I often find that when people start applying purity tests it’s mainly just to discredit any arguments they don’t like without having to make a case against the substance of the argument.
Assess the argument based on its merits. If you have to pick him apart with “he has no right to say it” that is not sufficient.
This thread is basically an appeal to authority fallacy so attacking the authority is fair game.
They did also "assess the argument on its merits" though?