Matt Walsh advocated for impregnating 16 year olds because it's "technically when ... most fertile"

[Kahane's Grave Is A Gender-Neutral Bathroom]

Wow the guy accusing other people of being groomers is himself attracted to children? What a shock!

It's always projection.

I don’t think he’s advocating it. It sounds like he’s responding to some assertion about the cause of teen pregnancy. My guess is something like “lack of access to abortion or lack of sex Ed in schools is causing more teen pregnancy”, but that’s just speculation. Of course we can’t know because the context and the beginning of the conversation is conveniently cut out. We all know what this is. Matt Walsh has received attention lately for publicizing gender reassignment surgeries for children and now the left has combed through everything he ever said to try and get him for exposing that stuff. If this is the worst they found Matt must be pretty clean.

That's true though. The states with the lowest teen pregnancy rates are Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Connecticut, Minnesota and New Jersey, while the ones with the highest are Arkansas, Oklahoma, Mississippi, Texas, New Mexico and West Virginia.

[Kahane's Grave Is A Gender-Neutral Bathroom]

Where’s that “it’s always projection” quote when you need it?

Already used it upthread.

[Kahane's Grave Is A Gender-Neutral Bathroom]

Kindly explain what somebody could possibly be arguing when they explain at length that teenage girls getting married and pregnant used to be the norm (which is true; we all know that), and then concludes that "so the problem (today) is not teenage pregnancy; the problem is unwed pregnancy."

You need to use more of your imaginative capacity if all you can visualize is, conveniently, the argument that makes him look the worst in your eyes, when a wide range of possibilities exists and they've not taken the step of giving us the source of the clip. Say we take your reading of his conclusion at face value; that still fails to make him look very bad. Teen pregnancy is a significantly less common thing in America than it was 40 years ago. Unwed pregnancies are on the other hand more common now than the start of the same time frame.

In any case, I think it's healthy to have skepticism and demand a higher burden of proof than "someone on Twitter decided to summarize it in X and Y terms". If they were so confident in this being the way they say it is (and also intellectually honest), they would have posted a link to something longer than a 139-second-long clip and allowed us to judge it for ourselves.

Minor anecdote here: back in 2014 Democratic senate candidate Mark Pryor was attacked by Republicans on the issue of Social Security. What they did was cherry-pick statements from him talking about potential social security reforms and then sold it as his unaltered opinions (essentially bending the truth to at least try to make him look bad). That's basically the same thing as what these Twitter users likely did here. I'm willing to consider both to be dishonest, I hope you can do the same.

I'll try again:

Kindly explain what somebody could possibly be arguing when they explain at length that teenage girls getting married and pregnant used to be the norm (which is true; we all know that), and then concludes that "so the problem (today) is not teenage pregnancy; the problem is unwed pregnancy."

(IFstudies)
Here's more info on the topic

(Pew Research)
(more info)
The ball is now in your court. Hysteria or reason. Which road will you go down?
Remember that it's never too late to enlighten yourself.

It's always funny how conservatives think teen pregnancy didn't exist back then. It's like how nobody cares to mention that the poverty rate in the 'prosperous' 50s was over 25%.

Up to 10% of females suffered through a teen pregnancy, while today less than 2% do. Shouldn't that be considered a good thing?