Danica Roem Becomes First Transgender Woman to Win State Seat

FireDragon76 said:

This is typical of what I associate with Christianity, and reminds me of what William Blake wrote in his poem, The Garden of Love. The Garden of Love by William Blake

Christians are never satisfied unless they attack every human desire and replace it with their rigidly mechanistic and biologically reductionist view of life. In such a scheme, a transgender person is a wrench in the works to the Church of "Thou Shalt Not", a nail that must be hammered down and rebuked with the "Word of God".

Well, I'm not buying it. I've had enough of that sort of pompous bullying. All you do with the above use of your scriptures is prove how irrelevant it really is. I'll take love of my fellow human beings over such religion any day. I don't need your holy books promised certainties to find satisfaction and fulfillment in my life, and increasingly, neither do many younger people.

Click to expand...

I don't what you are on about here, but you do you here.

No one is attacking anything or anybody or "bullying" anyone, certainly not me, whom you have quoted.

My response was to the following exchange far upthread:

"Expected with the end times so close. Some people will be in for a surprise once Jesus starts His Work."

"Y'all keep sayin' that but ..."

Tinker Grey said:

A: They laughed at Gallileo. So ...
B: Yeah, and they laughed at Bozo the Clown. Your point?

Click to expand...

My point is pretty obvious. This day is foretold, and it is coming.

RestoreTheJoy said:

My point is pretty obvious. This day is foretold, and it is coming.

Click to expand...

Cool story

Tinker Grey said:

Cool story

Click to expand...

How does it end?

Aryeh Jay said:

How does it end?

Click to expand...

With the heat death of the universe.... At least this iteration

RestoreTheJoy said:

I don't what you are on about here, but you do here.

No one is attacking anything or anybody or "bullying" anyone, certainly not me, whom you have quoted.

My response was to the following exchange far upthread:

"Expected with the end times so close. Some people will be in for a surprise once Jesus starts His Work."

"Y'all keep sayin' that but ..."

Click to expand...

You're associating transsexualism with degeneracy. I have every right to call that out as hateful and cruel.

If only you were more concerned about your own moral failings and not the perceived failings of others, perhaps your own moral compass would not be so broken.

FireDragon76 said:

You're associating transsexualism with degeneracy. I have every right to call that out as hateful and cruel.

If only you were more concerned about your own moral failings and not the perceived failings of others, perhaps your own moral compass would not be so broken.

Click to expand...

Some people love the Bronze Age so much that they cling to whatever little bits that are left of it.

Aryeh Jay said:

Some people love the Bronze Age so much that they cling to whatever little bits that are left of it.

Click to expand...

I believe they do so selectively. They probably would not care for the widespread violence that was normative for most of human civilization back then.

The world really is better than it was thousands of years ago, by that measure alone.

GoldenBoy89 said:

Why does it matter so much what gender she is, was our you believe her to be?

How does her gender impact any aspect of her job?

Click to expand...

Oh, I don't know... maybe....because.....a politician identified as transgender will likely encourage and promote policy and law that creates and enforces serious penalties for those who are not inclined to endorse ill thinking and perception, such as a teacher being fired for refusing to use a person's preferred pronoun.

Virginia high school teacher fired for refusing to use transgender student's new pronouns

Just how little do you favor liberty of conscience and a correspondence view of reality?

CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN said:

Good for her.

Click to expand...

Under transgenderism, all instances of gender self-determination are supposedly equally valid. Such subjective determination actually renders all such determination invalid. That is, if everyone is right in such self-determination, then effectively no one is right. So effectively, transgenderism renders the words, "man, woman, female gender, male gender" absolutely meaningless. So by what standard are you identifying the concept, "her" if you agree with the concept of gender self-determination? Do you have a problem at all with supporting self-defeating philosophical claims found with certain components of transgenderism, such as the idea that gender or "male" and "female" are non-binary?

You are supporting a belief system that renders the word "her" meaningless. Do you at all comprehend the implications of such? Have you actually thought it through? Seriously.

FireDragon76 said:

Christians are never satisfied unless they attack every human desire and replace it with their rigidly mechanistic and biologically reductionist view of life. In such a scheme, a transgender person is a wrench in the works to the Church of "Thou Shalt Not", a nail that must be hammered down and rebuked with the "Word of God".

Click to expand...

Your misrepresentations aside, are you not on this thread promoting your own "Thou Shalt Nots"?
Why are your prescriptions for moral behavior any better than those found in God's Word? You certainly have no objective standard on which to rely. Your worldview cannot even account for the source and nature of morality. Do you know of any society that offers any semblance of real peace, liberty, and prosperity that has not been strongly influenced by God's word? Seems to me that history favors God's Word.

AACJ said:

Your misrepresentations aside, are you not on this thread promoting your own "Thou Shalt Nots"?

Click to expand...

Nope, not at all. I'm saying when you describe friends and family as "degenerates", that's drawing a line in the sand for some of us. I'm not the one going around implying other human beings are degenerates, you all are.

Why are your prescriptions for moral behavior any better than those found in God's Word?

Click to expand...

Because they aren't based on "God's word". They are based on principles like compassion informed by scientific evidence.

You certainly have no objective standard on which to rely. Your worldview cannot even account for the source and nature of morality. Do you know of any society that offers any semblance of real peace, liberty, and prosperity that has not been strongly influenced by God's word? Seems to me that history favors God's Word.

Click to expand...

That's just not a persuasive argument for why I should go against my strongest moral intuitions.

Why is a morality derived from the supposed commands of a Midianite war god any kind of real foundation for human ethics?

There were and are plenty of civilizations that thrived despite their lack of your religion. In fact I'd say your religion has been a distinct minority throughout history, and judging by the US's standing in the world, is no guarantee of success. At any rate, I don't let appeals ad populum determine what I am going to believe.

AACJ said:

You are supporting a belief system that renders the word "her" meaningless. Do you at all comprehend the implications of such? Have you actually thought it through? Seriously.

Click to expand...

My grampa's name was Robert, but he liked to be called Bob. This does not make the words 'Bob' or 'Robert' meaningless. We just call people by the names they like to be called. No polite person goes around insisting on calling people by the names listed on their birth certificates.

essentialsaltes said:

My grampa's name was Robert, but he liked to be called Bob. This does not make the words 'Bob' or 'Robert' meaningless. We just call people by the names they like to be called. No polite person goes around insisting on calling people by the names listed on their birth certificates.

Click to expand...

Apples and Oranges.

"Bob" is based on an objective standard or referent, namely, "Robert." No objective standard is possible in a system of universal gender self-determination.

For the sake of argument, an adequate comparison should possess sufficient commonalities to support it's purpose. Gender is not in question in your example. Also, what your Grandfather preferred references what is real; that is, both "Bob" and "Robert" accurately represent his natural gender, an actual male being. Not so in cases involving transgenders. Also, in your example, "Bob" is based on an objective reference or standard. Not so with a person claiming an unnatural gender or "sex."

Lastly, what someone prefers to be called is a separate but related issue in relation to the issues of applicability and moral or logical appropriateness. Someone my have a bad curse word for a birth name, but that is a separate but related issue to the appropriateness of requiring other people in society to use that name in everyday conversation. That of course is an extreme and unlikely scenario, but the comparison serves its purpose, namely, that someone can prefer a particular name all they want, however, their personal preference does not determine such preference's logical, practical, and moral appropriateness.

Why do we need absolute, universal, objective standards? That just seems like a flaw in logic typical of the religious fundamentalist rather than a thoughtful, measured response.

AACJ said:

Under transgenderism, all instances of gender self-determination are supposedly equally valid. Such subjective determination actually renders all such determination invalid. That is, if everyone is right in such self-determination, then effectively no one is right. So effectively, transgenderism renders the words, "man, woman, female gender, male gender" absolutely meaningless. So by what standard are you identifying the concept, "her" if you agree with the concept of gender self-determination? Do you have a problem at all with supporting self-defeating philosophical claims found with certain components of transgenderism, such as the idea that gender or "male" and "female" are non-binary?

You are supporting a belief system that renders the word "her" meaningless. Do you at all comprehend the implications of such? Have you actually thought it through? Seriously.

Click to expand...

I could care less either way, And neither do you. If you met a transgender man or female . You would have no clue. Time to grow up.

FireDragon76 said:

Why do we need absolute, universal, objective standards? That just seems like a flaw in logic typical of the religious fundamentalist rather than a thoughtful, measured response.

Click to expand...

Standards in general, or something more specific?

You mention logic. The discipline of logic is precise and relies heavily on absolutes, such as pertains to the laws of thought. The field of logic has been described as something akin to the discipline of math. And how do you comprehend that which constitutes a flaw if not in relation to that which is ideally unflawed, wchich itself constitutes an absolute. The exercise of human reason is largely dependent on perfect standards or ideals. Perfection is a reality. Also you have made absolute truth claims on this thread. So why do you question the need for absolutes when you use them?

CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN said:

I could care less either way, And neither do you. If you met a transgender man or female . You would have no clue. Time to grow up.

Click to expand...

Why are you posting if you do not care?

AACJ said:

Why are you posting if you do not care?

Click to expand...

Why are you pretending to care. This has nothing to do with you.

AACJ said:

Standards in general, or something more specific?

You mention logic. The discipline of logic is precise and relies heavily on absolutes, such as pertains to the laws of thought. The field of logic has been described as something akin to the discipline of math. And how do you comprehend that which constitutes a flaw if not in relation to that which is ideally unflawed, wchich itself constitutes an absolute. The exercise of human reason is largely dependent on perfect standards or ideals. Perfection is a reality. Also you have made absolute truth claims on this thread. So why do you question the need for absolutes when you use them?

Click to expand...

I just don't find presuppositionalism persuasive. One might as well say you can't have any standards for logic without believing in the Flying Spaghetti Monster. In the end, your choice of religion is just as arbitrary when it comes down to whether it "justifies" logic.

Logic is not a skyhook for old-time Christian fundamentalism, that's not how that works.