New belief among teenagers. What do you think?

[Larniavc]

While therianthropy (identifying as a non-human animal) and LGBTQ+ identities are distinct, they can and often do overlap, with many individuals identifying as both. Therianthropy is not a gender identity or sexual orientation, and therefore not inherently part of the LGBTQ+ umbrella, but individuals who identify as therians may also experience gender or sexual orientations that align with LGBTQ+ categories.

Crikey, wait till you find out that all of that overlaps with people who self identify as Christian!

 

[Larniavc]

That's how they all start out. Even abortion was said to be "safe and rare", gays being only 3.5% in 2012, but 7.6% in 2024,

Correct; with those statistics by the year 2425 everyone will be gay and by definition no one will be Christian.

 

[Larniavc]

Its about prioiritizing the subjective thoughts and feelings of individuals over distinct objective categories.

What's wrong with that?

 

[BCP1928]

Simply because there are cultural expressions, generally as a matter of exagerating common secondary distinctions, does not render the entire category merely descriptive. And again, this isn't a moral objection I am raising.

The truth that what they were born is what they are, no matter how they alter the aesthetics. A man can never become a woman, and it is clear that trans people want their identity to overrule that basic fact.

A man can become a transwoman, that is his entire goal. Just because there is no category for transwomen in your classification scheme is not his problem. .You are imputing an ontological claim to trans people which they are not making.

 

[BCP1928]

Nature weeds out the genetic results of those who are not sexual males or females in the human reproductive cycle.




Animals have gender? I was told gender is a human social construct.

The map is not the territory, the name is not the thing.

 

[Fervent]

I hate to break it to you, but non-binary organisms in the animal and plant kingdom, the reclassification of Pluto due to additional space discoveries, and our expanding knowledge of the world around us due to science is not an opinion… It’s basic fact.

Gender isn't a scientific category, and sex diversity among plants and fungii is hardly applicable to the sexual binary of humans. You're conflating topics, either due to a lack of understanding or an attempt to legitimize gender theory by giving it a scientific dress.

Talking about the metaphysical in your version of Christianity is, however, an opinion.

Metaphysics and theology is not simply a matter of opinion.

 

[Fervent]

Your use of the word "become" there is misplaced. Unless you think Pluto "became" something different than it was when it was reclassified.

Again with the false analogy of pluto? Inventing a new term because the objective facts involved no longer support identifying Pluto as a planetary body due to a lack of uniqueness in the Kaiper belt is not an equivalent case to playing make believe based on thoughts and feelings.

Christianity does not depend on it. Your theology apparently depends on it but that is not the same thing at all.

It's not simply my theology, denying it leads to a denial of objective theories of atonement and robs the cross of its power. What is left is something entirely different from Christianity, but given your penchant for ignoring objective truth in favor of personal identity its not surprising you would believe as much.

 

[Fervent]

A man can become a transwoman, that is his entire goal. Just because there is no category for transwomen in your classification scheme is not his problem. .You are imputing an ontological claim to trans people which they are not making.

Oh? His goal is to be regarded as not-quite-a-woman? Then why do they take issue when others choose to deny them female qualifiers? Why do we have people making statements like "transwomen are women" and demanding that we alter our language about birth sex to claim that they are "assigned X at birth" as if the doctors made a subjective call on the matter?

 

[Fervent]

What's wrong with that?

Aren't atheists usually the ones concerned with facts over feelings? Why the change of heart?

 

[Larniavc]

but given your penchant for ignoring objective truth in favor of personal identity its not surprising you would believe as much.

When people talk about objective truths what they really mean 'wot I believe'. A bit like when people talk about what God wants they are really talking about 'wot I want.

 

[Fervent]

When people talk about objective truths what they really mean 'wot I believe'. A bit like when people talk about what God wants they are really talking about 'wot I want.

Right, there is no objective truth. So nothing is factual, it's all opinions.

 

[Larniavc]

Aren't atheists usually the ones concerned with facts over feelings? Why the change of heart?

My question was 'What's wrong with that?' Answer that and I'll answer your question.

 

[Fervent]

My question was 'What's wrong with that?' Answer that and I'll answer your question.

I've addressed that, it creates an environment where objective truth no longer matters since feelings trump objective categories.

 

[Larniavc]

Right, there is no objective truth. So nothing is factual, it's all opinions.

Correct. Ask any two Christians about the nature of God and you'll get radically differing answers. Which are of course, their opinions.

 

[Larniavc]

I've addressed that, it creates an environment where objective truth no longer matters since feelings trump objective categories.

Yes but you haven't said what was wrong with that; which was my question.

 

[RDKirk]

Correct. Ask any two Christians about the nature of God and you'll get radically differing answers.

I find that not to be true about "any two Christians."

Which are of course, their opinions.

But most can present evidence for their opinions, even if that evidence is contained only in scripture, so it's more than simply opinions.

 

[Fervent]

Yes but you haven't said what was wrong with that; which was my question.

I believe you've demonstrated what is wrong with that, in your retreat into rendering everything opinion. Even if you attempted to justify it by making an irrelevant attack on Christianity. It renders the whole idea of truth a meaningless concept.

 

[Larniavc]

I believe you've demonstrated what is wrong with that, in your retreat into rendering everything opinion. Even if you attempted to justify it by making an irrelevant attack on Christianity. It renders the whole idea of truth a meaningless concept.

It sounds more like you are conflating 'truths' with axioms.

 

[ralliann]

Good morning, what do you think about the rather disturbing belief that's currently trending among young people on platforms like Tumblr, TikTok, and Reddit, in which members believe they are animals and record themselves walking on all fours on TikTok?

They call themselves Therians, and they truly believe they are animals, most often dogs, cats, or other popular mammals. Many of them believe they have "species dysphoria" and that their souls are not human souls but animal souls. I even heard of a case of a teenager who wanted to rip off her skin because she felt she was a dog, and dogs have fur.

Am I the only one who finds this a bit terrifying? Not to mention the large number of children and teenagers who follow this trend. Even ten-year-olds are posting about it on TikTok and even creating special masks to sell on platforms like Vinted or Etsy. I've even seen adults walking on all fours in the mall or barking at strangers or howling.

-Marlena Telep.

They are getting these notions from elsewhere. Who in their lives are promoting this?

 

[Fervent]

It sounds more like you are conflating 'truths' with axioms.

Not at all, since nothing I'm talking about deals with a priori issues.