Yet Again, At Planet Fitness...

FireDragon76 said:

You need to explain how people read the Bible for centuries and didn't see "choosing whatever you want" as compatible with Christianity. Because what you are describing is potentially more revisionist of notions of truth than just allowing people to use whatever bathroom or locker room they need to use.

Click to expand...

At the risk of getting off topic choosing whatever you want is not what Christians do. We choose to follow Christ and try to live morally but it is a choice.
No one is forcing anyone to follow Christ, at least not since the Crusades. It’s a choice, it’s a decision you have to make.
I know God chooses us but he doesn’t want mindless beings who had no choice but to serve him.
Apparently even the Angels had a choice and some of them fell.
God is in control and he is all knowing but it may just be that he knew what choice we would make

BPPLEE said:

At the risk of getting off topic choosing whatever you want is not what Christians do. We choose to follow Christ and try to live morally but it is a choice.
No one is forcing anyone to follow Christ, at least not since the Crusades. It’s a choice, it’s a decision you have to make.
I know God chooses us but he doesn’t want mindless beings who had no choice but to serve him.
Apparently even the Angels had a choice and some of them fell.
God is in control and he is all knowing but it may just be that he knew what choice we would make

Click to expand...

This is getting off topic but my point is that morality is a universal human duty or obligation that isn't strictly about "getting to Heaven when you die" (a concern that is arguably not universal in Christianity, especially in early Christianity as found in the biblical text, as Bishop N.T. Wright has pointed out), but more importantly morality is about respecting the dignity of the divine image in our fellow human beings, regardless of their gender identity.

FireDragon76 said:

This is getting off topic but my point is that morality is a universal human duty or obligation that isn't strictly about "getting to Heaven when you die" (a concern that is arguably not universal in Christianity, especially in early Christianity as found in the biblical text, as Bishop N.T. Wright has pointed out), but more importantly morality is about respecting the dignity of the divine image in our fellow human beings, regardless of their gender identity.

Click to expand...

I treat everyone the same. At work, what I do for one I do for all. It’s not just the right thing to do, it’s one of the qualities of a type 6. There is a sense of security that comes from being on a friendly basis with everyone whenever possible.
But I also understand that there are women who don’t want biological males in their private spaces and I respect that.

rjs330 said:

I seem to recall that Trans people were offered their private spaces and they turned them down because they didn't want them. They wanted to strip down with the girls. They never asked for privacy. The woman have though.

Click to expand...

I don't believe this is a common problem. I believe that news in this day and age gets reported and blogged about all over the world. I don't believe that absolutely no trans women have wanted privacy. I believe predators are predators and they will find their prey where they can whether it's exposing themselves at the playground or school, they have always been a menace to society. I believe for the most part people who are pre or post-surgery would prefer not to lift their skirts at the men's urinal. Private stall, problem solved.

rjs330 said:

We don't want them in the closet. Just not in women's private spaces.
And it's their problem not ours. If they've altered themselves to the point where no one can tell the difference, no one is going to notice or say anything.

Click to expand...

I think the "problem" is that many conservatives have a problem with the trans community in general and look for ways to preach that they don't belong in society. As a Christian, I agree but we have secular laws rather than Christian laws.

rjs330 said:

But if you look like a dude stay out of the women's restrooms.

Click to expand...

Agreed. A dude with a beard wearing a parka and a baseball cap is not living their life as a woman. They should be treated like any other man.

rjs330 said:

We never used to have b I atantly obvious men in the women's room. They stayed out. So yes the trans identifying men caused this problem. Men are now using the lady's room and making the ladies uncomfortable. Why don't you care about the women? You just said yourself that if you have a penis you should stay out of the ladies room.

Click to expand...

I think we did but it wasn't so sensational of a news story for conservative news reporters. It was just illegal and the police could be called. I don't think perverts being perverts grabbed a lot of national headlines but trans people? We need to stop that apparently. I remember men putting "toilet cams" in the ladies room before they wore dresses to get in. Perverts have always had a problem but not all trans women are perverts.

FireDragon76 said:

Western Christianity up until the Enlightenment did not teach human freedom as the cause of salvation, and in many churches (Lutherans and Reformed), it still isn't relevant. Furthermore, a great many contemporary philosophers and neuroscientists don't believe free will is a coherent concept.

Click to expand...

I'm encouraged that the Enlightenment has rubbed off on some factions of Christianity.

FireDragon76 said:

This is getting off topic but my point is that morality is a universal human duty or obligation that isn't strictly about "getting to Heaven when you die" (a concern that is arguably not universal in Christianity, especially in early Christianity as found in the biblical text, as Bishop N.T. Wright has pointed out), but more importantly morality is about respecting the dignity of the divine image in our fellow human beings, regardless of their gender identity.

Click to expand...

I do agree with you. The situation is even though it's a duty or obligation we certainly can't say people choose to do that all the time. People do not respect the divine image in people. You know this so I don't really understand the issue here.

Ana the Ist said:

From your good friends at Dictionary.com.

Dictionary.com | Meanings & Definitions of English Words

The world's leading online dictionary: English definitions, synonyms, word origins, example sentences, word games, and more. A trusted authority for 25+ years!

www.dictionary.com

1. confidence or trust in a person or thing:

2. belief that is not based on proof:

Click to expand...

Believing someone who says something about themselves (that you can't independently verify) doesn't require faith. It just requires an acceptance of that statement, nothing more. And all that is required to accept that statement is a lack of any reason not to.

For example, you have stated that you're male. I accept that as true, because I have no reason to doubt it. Have I completely and totally verified this information? No. Nor do I really need to.

This doesn't mean I have faith in you, or that I would accept any and all statements made by you. Just that I have no reason not to believe this particular statement.

There is no faith in anything or anyone involved whatsoever.

Seems to me, you're using "faith" in such a nebulous, far-reaching way so as to make it utterly meaningless. Any belief is "faith", you seem to be saying. You're free to believe that, of course, but I don't buy it.

Ana the Ist said:

We've done this before. You're still wrong.

Click to expand...

No, I'm not. But you always say that about anything I say, so it means nothing.

-- A2SG, still unclear on why you keep insisting on pursuing this pointless rabbit hole about faith, though....

rjs330 said:

I do agree with you. The situation is even though it's a duty or obligation we certainly can't say people choose to do that all the time. People do not respect the divine image in people. You know this so I don't really understand the issue here.

Click to expand...

The issue is that a fundamental right, like access to public spaces, is more important than peoples perceived disgust or discomfort. Disgust or discomfort are not good reasons to deny anyone access to public spaces in a liberal society that respects human rights.

There are already rules in gyms against people exposing themselves or harassing women, so this notion that banning trans people from public spaces is about protecting women is just a red herring.

rturner76 said:

think the "problem" is that many conservatives have a problem with the trans community in general

Click to expand...

I don't think that's true. Haven't we had trans people around for quite some time? We didn't really have a problem with them because most understood they had a mental health problem. Conservatives never cared that much until the trans activists decided to try and come after the kids, start invading women's spaces and forcing people to use certain speech. We didn't start this. Then they went on to attack biology and make far fetched claims and then alter language to be point where people no longer could tell us what a woman was.

That why it's a problem now. They made it one and now we have dudes going into women's spaces getting baked and trying to shower with them all the while claiming to be trans. Gee and you wonder why it might be a problem?

FireDragon76 said:

The issue is that a fundamental right, like access to public spaces, is more important than peoples perceived disgust or discomfort. Disgust or discomfort are not good reasons to deny anyone access to public spaces in a liberal society that respects human rights.

Click to expand...

Who's denying anyone's access to public spaces? A women's restroom is not a public space. If it were there would be no reason to label it a women's room. Your argument is a bit silly. Are you now advocating for bathrooms and lockerooms to no longer be separated by sex?

FireDragon76 said:

There are already rules in gyms against people exposing themselves or harassing women, so this notion that banning trans people from public spaces is about protecting women is just a red herring.

Click to expand...

Obviously it's not. Because we've seen women harassed and assaulted in these spaces because men just walked in and were allowed to because of the trans claim.

Do you think what happened in the OP would have happened if men were not allowed in the lady's locker room?

rjs330 said:

Obviously it's not. Because we've seen women harassed and assaulted in these spaces because men just walked in and were allowed to because of the trans claim.

Do you think what happened in the OP would have happened if men were not allowed in the lady's locker room?

Click to expand...

Discrimination against people is wrong. Existing laws are adequate to protect women generally. There is no epidemic of men using women's locker rooms going on.

FireDragon76 said:

Discrimination against people is wrong. Existing laws are adequate to protect women generally. There is no epidemic of men using women's locker rooms going on.

Click to expand...

I don't consider myself discriminated against due to the fact that women would be very uncomfortable and or angry with me being in their restrooms and locker rooms.

Now obviously it could be said that's because I'm not a man who's pretending to be a woman. But if I was, should that give me a license to make a bunch of women and girls feel uncomfortable?

Liberals want this to be a whites only no "colorards" allowed type of thing, but it simply isn't.

FireDragon76 said:

Discrimination against people is wrong. Existing laws are adequate to protect women generally. There is no epidemic of men using women's locker rooms going on.

Click to expand...

Does it have to be an epidemic. How many times does it have to happen? How is it discrimination not to allow men into the lady's spaces?

BPPLEE said:

I treat everyone the same. At work, what I do for one I do for all. It’s not just the right thing to do, it’s one of the qualities of a type 6. There is a sense of security that comes from being on a friendly basis with everyone whenever possible.
But I also understand that there are women who don’t want biological males in their private spaces and I respect that.

Click to expand...

Absolutely! Trans people made their choice, they need to have respect for others that don’t agree with them.

rjs330 said:

Does it have to be an epidemic. How many times does it have to happen? How is it discrimination not to allow men into the lady's spaces?

Click to expand...

…because apparently men can now become women and that’s their right. I cannot wrap my head around this logic.

It's worse than that. They can now become umpteen different genders. Which can change around at the drop of a hat. And that's why a lot more people have stopped seeing transgender as being legit.

Ceallaigh said:

It's worse than that. They can now become umpteen different genders. Which can change around at the drop of a hat. And that's why a lot more people have stopped seeing transgender as being legit.

Click to expand...

Absolutely! It’s a mental illness and no one can convince me otherwise. A male is not a woman. Period.

rjs330 said:

I don't think that's true. Haven't we had trans people around for quite some time? We didn't really have a problem with them because most understood they had a mental health problem. Conservatives never cared that much until the trans activists decided to try and come after the kids,

Click to expand...

That's where Conservatism fails. It's not transgender people abusing children it's sexual predators who could be gay, straight, men, or women