OOTB's Political Thread . ..

[bleeduncblue]

Well it used to be that gay marriage was banned everywhere nationally. Not the case anymore. That’s one example.

In rural areas, school boards are often run by pastors and those who share their views, allowing them to impose a non secular educational curriculum filled with conservative Christian ideas and talking points.

It’s teaching people an often arbitrary set of rules that conflict with empirical study, life experiences, and thought.

Don’t mistake me, I don’t think religious people are all horrible or that it doesn’t have any uses. It’s just one of many ways humans try to rationalize the world around them. Nothing about religion is inherently sacred. To treat it like it’s infallible sets the wrong precedent.

but what does gay marriage have to do with Christianity? do you think it was banned based only on Biblical views? humans also cant marry horses or tree posts, is that Biblical too? or is just a convenient excuse for folks like yourself who do not practice Christianity and therefore use it as a weapon. cultural norms often get confused with religion.

regarding the school teaching - so you believe schools should teach only secular or "non Biblical" views? such as evolution, gay marriage, transgenderism, etc. couldnt those of us who are Christians (65%+ of the population in America) then say the opposite of what you are saying ... that opposing, silly views are being pushed down our throats. the knife cuts both ways.

 

[Heels Noir]

So often is more or less than 50%?

I'm going to step back and allow you and carolinablue to continue your discussion, but not before answering your question. Often is such a vague term one can imply almost anything they want when using it. For me, often <50%, very often ≥50%.

 

[gunslingerdick]

To be precise, carolinablue stated, "In rural areas, school boards are often run by pastors and those who share their views." That opens it up to a whole lot of rural communities, and more than just "one story" as you put it. Plus, he never claimed it was a general rule. To the contrary, he wrote, "I’m not saying it’s a general rule."

Don't those rural schools in Nebraska teach reading and writing?

I’m not saying it’s a general rule, but often times liberals are such fags and overly feminine.

Wait…nevermind. I think it is a general rule.

 

[gunslingerdick]

No to progressive absurdities.

We sure could set some records straight with referendums. My proposal is that Congress only writes bills and the Gen pop votes on it via referendum. The GOP would be behind this. Dems? For them it’s a hard “no”.

Chilean voters overwhelmingly reject proposed leftist constitution

Chilean voters resoundingly rejected a new, progressive constitution in a referendum on Sunday, following a nearly two-year process that aimed to reflect a broader array of voices in the nation's document.

amp.cnn.com

 

[heelmanwilm]

No to progressive absurdities.

We sure could set some records straight with referendums. My proposal is that Congress only writes bills and the Gen pop votes on it via referendum. The GOP would be behind this. Dems? For them it’s a hard “no”.

Chilean voters overwhelmingly reject proposed leftist constitution

Chilean voters resoundingly rejected a new, progressive constitution in a referendum on Sunday, following a nearly two-year process that aimed to reflect a broader array of voices in the nation's document.

amp.cnn.com

For abortion too?

 

[prlyles]

regarding the school teaching - so you believe schools should teach only secular or "non Biblical" views? such as evolution, gay marriage, transgenderism, etc. couldnt those of us who are Christians (65%+ of the population in America) then say the opposite of what you are saying ... that opposing, silly views are being pushed down our throats. the knife cuts both ways.

Think about this before you answer. Do you REALLY want religion taught to your children in school. Think about that and what it means…

 

[bluetoe]

Think about this before you answer. Do you REALLY want religion taught to your children in school. Think about that and what it means…

have you ever considered SAYING 'what it means' instead of 'think about what it means'? No one here knows if you've ever had a complete thought.

But I agree with you for once; if I was religious I wouldn't want religion taught to my kids in public school as if it was just another subject. It loses meaning. If one really cares, that kind of thing is best taught and lived at home and church. Too many parents lay the deeper stuff off on schools and teachers, and then complain because we now have teachers making gender-confused cross-dressing socialist prostitutes with eleven different pronouns out of children too young to even know what an erection is....unless of course the teacher has been showing them one.

 

[gunslingerdick]

For abortion too?

Absolutely

 

[carolinablue34]

but what does gay marriage have to do with Christianity? do you think it was banned based only on Biblical views? humans also cant marry horses or tree posts, is that Biblical too? or is just a convenient excuse for folks like yourself who do not practice Christianity and therefore use it as a weapon. cultural norms often get confused with religion.

100% it was banned based of Christianity. Look at all the quips about how God made Adam and Eve not 'Adam and Steve' for example. Culture and religion are often intertwined. There is no rational basis for banning gay marriage or gay sex acts if you look at it from a purely objective angle. So you use something like religion to justify it. I mean you consider yourself Christian. I'm sure you've heard many preachers hold sermons on the subject. Look at all the people who say 'the Bible says it's wrong'. Are you really suggesting that the stigma against homosexuality had nothing to do with religion?

regarding the school teaching - so you believe schools should teach only secular or "non Biblical" views? such as evolution, gay marriage, transgenderism, etc. couldnt those of us who are Christians (65%+ of the population in America) then say the opposite of what you are saying ... that opposing, silly views are being pushed down our throats. the knife cuts both ways.

'Transgender' is not an ism. It's a state of being not an ideology.

Second. I believe schools should teach what's empirical. What can be tested, proved, or disproved. Not something that relies on faith alone and then call it a fact. That goes for history, math, language, etc. Evolution is a theory (a scientific one) based off of years of research and study. So it does not fall under the the politicized category other social issues do.

Schools should teach kindness and respect while also allowing children to grow and make their own mistakes. No helicopter bullshit. No Bible, no sex ed until 6th grade. And certainly no topics covering the deeper nuances of gender until middle school as well.

So no, I don't think a left wing activist approach in schools is any more necessary than a right wing Christian conservative one is.

 

[carolinablue34]

What laws make it wrong? I’m unaware of any.

What I often cite are generally agreed upon social norms that have put some framework to civilizations since time began. Now those norms are under constant assault. And while I don’t wish persecution for those outside those norms, I respect and value those norms as they have worked for the masses for centuries. And I wish for those outside those norms to understand they are different. Not lesser, but different. And for them to approach life with that understanding and not to expect everyone else to all of a sudden alter the norms that have guided their lives.

This framework leaves out several important factors of human nature, however: social norms are changing constantly. They have been since the beginning. Every culture, civilization, empire, and nation has had their own standards, none of which were identical to each other. They either faded, were absorbed into another country, or moved elsewhere.

The Greeks and Romans are often held in high esteem in our Western culture (as they should be) as the forefathers of our modern civilization. They also openly embraced homosexuality. It was thought of so little no one categorized anyone by 'gay' or 'straight' but by sex acts themselves. Fast forward to 1950 in the USA, you can get thrown in jail, fined, or chemically castrated for it. Fast forward to now. The vast majority of the public accepts it as normal. Because it is. We don't always get it right as human beings. We change and evolve.

Hell, you look at the Founders. Most of them were HUGE drinkers. They put us to shame in the booze department. But there was a religious awakening in the period following the 1820s that really discouraged alcohol consumption and outright banned it in some areas. Women used to wear stockings every day. Now you barely see that style on a city street anymore.

And pardon me if I'm not a little skeptical of your claims not to view people who are different as 'lesser'. You've implied that many times in the most foul, disrespectful language possible. Using the word 'tranny' for instance and 'enemy' to describe trans folk and their advocates.

"I’m not saying it’s a general rule, but often times liberals are such fags and overly feminine.

Wait…nevermind. I think it is a general rule."

Case and point.

All it boils down to is fear. You fear what you feel is contrary to what you were taught growing up when in reality it doesn't threaten you at all. Acknowledging a minority and respecting who they are is not forcing anyone to alter anything. It does not threaten a majority. Two things can exist at once. What it really is, is an excuse for you to belittle them.

You only care about being in the majority when it suits you. When it doesn't, that goes out the window. This boils down to you hating on people that have no bearing in your life because they don't conform to what you want. Not the other way around.

 

[carolinablue34]

No to progressive absurdities.

We sure could set some records straight with referendums. My proposal is that Congress only writes bills and the Gen pop votes on it via referendum. The GOP would be behind this. Dems? For them it’s a hard “no”.

Chilean voters overwhelmingly reject proposed leftist constitution

Chilean voters resoundingly rejected a new, progressive constitution in a referendum on Sunday, following a nearly two-year process that aimed to reflect a broader array of voices in the nation's document.

amp.cnn.com

Lol I'd take this all day long. The GOP would get slaughtered on a ton of issues. Health care, abortion, LGBT rights, taxes, marijuana legalization, public school funding, etc.

I think the left would lose in some areas of economic policy, the border, national security, and foreign policy.

 

[randman1]

Ask @randman1 lol he seems to be obsessed with it more than anyone else.

We oppose you guys enabling pedophiles, grooming children both sexually for predators and in gender confusion.

"
“Like for kindergarten, for Pride month, we got — every kid had a mirror and we talked about — a read aloud about an animal, or about a boy that said he wanted to be a mermaid. It’s a way to start, like, ‘You should be whoever you feel like you should be.’ That was kind of the message of [the] read aloud,” he said.

“It’s delicate, right? So, in kindergarten and first grade, they [students] are five and six [years old] — but I think we start with the umbrella theme of, ‘Embrace who you are. You have to love who you are, and each part of you is beautiful, whatever you feel.’ As kids get older and the idea of gender becomes more salient, which happens more towards fourth grade…the conversations deepen as the kids get older.”
....

" Soper: If they [candidates] say that diversity is about — if they say something that lends itself to be colorblind, which could happen, like, “Oh, it’s like, you know, like everyone is equal.” Those things that are well intentioned statements, but they’re missing the depth of understanding of how the intersections of our identity live out in the world. So, that person wouldn’t get hired."

https://therightscoop.com/breaking-project-veritas-another-assistant-principal-who-wont-hire-conservatives/

 

[randman1]

This framework leaves out several important factors of human nature, however: social norms are changing constantly. They have been since the beginning. Every culture, civilization, empire, and nation has had their own standards, none of which were identical to each other. They either faded, were absorbed into another country, or moved elsewhere.

The Greeks and Romans are often held in high esteem in our Western culture (as they should be) as the forefathers of our modern civilization. They also openly embraced homosexuality. It was thought of so little no one categorized anyone by 'gay' or 'straight' but by sex acts themselves. Fast forward to 1950 in the USA, you can get thrown in jail, fined, or chemically castrated for it. Fast forward to now. The vast majority of the public accepts it as normal. Because it is. We don't always get it right as human beings. We change and evolve.

Hell, you look at the Founders. Most of them were HUGE drinkers. They put us to shame in the booze department. But there was a religious awakening in the period following the 1820s that really discouraged alcohol consumption and outright banned it in some areas. Women used to wear stockings every day. Now you barely see that style on a city street anymore.

And pardon me if I'm not a little skeptical of your claims not to view people who are different as 'lesser'. You've implied that many times in the most foul, disrespectful language possible. Using the word 'tranny' for instance and 'enemy' to describe trans folk and their advocates.

"I’m not saying it’s a general rule, but often times liberals are such fags and overly feminine.

Wait…nevermind. I think it is a general rule."

Case and point.

All it boils down to is fear. You fear what you feel is contrary to what you were taught growing up when in reality it doesn't threaten you at all. Acknowledging a minority and respecting who they are is not forcing anyone to alter anything. It does not threaten a majority. Two things can exist at once. What it really is, is an excuse for you to belittle them.

You only care about being in the majority when it suits you. When it doesn't, that goes out the window. This boils down to you hating on people that have no bearing in your life because they don't conform to what you want. Not the other way around.

Has nothing to do with fear. Just common sense and intelligent reasoning.

 

[randman1]

100% it was banned based of Christianity. Look at all the quips about how God made Adam and Eve not 'Adam and Steve' for example. Culture and religion are often intertwined. There is no rational basis for banning gay marriage or gay sex acts if you look at it from a purely objective angle. So you use something like religion to justify it. I mean you consider yourself Christian. I'm sure you've heard many preachers hold sermons on the subject. Look at all the people who say 'the Bible says it's wrong'. Are you really suggesting that the stigma against homosexuality had nothing to do with religion?



'Transgender' is not an ism. It's a state of being not an ideology.

Second. I believe schools should teach what's empirical. What can be tested, proved, or disproved. Not something that relies on faith alone and then call it a fact. That goes for history, math, language, etc. Evolution is a theory (a scientific one) based off of years of research and study. So it does not fall under the the politicized category other social issues do.

Schools should teach kindness and respect while also allowing children to grow and make their own mistakes. No helicopter bullshit. No Bible, no sex ed until 6th grade. And certainly no topics covering the deeper nuances of gender until middle school as well.

So no, I don't think a left wing activist approach in schools is any more necessary than a right wing Christian conservative one is.

Is that why Muslim nations ban homosexuality and even have the death penalty for it?

" Second. I believe schools should teach what's empirical. What can be tested, proved, or disproved. Not something that relies on faith alone and then call it a fact."

LOL. Ok, so why are you a progressive since nothing they advance and teach is empirical, tested and proven. It's all "faith," and you show that all the time here.

There is no scientific or biological basis claiming your birth sex is not your gender, for example. None at all. It's purely mental and psychological and a disorder to boot. Your chromosomes determine your gender and nothing anyone says or does changes that.

Also, fresh air ingredients are not pollutants. Neither CO2 or Nitrogen in gaseous form, which makes up something like 78% of air are pollutants. Yet you believe they are without any legit scientific basis for claiming so.

 

[strummingram]

Has nothing to do with fear. Just common sense and intelligent reasoning.

It has everything to do with fear.

You're afraid of burning in hell for eternity... after you die. It's all based on the notion that "He" is going to punish you after you die.

 

[heelmanwilm]

We oppose you guys enabling pedophiles, grooming children both sexually for predators and in gender confusion.

Yea you just want more for yourselves

Missouri Republicans Knowingly Backed an Alleged Child Sex Abuser | Washington Monthly

There Should Be Accountability.

washingtonmonthly.com

 

[carolinablue34]

Is that why Muslim nations ban homosexuality and even have the death penalty for it?

" Second. I believe schools should teach what's empirical. What can be tested, proved, or disproved. Not something that relies on faith alone and then call it a fact."

LOL. Ok, so why are you a progressive since nothing they advance and teach is empirical, tested and proven. It's all "faith," and you show that all the time here.

There is no scientific or biological basis claiming your birth sex is not your gender, for example. None at all. It's purely mental and psychological and a disorder to boot. Your chromosomes determine your gender and nothing anyone says or does changes that.

Also, fresh air ingredients are not pollutants. Neither CO2 or Nitrogen in gaseous form, which makes up something like 78% of air are pollutants. Yet you believe they are without any legit scientific basis for claiming so.

Yeah if you actually believed in science and didn’t cherry pick it in order to prop up your own bullshit, you wouldn’t believe any of that.

Has nothing to do with fear. Just common sense and intelligent reasoning.

There is nothing about you that’s rooted in intelligence or common sense. Take a hint. **** off.

 

[heelmanwilm]

Hey @randman1 some of your buds been busy

Southern Baptist Convention sex abuse list includes at least 30 from N.C.

The list includes more than 700 people.

spectrumlocalnews.com

My guess is it’s how you show the little ones about tithing.

 

[heelmanwilm]

Shoutout to @randman1 for his church being in the news.

'He took my childhood': Sex abuse survivor speaks after Sunday school teacher sentenced to 87 years

A Benson man was found guilty by a Johnston County jury of sexually assaulting underage girls at a church in a pattern of abuse that lasted for years.

abc11.com

at least he wasn’t wearing a dress. That would be totally messed up

 

[heelmanwilm]

You pastors make the best groomers eh @randman1 ?

North Carolina Pastor Sentenced To Prison For Sex Abuse Of Child

A North Carolina pastor has been found guilty of nine counts that included taking indecent liberties with a child and sex offense of a child.He has been sentenced to serve time for sexual abuse of a minor.

praisephilly.com

do you read library books to them first?

 

[heelmanwilm]

Wow @randman1 when you republicans say you love your families I didn’t know it was like this

Republican accused of abuse by his children resigning from Missouri House • Missouri Independent

Rep. Rick Roeber, accused by his children of physically and sexually abusing them when they were young, is resigning from the Missouri House.

missouriindependent.com

i heard he wouldn’t let them turn on the AC either!

 

[heelmanwilm]

I see what you mean @randman1 about you guys and science. Nothing shows your relationship with it better than the leader of your cult having a lawyer that’s a flat earther.

Who Are You Going to Believe, Lin Wood or NASA?

A leading election-conspiracy lawyer has made the seamless transition into flat-Eartherism.

nymag.com

“common sense and intelligent reasoning” for sure !

 

[prlyles]

have you ever considered SAYING 'what it means' instead of 'think about what it means'? No one here knows if you've ever had a complete thought.

But I agree with you for once; if I was religious I wouldn't want religion taught to my kids in public school as if it was just another subject. It loses meaning. If one really cares, that kind of thing is best taught and lived at home and church. Too many parents lay the deeper stuff off on schools and teachers, and then complain because we now have teachers making gender-confused cross-dressing socialist prostitutes with eleven different pronouns out of children too young to even know what an erection is....unless of course the teacher has been showing them one.

Well, ar least you had the balls to answer the question. I’ll give you that.

 

[prlyles]

What laws make it wrong? I’m unaware of any.

What I often cite are generally agreed upon social norms that have put some framework to civilizations since time began. Now those norms are under constant assault. And while I don’t wish persecution for those outside those norms, I respect and value those norms as they have worked for the masses for centuries. And I wish for those outside those norms to understand they are different. Not lesser, but different. And for them to approach life with that understanding and not to expect everyone else to all of a sudden alter the norms that have guided their lives.

At one time owning slaves was the norm, a man owning his wife was the norm. Killing people as a sacrifice to the gods was the norm. See where this is going?

 

[bluetoe]

Well, ar least you had the balls to answer the question. I’ll give you that.

LMAO, I have doubt you actually think your questions aren't answered because of a lack of balls, but it's hard to tell for sure. That's just one of the many things that makes you the mindless fvck that you are. Take a hint for once. Get a clue. It doesn't take balls to answer your stupid questions, it just takes patience to tolerate your lack of balls in asking them. Have the nads to say what you want to say and stop couching your opinions in half-baked questions that protect you from direct responses and actual exchanges.

I don't generally have the patience to tolerate such foolishness. Don't talk to me about balls until you decide to find a pair.

 

[bluetoe]

For abortion too?

maybe especially for abortion, and other weighty matters that aren't easily decided for us by our inadequate (for this purpose) and pandering representation, and certainly not by a few judges arrogantly and erroneously making laws.

I don't think it's practical to hold a referendum on every item that comes up for consideration, but there needs to be some feedback mechanism that allows us to officially invoke a response to our need for direct input when those situations arise that give us great concern.

 

[heelmanwilm]

maybe especially for abortion, and other weighty matters that aren't easily decided for us by our inadequate (for this purpose) and pandering representation, and certainly not by a few judges arrogantly and erroneously making laws.

I don't think it's practical to hold a referendum on every item that comes up for consideration, but there needs to be some feedback mechanism that allows us to officially invoke a response to our need for direct input when those situations arise that give us great concern.

I agree. It seems we don’t have a voice and that partisan politics calls the shots whether in DC or the courtroom

 

[bluetoe]

I agree. It seems we don’t have a voice and that partisan politics calls the shots whether in DC or the courtroom

if we had such a mechanism, that is, an effective and easily initiated one, the first matter at hand should be reining in these arrogant bastards fighting their little political wars while we act as pawns to them. That's what is missing in our structure....instead of us pulling their strings to our purposes, those relatively few are pulling ours to theirs.

 

[gunslingerdick]

At one time owning slaves was the norm, a man owning his wife was the norm. Killing people as a sacrifice to the gods was the norm. See where this is going?

No, I don't. Try harder.

 

[gunslingerdick]

Lol I'd take this all day long. The GOP would get slaughtered on a ton of issues. Health care, abortion, LGBT rights, taxes, marijuana legalization, public school funding, etc.

You'd like to believe that. But over half the people you think support some of that absurd shit, really don't. They act like they do because they're weak-minded people that have a need to be perceived a certain way. But when the curtain is pulled and it's just them in the voting booth with no one to see, they don't support such radical lunacy.

 

[gunslingerdick]

This framework leaves out several important factors of human nature, however: social norms are changing constantly. They have been since the beginning. Every culture, civilization, empire, and nation has had their own standards, none of which were identical to each other. They either faded, were absorbed into another country, or moved elsewhere.

You want to talk about human nature? Let's talk about it. Human are animals. And animals have one dominating instinct - to procreate. Whether you believe in a god or just Mother Nature, there is nothing more true than the following statement - the purpose of any species' life is to procreate and live on. So let's start there as far as the societal norms we subscribe to.

The Greeks and Romans are often held in high esteem in our Western culture (as they should be) as the forefathers of our modern civilization. They also openly embraced homosexuality. It was thought of so little no one categorized anyone by 'gay' or 'straight' but by sex acts themselves. Fast forward to 1950 in the USA, you can get thrown in jail, fined, or chemically castrated for it. Fast forward to now. The vast majority of the public accepts it as normal. Because it is. We don't always get it right as human beings. We change and evolve.

And pardon me if I'm not a little skeptical of your claims not to view people who are different as 'lesser'. You've implied that many times in the most foul, disrespectful language possible. Using the word 'tranny' for instance and 'enemy' to describe trans folk and their advocates.

I've maintained that I do not hate trans people. I pity them. I know they are sick and they need treatment. What they don't need is someone agreeing to play pretend with them. And what I don't need is pressure or be forced into playing pretend with them.

Let me ask you, what science has changed? Transgenderism used to be classified as a mental disorder. So what is the science that changed to not classify it as such anymore?

Let's say my son chose to walk on his hands and his feet. Everywhere he went. He feels as if he should. Should I enable that? Should I have his body modified so that he is more comfortable walking on all fours? Should he expect people to accommodate his abnormal behavior? Should others be taught about people that like to walk on all fours and even encouraged to walk on all fours and see if it works for them? As bizarre as you may find that, many (most?) of us view transgenderism the same way. Maybe my son is just ahead of the curve and because, as you say, of our ever changing societal norms, we should evolve to a place where bipeds are no better than those that walk on all fours.

The rest of that long diatribe wasn't worth reading. I might have skimmed it but I didn't really take any of it in. It seemed like a lot of angry justification and virtue signaling so you can appear a certain way.

 

[randman1]

Yeah if you actually believed in science and didn’t cherry pick it in order to prop up your own bullshit, you wouldn’t believe any of that.


There is nothing about you that’s rooted in intelligence or common sense. Take a hint. **** off.

You get exposed as a phony and can't even muster up a factual response. Is there anything you believe rooted in empirical facts?

 

[randman1]

I see what you mean @randman1 about you guys and science. Nothing shows your relationship with it better than the leader of your cult having a lawyer that’s a flat earther.

Who Are You Going to Believe, Lin Wood or NASA?

A leading election-conspiracy lawyer has made the seamless transition into flat-Eartherism.

nymag.com

“common sense and intelligent reasoning” for sure !

You believe that? LOL. When are you guys going to realize you can't trust any of the BS the likes of the NYTs and their magazine report when it comes to politics?

 

[randman1]

You pastors make the best groomers eh @randman1 ?

North Carolina Pastor Sentenced To Prison For Sex Abuse Of Child

A North Carolina pastor has been found guilty of nine counts that included taking indecent liberties with a child and sex offense of a child.He has been sentenced to serve time for sexual abuse of a minor.

praisephilly.com

do you read library books to them first?

Difference is conservatives don't laud and support them like you groomers do.

Maybe that's too nuanced of a concept for you? Seriously, are you just low IQ or what?

 

[bluetoe]

Let's say my son chose to walk on his hands and his feet. Everywhere he went. He feels as if he should. Should I enable that?

I don't know, but figuring out his pronoun should be fun.

 

[bluetoe]

Lol I'd take this all day long. The GOP would get slaughtered on a ton of issues. Health care, abortion, LGBT rights, taxes, marijuana legalization, public school funding, etc.

I think the left would lose in some areas of economic policy, the border, national security, and foreign policy.

this is why before we do this, we need to stiffen up the Constitution with some hard and fast Republican (the democracy, not so much the political party) principles that protect the individual and prevent the masses from making us pretty much a pure democracy. We are already half-broken in that regard. I'd like to maybe get to my reward before we go all in with outright mob rule where citizens are the minority and Elon Musk is the only taxpayer..

 

[randman1]

UK gets wise to a Groomer scheme.. Bans vax for children aged 5-11.

" Dr. Wolf: The vaccines hurt the testes and hurt the parts of the testes that develop the masculinity and secondary sex characteristics of little boys, and baby boys, and teenage boys. So they literally harm the chances of your little boy child to grow up normally as a male human adult."

UK Bans COVID Vax for Kids - Investigation Finds Vaccine Affects Sexual Development in Little Boys (VIDEO) | The Gateway Pundit | by Jim Hoft

Dr.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

 

[bluetoe]

No, I don't. Try harder.

vintage @prlyles.

You specifically indicated norms that have stood the test of time and that people are in general agreement on. He responds by throwing out there what has decidedly NOT stood the test of time and that there is no indication of general agreement with, other than possible local acceptance or tolerance.

And of course he then asks, 'see where this is going?' He asks that because he can't tell you where it was supposed to be going.

 

[carolinablue34]

You use one example of a 'lesbian activist' and it somehow proves homosexuality is wrong beyond a shadow of a doubt? Dude, other animals in the animal kingdom engage in homosexual behavior. There's a bird species where 50% of them are basically gay. It is absolutely inborn and just because it's not 'the norm' does not make it abnormal. And there is nothing inherently objectionable to it. It doesn't affect you in any way. And I can guarantee you the vast majority of gay and lesbian people do not view themselves in such a way. This isn't some work of academia but nature itself.

We're humans. Procreation is not the sole purpose of our existence and hasn't been for awhile.

I've maintained that I do not hate trans people. I pity them. I know they are sick and they need treatment. What they don't need is someone agreeing to play pretend with them. And what I don't need is pressure or be forced into playing pretend with them.

Let me ask you, what science has changed? Transgenderism used to be classified as a mental disorder. So what is the science that changed to not classify it as such anymore?

Let's say my son chose to walk on his hands and his feet. Everywhere he went. He feels as if he should. Should I enable that? Should I have his body modified so that he is more comfortable walking on all fours? Should he expect people to accommodate his abnormal behavior? Should others be taught about people that like to walk on all fours and even encouraged to walk on all fours and see if it works for them? As bizarre as you may find that, many (most?) of us view transgenderism the same way. Maybe my son is just ahead of the curve and because, as you say, of our ever changing societal norms, we should evolve to a place where bipeds are no better than those that walk on all fours.

The rest of that long diatribe wasn't worth reading. I might have skimmed it but I didn't really take any of it in. It seemed like a lot of angry justification and virtue signaling so you can appear a certain way.

Your 'pity' goes right out the window as soon as you're told it's refused. Because it isn't. We need to be treated like regular human beings, not shock therapy or whatever horrible thing you'd come up with. The fact of the matter is, you cannot force people to live or behave in a way that is counter to their inborn traits. This always seems to fly over your head. Not everyone can be twisted into your version of what's acceptable and what isn't.

There's this nasty habit you have of assuming your opinion speaks for everyone. I assure you, 'most' people do not view trans people the way you do. And the acceptance will continue as it should.

The example of your son is twisting the argument. We aren't physically capable of walking on our hands and feet. Evolution eliminated it as part of our ability. It's uncomfortable, it's impossible. What we're dealing with is not the silliness of children but something concrete, innate. That's not virtue signaling, it's stating the truth about what we are and how this all works. 'Transgender' is not an ism. It's simply a state of existence. Or to quote God in Exodus (ironically) 'I am that which I am.'

I'm really not upset. But I am going to push back any time you spout mistruths, falsehoods, and patronizing opinions when you have absolutely NO idea what you're talking about.

You don't entertain anything outside of that southern, Protestant, Christian bubble you live in. Get back to me when you dare to step out of it.

 

[gunslingerdick]

... just because it's not 'the norm' does not make it abnormal.

You use one example of a 'lesbian activist' and it somehow proves homosexuality is wrong beyond a shadow of a doubt? Dude, other animals in the animal kingdom engage in homosexual behavior. There's a bird species where 50% of them are basically gay. It is absolutely inborn and just because it's not 'the norm' does not make it abnormal. And there is nothing inherently objectionable to it. It doesn't affect you in any way. And I can guarantee you the vast majority of gay and lesbian people do not view themselves in such a way. This isn't some work of academia but nature itself.

50%?

There's this nasty habit you have of assuming your opinion speaks for everyone. I assure you, 'most' people do not view trans people the way you do. And the acceptance will continue as it should.

Yeah, I guess you're right. That's why there's been absolutely no pushback to the left's transgenderism indoctrination in schools. lol.

The example of your son is twisting the argument. We aren't physically capable of walking on our hands and feet. Evolution eliminated it as part of our ability. It's uncomfortable, it's impossible. What we're dealing with is not the silliness of children but something concrete, innate. That's not virtue signaling, it's stating the truth about what we are and how this all works. 'Transgender' is not an ism. It's simply a state of existence. Or to quote God in Exodus (ironically) 'I am that which I am.'

"Twisting the argument" is code for "I'm at a loss as to how to refute your comparison." Just like the phrase "I identify as" is akin to "I pretend to be".

I'm really not upset. But I am going to push back any time you spout mistruths, falsehoods, and patronizing opinions when you have absolutely NO idea what you're talking about.

Nah, you're mad. You get pretty mad about this subject. But I'm sure you feel good about being their champion. Or more importantly, you feel good about looking like their champion. I commend your commitment to your virtue signaling. It's impressive.

And for the record, I didn't spout any mistruths. Transgender people are sick and in need of treatment. They have been viewed as such from the beginning of man's exploration of the human psyche up until about 10 years ago. Seems strange how the science changed all of a sudden.

You don't entertain anything outside of that southern, Protestant, Christian bubble you live in. Get back to me when you dare to step out of it.

Why would I step out of it? I have no desire to live as a heathen. I don't begrudge you or others doing it but it's not for me.