Conservative pundit Matt Walsh compares gay people raising kids to cutting a kid’s arm off

Anti-LGBTQ+ pundit Matt Walsh said that it would be better to rip the arms off a child than to let them be raised by a same-sex couple.

Walsh, the Daily Wire commentator who made a name for himself with his anti-transgender movie What is a Woman?, has long opposed LGBTQ+ people being parents, and he made his antipathy apparent in a screed on a recent broadcast where he said that voluntary surrogacy is the same as “human trafficking.”

Related:

Anti-trans activist Matt Walsh presents “evidence” that Michelle Obama is actually a man

He pretended not to be promoting the bizarre conspiracy theory while pretty much doing just that.

“Now, if you hear all of that, how human bodies are rented for money, babies are exchanged as part of contractual agreements, and you think to yourself, wow, that sounds an awful lot like human trafficking, well, that just means you’re more perceptive than the average moderate conservative who is always on hand to wish a hearty congratulations to gay couples who engage in this trafficking,” he said. “Because it is indeed human trafficking by definition.”

LGBTQ+ news you can rely on

Keep track of the ongoing battle against bias and for equality with our newsletter.

Daily

Weekly

Good News

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security defines human trafficking as “the use of force, fraud, or coercion to obtain some type of labor or commercial sex act.” Surrogacy does not meet this definition.

Walsh then decided that the best comparison for same-sex couples raising kids is cutting the arms off a child.

“You know, it’s true that some children grow up with one arm or no arms, but that obviously doesn’t make it any more horrific, or any less horrific or barbaric to intentionally chop a child’s arm off,” he said. “But this is essentially what we’re doing with commercial surrogacy. And – only it’s worse because it’s far better for a child to be raised lacking one of his arms than to be raised lacking one of his parents.”

“And that’s why I will never applaud and cheer when we get these birth announcements from gay couples, because I’m more concerned about what the child needs than what those men want.”

He said that some people might think “this is unfair to gay couples” and his response is that “homosexual unions are sterile by their nature… It’s not the result of sickness or genetic defect when a homosexual couple is unable to have children… That is a sign from nature, about as glaring and obvious as signs as you can ever see, that gay couples are not meant to have kids. They’re not meant to have kids because they cannot ever have kids because kids are meant to have both a mom and dad.”

Studies have actually shown that children raised by same-sex couples fare as well as or better than those raised by opposite-sex couples.

This is far from the first time that Walsh has attacked LGBTQ+ people who are parents. He called gay Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg’s paternity leave in 2021 an “absurd… luxury” and said that Pete and Chasten Buttigieg couldn’t raise a kid because neither one of them is a woman.

“Babies need their mothers, which is why two men shouldn’t be allowed to adopt babies in the first place,” Walsh recently said. “Every child deserves a mother and father.”

“The outrage mob can now start a secondary campaign over that comment,” he continued. “But I’ll say it again. Two men should not be allowed to adopt babies because babies need mothers. They also need fathers, which is why two women shouldn’t be allowed either.”