Choice

[romishpopishorganist]

The topic isn't exempt - anti-choicers just want to make it that way because of their desire to take rights away from women (and all the other reasons for being anti-choice, none of them good).

How do you like it when Fundamentalist Christians refer to abortion supporters as "baby-killers" "pro-death" etc? You do not like that do you? You would not accept that characterization of what it is to support abortion, right? You see things like this as childish don't you?

And you should.

However, when you make the comment you did above-----when abortion supporters say stupid things like "Pro-lifers just want to take away women's rights, control women, make them barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen, etc" that is analogous to me as a pro-lifer saying you are pro-death and pro-killing babies.

You know full well that most reasonable pro-lifers do not want to take away the rights of women to choose. For me as a pro-lifer the issue isn't even about choice. Pro-lifers are interested in protecting unborn human beings. Our choices are limited when they effect someone else negatively. Women get to choose whatever they want to choose--until their choice comes up against the rights of another human being. Then their choices are limited.

As I have told you repeatedly: I do not care what a woman wants to do to HER body. If a woman wants to have her breasts enlarged, reduced or removed, who cares? Between her and her doctor. That involved her body, therefore it is her choice. If a woman wants her appendix removed, leg, whatever operated on, once again, her body, her choice. That is between her and her doctor.

When a woman wants to kill her unborn child----that is when I stand up and proudly say "Wait just a minute there---you do not get to kill another human being becasue they are an inconvenience to you."

Besides, you know full well that "choice" is just a euphemism for abortion anyway. Why? Because when you talk to people who call themselves "pro-choice" they aren't really for choice. They do not believe women should have the right to choose to keep and bear arms for the purposes of self defense. They do not believe women should have the right to choose what school to send their children. They do not believe women should have the right to choose whether or not to take an experimental vaccine. So in what sense are "pro-choicers" for choice? They aren't. They are just pro-abortion.

 

[BMS]

I assumed that you were using the Royal "we" as usual.

I have never used the 'royal' we though every time you assume I do. But there again, you cant communicate with people in evidenced based reality

So nothing then.

All cant be nothing. What do you mean by 'nothing'?

What has your question got to do with abortion?

Depends what you mean by 'rugby'

Nothing.

There you go again. If you cant follow a conversation, dont bother posting.

 

[Temujin]

All cant be nothing. What do you mean by 'nothing'?

It is all that you have shown to make gender and sex relevant to abortion. Nothing. Gender and sex have no relevance to abortion whatsoever, which is why you have managed to show us nothing.

Depends what you mean by 'rugby'
There you go again. If you cant follow a conversation, dont bother posting.

You could do us all a favour and follow your own advice here.

 

[BMS]

It is all that you have shown to make gender and sex relevant to abortion. Nothing. Gender and sex have no relevance to abortion whatsoever, which is why you have managed to show us nothing.

If its all that I have shown then its not nothing. As I said, we need to recognise what a woman is, and not someone who identifies as a pregnant person before we can discuss abortion, because it is only a woman that can be pregnant. Your gender ideas have nothing to do with it except where they interfere with your understanding of what a woman is. I don't have to show you what is observable reality. It is your inability to acknowledge observable reality that is preventing you from being able to debate.

 

[Temujin]

If its all that I have shown then its not nothing. As I said, we need to recognise what a woman is, and not someone who identifies as a pregnant person before we can discuss abortion, because it is only a woman that can be pregnant.

This equates to nothing. It is quite meaningless and in context is insulting to both women who cannot become pregnant and transmen who happen to be pregnant. You should be aware that misgendering individuals can be classed as harassment and would be grounds for dismissal or even prosecution. "pregnant people" covers everyone who is pregnant and ignores those who are not. This is a classic strawman argument of yours.

Your gender ideas have nothing to do with it except where they interfere with your understanding of what a woman is. I don't have to show you what is observable reality. It is your inability to acknowledge observable reality that is preventing you from being able to debate.

We have very different ideas about what observable reality is. You seem to spend a great deal of time and energy complaining about the reality that everyone but you observes.

 

[BMS]

This equates to nothing.

That is because you dont recognise reality

It is quite meaningless and in context is insulting to both women

It depends what you mean by men and women. That is the issue. only a woman can become pregnant. When I say only a woman can become pregnant as opposed to a man, I mean can and not will.
Do you understand this. It makes no difference whether you call the woman a pixie or a 'transman', its NOT a pixie or a transwoman, but a woman. Only a woman can become pregnant. Until you get that we cant communicate properly, nor with others here.

We have very different ideas about what observable reality is.

Do we? What you you think a woman is? Do you recognise and acknowledge that a woman has XX chromosomes, female anatomy and female reproductive organs, and that a woman is the adult female of the species. If that is the case then a man cant have female 'gender' which is the lie you peddle

 

[Temujin]

That is because you dont recognise reality


It depends what you mean by men and women. That is the issue. only a woman can become pregnant. When I say only a woman can become pregnant as opposed to a man, I mean can and not will.
Do you understand this. It makes no difference whether you call the woman a pixie or a 'transman', its NOT a pixie or a transwoman, but a woman. Only a woman can become pregnant. Until you get that we cant communicate properly, nor with others here.

Sadly, for you, this simply isn't true. Transmen can and do become pregnant. Rare compared with other pregnancies,, but neither impossible nor unknown. You want to insult and misgender people because you are threatened by their very existence, I get that. But that doesn't define how ordinary people approach this issue.

Do we? What you you think a woman is? Do you recognise and acknowledge that a woman has XX chromosomes, female anatomy and female reproductive organs, and that a woman is the adult female of the species. If that is the case then a man cant have female 'gender' which is the lie you peddle

I recognise what mainstream biologists say about the definition of woman, which is more complicated than your playground version. I also acknowledge what sociologists and medical practitioners say about gender identity issues. Most importantly, I acknowledge what transgender individuals themselves say, even the tiny, tiny minority who are critical of transgender rights. What I don't acknowledge is what you say, since you have shown your knowledge to be inadequate.

 

[BMS]

Sadly, for you, this simply isn't true. Transmen can and do become pregnant. Rare compared with other pregnancies,, but neither impossible nor unknown. You want to insult and misgender people because you are threatened by their very existence, I get that. But that doesn't define how ordinary people approach this issue.

No that is a lie. All people are men, women or intersex, so I am not threatened by anyone. I do reject the lie that is gender identity but everyone should. Look, A woman has XX chromosomes, female anatomy and female reproductive organs, and that a woman is the adult female of the species. The man has XY chromosomes, male anatomy and male reproductive organs. To reproduce it requires one of each sex.

I recognise what mainstream biologists say about the definition of woman, which is more complicated than your playground version. I also acknowledge what sociologists and medical practitioners say about gender identity issues. Most importantly, I acknowledge what transgender individuals themselves say, even the tiny, tiny minority who are critical of transgender rights. What I don't acknowledge is what you say, since you have shown your knowledge to be inadequate.

Biological sex is observable evidence, it doesn't require this scientist or that scientist to recognise it. That is why we get these stupid replies to the question 'what is a woman' about not being a biologist. How mentally retarded, its like what time is your flight to Majorca, I dont know I'm not a pilot. How do you know people are telling the truth? I acknowledge the reality, you just acknowledge what people claim when it suits you even when its observably a lie. That is mentally deficient.

And until you can recognise observable reality, you cant communicate with anyone who does

 

[Temujin]

No that is a lie. All people are men, women or intersex, so I am not threatened by anyone. I do reject the lie that is gender identity but everyone should. Look, A woman has XX chromosomes, female anatomy and female reproductive organs, and that a woman is the adult female of the species. The man has XY chromosomes, male anatomy and male reproductive organs. To reproduce it requires one of each sex.


Biological sex is observable evidence, it doesn't require this scientist or that scientist to recognise it. That is why we get these stupid replies to the question 'what is a woman' about not being a biologist. How mentally retarded, its like what time is your flight to Majorca, I dont know I'm not a pilot. How do you know people are telling the truth? I acknowledge the reality, you just acknowledge what people claim when it suits you even when its observably a lie. That is mentally deficient.

And until you can recognise observable reality, you cant communicate with anyone who does

Let's be clear. Are you calling me a mentally deficient liar because I hold the same views on gender issues as every major politician, scientist and doctor in the developed world, or are you calling me a mentally deficient liar because you have nothing cogent to say, so are reduced to insults? Or both?

 

[romishpopishorganist]

You should be aware that misgendering individuals can be classed as harassment and would be grounds for dismissal or even prosecution. "pregnant people" covers everyone who is pregnant and ignores those who are not. This is a classic strawman argument of yours.

Oh I am well aware of the tactics used by the left to threaten, scare and otherwise beat people into submission to their secular values.

The left never seems to learn---that---tactics like that never work.

They tried to destroy Christianity in the first century. It didn't work.

 

[BMS]

Let's be clear. Are you calling me a mentally deficient liar because I hold the same views on gender issues as every major politician, scientist and doctor in the developed world, or are you calling me a mentally deficient liar because you have nothing cogent to say, so are reduced to insults? Or both?

Lets be clear, you are not a gender identity. You are either a male, female or intersex like everyone else. You are not an ideologue.
Your gender identity ideologue is a lie however.
Furthermore, there are plenty of politicians who recognise gender dysphoria but not gender identity. The two are different.. you keep.making propaganda claims.. as you have been told, we dont get bullied by woke tactics. You may also note that following Maya Forstayer's sucessful tribunal and now Allison Bailey's, your previous threatening comment about the workplace wont now work.
What is woman Temujin?

 

[romishpopishorganist]

No that is a lie. All people are men, women or intersex, so I am not threatened by anyone. I do reject the lie that is gender identity but everyone should. Look, A woman has XX chromosomes, female anatomy and female reproductive organs, and that a woman is the adult female of the species. The man has XY chromosomes, male anatomy and male reproductive organs. To reproduce it requires one of each sex.


Biological sex is observable evidence, it doesn't require this scientist or that scientist to recognise it. That is why we get these stupid replies to the question 'what is a woman' about not being a biologist. How mentally retarded, its like what time is your flight to Majorca, I dont know I'm not a pilot. How do you know people are telling the truth? I acknowledge the reality, you just acknowledge what people claim when it suits you even when its observably a lie. That is mentally deficient.

And until you can recognise observable reality, you cant communicate with anyone who does

I have said it before and I will say it again:

Liberals tend to be people of high intelligence--but that intelligence is their own undoing. They have no common sense and overthink everything---and as you can see----the result of that--they wind up denying the obvious.

 

[Temujin]

Oh I am well aware of the tactics used by the left to threaten, scare and otherwise beat people into submission to their secular values.

It's the law, passed to uphold public decency and protect vulnerable people from thugs.

The left never seems to learn---that---tactics like that never work.

They don't exist, that's why. The actual tactics of education, holding bigots to account and protecting the vulnerable, are working.

They tried to destroy Christianity in the first century. It didn't work.

No one is trying to destroy Christianity. Why bother? That's like trying to destroy belief in fairies. Once popular, it is fast vanishing. Christianity is preserved because of its traditions and its buildings. Its relevance as a faith system is rapidly vanishing.

 

[Temujin]

I have said it before and I will say it again:

Liberals tend to be people of high intelligence--but that intelligence is their own undoing. They have no common sense and overthink everything---and as you can see----the result of that--they wind up denying the obvious.

The obvious, like that the earth is flat and circled by the sun. That heavier objects fall faster than light objects. That kind of obvious.

 

[BMS]

The obvious, like that the earth is flat and circled by the sun. That heavier objects fall faster than light objects. That kind of obvious.

Do you understand what the sun is? What is a woman Temujin?

 

[BMS]

It's the law, passed to uphold public decency and protect vulnerable people from thugs.

Except in more and more cases the UK police are breaking the law and acting like the Gestapo, Stasi and thugs.

 

[BMS]

That's like trying to destroy belief in fairies.

and a man who calls himself a 'transwoman' or a 'fairy' is a man. that is why I said it was a man who was calling himself something. If I had meant giraffe or woman I would have said so

 

[romishpopishorganist]

The obvious, like that the earth is flat and circled by the sun. That heavier objects fall faster than light objects. That kind of obvious.

No, not like that.

Science does not seek to undermine reality in those cases, but to understand in so far as possible the nature of reality and how it works.

The difference there--is that when it comes to gender ideology, people are not seeking to understand how nature works, they are seeking to change the fundamental laws of biology and use pseudo-science to advance the narrative.

 

[romishpopishorganist]

It's the law, passed to uphold public decency and protect vulnerable people from thugs.

Protecting all people from violence, discrimination, etc, is one thing. It is very good and should be done.

But calling something hatred--simply becasue it goes against a political narrative is not upholding public decency and protecting anyone.

They don't exist, that's why. The actual tactics of education, holding bigots to account and protecting the vulnerable, are working.

So now it is bigoted to say that marriage is for one man and one woman, that there are only two genders? THAT is bigoted?

WHY? What is bigoted about it?

No one is trying to destroy Christianity.

You are right. Wrong choice of words.

Many are attempting to refashion Christianity according to liberal, secular, atheist, humanism--they are attempting to refashion Christianity after their image. To me--once that happens, it isn't Christianity anymore--since the Church is meant to be a light to the world, not the other way around. So--it has the effect of destroying Christianity in my opinion.

Why bother? That's like trying to destroy belief in fairies. Once popular, it is fast vanishing.

Really? Well, for 2022 years people have believed in Jesus--and continue to do so--so you stand refuted.

Christianity is preserved because of its traditions and its buildings. Its relevance as a faith system is rapidly vanishing.

I will agree the relevance of Christianity is vanishing. That isn't thanks to scientific advancement, but liberal, secular, atheistic, humanism.

 

[BMS]

Sadly, for you, this simply isn't true. Transmen can and do become pregnant. Rare compared with other pregnancies,, but neither impossible nor unknown. You want to insult and misgender people because you are threatened by their very existence, I get that. But that doesn't define how ordinary people approach this issue.

I recognise what mainstream biologists say about the definition of woman, which is more complicated than your playground version. I also acknowledge what sociologists and medical practitioners say about gender identity issues. Most importantly, I acknowledge what transgender individuals themselves say, even the tiny, tiny minority who are critical of transgender rights. What I don't acknowledge is what you say, since you have shown your knowledge to be inadequate.

You dont recognise what mainstream biologists say. There are mainstream biologists as signatories on the Nettie Project. Who are you claiming as a mainstream biologist?
Biological.sex isnt complicated, its also observable reality. You are confused by the things people make up about it.
Besides as shown, rogue biology can be easily spotted. So for example gender dysphoria is an incongruence with the sex a person is. Anyone can claim they have a gender dysphoria but what sex they are is evident.
Naah. Your thinking elevates imagiantion above reality.. but only where it suits your feelings