(LifeSiteNews) – Matt Walsh took exception to an article I recently wrote for LifeSiteNews on the proper response to those who reject the undeniable connection between human biology and sexuality.
I want to make clear how much I applaud Matt Walsh’s courageous work in combatting this dangerous ideology over the years. I also wanted to clarify that there is no daylight between our respective positions as regards the societal obligation NOT to appease those who reject the immutability of sex.
The only slight difference we have is tactical – what argument is most likely to resonate.
Walsh believes that our strongest case against transgenderism is an appeal to logic. The hope is that drawing attention to the sheer irrationality of gender ideology will lead people to reject the awful conclusions that result: the destruction of bodies, men in women’s bathrooms, the corruption of women’s sports, new pronouns, etc.
Walsh deployed this approach most memorably on Dr. Phil when he pressed his opponents on their inability to provide an objective definition of the word “woman.”
However, the sad reality in the West today is that truth is considered “fluid” and expendable at the service of a perceived higher end. Therefore, many are unmoved by common sense and eager to accept the notion that happiness can be achieved without recourse to reason.
In my opinion, a proper understanding of this fraught topic will develop more easily if the conversation starts with a celebration of life’s joys – the wonders of parenthood, the beauty of sexual intimacy, the wholeness derived from normal development and an embrace of biological reality. And that to lose these goods is to lead a deprived existence.
The positive alternative of a truly happy and fulfilled life almost presents itself as the easy choice.