Why Matt Walsh's Spanking Arguments Ultimately Fail

REFUTING MATT WALSH ON SPANKING

INTRODUCTION

     I just finished reading Matt Walsh's new blog from yesterday (09/18/2014) entitled "Spanking is a disciplinary measure, not child abuse. Get a grip, people."  I am almost unable to retain my composure in responding to this, not because I am angry, but because his arguments are the most laughable serious arguments that I've ever read.  Matt completely butchered philosophical arguments and basic logic.  I say philosophical arguments because any arguments pertaining to morality automatically fall under the category of philosophy.  I will not only refute Matt's, but I will fix his arguments.  My position personally is that spanking is wrong, but any good philosopher/debater can argue from both sides effectively.  For the purposes of this blog, I will only be refuting the general points rather than traveling deep into the intricacies of the points because his points are so ridiculous and paper thin that they can be refuted at the basic level, let alone on a deeper, more complex level.