'If they even TRY to replace RBG we burn the entire #@%#@%#@& thing down.'

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cathoholic
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
meltzerboy2 said:
At least schools are making some effort to stop the endless chain of intolerance, as they continue to do toward women, minorities, and the disabled.
Click to expand...
When I was growing up, I was taught not to mock or otherwise behave badly towards anyone.

I was not taught about a slew of different kinds of people and told not to mock or not to behave badly towards these particular people.

As a result, I and many of my peers learned to treat everyone well and no one badly, in one basic series of lessons.

So I do not understand why children have to be exposed to lessons about a lot of different types of people in order to end up treating people well. Teach children the one rule, and everyone is covered.

And then we can go back to academic subjects such as reading and math.
 
Yes, because one’s sexual orientation is not learned but rather is a product of nature, whereas the words we use to describe others are based on the environment we grow up in.
 
Last edited:
I would argue that having hatred, disrespect, and intolerance for others and their behaviors is not clarity, nor is this a “biologically based heterosexual understanding of sexuality.” People who have clear, biologically based sexual understanding have no tolerance with regard to hatred or disrespect for those who are different from themselves. They have nothing to prove by being mean, nasty, or bullying of others. Bullies, whether physical, verbal, or mental (by means of their own thought processes) generally have self-esteem issues of their own concerning their interaction with people who are not mainstream in their behavior. They are often unwilling or incapable of expanding their notion of sexuality due to their own prejudiced upbringing, and unwittingly perpetuate prejudiced ideas about sexuality toward their own children.
 
Last edited:
meltzerboy2 said:
Yes, because one’s sexual orientation is not learned but rather is a product of nature, whereas the words we use to describe others is based on the environment we grow up in.
Click to expand...
That is one thesis regarding how sexual behaviour is acquired. It is not the only thesis, however.

The problem is that we are in the middle of a vast socialization experiment wherein the thesis that sexual behaviour is solely the “product of nature” is going to be put to the test. What if it turns out socialization is a big or even biggest factor and sexuality becomes completely disconnected from having and raising offspring?

Will that, do you suppose, be an improvement for humanity or potentially catastrophic in terms of the way in which human beings view others, especially their biological offspring.

I, for one, am very concerned by many of the behaviours and attitudes of protestors, activists, celebrities, the media and others who have completely dehumanized those who do not share their ideology regarding the way things ought to be. In particular, those who keep inciting violence, threats and mayhem to force agreement. That tactic, by itself, assumes those who do not share the current narrative ought not be permitted to exist let alone have a voice.
 
Last edited:
meltzerboy2 said:
I would argue that having hatred, disrespect, and intolerance for others and their behaviors is not clarity, nor is this a “biologically based heterosexual understanding of sexuality.” People who have clear, biologically based sexual understanding have no tolerance with regard to hatred or disrespect for those who are different from themselves. They have nothing to prove by being mean, nasty, or bullying of others. Bullies, whether physical, verbal, or mental (by means of their own thought processes) generally have self-esteem issues of their own concerning their interaction with people who are not mainstream in their behavior. They are often unwilling or incapable of expanding their notion of sexuality due to their own prejudiced upbringing, and unwittingly perpetuate prejudiced ideas about sexuality toward their own children.
Click to expand...
So anyone anyone who does not share your view is prejudiced and has no right to bring up their children to share their beliefs?
Your view is the correct one, by default? Despite that human beings for thousands of years have not held your view? Kind of audacious of you, no? You are right and the vast majority of humanity has been wrong?
 
Last edited:
I am likewise concerned about the dehumanization of everyone, including those who dehumanize by using violent tactics to destroy others and their property, as well as those who are physically or verbally violent toward people who have been marginalized in our society. What we need is non-politicized education about such things as sexuality, racial justice, prison reform, climate change, abortion, sexual lifestyles, and so on. Unfortunately, today everything is politicized to such a degree that information itself has become suspect as having, by necessity, a political agenda. And I have long wished to have a SCOTUS that is as apolitical as possible, but realize we are continuously heading in the opposite direction on all counts.
 
Last edited:
At this hour of the night, I tend to become more audacious in some of my posts, especially since I realize I have to get up early in the morning.
 
meltzerboy2 said:
People who have clear, biologically based sexual understanding have no tolerance with regard to hatred or disrespect for those who are different from themselves.
Click to expand...
But people who are so clear about their own view of sexuality that they can call others who do not share it, “prejudiced” are NOT being mean or incapable of expanding their own notion of sexuality? You are that sure you are correct that it is only others who cannot entertain the possibility that THEY are wrong?

You don’t find that slightly ironic?
 
Last edited:
meltzerboy2 said:
At this hour of the night, I tend to become more audacious in some of my posts, especially since I realize I have to get up early in the morning.
Click to expand...
Audacity deserves some respect, think about what you have written in the clear light of day. We live in confused times, my friend.
 
If RBG had retired when she should have in 2014 or earlier we wouldn’t be having this conversation.
 
There are no ethical principles left in government anymore. There is no camaraderie left either. There is only the constant quest for power.
 
meltzerboy2 said:
The author speaks of limited government. How limited is government really when it tells a mother whether or not she can bring her baby to term and tells people whom they are allowed to or not allowed to marry? These seem like awfully personal decisions to me.

But apart from this, what a disrespectful castigation of RBG and her role as champion for women, LGBT, and minorities her whole life, way before she became a Supreme Court Justice. She will be justly remembered as a heroine and role model for both women and men after the writer of this article is long forgotten.
Click to expand...
In 2016, the GOP controlled the Senate, that’s just the numbers. Every Senator could have voted against Garland. As every Senator or almost ever Democratic Senator voted against Kvanaugh. Maybe the West Virginia Senator voted for Kavanaugh.

I also might remind you, the right to life is of utmost importance to many Catholic, our faith tells us to respect the sanctity of life.

I try to respect other religions. I think we all should try to do that.

It doesn’t really engender in me, some great feeling, that voting against life, means participating in this elimination of so many souls. In fact, I find it highly immoral. And here, we have in some states, talk of Infanticide, NY and Virginia.
 
Last edited:
Yes the seeds of confusion being sown by the whole gender fluidity issue and the willingness of parents in the name of tolerance ,subjecting their children to this is a form of abuse.
 
Last edited:
marybobo said:
There are no ethical principles left in government anymore. There is no camaraderie left either. There is only the constant quest for power.
Click to expand...
I’m not so sure, in the past, you might have Scoop Jackson or Lieberman and so on.

I think the power is with special interest groups, at least, in some cases.

That’s easy to see, that’s really who is behind the scenes when Kavanaugh was nominated.

We should remember Kavanaugh, who dragged his name through the mud with apparently no proof.
 
Last edited:
Many on the left encourage child abuse? How many? I certainly do not, and I don’t believe any leftist in their “right” mind does either. And how many child abuse cases can we find that have nothing to do with homosexuality but rather with such things as alcoholism, mental illness, and even overzealous religious beliefs? Any kind of child abuse is wrong.
 
Last edited:
I do think parents allowing their kids to experiment with gender is a form of abuse.Two doors down from me live a physician and his wife.Thery are very progressive.Three kids,alThe oldest is early twenties.The other two in late teens.Several years ago the oldest boy decided he was really a girl, he is in transition with breast implants and hates his man part and wants it removed.He cannot decide on his new feminine name and has changed it several times.Clearly a confused soul.His younger sister age 15 is a lesbian ,only the middle kid is without these issues but is antisocial as all get out.
I have to question the parents role in all this dysfunction
 
Last edited:
Yes, I agree that allowing your kids to “experiment with gender” is, if not abusive, then at the least bad parenting. The kid must have a real need to transition, and even then, I don’t think anything of the sort should be done until later on. I don’t believe most doctors will aid in transition through surgery until the child is a certain age, as well as hormone treatments.

By the way, who you might think is the most liberal or leftist parent in this regard can sometimes be surprising. For example, one might have thought that someone such as Cher would be a permissive parent, but when her daughter broke the news to her about her being transgender, Cher, at first, as I recall reading, was really upset and refused to even entertain the idea.
 
Last edited:
Domestic terrorists making terrorist threats should be swiftly arrested and tried.
 
Yeah,that’s true,In this situation both parents very progressive .However, the mom had expressed her sadness that she probably won’t ever have grandkids because of the way her children are.I just find it curious that in one family there would be two out of three sexually confused.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top