Choice

[Temujin]

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.

They are indeed. Science has made leaps and bounds in this area, and discovered some, but not all of the reasons behind transgender and non-binary identities. Similarly medical practice has advanced to give safe and effective treatment that goes as far, but no further than the individual wants. And society has changed is also not in doubt. In common with ancient societies of other cultures, we now accept, even welcome difference. There are difficulties in the area of elite sport, but these are fixable. That these are real conditions have never beeb in doubt. What has been difficult is how to react to them. That is becoming resolved as we speak.

Unfortunately, as you say, there are people who are not seeking to understand how nature works, they are seeking to deny the fundamental laws of biology as explained by biologists and use pseudo-science to advance the narrative. Just as there are flat earth believers and geocentric believers. People who cannot let go of the "obvious" for some personal reason of their own. People who cannot accept others as they are but have to invent "obvious" reasons why they cannot be. People who think that someone else's Pride is at the expense of their own self-worth. There are people like that on this forum, on this very thread, in much higher proportion than in real life. They will whither, as flat earthers have withered. Until then we must call them out and the pseudo science they don't understand.

 

[Temujin]

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.

Agreed. It is possible for people on all sides to express hatred. Hatred in a cause that one personally believes in, is still hatred.

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?

No, that is not bigoted. It is simply wrong. When expressed in terms that cause distress or alarm, then it becomes bigoted.

WHY? What is bigoted about it?

See above.

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.

Christianity has the choice of reflecting the society in which it is placed, and risk becoming diffused and losing its identity or refusing to adapt and do becoming irrelevant. All institutions face this dilemma, adapt or die.

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

For much longer people have believed in witches, or that their ancestors can influence their fortunes. Ancestor worship used to dominate societies, but now is irrelevant. That's the point I was making.

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

It doesn't really matter. Christianity isn't, or shouldn't be, at risk from scientific advancement. Science unveils how reality works. Christians who embrace as part of their faith, tenets that science show to be false, deserve to be made irrelevant. If in the other hand, society simply ceases to find Christianity relevant, whose fault is that? I appreciate that as a believer, that might be difficult to accept, but from my perspective, organised religion just isn't needed or appropriate any longer. It is literally dying out.

 

[romishpopishorganist]

No, that is not bigoted. It is simply wrong. When expressed in terms that cause distress or alarm, then it becomes bigoted.

And what would be an example in your opinion of something in this case about gay marriage that is expressed in terms that cause distress or alarm?

For many of your liberal cohorts, the mere mention that Gay Marriage is an oxymoron, or that marriage is between one man and one woman IS something that causes distress and alarm--and is thus bigoted.

 

[romishpopishorganist]

They are indeed. Science has made leaps and bounds in this area, and discovered some, but not all of the reasons behind transgender and non-binary identities.

Of course there are "reasons" why people are transgender or non-binary. There are "reasons" for everything. Those who believe there are two and only two genders are not suggesting there is no "reason" why someone might not identify with their biological gender, or "reasons" why someone would want to be transgender, etc.

But from the perspective of people like me, what you ultimately have going on is a mental delusion or wiring problem. The problem is not with the gender, the problem is with the wiring, or brain, etc. Thus, proper "treatment" should not include enabling the delusion through surgically altering a perfectly fine body with nothing wrong.

Similarly medical practice has advanced to give safe and effective treatment that goes as far, but no further than the individual wants. And society has changed is also not in doubt. In common with ancient societies of other cultures, we now accept, even welcome difference. There are difficulties in the area of elite sport, but these are fixable. That these are real conditions have never beeb in doubt. What has been difficult is how to react to them. That is becoming resolved as we speak.

It is becoming anything but "resolved." All it is doing is further dividing society. God help you if you disagree with the establishment. You put it more eloquently than this, but in the end, the government will get you if you do not go along with the narrative.

Unfortunately, as you say, there are people who are not seeking to understand how nature works, they are seeking to deny the fundamental laws of biology as explained by biologists and use pseudo-science to advance the narrative.

Right: and it is pseudo-science to assert that that there are more than two genders, or, that one can change their gender through surgery. Only females can get pregnant in the homo-sapian species. A woman who is transgender is---still a woman--just a woman that has had surgery to make herself look masculine. A pregnant male is an oxymoron.

 

[romishpopishorganist]

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

The sun is a star---but only if it identifies as a star. If the sun identified as the moon, then it would be the moon--and scientists would have to surgically alter it to make it more moon like.

 

[Eightcrackers]

For many of your liberal cohorts, the mere mention that Gay Marriage is an oxymoron

Only by your definition of marriage.

 

[romishpopishorganist]

Only by your definition of marriage.

My "definition" of marriage huh?

So marriage has no objective reality? Marriage is--however we choose to define it?

Tell me, on what basis do we deny people the right to polygamy if the definition of marriage is subjective?

 

[Eightcrackers]

My "definition" of marriage huh?

Yes.
There are several.

So marriage has no objective reality? Marriage is--however we choose to define it?

YES.
No definition is objective; we assign words to concepts, and we can always change either the word or the concept.

Tell me, on what basis do we deny people the right to polygamy if the definition of marriage is subjective?

If the legal definition does not allow for it.

Can the legal definition change? Certainly. It has already.
But until it does, polygamy is illegal, and the right to it is denied.

 

[BMS]

They are indeed. Science has made leaps and bounds in this area, and discovered some, but not all of the reasons behind transgender and non-binary identities. Similarly medical practice has advanced to give safe and effective treatment that goes as far, but no further than the individual wants. And society has changed is also not in doubt. In common with ancient societies of other cultures, we now accept, even welcome difference. There are difficulties in the area of elite sport, but these are fixable. That these are real conditions have never beeb in doubt. What has been difficult is how to react to them. That is becoming resolved as we speak.

Unfortunately, as you say, there are people who are not seeking to understand how nature works, they are seeking to deny the fundamental laws of biology as explained by biologists and use pseudo-science to advance the narrative. Just as there are flat earth believers and geocentric believers. People who cannot let go of the "obvious" for some personal reason of their own. People who cannot accept others as they are but have to invent "obvious" reasons why they cannot be. People who think that someone else's Pride is at the expense of their own self-worth. There are people like that on this forum, on this very thread, in much higher proportion than in real life. They will whither, as flat earthers have withered. Until then we must call them out and the pseudo science they don't understand.

No such thing in science to support gender
dysphoria and non-binary is a lie.
How do you think science can prove whether someone has gender dysphoria?

You keep peddling these lies. Dont

 

[BMS]

Agreed. It is possible for people on all sides to express hatred. Hatred in a cause that one personally believes in, is still hatred.

No, that is not bigoted. It is simply wrong. When expressed in terms that cause distress or alarm, then it becomes bigoted.

See above.

Christianity has the choice of reflecting the society in which it is placed, and risk becoming diffused and losing its identity or refusing to adapt and do becoming irrelevant. All institutions face this dilemma, adapt or die.

For much longer people have believed in witches, or that their ancestors can influence their fortunes. Ancestor worship used to dominate societies, but now is irrelevant. That's the point I was making.

It doesn't really matter. Christianity isn't, or shouldn't be, at risk from scientific advancement. Science unveils how reality works. Christians who embrace as part of their faith, tenets that science show to be false, deserve to be made irrelevant. If in the other hand, society simply ceases to find Christianity relevant, whose fault is that? I appreciate that as a believer, that might be difficult to accept, but from my perspective, organised religion just isn't needed or appropriate any longer. It is literally dying out.

There are only two sexes, two sex determining chromosomes and two resulting anatomies having one of two resulting reproductive organs.
The half a dozen syndromes only involve combinations of the two chromosomes and the two anatomies..
You have been given the scientific evidence whilst you simply spout the same old baseless myths.

Science shows us you are wrong but science cant show us why you think that way.

 

[Temujin]

And what would be an example in your opinion of something in this case about gay marriage that is expressed in terms that cause distress or alarm?

For many of your liberal cohorts, the mere mention that Gay Marriage is an oxymoron, or that marriage is between one man and one woman IS something that causes distress and alarm--and is thus bigoted.

Gay marriage is objectionable to some in the religious community. The religious community does not equal the community as a whole. So denying that someone is married, when they are, legally, then that can cause distress. It is accompanying homophobic abuse that is the real bugbear. If your church doesn't approve of gay marriage, say so and don't carry out gay marriages in your church. Explain your reasons if asked. Otherwise, don't get involved in what others do. It isn't true to say that gay marriage is an oxymoron, or that marriage can only be between a man and a women. It may be that is the teaching of your church, or your personal believe, but the bald statement as you put it above is wrong, and obviously so. Your failure to recognise the legality of such marriages does not actually make them illegal. There are certainly circumstances where your statements above alone would be enough to cause harassment or distress.

 

[romishpopishorganist]

No such thing in science to support gender dysphoria and non-binary is a lie. How do you think science can prove whether someone has gender dysphoria?

Actually--I see no harm in supporting the idea of Gender Dysphoria. There are people who do not identify with their given gender. I think this is a real disorder.

My problem---is not with the disorder itself, but with the proposed solution by the left. The left wants to treat what in the end amounts to a mental disorder---by----going along with it and surgically altering the body.

The problem of gender dysphoria is a real problem. It is the current treatment for the problem I disagree with. You do not treat mental delusions by playing along with the delusion.

 

[Temujin]

Of course there are "reasons" why people are transgender or non-binary. There are "reasons" for everything. Those who believe there are two and only two genders are not suggesting there is no "reason" why someone might not identify with their biological gender, or "reasons" why someone would want to be transgender, etc.

Quite simply, it is untrue that there are only two genders. This is a falsehood. It is true that until recently the society we live in has only recognised two genders. That is no longer the case. Other societies have recognised more than two genders for millenia. The number of genders is determined by society. If society legally recognises non-binary or transgender persons, then they officially exist in exactly the same way as everyone else. Your personal feelings about this don't matter. The teachings of your church matter, within your church. Would your church sanction a marriage between a transman, born a woman, and a gay man. (such marriages exist.) If not, why not?

But from the perspective of people like me, what you ultimately have going on is a mental delusion or wiring problem. The problem is not with the gender, the problem is with the wiring, or brain, etc. Thus, proper "treatment" should not include enabling the delusion through surgically altering a perfectly fine body with nothing wrong.

For people like you, "Get over yourself and pull yourself together" is adequate treatment for depression. Unless you are a clinician specialising in this area, your ideas of diagnosis or treatment are worthless.

It is becoming anything but "resolved." All it is doing is further dividing society. God help you if you disagree with the establishment. You put it more eloquently than this, but in the end, the government will get you if you do not go along with the narrative.

It is the prime task of every government to protect its citizens. The military protects against external threats. There are laws against theft and offences against the person. There are now laws protecting trans and non-binary people from harassment or discrimination. Not liking those laws is just tough. The government narrative is that you don't steal or rape, or discriminate on grounds of gender identity. Neither you nor the rapists get to pick and mix the laws they abide by.

Right: and it is pseudo-science to assert that that there are more than two genders, or, that one can change their gender through surgery. Only females can get pregnant in the homo-sapian species. A woman who is transgender is---still a woman--just a woman that has had surgery to make herself look masculine. A pregnant male is an oxymoron.

A pregnant transman is rare, but they exist. You are not qualified to make these assertions. Your opinion is noted, as is the fact that it is contrary to the opinion of those who are qualified to judge

The sun is a star---but only if it identifies as a star. If the sun identified as the moon, then it would be the moon--and scientists would have to surgically alter it to make it more moon like.

Untrue. What determines what is a star, or a planet or a moon, is science. Sometimes science updates itself in the light of new information, such as when Pluto was "demoted" from planet to dwarf planet.

Science is used to denote sex and medical conditions surrounding sex and identity. Society on the other hand determines what gender identity means, how to treat people of non-typical gender identity, what rights they have and how they should be protected. If you are out of step with society, tough. Live with it, campaign to change society or move. Those are your options. You decide which option making snide remarks on an obscure niche website is most compatible with.

 

[Temujin]

My "definition" of marriage huh?

So marriage has no objective reality? Marriage is--however we choose to define it?

How the society in which you live defines it.

Tell me, on what basis do we deny people the right to polygamy if the definition of marriage is subjective?

On the grounds that the society in which they live deems such marriages inappropriate. Marriage is a social contract. It may or may not have a religious element, but the important bit is the social contract whereby the union of (usually) two people is recognised by society and the benefits accruing to marriage in that society are conferred upon them. Marriage is what society wants it to be. All other elements, including the approval of your God, are optional extras.

 

[Temujin]

Actually--I see no harm in supporting the idea of Gender Dysphoria. There are people who do not identify with their given gender. I think this is a real disorder.

My problem---is not with the disorder itself, but with the proposed solution by the left. The left wants to treat what in the end amounts to a mental disorder---by----going along with it and surgically altering the body.

This decision is made not by the left, but by the medics, who are qualified to make it. Not you in other words.

The problem of gender dysphoria is a real problem. It is the current treatment for the problem I disagree with. You do not treat mental delusions by playing along with the delusion.

The delusion is that you are qualified to make such an assessment in the teeth of the medical establishment, who are so qualified, on purely ideological grounds.

 

[BMS]

Gay marriage is objectionable to some in the religious community. The religious community does not equal the community as a whole. So denying that someone is married, when they are, legally, then that can cause distress. It is accompanying homophobic abuse that is the real bugbear. If your church doesn't approve of gay marriage, say so and don't carry out gay marriages in your church. Explain your reasons if asked. Otherwise, don't get involved in what others do. It isn't true to say that gay marriage is an oxymoron, or that marriage can only be between a man and a women. It may be that is the teaching of your church, or your personal believe, but the bald statement as you put it above is wrong, and obviously so. Your failure to recognise the legality of such marriages does not actually make them illegal. There are certainly circumstances where your statements above alone would be enough to cause harassment or distress.

Its actually same sex marriage. It involves two people of the same sex. Gay means having a same sex attraction which could mean a man and a woman who both have a same sex attraction... its typical.of the ideology that twists meanings of words and doesnt care because it feels.ok, until someone doesnt go along with it and feels terribly hurt and offended, which is a mental health issue.
Whilst we realise people have different opinions, views and beliefs, you dont have a grasp of the reality because you.keep.making generalisations that get exposed as faulty.
However since there are two sexes for sexual intimacy and consequently reproduction, it makes logical sense that a marriage would be a man and a woman in a loving relationship as opposed to any other loving relationshio without sexual intercourse. I dont expect you to understand because you cant acknolwdge biological sex, but I do expect you to support your imaginary ideas and false generaliaations. Most of the world does not consider same sex coupling as natural or normal and this has been explained to you time and again, ie Christians, Muslims etc including secular nations like China... but you still gi on trotting out the same unsupported claims.

 

[BMS]

This decision is made not by the left, but by the medics, who are qualified to make it. Not you in other words.

The delusion is that you are qualified to make such an assessment in the teeth of the medical establishment, who are so qualified, on purely ideological grounds.

You dont know much about medics as we have seen. Try and give some evidence based reasoning for your claims rather than what you think these people or those people actually say, and if your expert is the drag queen Fifi McLabia then cite him.

 

[Temujin]

Its actually same sex marriage. It involves two people of the same sex. Gay means having a same sex attraction which could mean a man and a woman who both have a same sex attraction... its typical.of the ideology that twists meanings of words and doesnt care because it feels.ok, until someone doesnt go along with it and feels terribly hurt and offended, which is a mental health issue.
Whilst we realise people have different opinions, views and beliefs, you dont have a grasp of the reality because you.keep.making generalisations that get exposed as faulty.
However since there are two sexes for sexual intimacy and consequently reproduction, it makes logical sense that a marriage would be a man and a woman in a loving relationship as opposed to any other loving relationshio without sexual intercourse. I dont expect you to understand because you cant acknolwdge biological sex, but I do expect you to support your imaginary ideas and false generaliaations. Most of the world does not consider same sex coupling as natural or normal and this has been explained to you time and again, ie Christians, Muslims etc including secular nations like China... but you still gi on trotting out the same unsupported claims.

Twaddle.

 

[BMS]

Actually--I see no harm in supporting the idea of Gender Dysphoria. There are people who do not identify with their given gender. I think this is a real disorder.

My problem---is not with the disorder itself, but with the proposed solution by the left. The left wants to treat what in the end amounts to a mental disorder---by----going along with it and surgically altering the body.

The problem of gender dysphoria is a real problem. It is the current treatment for the problem I disagree with. You do not treat mental delusions by playing along with the delusion.

Absolutely spot on. Sadly however you are arguing with someone who was evidenced the abuse at the Gender Clinic and told us in effect, they know best. Now the NHS is shutting it as unsafe he seems oblivious to what he was supporting. He is not a free thinker or a rational evidence based thinker but blinded and captured by an ideologue

 

[BMS]

Twaddle.

Tell us what you cant grasp and we will try and help you understand. Its all evidence based and observable reality.