do that.

00:29:47.120 How dare you body shame you old, fat, miserable lump of clay. That was essentially his message. 0.96

00:29:55.080 And, uh, and they get away with it. Of course, Seth, I forgot his name already. Seth didn't call

00:30:02.500 him out on that. They never get called out on it. Amazing. All right. Let's move on to, uh, emails

00:30:11.360 at a couple of good ones here. I want to leave a little time for it. Matt Walsh show at gmail.com

00:30:16.560 is from shame. Hey, Mr. Walsh. Uh, I hope your Sunday is going, is going well. I saw someone

00:30:26.220 that looked exactly like you at mass today. He had a beard glasses look to be out six feet tall.

00:30:30.560 However, I knew it wasn't you because he exited mass when he exit mass. He didn't go in his car

00:30:34.680 and yell into a camera for 20 minutes. So that gave away the imposter. Just wanted to let you know,

00:30:38.360 there's a guy in Delaware trying to steal your identity to, uh, so be wary with that knowledge.

00:30:42.840 I hope you have a nice day. You know, I get emails like this all the time from people

00:30:46.480 saying that they saw someone who looks like me. There are, these are all imposters. There are people

00:30:52.060 who are clearly trying to steal my identity. And even if they just so happen to look like me,

00:30:57.520 it's not intentional. Um, they still are stealing my identity. And I think it's, it, it's up to them.

00:31:03.260 It's their responsibility to do something, to change their appearance. Uh, whether they want to like,

00:31:09.780 let's say cut themselves in a face, give themselves a huge scarge. And I mean, it's like, I'm not going

00:31:14.200 to, whatever they want to do, but I think it's up to them. It's their moral responsibility

00:31:18.320 because this is my, this is me. I look like this. Uh, it's, I don't think it's fair for anyone else

00:31:24.360 to look how I look, you see? Uh, so I think it's up to them to do something like cut off an arm for

00:31:30.120 instance. So that, you know, I mean, they could, they could be the one arm mat. It's up to them.

00:31:34.040 But yeah, I'm not, I'm just throwing out suggestions. Um, all right. This is from Brianna

00:31:40.740 says, I'm a new listener to your podcast. Love your sarcastic and cynical humor. How dare you

00:31:45.700 accuse me of being cynical. Four years ago, I was a radical feminist who believed the Republican

00:31:49.780 party was identical to the KKK. I would have called you racist, homophobic, all the phobics, 1.00

00:31:53.880 and basically every horrible word in the feminist new dictionary. However, um, during my time 0.89

00:31:58.980 in college, which I know is strange, my mind changed. I began questioning if I ever had a

00:32:04.420 unique thought or if I was just repeating garbage. I heard I converted to Catholicism.

00:32:08.780 My family's atheist and then became pro-life after reading the science and seeing that it was truly

00:32:12.860 a baby. I began to question transgenderism. The problem is I feel like a fraud. Whenever I visit 1.00

00:32:17.860 my friends, they're, they're all like me four years ago. They truly believe CNN is an unbiased news

00:32:22.880 source. Hillary Clinton is honest and abortion is needed for women to get ahead somehow. 1.00

00:32:27.160 They knew me before I changed and grew as a person, but I love them as friends and I have

00:32:31.700 so many memories with them. How can I come out to them as a conservative, um, uh, come out to them

00:32:37.300 as a conservative. I used to be, I used to behave very badly towards conservatives and I am afraid

00:32:42.560 of the backlash and verbal assault. Also playing the victim card. I recently got my victim license.

00:32:47.540 I am a mixed race, Mexican and Middle Eastern women, woman whose father was a refugee and mother

00:32:52.420 an immigrant. So you can only imagine the array of questions and verbal assaults that I will get if I say

00:32:57.000 anything good about conservatism. I mean, you, I mean, you've got some cards there to play. Um,

00:33:01.540 so that's, but you know, we taught and I'm sure you've noticed this, Brandon, but, uh, when I talk

00:33:07.680 about the, the victim cards and the victim hierarchy, the thing is, it's just sort of, it should be

00:33:13.280 understood. It goes without saying that all of that only applies to liberals. And in fact, the interesting

00:33:19.240 thing is, and again, probably you've noticed this. If you, you know, someone like yourself, mixed race,

00:33:25.600 refugee father, immigrant mother, woman, if you're as a feminist, as a liberal, you had a ton of victim 1.00

00:33:32.820 cards to play. Um, you weren't at the top. Uh, I mean, you didn't say if, you know, there, there are

00:33:40.280 levels above you, but then when you change and you become conservative, everything kind of flips over

00:33:49.560 and you actually end up below white men and on the left, you're seen as a greater enemy, even than me

00:33:56.440 as a straight white Christian male, because there's the added, um, thing of where you're viewed as a

00:34:04.200 traitor. So that's, what's interesting. And so, um, and you know, I, I, I, I don't even mean to make a

00:34:11.860 joke of it because that is actually what happens to women and to minorities who don't follow the party 1.00

00:34:16.980 line, so to speak. And so I can understand why you're, um, why you're hesitant. But what I would

00:34:24.660 say is this, um, you know, I, I have friends, I've always basically been a crazy right-wing

00:34:32.100 nut job, but so my friends, even from back in, in the old days, you know, back by friends I knew in

00:34:38.440 high school who I still keep in touch with, uh, they already knew that about me. But, but even some

00:34:43.040 of those friends are some of them very liberal, in fact, and we disagree about pretty much everything.

00:34:50.300 But the way I look at, we still get along, um, and, uh, get along well, I think. And the way I look at

00:34:56.820 it is, um, even as we both continue to change and so on, but the way I look at it is, is, you know, if,

00:35:03.140 if you changing your mind about something in an intellectually honest way, even if they disagree,

00:35:09.200 the fact is you've been thinking about these issues, you've come to a different conclusion.

00:35:14.100 If they can't accept that, um, if they're going to hate you for that, then they're not, they were

00:35:19.800 never really friends to begin with. It's just, they were kind of these default people who you happen

00:35:24.760 to gravitate towards each other because you were similar. And that's not really a friendship. I don't

00:35:29.960 think friendships are built solely on similarities. I think friendships are deeper than that. And so if

00:35:35.460 there is, so it's kind of a good test actually, that, um, you tell them how you actually feel,

00:35:40.480 you talk about it. If they're not interested in talking about it, they don't want to be around

00:35:43.680 you. They don't want to see you. They reject you. Then that's a good test. And you see that there

00:35:47.760 was never that deeper thing, that actual real friendship that, that was bonding you together.

00:35:52.920 And so you're not losing much. I know that's not much of a solace, not much consolation when you're

00:35:58.560 losing people who you've known a long time and you're, you know, your, your, your whole life is sort of

00:36:03.520 shifting and all of that. It's not much consolation, but it is true. At least, you know, that,

00:36:09.200 that if you do lose friends over it, you didn't really lose friends because they weren't to begin

00:36:15.180 with. Um, but I congratulate your, um, courage and, uh, and also your just intellectual honesty

00:36:23.260 to actually think about these issues and, and be willing to change your mind. I have so much respect

00:36:28.540 for people that can do that because so many other people on both sides are unwilling, will not do it,

00:36:34.060 can't do it, will never do it. And so the fact that you do and have and will, um, is I think,

00:36:39.860 uh, really great. All right. This is from Daniel, big fan of the show. You recently did a mailbag

00:36:44.360 segment and answered a question about the ontological argument for the existence of God.

00:36:49.900 You answered that existence is not a predicate and therefore renders the argument invalid.

00:36:54.200 I would like to offer a rebuttal to this. Although it is accurate to say that the existence,

00:36:59.320 that existence is not a predicate that doesn't actually affect the argument because the thing

00:37:03.020 in question is not merely existence, but necessary existence, an attribute that only a maximally great

00:37:07.780 being could possess. As such, a few implications follow these implications, which when stated as

00:37:14.060 premises in a syllogism, uh, form the current iteration of the argument. It is just, it just so happens

00:37:19.420 that St. Anselm's version has been supplanted by Alvin Plantinga and is constructed as follows.

00:37:25.140 One, God is by definition, the greatest conceivable being. Two, if such a maximally great being is even

00:37:31.900 possible, then it exists in some possible world. Three, if it exists in some possible world, then it

00:37:38.660 exists in every possible world by the necessity of its own nature. Four, if it exists in every possible

00:37:44.240 world, then it exists in the actual world. Five, if it exists in the actual world, then it exists.

00:37:48.780 Six, therefore God exists. 0.98

00:37:54.500 I know you think it sounds like a too-good-to-be-true argument by the way you so cavalierly dismiss it

00:37:59.380 as an attempt to conjure God in a word game, quote-unquote, but the premises are purely

00:38:04.300 deductive. They follow from each, uh, from each other inescapably and no atheist has ever been able 0.98

00:38:08.940 to refute them. For example, William Lane Craig has been using the argument for decades and even his

00:38:13.340 most formidable opponents seem to only be able to dismiss it in the same manner without actually

00:38:17.560 addressing any of the premises. All right. Um, you know, I've gotten a lot of email about the

00:38:22.740 ontological argument. I didn't realize it's, it's so popular. I, I, I, so that's been news to me.

00:38:27.200 That's been interesting. Apparently this is a popular argument. A lot of Christians like it. I still don't.

00:38:33.060 I don't think I, I apparently didn't do a very good job of explaining why I don't like it. Let me try

00:38:37.300 again. Um, obviously it goes without saying, I agree with the conclusion. Number six, therefore

00:38:42.480 God exists. I agree with that part, but I don't think the argument works. I don't think the argument

00:38:47.620 gets you there. I don't think the argument proves the conclusion and I'll try to explain why.

00:38:53.540 Now, obviously if I can prove that there are problems with any of your premises,

00:38:59.400 then I've proven that the argument as constructed is invalid. I mean, obviously your conclusion,

00:39:04.500 uh, flows from the premises. And if the premises don't work, then the conclusion is, is, then the

00:39:11.940 argument is invalid, even if the conclusion is ultimately correct. So, um, let's go through this

00:39:17.640 first premise. God is by definition, the greatest conceivable being. We already have a problem. Uh, I,

00:39:23.160 I think you've got a problem there. I think we could stop right there really, because

00:39:26.620 is that the definition of God? I mean, that's your definition. That's my definition. Um,

00:39:32.880 I believe that's what God is, but there are other plausible and logical definitions of God.

00:39:40.400 So in order for this argument to work, you are assuming a definition of God that works for your

00:39:45.000 argument, but that's not the only definition. You need everyone to just accept that definition

00:39:52.320 for the argument to work. But first you have, but you have to prove it first and you haven't done that.

00:39:56.420 You've got a whole other argument you have to make to prove that God is the greatest conceivable

00:40:00.640 being, which is a problem because you're trying to prove the definition of something that you

00:40:05.060 haven't yet proven exists in the first place, yet you need it to be defined in order to prove that

00:40:10.280 it exists. And so you have a circular argument. You have the, you're going in circles here.

00:40:16.220 There are plausible, logical, possible definitions of God that do not include things like omniscience,

00:40:27.560 omnipotence, um, perfect morality, you know, all good, all loving, and so on. There are plausible,

00:40:35.720 possible definitions of God that don't include those things. In fact, it is plausible, though I

00:40:42.820 don't believe this, uh, or I should say, uh, possible. It is possible that God is inferior to

00:40:50.180 his creation in certain ways. That is a possible definition. Now, when I say possible, I think,

00:40:55.920 you know, that I say possible in the, in a strictly philosophical sense, I say possible in the same

00:41:00.980 way that I would say it's possible that unicorns exist. They don't exist, but it's possible. It's

00:41:07.100 not logically impossible. So that's what, in a philosophical sense, just to clarify for anyone

00:41:11.720 who's confused, when I say it's possible that God is inferior, God is not all powerful, and so on,

00:41:17.140 I'm not saying that I believe that or that I think it's likely or, or, or anything. I'm just saying

00:41:22.420 that it's, it's not logically impossible. So a God who is not all powerful is not the same as an

00:41:29.980 unmarried bachelor. An unmarried bachelor is logically impossible. A, a, a God who is limited 1.00

00:41:36.420 in his power is not logically impossible. Uh, maybe the deists are right, and God is a force that just

00:41:44.620 got the ball rolling and then sat back and does nothing now. I mean, maybe God got the ball rolling

00:41:49.660 and then disappeared and doesn't exist anymore. I mean, um, in that case, he's, he's not omniscient,

00:41:55.360 not omnipotent, doesn't need to be, certainly doesn't need to be all loving, probably isn't if

00:41:59.660 the deists are right. Um, there could, in that case, be beings in the universe who are more loving,

00:42:06.380 more knowledgeable than God, possibly even more powerful than God. I mean, the, in order for,

00:42:12.500 at the, at the most basic definition, the only thing God needs to be able to do is get the ball

00:42:18.040 rolling on the universe. It's, it's, he doesn't need to have any other powers aside from that.

00:42:24.320 Um, maybe the Greeks were right and God is a, is a pretty powerful being, but he's also petty and

00:42:30.080 jealous and kind of stupid sometimes and not all knowing. Um, in which case, uh, you know, you,

00:42:35.860 you could argue that a, a, a virtuous human being is greater than God, at least in some sense,

00:42:41.360 maybe the pantheists are right. And God is just a force like, like love, you know, an abstraction.

00:42:46.840 I don't believe any of that, but I think your argument fails because you've ruled out those

00:42:51.860 possibilities to begin with, without proving that they should be ruled out. Um, premise two,

00:42:59.500 you say, if such a maximally great being is even possible, then it exists in some possible world.

00:43:04.520 The problem is that you haven't defined exists. Okay. Does love exist? It doesn't exist as a thing.

00:43:13.040 It isn't a person. It's an, it's a sort of abstract concept. Uh, it's a force. Okay. What if love is

00:43:21.320 God? Um, what if the universe is bound together by the energy of love or some such crap, something

00:43:27.280 like that? I mean, some, something that some new age moron would say it's not, it's not, it's not

00:43:31.480 logically impossible. Premise three, uh, you say, if it exists in some possible world, then it exists in

00:43:37.800 every possible world by the necessity of its own nature. We've got a big problem here. I don't see

00:43:42.300 how you've proven that God is necessary by his nature just because he's a conceivable being who

00:43:47.440 is perfectly great, though, not necessarily perfectly great as I've established. I don't

00:43:51.400 see how that proves that he's necessary. I think you've just kind of snuck that into the premise

00:43:55.720 without proving it. I mean, I think if, if an atheist, if you're, if you're trying to presenting

00:43:59.640 this to an atheist, I think he could stop you right there and say, why is he necessary? What do you 0.57

00:44:02.320 mean? Just because he's, even if I accept that God, by definition is the greatest possible being

00:44:07.860 that doesn't make him necessary. Um, it doesn't make him necessary for reality to exist.

00:44:16.480 Uh, the premise is an assertion that also needs to be proven unless you're defining greatness in part as

00:44:23.000 necessity, you know, a perfectly great being has to also be necessary for reality, but that's special

00:44:29.940 pleading. You're just, you're, you're putting your argument into the definition. It seems like

00:44:33.960 you're doing that all over the place with all these premises. You're, you're just supplanting

00:44:37.640 assumptions from your conclusion into all of these arguments, which you can't do. It's not,

00:44:43.880 it's not valid. It's not a valid way of arguing. Um, so it seems for this argument to work,

00:44:50.080 you've assumed, you've asserted from the get-go without proving it, that God is both maximally

00:44:55.120 great and necessary. Circular, I think. Um, now I see what you've done here or, or what planting has

00:45:04.760 done. You've subbed out the whole bit about how God's greatness means, uh, uh, you know,

00:45:09.440 he must exist because it's greater to exist than not exist. That, that was Anselm's, uh,

00:45:14.360 formulation, which is what I responded to. So you've gotten rid of that. Um, but instead you,

00:45:20.320 and instead you said, well, he's necessary by his nature, but again, you haven't proved that he's

00:45:23.640 necessary by his nature. You've dropped that into the premise without proving it. So I think you

00:45:28.720 need to stick with the assertion with Ansel's assertion that a great being must exist because

00:45:33.180 it's greater to exist than not exist. And that's where you get the necessity from, but that doesn't

00:45:38.060 work because it does treat existence as a feature, as a trait. And it assumes that existence is

00:45:44.300 necessarily greater than non-existence, which it probably is, but I, you know, you've got to define

00:45:50.860 the word great, which you haven't done. I mean, at a minimum, before you begin this argument,

00:45:56.280 you've got to, what do you mean by great? Um, I mean, is it possible for something that doesn't

00:46:01.300 exist to be greater than something that does? I, I, I mean, I don't know. I, you could potentially

00:46:06.820 make that argument and that argument also doesn't work because, uh, because of, because it, it can be

00:46:12.860 used to prove the existence of literally anything. Let me show you what I mean. Using most of your

00:46:18.220 argument, um, only taking out the necessity bit and putting in Anselm's formulation, because I think

00:46:22.800 that's the only way this works. So, but, but, but it doesn't work because of this. Num, premise one,

00:46:28.720 um, a superhuman basketball player is by definition, the greatest conceivable basketball player. He can,

00:46:34.960 for instance, hit every shot. He's got a 100% shooting percentage. I think we can all agree

00:46:38.700 that a, the greatest conceivable basketball player at a minimum can hit every shot.

00:46:43.000 Two, if such a maximally great basketball player is even possible, then it exists in some possible

00:46:49.600 world. And it is possible. It's not logically impossible that you could have a guy that hits

00:46:53.160 every single shot, even from a hundred miles away. It's not logically impossible. Three,

00:46:58.920 if it exists in some possible world, then it exists in every possible world because it is greater to

00:47:02.640 exist than not exist. Plus you can't really hit a jump shot if you don't exist. Number four,

00:47:07.000 if it exists in every possible world, then it exists in the actual world. Five, if it exists in the

00:47:10.860 actual world, then it exists. Six, therefore the NBA better go find this guy. Um, uh, you know,

00:47:16.480 because he's so far gone undrafted. Is that a reducto ad absurdum argument? Well, you're absolutely

00:47:22.460 right. Of course it is. Uh, and, and, and that's a problem. You know, if I, if I can use your argument

00:47:26.820 intact to prove things that we all know are not true, like for instance, that a basketball player

00:47:34.820 with a hundred percent shooting percentage exists, that means your argument is flawed. It doesn't mean

00:47:39.540 your conclusions flawed. It means your argument, the way you got there is flawed. And I mean,

00:47:43.940 you could sub in, I mean, really anything you could use this argument to prove anything. Unless

00:47:49.020 again, you're setting the argument up in such a specific way that it could only possibly apply

00:47:56.680 to God. And that it, that you're setting it up so that this form of argumentation is invalid

00:48:02.580 when applied in any other circumstance, but that is special pleading. You're, you're setting up the

00:48:08.300 argument specially so that it only will prove your conclusion. There's one last problem here that

00:48:14.500 I'll mention just as kind of a warning. Okay. If you're going to try this against atheists, 1.00

00:48:20.580 here's another thing that's going to happen. Um, even if they let you get away with the whole bit

00:48:28.200 in premise one, where you're saying God is maximally great by definition. He's all knowing. He's all,

00:48:32.700 you know, he's omniscient, omnipotent, all good. I'll, you know, uh, all of that. Um,

00:48:39.100 let's say they accept that. Well, they're the next step, if they're smart is they're going to say,

00:48:47.160 well, hold on a second. Cause then you go for to premise two and you say that, um, uh, if,

00:48:53.360 if such a being is even possible to existence on possible world, what they're going to say is,

00:48:56.820 well, that being is not possible. Actually, that's an impossible being not, not that, um,

00:49:02.180 that, you know, there could be some version of a God that's possible, but that particular version

00:49:07.440 that you're using here is not possible because it's a logical contradiction. And what they'll say

00:49:12.380 is that omniscience and omnipotence are logically contradictory because if a being knows everything,

00:49:18.060 um, if he's omniscient, then he knows what he's going to do in the future. If he's omnipotent,

00:49:24.480 then he can do anything. But if he's omniscient, he knows what he's going to do in the future,

00:49:28.360 which means he can't not do the thing he knew he was going to do, which means he's not omnipotent.

00:49:35.260 And if he can really do anything and make any choice at any moment, then he's not omniscient.

00:49:41.280 Now that, to me, that argument, obviously I'm a theist, so I don't think that argument

00:49:46.700 disproves God. It is an interesting argument. Um, it's an argument you better have an answer for

00:49:52.400 and a good one because you're walking right into that. Uh, now, you know, I, I think we're getting

00:49:56.640 into areas where it's just beyond our comprehension as human beings, but you can't, see, here's the

00:50:01.040 thing. I, that's my belief. I think it's beyond our comprehension. You can't do that. If you're

00:50:06.640 trying to make a logical argument, if you're trying to play this game on a philosophical level

00:50:10.320 and an atheist comes back with something like that, you can't say, well, yeah, it's fine. It's

00:50:14.540 beyond our comprehension. You can't do that. You can't just say, well, this part's your objections

00:50:19.440 are beyond our comprehension. Let's move forward with my logical argument. You can't do that.

00:50:23.940 Um, so you better have an answer. Maybe you have an answer. I don't, you know, I'm, I've thought

00:50:28.100 about that question a lot. I don't exact. Now, uh, I think the answer you might go with is you might

00:50:35.700 say, well, he's outside of time and space, so there is no going to do, you know, God is all now,

00:50:41.400 all action, all present. Uh, there is no, it's not like he's looking into the future and knows what he's

00:50:46.300 going to do. Then the problem is that you have just said that God exists outside of time and

00:50:51.140 space. And so the next question is going to be, well, if something is outside of time and space,

00:50:55.020 by definition, it doesn't exist, you know, provide a definition of existence that could include the

00:51:02.060 possibility of not being in time or space. Um, and that's going to be a difficult challenge as well.

00:51:08.660 So, uh, uh, which again, I think you could do, but you better have an answer for it. Uh, a good one.

00:51:15.320 If you want this to work. So there's a lot of stuff you got to sort through before you can even

00:51:20.640 get to this argument. And then I think once you've got gotten there, you still have problems.

00:51:26.000 And that's why, um, I just don't think it works. I think it's the kind of theistic argument,

00:51:31.820 if I could say so, that is impressive to theists. We like it because it sounds smart,

00:51:38.900 but I don't think you're going to find many atheists who are impressed by it.

00:51:43.240 Uh, and ultimately if you're making a logical argument for God, then who are you making it

00:51:47.100 for? I mean, you're not making it for yourself, right? Unless you're trying to convince yourself,

00:51:50.360 you're making it for people who don't believe. So, you know, it's got to be compelling to them.

00:51:55.720 And, um, for all the reasons I've stipulated, I don't think it is. All right. That was a very long

00:52:00.200 discussion of that. Uh, we will leave it there. Thanks for everybody for watching. Godspeed.

00:52:16.560 A man sues immigrant women for refusing to wax his genitals. Miss World USA dethrones Miss Michigan

00:52:23.540 for refusing to wear a hijab and three democratic presidential candidates choose their preferred

00:52:29.140 pronouns. All that and more. Check it out on the Michael Knowles show.

The Matt Walsh Show - July 23, 2019

Ep 301 - Twitter Protects Predators

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript