WALSH: Biden Endorses The Idea That 8-Year-Olds Can Choose Their Gender, Proving That He Is Owned By The Radical Left

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cathoholic
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Cathoholic

Guest

WALSH: Biden Endorses The Idea That 8-Year-Olds Can Choose Their Gender, Proving That He Is Owned By The Radical Left​

By Matt Walsh

Oct 16, 2020 DailyWire.com

During his ABC town hall on Thursday night, Democrat presidential candidate Joe Biden responded to a question . . .

. . . The former Vice President Biden also endorsed the insane notion that 8-year-olds can choose their own gender. When questioned by a mother who said that her 8-year-old daughter is “transgender” (a biological boy who now lives as a girl), Biden offered a typically rambling response:
I was raised by a man. . . And these two men, well-dressed, leaned up and hugged one another and kissed one another. I’m getting out of the car at the light, and I turned to my dad, and my dad looked at me, he said, “Joey, it’s simple. They love each other.”
Click to expand...
It’s not clear what two men kissing at the pool has to do with transgender kids, but this part of the answer gets closer to the point:
The idea that an 8-year-old child, a 10-year-old child, decides, you know, “I want to be transgender, that’s what I think I’d like to be, it’d make my life a lot easier” — there should be zero discrimination. And what’s happening is, too many transgender women of color are being murdered. They’re being murdered… And so, I promise you, there is no reason to suggest that there should be any right denied your daughter… And by the way, my son, Beau . . . was the guy that got the first transgender law passed in the state of Delaware and because of a young man who became a woman, who worked for him in the attorney general’s office. And I’m proud of that.
Click to expand...
It is a little hard to decipher his stream-of-consciousness, but he is clearly affirming the notion that a young boy may in some mystical way discover his own inner girlness and that the child ought to be able to act on that discovery by “becoming” a girl. He also amplifies the dubious claim that “transgender women” are the victims of some sort of hate crime epidemic. . . . The evidence — including the whole of biological science, and everything we know about child psychology — also indicates that males cannot in any scientific sense “become” girls, and that even if they could, children do not possess the psychological and emotional maturity to make life-altering decisions for themselves.

. . . If instead this is a recent development, he should be required to explain it. What prompted him to decide, suddenly, that sometimes women can have penises and men can get pregnant? What data lead him to this startling conclusion? Or is he only pretending to believe in radical left-wing gender theory, and endorsing what is to my mind the psychological and emotional abuse of children, for political purposes? If so, we are back to him being a monumental coward. And also a liar.

These are questions he should have to answer. But that would require a real news media to ask them.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Frankly, I m even more concerned at his incoherence than at his politics.
 
It’s still hard for me to believe that people, especially Christians, would even consider voting for VP Biden/Sen. Harris, or most other Democrats.

Anyway, I’m wondering how Pres. Trump would have answer the same question.

My husband and I were just talking this morning about how Pres. Trump really doesn’t seem to have a lot to say about homosexuals and their issues. We believe that because he has lived most of his life in New York City among the “wealthy, beautiful people” crowd, that he has come to accept homosexuals as just “people”, and works with them with no prejudice about their sexuality–as long as they do their job and get along with their co-workers, they’re fine, no big deal.

I don’t think that religion has been part of his daily life long enough to have developed an opinion about the “rightness” or “wrongness” of practicing homosexuality (or for that matter, about many issues that Christians normally think about!).

But even devout Catholics recognize that some people have an attraction to the same sex, and that although this is “disordered” (with no explanation yet as to why it happens), it is not sinful to have this attraction, but only sinful to act upon it. It is fair to say that a Iife-long Catholic like VP Biden SHOULD have a thorough understanding of Catholic teaching about homosexuality and that he has chosen to reject that Catholic teaching.

I’m guessing that Pres. Trump, as a “baby Christian” (according to Dr. James Dobson) is not aware of this teaching, and probably believes, like many Americans (and like many practicing Christians), that it’s OK to be homosexual, and even OK for two homosexuals to have sex as long as they are in a committed relationship (not a “marriage”). Of course, this is incorrect theology, opposed to what the Church teaches. But nevertheless, it’s what a lot of Christians cling to in an attempt to be conciliatory towards their relatives, friends, and neighbors.

I think that those Christians who have children or other close family members who have come out as “gay” or “lesbian” are especially inclined to hang onto this “accepting” view of homosexual practice, otherwise, they are forced to remain in conflict with their loved ones.

But again, I doubt Pres. Trump has studied Christian theology or even the Bible to know what he is supposed to believe about homosexuals. He just accepts them, and doesn’t really worry about what they’re doing in their bedrooms.

Same for transgender issues–these are not well-understood by Christians, and it is perhaps understandable and forgiveable that VP Biden doesn’t have a clear understanding of Christian teaching about this tough issue, and certainly Pres. Trump, a newcomer to “religion,” cannot be expected to emote correct Christian teaching either.
 
Peeps said:
It’s still hard for me to believe that people, especially Christians, would even consider voting for VP Biden/Sen. Harris, or most other Democrats.
Click to expand...
I think many are just voting for the non-Trump option.
 
I think that’s what the polls suggest. Even before the virus, the majority of Americans wanted Trump removed immediately, according to Fox’s own polls.
 
Last edited:
I am wondering about the mother who says her child, 8 years old, is transgender and seems fine with that.
 
ThinkingSapien said:
I think many are just voting for the non-Trump option.
Click to expand...
But that’s terrible. If the Democratic Party had essentially the same social agenda and taxing strategy as the Republican Party, then okie dokie.

But the two Parties are so different! And the social agenda of the Democratic Party is utterly opposed to Catholic teachings!

It’s no wonder so many Catholics leave the Church and go over to the Evangelical Protestant fellowships, which have continued to maintain consistent teaching when it comes to elections–vote pro-life, vote pro-traditional family, vote low taxes and less government involvement with everyday life.

Every single Evangelical that I have maintained contact with is solidly behind Pres. Trump. Evangelicals do tend to show up to vote no matter what the weather and no matter that there is a pandemic. I hope it’s enough to get him re-elected and avoid a 4-year nightmare of Democratic big government, uber-involvement with social issues, pro-death and anti-traditional family policies, and anti-American foreign policy.
 
I know one of those moms. She’s a self-described SJW and her kid is like her private social experiment.
 
This only proves that Trump has successfully hoodwinked Evangelicals.
 
FrankFletcher said:
I know one of those moms. She’s a self-described SJW and her kid is like her private social experiment.
Click to expand...
You must know the same mom that my daughter knows. It’s so sad–the poor child is, as you say, a “social experiment.” We can only hope that God will keep the child’s soul pure and that his guardian angel will guide him to Jesus.
 
This only proves that Democrats has successfully hoodwinked some Catholics concerning abortion and sexual deviancy and anti-subsidiarity.
 
Last edited:
Peeps said:
But that’s terrible. If the Democratic Party had essentially the same social agenda and taxing strategy as the Republican Party, then okie dokie.
Click to expand...
This election has been light on policy. It’s not discussed much. Right now personality appears to be the stronger driver. The non-Trump options are fairly boring. Boring is stable. Sometimes stability feels good.
 
sloancaprice said:
They will vote for Biden with well-formed consciences formed with a strong understanding of Church teaching.
Click to expand...
explain how it is possible to vote in good conscience for the democrat policy on:

abortion, 50 million kids a year die worldwide, 60 million in the USA since RvW
the LGBT agenda,
euthanasia,
embryonic stem cell research,
transgenderism,
identity politics,
the destruction of the family,
contraception,
socialism,
breaking the seal of the confession,
federal funds to pay for abortions,
forced abortions in Catholic hospitals,
the selection of liberal judges who will uphold these policies,
the anti-family welfare system,
etc

what are the proportionate reasons for voting for these anti-catholic policies
 
Excuse me? How was that ‘not polite”? you appear to have castigated one poster’s tone. I simply asked how ‘you’ would respond in the situation since you found fault with the other person’s response and obviously had a different take on the subject. The fact that you responded to me as you did with yet another attempt to claim that those who asked you to give your opinion on a subject are ‘not polite’ therefore ‘you’ need not bother responding until your ‘politeness standards’ are met says volumes.
 
Last edited:
Oh how lovely. Thank you for informing me that I needed to pass an unspoken ‘test’ before you would respond to a simple, and polite, question I posed to you.

I will wish you a good day as well. Perhaps some day you will find yourself wanting to engage in dialogue with others a bit more and less inclined to play games or make assumptions so that you can pretend somebody has done what you accuse them of, “Gotacha, anyone”? You might find it worthwhile, maybe not. After all, I only asked you a simple question, and I don’t exactly feel the answers I received, even if after the second communication were exactly what I might have expected, had any ‘positive’ effect on me or others. It’s actually kind of sad. Good day.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top