Matt Walsh advocated for impregnating 16 year olds because it's "technically when ... most fertile" (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 01, 2024, 10:50:45 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  Matt Walsh advocated for impregnating 16 year olds because it's "technically when ... most fertile" (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Matt Walsh advocated for impregnating 16 year olds because it's "technically when ... most fertile"  (Read 1353 times)
Del Tachi
Republican95
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,010
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.52, S: 1.46

P P P

« on: October 05, 2022, 11:59:09 PM »

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."

He means rates of teenage pregnancy are down and rates of unwed pregnancy are up. 

If you're concerned about the number of American children being born into precarious or unsupported situations, then births to unwed mothers (in their 20s or 30s) are a way bigger problem than births to teen mothers. 
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.025 seconds with 10 queries.