Total posts: 2,182
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
Hatred towards women in a political context is about viewing women as objects not entitled to the same rights and respect as men. That has nothing to do with sex.
Ok well most pro-lifers don't view women as objects, so I don't really understand what you're trying to get at.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheUnderdog
They didn’t transition, so they are not transgender.
So, you can only be transgender if you get a penis/ and or vagina.
But even with the surgery of either one, they aren't really "real" penises or vaginas.
Surgery for women who want a penis. Those penises won't work the same as a biological mans would.
Surgery for men who want a vagina. You still have to work at it every week to keep the wound/vagina open.
So, if men are defined by penises, then transgender men aren't actually men, because those are not real biological penises.
There is not a single male out there that had their penis cut off against their will. And if this is the case, they are going to get a surgery to recover their penis. Once they retransition, they are men again.
This is nonsense.
If a guy gets his penis cut off, then for that small amount of time that he doesn't have a penis, (even if he doesn't identify as one) he is a woman?
That makes no sense.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheUnderdog
Heaven doesn't have a ranking system.
With a ranking system, comes those of higher class, and lower class.
That means you have "better people "and "fewer good people."
Therefore, creating a system in which people who have done better, live or exist in a better way.
And in doing this is capable of introducing many types of sin.
Again, we will be able to sin in heaven, but way less inclined to, because we will be infinitely smarter and knowledgeable.
If in heaven we didn't have the capability to sin, then we wouldn't be free beings anymore, now, would we?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sidewalker
Maybe learn how to intellectually argue, then I'll pay attention to your arguments.
If your arguments are only insults, then I'm not going to waste my intellect on someone who isn't going to listen.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
In other words: Freedom creates diversity but diversity never creates freedom.
Exactly.
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
Not like a full-on smack in the face, but a little pop on the jaw/mussel of the dog.
He doesn't whine or bark when I do it, more or less just a surprised look, then carry's on with his day.
Not abuse, just firm discipline.
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
I give my dog a pop in the jaw when he misbehaves.
Nothing too hard, just a little suprise pop with a firm "No" to get the point across.
Created:
Posted in:
Why do we need a category called European history? Why not call it human history?
In history class, you can have certain months, where you learn about different parts of human history, but not define it by race.
You can learn about African history, but not everyone involved in that was black.
You can learn about European history, but not everyone involved was white.
You can learn about Asian history, but not everyone involved was Asian.
You can learn about Asian history, but not everyone involved was Asian.
ETC.
What you are assuming with this comment is that all of European history is based upon one race, which is entirely untrue.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
Is freedom is your axiom of good in a society, as a unified goal, then maximal diversity would be inevitable as all would be free to be as diverse in their weirdness as possible.You need to first realise this internal contradiction.
Yes, I understand what you're trying to say.
But what I am claiming is different.
Freedom is what we should base our societies on. That is as long as our freedoms don't threaten......well our freedoms. At some point, you can't justify a certain thing as free, because it threatens the very thing that your country is based upon. And if that is destroyed, then you don't have a society anymore.
Diversity is not a bad thing. I actually promote diversity, because I think that it brings a lot of people together, in a unique type of way, but when you have just diversity, and no unifying concept, then you just have groups of people who don't share any unifying things in common and separate because of their differences.
I mean just look at history. People have fought big wars, and thousands have died over differences in their unifying beliefs. So, the solution to this outcome is that you can have diversity, and a basic belief in something that can unite a society, that way you can have your diversity in people and religion etc. and have your basic founding belief, so everyone can come together.
Right now, what is dividing the country is that you have a lot of people saying things like how this country's laws are bad, and that America is racist etc.
On the other hand, you have the other side who are trying to defend America and promoting this country's laws.
And where does it all stem from?
Basing our inability to come together with one unifying goal or belief.
That belief used to be freedom, but I'm not so sure that we are all unified anymore.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sidewalker
OK, so you accept diversity, as long as them inferiors stay in their place and are not included or involved in white society,got it Bubba.
When did I ever say that or imply that?
So the problem is that diversity causesdivisiveness, there would be no problems if it were a pure Aryan nation? Imean, if darkies didn’t exist, we wouldn’t need to hate them would we, soracism is their fault, got it Billy Bob.
You're really going to take half of what I said, and make it sound like the whole. thing?
In my last post I said that basing a nation off of diversity is the problem, not diversity itself.
LOL, so their agenda is to pollute the purityof the two Aryan genders. You reallyneed to stop obsessing about other people’s genitals, even if that’s what it takes for you to “feelcomplete, it’s beyond creepy.
Not Aryen genders. Two genders that have existed in almost every single nation in human history. I'm not obsessing over the genitals; I am obsessing over the identification part of the problem. I don't need see your penis to know that you're a man, and I don't need to see your vagina to know you're a woman.
No, I don’t think so because I’m not aracist, I don’t think these uppity blacks should stay in their place, and I don’tthink that black history oppresses racists.These inferior people want tobe included and that would pollute the purity of the Aryan nation, got it Green Teeth..
Again, I never said anyone is inferior or anyone should stay in their place. It's quite the opposite in fact.
Black history is not bad, but what is the reason you need to call it black history? Why not call it human history? Calling it black history just suggests that you are dividing what kind of history we can have by race.
It's historic segregation. Pretty dang racist if I say so myself.
I see, so black history isn’timportant, if they aren’t included or involved the Aryan nation remains pure, andthere would be no reason to teach unimportant black history, we should justteach important Aryan history.
The Aryan nation has nothing to do with this conversation buddy.
Oh please, black history month isn’twhy you are a bad white man, you are a bad white man because you are a racist,and because you think you can justify it with inane doubletalk, you are a stupidracist.
Are you reading what you type before you post?
You just called me a bad white man, with no justification.
a racist with no justification.
and a stupid racist with no justification.
If these are your best arguments, then I don't want to continue this (supposed to be) intellectual discussion with you.
Oh please, black history month isn’twhy you are a bad white man, you are a bad white man because you are a racist,and because you think you can justify it with inane doubletalk, you are a stupidracist. It’s not just diversity that makes youa racist bad person, most white people think you are a stupid hatemongering white supremacist too. Yeah, we all know your orange Messiah saidthere are good people on both sides, but he is also a racist, so thatdoesn’t count.
So, not a response to my argument, just more non-sensical insults.
Got it.
Finally,I see what you are getting at, you want to be included in the LGBTQ community, andyou resent them for not including you. If you come out of the closet, I'm sure they will include you.
Nope. Never have, and never will.
This is what I was talking about when Isaid the more you try to justify your bigotry, the more you reveal just howstupid you are. This idea that bypreaching inclusion they are excluding homophobic white supremacists, is thedifference between a homophobic white supremacist and a stupid homophobicwhite supremacist. This stupidity mayfly at your Klan meetings, but outside of the white trash community, it justsounds stupid. Go back and tell yourhandlers that even them traitorous whites ain’t buying it.
So, are you actually going to intellectually argue with me or are you just going to keep spewing nonsense?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheUnderdog
Biological women that get dicks would be classified as men because they would have transitioned.
So, in order to identify as transgender, you have to get a surgery done?
What about the people who identify as transgender, but don't have the surgery?
And also, you would have to exclude any man who might have had an accident with his penis, like it gets cut off.
You have to look at all of the variables when defining things.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheUnderdog
Your only problem with this confusion, is that you think that in heaven, there is a ranking system.
But there is not a ranking system, because with a ranking system comes sin in multiple ways.
Heaven is paradise.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sidewalker
definition of the word diversity explains what you mean by basing a nation on diversity. Is it that you don't know what the phrase you typed means? Are you just saying what you have been told to say, without even knowing what it
Ok, read my lips/words.
Based in Diversity, means based in the practice or quality of including or involving people from a range of different social and ethnic backgrounds and of different genders, sexual orientations, etc.
"Diversity is a good thing. But when you base a nation or society on diversity" is supposed to mean something, if you don't know what it means try telling me whata nation based on diversity does differently than a nation that is not based on diversity does.
A nation based on diversity divides the people into subcategories of people, tribe like.
It causes tensions and wars to build up.
LOL, so the people that told you what to say didn't tell you what the LGBTQ agenda was either? I know what an agenda is, using your own definition tell us what you mean, what are the "underlying intentions or motives" of the LGBTQ community?
The motives of the LGBTQ+ community is to push the insane idea that there are more than two genders, and that you can do whatever you feel like you need to do to yourself, in order to "feel complete."
LOL, and how does black history month cause division? If black history month causes division because it upsets you, then black history isn't the problem, you are the problem.
Black history month doesn't offend me, but the idea that we should be celebrating one race, and only the good things about that particular race, is kind of demining to other races, don't you think?
I mean, what would you say, if there was no black history month, but instead a white history month. Wouldn't that be just a little racist?
How about no "specific race" history months. How about we just teach important history.
How?
Well, it enforces the idea, that I am a bad white man, and that black people are more important than white people, because we are supposed to celebrate black lives and history. Oh, but if we even suggest celebrating white lives and history, we are called racists and bigots.
They preach inclusion, which would be OK, but you don't agree with inclusion for the LBGTQ community, and they have the nerve to think you aren't a good person" Again, the LGBTQ community is not the problem, you are the problem.
If the LGBTQ+ community actually preached inclusion for all then yes, I wouldn't have a problem with it.
But the fact that they preach inclusion yet try to prosecute any who oppose their ideas and beliefs shows that they don't really care about inclusion, and instead care about pushing their agendas.
The problem is the LGBTQ community does not appreciate your intolerance and desire to exclude them from society, wow, that is one of the most twisted arguments ever, go back and ask your handlers if you got that right.
You phrase that, to make it seem like I am just going after them, when they have done nothing wrong.
You are wrong.
They have done wrong, in PREACHING INCLUSION yet don't include anyone who opposes their ideals.
I see, so they preach inclusion and tolerance, and since you are opposed to thier inclusion and intolerant of them, they are against your freedom.
......dude. You just ignored the base of what I am saying.
The LGBTQ+ community do indeed preach inclusion and tolerance, but they do not put it into actions, and instead to the opposite of that, by shunning and shaming anyone who opposes their ideas which have nothing to do with inclusion.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
Terribly sorry. Didn't understand for a second.
My apologies.
Created:
Posted in:
So history classes shouldn’t be broken down into subcategories? No world history, no European history, no American history classes - just human history or history.
Don't make yourself sound stupid now.
Yes, there should be subcategories of certain ethnicities and nations, but not one particular race.
Also, not all of black history is good history.
You know that black Africans sold their own people in the Atlantic Slave Trade.
Also, all of the massacres and rapes in Black history in Africa are a part of black history that isn't good. But you don't see them celebrating those.
It's the equivalent of making a white history month and only showing the good white history.
Should we stop teaching American History because talking about King George the III makes Americans who came from Great Britain feel bad
Maybe in school your teachers were biased but nowadays, teachers teach what happened, and their opinions on it, not that everyone thinks it was good.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Melcharaz
yes. if they are debating to prove Christ to those that blasheme God.we have an example of when to debate and when not to.knowing to do good (not debate blashemers about christ) and doing it not, is sin.again, you are aware of it now, and must answer to christ if you sin.
Ok so all the apologists who debate atheists are sinning?
That is a load of bull crap.
Questions:
1. What makes debating someone who blasphemy's God a sin?
2. Where explicitly in the bible does it say that debating against those who blaspheme is a sin?
Created:
This is proof that Socialism is fine as long as it benefits white middle class people and not just poor people, especially poor people of color.
So, Socialism is bad.
Got it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Melcharaz
why do you only read 1/4th what i post and ignore the rest? do you want to misquote me to make yourself right? scripture is against debating people who blasheme God.you have no defense against it and now that you know it, you sin everytime you disobey.
So, all the apologists all of the Christain debaters are sinning?
Debating isn't just for your opponent, it's for your audience as well. To prove to your audience that the other side is wrong, and to educate them.
No where in the bible does it explicitly say that debating is sin.
Created:
Posted in:
Division for bigots who don’t want to believe facts. Black History Month helps to fight ignorance that someone like you is submerged in. You think black people have less wealth than their white counterparts because of “cultural differences”. That’s nonsense. Black history lessons can teach you about the systemic racism that caused black American wealth to stagnate. Black history lessons can teach you and people like you all the contributions black Americans have made to this country which will help dispel your faulty beliefs about black culture.
No, black history month is there to make white people feel bad about something they didn't do, and give entitled black people more to be feel entitled about.
Black history is human history. There is nothing special about it.
Created:
Posted in:
There are lots and lots of gay republicans.
Like I said.......most republicans.
Again, you just love to point out the obvious, don't you?
They just live the lie, afraid to tell people who they are from fear of being ostracized.
Wait.......who do you think is Gay, but doesn't say it?
Created:
Posted in:
The racists always lose in the long run. It use to be illegal for gays to marry or blacks and whites to marry. People use to hate Italian and Irish immigrants. We use to have white only drinking fountains in this country. We once put Japanese Americans in isolated camps. Most Americans learn from our disgraceful past conduct.
Yes........that is basic history.......nice job, I guess?
Yes genius, we have several things like our founding documents and the great story of the American War for Independence.
Again....just basic history.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sidewalker
Whatdoes “base themselves on diversity” mean? Diversity is simply the reality of the situation; we are a diversecountry. Are you talking abouttolerance? We shouldn’t base ourselves on tolerance?Please clarify.
Base in diversity, means what it says.
Diversity: the practice or quality of including or involving people from a range of different social and ethnic backgrounds and of different genders, sexual orientations, etc.
Now I'm not saying diversity is bad. Diversity is a good thing. But when you base a nation or society on diversity, it leads to seperation from the differences in certain people, because people tend to group together based on something they all have in common. That is how communities and nations form. When you have a certain group of people who believe one thing, and another group of people who believe another thing, and those people don't want to share a common belief, then history has shown that that can lead to big conflicts.
Youkeep referring to this LBGTQ agenda, what exactly is the LGBTQ agenda?
Ok now your just asking stupid questions.
Ok so what you do in English grammar is you put two words together to form a sentence.
First find out what the LGBTQ+ community is.
Then use the definition of agenda.
Agenda: the underlying intentions or motives of a particular person or group
Then you have the phrase: LGBTQ+ agenda.
Thispost is all over the place, it sounds like you are saying that instead of allowingthings like Black History Month or the LGBTQ “agenda” we should have freedominstead”? Isn’t that self-contradicting?
People have the right to make a black history month sure. But what I am proposing is that doing those things is not a good idea, because it causes division.
Do youthink Black History Month enforces ideas on you?
Oh, most definitely.
OK, andwhen you refer to the LGBTQ agenda, aren’t you defining people by what theybelieve in?
What I mean by define people, is push yourself and them into somewhat of an extremist group just soley because you don't agree with them. Now when it comes to the LGBTQ+ community, they preach inclusion, which would be ok, if they actually did that. Instead, they say if you don't agree with them, then you are a bad person. So, if a group of people are going to define me by what I believe in, then I am not going to respect that group of people. So certain groups of people need to be defined, because they preach the opposite of freedom.
So, we should not define people by what they believe in, unless what they believe in involves defining people by what they believe in.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ludofl3x
Can you explain how you think this isn't what we all believe in today? Does it have anything to do with transgender or gay people? How and where do you think division is being promoted, and by whom?
Some people do think this today. I never said no one believes this today.
And when it comes to the transgender and gay, community it causes division between the people who are LGBTQ+ and people who are anti-LGBTQ+, and right now certain things that both the LGBTQ+ community and the anti-LGBTQ+ community are going to the extreme on both sides to push certain laws. When the law is something that threatens someone's beliefs, people tend to fight against it, and try their best in any way to go against it, which can lead to division.
Division is also being promoted with the BLM movement, and with other companies like it.
Because when someone preaches anything besides the fact that all lives matter, then some people tend to divide from that.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Melcharaz
i agree we should reach out to them, love them and care about them. but not debate them.scripture tells in romans 1 that they are in rebellion against God.
Well, we are on a debate website.
Scripture also tells us that we need to reach out to the lost and help them find their way back to God. Now this might not be immediately shoving Christianity unto them, but rather teaching why certain things are morally right and wrong with topics that they are confused on, or society has confused them about. Then linking those morally right values to Christianity in the end.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ludofl3x
So your perfect politician would what, outlaw people choosing their pronouns? Or outlaw people thinking you're an asshole? Or would solve problems that don't exist? I'm confused.
Let me help you understand.
In my perfect world, my perfect politician would outlaw gender reassignment surgery, and the use of chemical castration before the age of 18.
They would also stop any attempt to make pronouns a legal matter.
You aren't pro-choice.
I believe in my body my choice, but I also believe and know with evidence that the zygote, fetus, or unborn child is biologically not part of the woman's body.
"It is simply untrue that the unborn child is merely “part of the mother’s body.” In addition to being genetically distinct from the time of conception, the unborn possesses separate circulatory, nervous, and endocrine systems."
Let's look at it another way: how does society cease to function if we remove any and all gender references on all documentation, legal or otherwise? Can a doctor decide that you have a vagina if you go into an OBGYN, or do they say "I can't help you, I have no idea if you have a vagina without you ticking this box."
Ok. Good question.
How does taking all gender and sex references out of legal documents affect society in a bad way?
Well for one:
1. DNA at crime scenes will be useless in catching criminals, so homicide and crimes will spike.
2. Womens sports will be dominated by biological men who identity as women, and women will have sports taken away from them. This would be considered Trans-supremacy.... oh, wait never mind, they didn't have a gender to begin with.
3. The whole medical field would be screwed, causing more deaths, and more people with sex/gender related diseases.
So basically, you would have an increase in crime, more hospitalizations, and more people dying because of it.
Now I don't know about you, but a constant increase in death is not necessarily a good thing to have.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Melcharaz
As for what you said, I halfway agree.
Though these people are lost, God calls us to reach out to the lost. It may not always work, but we are trying to spread his message and try to reach those who don't understand.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ludofl3x
No one TODAY can force you to use certain pronouns, at all, and in fact no one can ever force you to use or not use certain language. So, problem 1 is entirely imagined.
Yes, the whole idea of what it would be a perfect politician, and what they would say is imagined. You asked me, "if".
Gender reassignment surgeries are not routinely performed on minors, but I agree with you that as an elective surgery, you should be an adult to get one. Your "whatever decision you want with your body" probably needs some context as I know you don't actually think that, though.
At least we can agree on that.
As for your confusion on my statement of "whatever decision you want with your body" what makes you think I don't think that?
You have provided literally no evidence in support of those positions. What is the "big problem" legally that you see if your driver's license says M and you don't have a dick, exactly? Can you, for example, be convicted of vehicular manslaughter, or would having this mismatch mean all cases against you would automatically be dismissed?
Your lack of understanding how legal documents work is hilarious.
It's not just as simple as getting pulled over dude.
I suggest you look into it:
Created:
Posted in:
Simply put, when nations base themselves on diversity, they open the doors for "tribal" like groups of people with different beliefs, races, and ethnicities to separate and not work together, therefore creating a society where no one gets along.
America has tried this approach in the presenting holidays like black history month and, Latino heritage month. America has also done this in pushing the LGBTQ+ agenda, and dividing the political parties into two extreme sides, and has in doing so, divided different groups of people so far apart, that we cannot agree on one single thing anymore soley based on who you are, or what you believe in.
Nations, and societies have to have at least one thing that unites us all and causes us to come together as one nation.
Now I'm not saying that we shouldn't have different believes and ideas to ourselves and communities, but what I am saying is that the whole point of America is that we can have differencing opinions about things, yet still get along. Division is not something we should be promoting, and instead we should be uniting as one nation, under the basic believe and right that we all hold dear. Freedom.
We should not be enforcing ideas to each other, rather living along with one another despite our differences. NO one should be defined by what they believe in, what they look like, or what they hold dear. As Americans we should all hold one definition of ourselves.
We are all Americans, and that is the only definition that we hold.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@K_Michael
Biological women that get dicks would be classified as men because they would have transitioned.
So, in order to identify as transgender, you have to get a surgery done?
What about the people who identify as transgender, but don't have the surgery?
And also, you would have to exclude any man who might have had an accident with his penis, like it gets cut off.
You have to look at all of the variables when defining things.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
The human is not an independent, breathing { inspirited } individual person until they have been born out of the pregnant woman, taken their first inspiration _ inspire } of oxygen and had their umbilical cord severed.
Are you saying that the ability to breath oxygen on your own is what makes a person intrinsically valuable?
Because if you are, then what would you call people who have been born, but can't breathe on their own (hooked up to a medical machine)?
Are their lives not intrinsically valuable? Is it morally ok for me to kill them based soley on my own convenience?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ludofl3x
Excellent...so when you're outvoted nationally, then what? You just accept that you hold a minority position and are free to maintain your personal beliefs, right?
*IF* my opinion is outvoted nationally, then yes. I will have to accept what the majority believes, and if it gets to the point where the majority, believes total BS, then I will do what I have to do escape the chaos.
Can you describe to me what sort of platform a politician you'd be comfortable voting for would hold on this matter? What sort of legislation would this politician propose, for example. "My preferred politician would stand on a stage in front of people and say I swear when I'm elected, transgender people will _____________ ________________________________." I am trying to understand what you're looking for exactly that would be "legislatable."
In my opinion, I believe that people should be able to identify as whatever they want, but that they can't force others to use certain pronouns, when taking to, or about them. As far as gender reassignment surgery, I think that it shouldn't be illegal, but the age limit for any kind of chemical castration, or surgery pertaining to this, should have an age limit, and anyone 17 or under shouldn't be allowed to get it. After all, when you're an adult, you can make whatever decision you want with your body.
I can tell you're super worked up about it, but you've as yet been unable to demonstrate how, in practical terms, a person being able to pick their gender for themselves on legal documents is somehow deleterious to the future of this nation. You've made a bunch of claims:
I have provided the reasons why doing this would affect our community's and nation in a bad way, but your lack of understanding, of how legal documents, work has blinded you from being able to understand any of my points. Legal documents are how people identify who you are, and if the biological aspects of yourself, doesn't line up with the legal identification of yourself, then that poses a big problem, and anyone with a functioning brain could see that.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
No. Read my statement again. Note the bold.A logical trap is a question framed in such a way that the person answering it won’t be able to do so without arguing against a position they previously held.
Ok yes, it is a logical trap, but is my point wrong?
You can call it a logical trap, but that doesn't immediately make it a non-usable argument.
Just because my basic question defies all you believe to be true, doesn't mean that it's wrong.
My one and only question, is:
What is a Woman?
What is a Woman?
In other words, either define woman without excluding any particular person, that could identify as a woman, or accept that your thinking is flawed.
You don’t see sex and gender as different things. That’s fine, you are free to view it however you like. But what you don’t get to do is pretend that the rest of us are looking at it the same way in order to attack things we aren’t even saying.If you can’t be bothered to understand alternative points of views, then you don’t get to be taken seriously when you criticize them.
If you're view is different, then why are you arguing against mine in the first place? Oh, right because debating is about conflating different views on certain points.
The fact of the matter is that gender/sex are the same thing.
Gender: How you express yourself, based on how you were born (man/woman)
Sex: How you were biologically born (male/female)
If gender is different than sex, then what is it?
Let's think about this logically.
Male and female are two sexes, and man and woman are two genders.
If we are to believe that gender is indeed a social construct, and gender is different than sex, than that would have to assume that the gender man and woman don't equivalate to the sex of male or female.
So, if a woman is not a female, then I ask you again this simple question:
What is a woman?
A trans man would no doubt according to you be considered a biological woman, but would have no need to see a gynecologist.
So, in order to be a trans man, you have to have surgery done? What about people who identify as a man, but don't want the surgery?
*No one [on the political right] really cares about your feelings*Fixed, and agreed. This one sentence is really all you had to say, that is clearly the difference between people like you and people like myself. It’s not difficult to understand that there are a lot of people who have deep and sincere problems with this and carry it on their shoulders every day of their lives. All the political left is trying to do here is recognize these problems as being very real and do what we can to help people who are struggling with it. If calling someone a she instead of a he is what it will take to make someone feel like a human being, I don’t see a problem with that.
Your correct. There are a lot of people who have deep and sincere problems and carry it on their shoulders every day of their lives. You literally just described every single person on planet earth. If your goal is to make everyone happy, then that's not a bad goal, but it's unrealistic, because there are always going to be other people who will purposefully do the opposite for their own benefit and make people even more unhappy.
Us on the political right are trying to show you that the world is not always happy and nice, and it won't ever be, because there are bad people out there. So, what we have to do, is live with this reality, and try our best to live good lives for the benefit of others. That is the best you can do to make the most people happy.
If you are someone who has gender dysphoria, there are other, more reasonable ways to fix that desire to become the opposite sex, like therapy. And it has worked before with many people. If you have gender dysphoria, if you really think that making everyone around you bend to your preferred pronouns, and getting life altering surgery, is going to make you feel like a human being, then I am sorry to say, but that's not going to help you, because then you're going to feel even worse because you will have a fake penis/vagina, unstable amounts of chemicals in your body, and have a constant remembrance of who you were born as.
You however do. But instead of just admitting that when it comes to this issue at least, you’re just an asshole, you instead pretend that this debate is about facts and basic biology. It’s not. That’s your convenient excuse because you won’t just call yourself what you are.I don’t say any of this to be disparaging or disrespectful to you, just calling it what it truly is.
It's ok to have differing opinions, but just because I have differing opinions as well, doesn't mean you get to call me an a**hole, and when I call you one, I'm still the a**hole.
My opinion is that when it comes to living our lives in the best way possible, we have to base it in facts, and not feelings, because feelings can be unstable. So, we have to base it in fact, and basic biology is factual.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
Was this a serious comment?
More or less a joke but can be a serious point.
Some democrats accuse Republicans of "hating women" because most of us are pro-life, but if we really hated women, wouldn't we just be gay?
Why would we date, and marry a sex that we hate?
Created:
-->
@TheUnderdog
Yes I was.
Created:
Wonder why it's getting harder.
Oh right, daddy Biden is spending more than he can make.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ludofl3x
What do "we the people" have to do to fix the problem of transgender people using pronouns they see fit rather than what some sixteen year old thinks they should use?
Use our voices and our constitutional right to fight back against this (not physically).
And it's not just some 16-year-old, it's a lot of people.
All I have to say is that for the rest of what you said, you are not seeing what is truly happening.
It's not just a couple of people putting dresses and makeup on. Of course, the media makes it look like that, because they don't want to reveal their true intentions.
It's thousands of kids, getting groomed, getting indoctrinated, getting life changing surgeries, girls getting opportunity's taken away in sports, and becoming less intellectually interested in basic knowledge, all because the left has pushed this agenda, and the media has pushed it everywhere, all the time.
The more you look into it, the more you will see. It's not a small issue that I am obsessing over, like you say I am. It's the future of this nation.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Melcharaz
It's fine, I must have just misinterpreted it.
You bring a good message though.
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
I 100% agree.
The media should hit on every good and big donation that happens, not just biased ones.
Created:
Posted in:
“I don’t put up with bullies, and when you kick back, it hurts them more if you’re wearing heels,” she says.So cute
You say Republicans don't like women, yet most republican guys are strait.........
Also, with this you are making fun of a woman, therefore contradicting what you just accused republicans are............
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Melcharaz
If that was your intention, then by all means that is my fault, but when you say:
according to matthew 24:5-8
That gives me the impression that what you are about to say, is somewhat of a translation to what it means and is trying to convey.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheUnderdog
Thanks for never blocking. Free speech till the end!
Anyways, this definition, while interesting, wouldn't properly define it, because biological women can surgically get a penis, and it works the same.
So biological woman would have penises too.
Also, you would have to exclude, women with penises, because apparently "some women have penises", aka transgender women (biological men).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Melcharaz
Also, don't mind Brother D.
He is a certified troll.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Melcharaz
according to matthew 24:5-8love God and then he will teach you to love others. love is not an emotion, its a behavior rooted in the Holy Spirit. which is necessary for salvation and can only be given to those who obey God, asking and waiting on it in faith.
I'm going to have to disagree with this.
Matthew 24:5-8:
For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.
And ye shall hear of wars and rumors of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet.
For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers' places.
All these are the beginning of sorrows.
And ye shall hear of wars and rumors of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet.
For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers' places.
All these are the beginning of sorrows.
This verse talks about false prophets, not how to enter the kingdom of heaven, or how to make a relationship with God.
And love is an emotion, that God gave us. God is love, and he gave us each little pieces of himself, so that in return we could love him back.
But yes, there is only one way to be saved.
I like to keep it in simple terms. Loving God is like a marriage. You wouldn't cheat on your significant other, unless you didn't truly love them.
Same with God. It's like a marriage, and cheating is sin.
God will still forgive you of your sin, but you must love him.
It's more than just believing he exists; you have to have a relationship with him.
You don't use God as a "get into heaven free card".
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
The logical trap you continue to try and portray your question as only demonstrates your ignorance and/or unwillingness to engage in good faith conversation.
SERIOUSLY?
Asking for the non-contradictory answer for the definition of a woman, is a logical trap?
I didn't know asking for definitions, were traps these days.
No dude, my question is here to show you how silly the political left is when it comes to defining simple words.
The definition of the word “woman” depends entirely on the context it’s being used in. If we’re talking about biology then that’s one thing, if we’re talking about socially that’s another.
Ahhh I see, so you're saying that sex, and gender are different, well heads up buddy, they're not.
If we’re talking medically that’s another.
Please explain to me how the biological definition of a woman is different from the medica definition of a woman. I mean really.
So no, there isn’t one definition across the board and there shouldn’t be so long as we live in a society where we recognize the harsh realities some of us face and give a damn about doing what we can to ensure that everyone has the opportunity to live a dignified life.
Is facing the harsh reality making others feel happy about themselves?
Because the last time I checked the world is not all sunshine and rainbows, and at the end of the day, no one really cares about your feelings.
So, when someone feels like a woman, no one except the ones who are pushing an agenda really cares, and those people don't really care either.
The political left couldn't give two craps if someone felt like a man or a woman. They would just use those people's feelings to push their agenda.
If we really want to live a dignified life, then we have to face the fact that facts don't care about your feelings.
Some of us are working too hard and too long to improve this dignified society to care about someone's pronouns, or how they identify. So, it pisses us off when they start to become a threat to society, and the government won't do anything, so we the people have to go out of our way just to fix this problem.
So no, there is one definition of a woman only.
I don't care how you feel and no one else does either.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ludofl3x
I mean the data where, as you say in 34, "thousands of kids" are getting this surgery and somehow this affects our national ability to gather resources and undermines national defense. That was your claim, not that some people have considerably higher risk for psychiatric morbidity. You didn't say "AND THINK OF THE PSYCHIATRIC MORBIDITY OF THESE POOR CHILDREN." You said it affects our nation's ability to gather resources and defend ourselves. Please draw this connection as it is your claim, and support with data.
Well first of all, I thought you were arguing, that it's "not a big deal" and "I'm being a drama queen", yet you didn't refute any of the data that you asked for.
It does affect our national ability to gather resources and defend ourselves, because this generation of new kids (which this stuff is being pushed on) is going to not be as strong, physically, or mentally, and when that comes to finding good politicians and military personal, that is going to be a major problem.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ludofl3x
I'm aware that such a thing as gender reassignment surgeries exist. I'm unaware of a "push" (by whom?) to be able to change your gender on legal documents, but again not sure how having a dick would be of great import on any of these documents.
It's not just "having" a penis. It's a lot more than that.
It changes your hormone levels, it takes chunks of meat off of your body, it removes organs, etc.
If someone can change, there literal biological sex on paper (not in reality because that it biologically impossible) then thousands of criminals would be getting away with crimes, and if someone comes into the emergency room, and their papers say male, but they are actually female, it's going to give the doctors a harder time to help with them (and doctors are already stressed out enough as it is).
So, yea, the truth is pretty important when it comes to your legal documents.
What does gender reassignment surgery have to do with your concern over precious precious language?
Well, if the Trans movement is trying to change their gender surgically, and hormonally, then that would have to change language as well, and as we all know, when you try to twist basic English grammar, or any other languages grammar, it doesn't work out that well. Think about how changing grammar could affect court systems and school systems. It's something that we don't need and would confuse a lot of people even more in their very busy day-to-day lives.
I know your entitled self wouldn't understand, because all you do is sit around and watch CNN all day, so you can afford to change the entire way you live your day to day live, but the rest of us have, jobs, families, school, and futures to look forward to, and we don't have time to sit around all day, worried about misgendering people.
How does what someone else has on their license or on their medical records in ANY WAY affect your personal life at all?
Like I said before, it could lead to more murders, and more deaths, so yea that affects my personal life.
Created: