T
Thorolfr
Guest
How do you know what was “programmed” for a particular person or what they “were originally destined to be”? Do you have some special knowledge of what God’s plans are for other people?
- Status
T
Thorolfr
Guest
Are you talking about the “Northern treachery” of forcing the South to give up slavery?
P
PRmerger
Guest
No. But I don’t think that I proposed that I did.
Does that change anything about the fact that someone who’s XXY or XYY is still, at one’s essence, either male or female.
P
PRmerger
Guest
Incidentally, the condition in which a person is XXY is called Klinefelter syndrome, and they are genetically males.
The condition in which a person is Xx is called Turner syndrome and they are genetically females.
T
Thorolfr
Guest
What does it mean to be “genetically male”? Does it mean that such a person produces sperm or has a penis or what exactly?
Also, what about people who have a genetic mosaic where some of their cells are XX and some are XY? Is such a person male or female?
P
PRmerger
Guest
It means that they would be able to do everything that a male could do, were it not for this anomaly.
So in the case of Klinefelter syndrome, it may produce infertility, small testes, decreased testosterone.
If he were the way he should have been, he would be fertile, have normal sized testes, and have the normal amount of testosterone.
L
lmachine
Guest
I’m aware of Church teaching. I said many Catholics remain faithful to Christ despite supporting the rights of LGBT people. You can say we’re wrong, claim we’re not faithful Catholics, threaten our souls, and that’s fine. It’s easy to throw stones, it’s not easy to be kind to people.
P
PRmerger
Guest
Threaten your soul?
Firstly, I haven’t seen anyone here even mention eternal damnation for support of lgbt rights
Secondly, you do know that any Catholic who does this is contradicting the teaching of the Catholic Church, yes?
Thirdly, all Catholics are called to be kind to all people who have disordered desires. It is part of what it means to be a Catholic.
This is utter nonsense. I was raised in the north, and the very idea that if you live in the north you must oppose common decency and promote a discriminatory privileged state for a small fraction of the population is just false.
There is a absolutely no connection between the oppression of blacks in the Democratic south and HB2.
Jon
Z
zz912
Guest
No one is throwing stones. And instructing the ignorant and correcting the sinner are spiritual works of mercy. Encouraging someone to ignore or reject Church teaching is the opposite of being kind.
Church teaching isn’t optional. The teachings of Jesus aren’t optional. Warning someone that they can’t reject Church teaching is being loving and merciful.
A
_Abyssinia
Guest
Prominent feminist: Bans on sex discrimination ‘emphatically’ do not ‘require unisex restrooms’
washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2016/05/09/prominent-feminist-bans-on-sex-discrimination-emphatically-do-not-require-unisex-restrooms/
This is regarding Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2016/05/09/prominent-feminist-bans-on-sex-discrimination-emphatically-do-not-require-unisex-restrooms/
This is regarding Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
E
edwest2
Guest
Where did I say anything like your last two sentences? You are instigating and presuming. Please don’t do that.
LGBT is an artificial construction in terms of sexual activity. And that is the primary point of so-called gay marriage - to make it completely equal to male-female marriage. The bulk of those rights are wrong. Other issues that do not involve sexual behavior should be examined on a case by case basis.
I worked with LGBT people in a major hospital in the 1970s and early 1980s when “sex reassignment surgery” began. It was easy to be kind to everyone. They practiced something that was encouraged at the time: privacy. I did not think for one second what they did on their own time.
Now that many LGBT people have abandoned privacy to be “out and proud,” that’s my fault? To bully people and call them names if they don’t agree with their sexual behavior? That’s being nice? How about an athlete who recently appeared on CNN and told all viewers to stop being homophobic? Was he being nice? Everybody watching was labeled homophobic? Is that even rational?
Try being nice to me as well. I go to to LGBT web sites and related, and see signs like this if LGBT people are opposed to some law in some state that prohibits what they want: “No Hate in my State.” So, every single person who disagrees is filled with hate in that state? Is that rational? No.
Best,
Ed
J
JimG
Guest
Interesting. It will also be interesting to see whether, when it comes to a SCOTUS case, Justice Ginsburg decides to walk that one back.
Z
zz912
Guest
You’re expecting a leftist to be intellectually honest or consistent?
There’s little chance she will even acknowledge she ever said it.
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
This is barely relevant but I’ll say it anyway.
I remember, years ago, traveling in the deep south where segregation was really strict. It was not uncommon to see, at a service station, for example, three restrooms. The signs read “White men”, “White women” and “Colored”. At the time, that was considered one of the worst things about segregation; that blacks were so disdained they weren’t afforded the privacy and gender separation to which whites were entitled. “Throw the ******* all in there together. It doesn’t matter” was the message.
And now, it’s going to be all of us, eventually thrown into the same restrooms like the blacks were presented with back then. And to me, it evidences the same disregard for individual privacy and gender separation in those acts as was shown to blacks back when segregation was in full bloom. Except now, of course, it’s all of us.
I remember, years ago, traveling in the deep south where segregation was really strict. It was not uncommon to see, at a service station, for example, three restrooms. The signs read “White men”, “White women” and “Colored”. At the time, that was considered one of the worst things about segregation; that blacks were so disdained they weren’t afforded the privacy and gender separation to which whites were entitled. “Throw the ******* all in there together. It doesn’t matter” was the message.
And now, it’s going to be all of us, eventually thrown into the same restrooms like the blacks were presented with back then. And to me, it evidences the same disregard for individual privacy and gender separation in those acts as was shown to blacks back when segregation was in full bloom. Except now, of course, it’s all of us.
E
edwest2
Guest
Call me dense, but I’m not understanding you. How did the treatment of blacks compare to “Bathroom Bills” today?
Ed
T
Thorolfr
Guest
Back in the 1970s and early 1980s, LGBT people “practiced privacy” (i.e. were “in the closet”) mostly out of fear; fear of losing their jobs, fear being harassed or beaten; fear of discrimination.
It doesn’t, Ed. In fact, it’s the complete opposite. HB2 affirms that all males, equally, have the right to the restroom designated for males, and the same for females, and that no portion of each gender is given a discriminatory privilege. Segregation, OTOH, provided a discriminatory privilege to a portion of the population. HB2 is the exact opposite of segregation.
Jon
E
edwest2
Guest
How can you possibly prove that? There were a lot of people where I worked. A lot.
One female employee decided to undergo sex-reassignment surgery. When I saw her in the cafeteria, I noticed she had cut her hair and grown a mustache, but her female bone structure was not altered. There was no harassment, no job loss. Nothing. Or discrimination. At the time, I noticed, and promptly forgot about it.
Everybody practiced privacy. Today, turn on the TV and you’ve got porn in some cases. Casual discussion about intimate matters among straights, much less total strangers on TV, was out of the question. Privacy meant privacy for everybody.
I noticed one female employee embrace another woman on the way to my car at the time. Privacy. Nothing to talk about.
Ed
- Status