North Carolina to Limit Bathroom Use by Birth Gender

[clem456]

How do you apply this in this case?

In a straightforward common sense way.
How do you apply it in this case? (you’ve asked a series of one-liners so I am not quite sure where you want this dialogue to go…)

1740 Threats to freedom. The exercise of freedom does not imply a right to say or do everything. It is false to maintain that man, “the subject of this freedom,” is "an individual who is fully self-sufficient and whose finality is the satisfaction of his own interests in the enjoyment of earthly goods."33 Moreover, the economic, social, political, and cultural conditions that are needed for a just exercise of freedom are too often disregarded or violated. Such situations of blindness and injustice injure the moral life and involve the strong as well as the weak in the temptation to sin against charity. By deviating from the moral law man violates his own freedom, becomes imprisoned within himself, disrupts neighborly fellowship, and rebels against divine truth.

 

[Crossbones]

In a straightforward common sense way.
How do you apply it in this case? (you’ve asked a series of one-liners so I am not quite sure where you want this dialogue to go…)

For the bathroom thing, I think it’s like the Republican Voter ID laws, set to fix a problem that doesn’t exist.

For requiring businesses open to the public to serve gay people, I find some guidance in the parable of the Good Samaritan. The innkeeper did not refuse the business of the Samaritan. Personally, I see no reason morally why baking a cake is objectionable and it seems to me that the refusal does more harm than good as ostracizing a segment of the society.

For gay marriage, I think people must find their own way. Too many children were raised by bad parents and ended up gay. I’d rather they not pretend otherwise and ruin the lives of straight people.

But I am not inflexible on these issues and am interested in your views as to better help my thinking on these matters.

 

[Joie_de_Vivre]

For the bathroom thing, I think it’s like the Republican Voter ID laws, set to fix a problem that doesn’t exist.

For requiring businesses open to the public to serve gay people, I find some guidance in the parable of the Good Samaritan. The innkeeper did not refuse the business of the Samaritan. Personally, I see no reason morally why baking a cake is objectionable and it seems to me that the refusal does more harm than good as ostracizing a segment of the society.

For gay marriage, I think people must find their own way. Too many children were raised by bad parents and ended up gay. I’d rather they not pretend otherwise and ruin the lives of straight people.

But I am not inflexible on these issues and am interested in your views as to better help my thinking on these matters.

Bad parents causing children to be gay has been disproven

 

[Crossbones]

Bad parents causing children to be gay has been disproven

Then how do people end up gay?

 

[Thorolfr]

Then how do people end up gay?

They’re born that way (actually no one knows yet, but most scientists believe that there is at least some biological component. It could be due at least partially to certain hormone levels in utero).

 

[Crossbones]

They’re born that way.

So, it’s kind of like race. You are born black. You are born gay. I see.

Well, by that logic, then the government has a right to step in to ensure the civil rights of gay people are protected.

But I don’t think most accept that fact and I do think there is a psychological component (usually bad parenting)

 

[Joie_de_Vivre]

Then how do people end up gay?

Probably something went wrong in utero.

 

[clem456]

For the bathroom thing, I think it’s like the Republican Voter ID laws, set to fix a problem that doesn’t exist.

I think we are on the same page then on bathrooms.
There is no problem if we already have male and female restrooms, so the law is not necessary.
On the other hand, I do understand the people of NC are taking a preemptive action to prevent some insanity as has happened in other states.

For requiring businesses open to the public to serve gay people, I find some guidance in the parable of the Good Samaritan. The innkeeper did not refuse the business of the Samaritan. Personally, I see no reason morally why baking a cake is objectionable and it seems to me that the refusal does more harm than good as ostracizing a segment of the society.

I would tend to agree. Now we are talking about retail services, privately owned businesses, comparative beliefs and weighing the validity, applicability, the consequences, all that.

If I was asked by a bachelor party to bake a giant cake-phallus, (don’t laugh it happens) I should have my beliefs and sensibilities respected. I should be allowed to decline this business. Go to the baker down the street who has no reservations about baking you a porn-cake.
A more likely scenario will be the demand for use of Church facilities for unions that violate the Church’s beliefs. It will happen. Again, you can go to the church down the street who does not object to a gay union.

These things are not the same as denying a black person a loan, or a meal, at a public establishment. That’s a denial of basic human resources based on an intrinsic human trait.

It’s a lie, isn’t it? You claim a black person is inferior intrinsically because they are black, and so do not deserve basic services. You ask society to accept your lie. Not all lies are negative in nature. In other words, the above scenario attempts to rob a person of humanity by denying their humanity. In the case of gender confusion, the lie proposes something additional that is contrary to basic human realities.

Here’s the point of the passage I quoted:
Deception robs the person, and society in general, of freedom and human dignity. *A lie in one area robs every single human being of his/her humanity. * And helps push human dignity down the slippery slope. The history of genocide and racism makes this self evident. A lie that is accepted is disastrous for everyone, as human rights become quicksand .

For gay marriage, I think people must find their own way. Too many children were raised by bad parents and ended up gay. I’d rather they not pretend otherwise and ruin the lives of straight people.

Not sure what your point is here. No child should be raised in a bad home. But I certainly don’t agree with you that a tough home makes a person “end up gay”.

But I am not inflexible on these issues and am interested in your views as to better help my thinking on these matters.

 

[TMC]

So, it’s kind of like race. You are born black. You are born gay. I see.

Well, by that logic, then the government has a right to step in to ensure the civil rights of gay people are protected.

But I don’t think most accept that fact and I do think there is a psychological component (usually bad parenting)

I do think that most people accept the fact that sexual orientation is in-born, and there is no evidence that it is caused by bad parenting.

 

[FollowChrist34]

I do think that most people accept the fact that sexual orientation is in-born, and there is no evidence that it is caused by bad parenting.

I think these kinds of beliefs are broken down by cultural background, political views, etc. The evidence bears this out. Most secular liberals believe this - practicing Christians, Muslims, Orthodox Jews would follow their teaching. Also the academic community of psychologists and psychiatrists have really made a 180 degree turn on this. Up to about 1970, bad parenting (abusive incidents) was widely accepted as one of the major factors in sexual disorientation. But now there is pressure to view it as in-born. (what does this say about the individual’s reproductive capacity? in terms of a defect in the species I mean) Anecdotal evidence to the contrary is surpressed or ignored. Counselors (straight or gay) who accept/acknowledge it are shunned. I give this ‘in-born’ approach about 100 years, maybe less. My guess is there some sort of nature (genetic)/nurture (abuse/disorientation) combo going on - a little of both. I remember seeing somewhere that many studies point to negative influence/neglect/abuse/example from the father, not the mother. It is a shame political correctness has shut down this research; it would be interesting to know.

 

[Ender]

I do think that most people accept the fact that sexual orientation is in-born, and there is no evidence that it is caused by bad parenting.

There is “evidence” to support pretty much every theory of same-sex attraction. Yes, there is evidence that it is in-born, just as there is even more that it is not. There is no justification for asserting that it is genetically determined, as if the issue was settled. More to the point, this topic has nothing to do with same-sex attraction so the question is irrelevant in this context.

Ender

 

[estesbob]

I do think that most people accept the fact that sexual orientation is in-born, and there is no evidence that it is caused by bad parenting.

I have four daughters-one is a homosexual. So did we parent three of them “good” and one of them “bad” Of course most people who have been around these forums for any length of time know I have a homosexual child so I take such statements for what they are worth

 

[zz912]

Probably something went wrong in utero.

Be careful. Once they find a genetic test for it, those babies testing positive will be killed like Down’s Syndrome babies are now.

I do think that most people accept the fact that sexual orientation is in-born, and there is no evidence that it is caused by bad parenting.

On the contrary, there is a strong correlation to homosexual behavior and a lack of a father or a good relationship with a father, especially among homosexual men. Obviously there are exceptions to any rule, but it’s not just coincidence that the vast bulk of homosexual men lack a good relationship with their father.

 

[clem456]

Be careful. Once they find a genetic test for it, those babies testing positive will be killed like Down’s Syndrome babies are now.

On the contrary, there is a strong correlation to homosexual behavior and a lack of a father or a good relationship with a father, especially among homosexual men. Obviously there are exceptions to any rule, but it’s not just coincidence that the vast bulk of homosexual men lack a good relationship with their father.

There is good evidence for this.
On the other hand I have a life long gay friend who has a wonderful family and great father, 11 children in the family, five straight brothers, so…

This is my concern for my gay friend:
I am not going to change him, that is not even my concern. I will be his friend for life, as he is.
My concern for him is the insanity our society is encouraging. This same insanity will turn on everyone eventually.

That’s the nature of insanity. It has no real friends, it just does whatever moves it at the time. Insanity obeys it’s own passions and prejudices, and those change on a dime.

So today we allow silly privileges for a few.
Tomorrow those few will be persecuted depending on who wields the power, because the underlying concept of human rights and dignity is a farce.

 

[mary_bobo]

I have four daughters-one is a homosexual. So did we parent three of them “good” and one of them “bad” Of course most people who have been around these forums for any length of time know I have a homosexual child so I take such statements for what they are worth

As I have said before on CAF I do not think anyone would choose to be gay. They are born that way and are a child of God as all of us are. Psychology has said that there is no correlation in how an individual is raised. That is an old wives tale.

 

[Thorolfr]

On the contrary, there is a strong correlation to homosexual behavior and a lack of a father or a good relationship with a father, especially among homosexual men. Obviously there are exceptions to any rule, but it’s not just coincidence that the vast bulk of homosexual men lack a good relationship with their father.

A correlation does not imply causation. At least in the past, a lot of gay youth were not accepted by their fathers. This did not make them gay (causation), but was rather a result of them being gay. Studies have shown that many gay people are gender non-conforming even as children and fathers pick up on this whether consciously or unconsciously, and sometimes mistreat these children or treat them differently. So it’s not surprising that many gay men do not have a good relationship with their fathers who probably wished that their sons were straight, liked sports, acted more masculine, etc.

 

[meltzerboy]

As I have said before on CAF I do not think anyone would choose to be gay. They are born that way and are a child of God as all of us are. Psychology has said that there is no correlation in how an individual is raised. That is an old wives tale.

Actually it’s an old Freudian tale, in which the mother, not the father, is inadvertently responsible for everything about the child. Of course psychology believed this about gay children when the psychoanalytic school of psychology was fairly dominant. But today the psychoanalytic school no longer reigns: the modern cognitive neuroscientific school does, so psychologists have adapted their theories according to the dominant psychological school.

 

[clem456]

Actually it’s an old Freudian tale, in which the mother, not the father, is inadvertently responsible for everything about the child. Of course psychology believed this about gay children when the psychoanalytic school of psychology was fairly dominant. But today the psychoanalytic school no longer reigns: the modern cognitive neuroscientific school does, so psychologists have adapted their theories according to the dominant psychological school.

So, psychology is searching for reason and meaning in this issue, so that confusion does not reign. Confusion is bad for human beings. Maybe we can all agree on that (then again, maybe not).
How does the transgender bathroom issue promote reason and true human dignity and meaning for society and for individuals?

 

[meltzerboy]

So, psychology is searching for reason and meaning in this issue, so that confusion does not reign. Confusion is bad for human beings. Maybe we can all agree on that (then again, maybe not).
How does the transgender bathroom issue promote reason and true human dignity and meaning for society and for individuals?

The transgender “bathroom” issue is not an issue, psychologically speaking; but the transgender issue is. And the tendency now is to search for biological links.

BTW, transgender is not the same as gay. I hope we can agree on that. Some transgendered people are gay, while others are straight. Sexual preference is a complicated and messy business, and the jury is still out.

 

[Thorolfr]

Sexual preference is a complicated and messy business, and the jury is still out.

I agree. Some people want to find a simple explanation for this such as bad parenting or sexual abuse, but I think it’s more complicated.