Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
With nothing to substantiate your assertion, I can refute it very simply...... No they're not.
It vindicates those such as myself.
The good thing about orthodoxy is that it's true whether you choose to believe it or not.
It vindicates those such as myself. It is also true that just because some Christians have lied to you does not mean it is so.
Laboring under the delusion that continuing in a sex reassignment is biblical and sound is just bad.
You losing religion is less important to you then your sex change, and that is why alleged Christian transgenders need to really rethink their worldview.
I have not lost religion. In fact, religion itself is of little worth as compared to the relationship with The Father, Christ, and The Holy Spirit. And that relationship is stronger than ever.
Some people privilege religious doctrines and experiences too much, and they miss the deeper truths of the Gospels in favor of man-shaped doctrines and traditions. They want to put God in boxes and try to shut people out of the Kingdom, but the only way that works is to try to make us buy into self-hatred.
Well then you're being unfair when you ask for conclusive evidence since what you're basically saying here is that the entire field is questionable in its conclusions. Of course, as others have mentioned, transgender isn't something that's only been studied psychologically, but we don't even have to go there. We can make reasonable inferences from the existing data that we have. Even if we don't have "conclusive evidence" that post-traumatic stress disorder is real, we can infer that people like our men and women who serve overseas experience so many traumatic events that it can be reasonable to assume that their condition is one which is real and requires treatment, even if it's hard to establish since it occurs at the level of the brain and is intangible. Likewise, a condition which a certain percentage of the population have admitted has plagued them since infancy and has persisted way into adulthood can be reasonably relied on as being a real distress that is unlikely to be either a "liberal" conspiracy nor a petulant whim. It seems that you, like many other ardent dogmatists here on this forum, are just bothered because this issue touches on taboo subjects that you dislike: sex and gender. It's laughable that as someone who adopts outlandish extraordinary claims about the nature of reality based on the scribblings of desert nomads from centuries ago coupled with highly dubious epistemologies that rely on blind trust (i.e., faith) is also conveniently skeptical of fields like psychology because they aren't as empirically demanding as other, harder sciences. In the words of Judge Judy: "Don't pee on my leg and tell me it's raining.""Mental illness" has always been a loaded subject.
I read a thing once, a long time ago, that spoke on the probability that as much as 50% of children diagnosed with ADHD actually don't have it, and 25% of children who aren't diagnosed have it.
It went on to explain that diagnosing a kid with ADHD was a bit over the top anyway, simply diagnosing those with bad upbringings.
The point is obvious- psychology has a hard time pinning anything down, and is a science in it's infancy.
If a conflict of interest or deduction exists on a matter such as that, then it exists among a lot of other things in psychology as well.
To say that transgender is factually innate is to be scientifically dishonest and arbitrary. If one were to be honest, one would admit that most of it all is propelled by emotion and forced leeway.
Well then you're being unfair when you ask for conclusive evidence since what you're basically saying here is that the entire field is questionable in its conclusions. Of course, as others have mentioned, transgender isn't something that's only been studied psychologically, but we don't even have to go there. We can make reasonable inferences from the existing data that we have. Even if we don't have "conclusive evidence" that post-traumatic stress disorder is real, we can infer that people like our men and women who serve overseas experience so many traumatic events that it can be reasonable to assume that their condition is one which is real and requires treatment, even if it's hard to establish since it occurs at the level of the brain and is intangible. Likewise, a condition which a certain percentage of the population have admitted has plagued them since infancy and has persisted way into adulthood can be reasonably relied on as being a real distress that is unlikely to be either a "liberal" conspiracy nor a petulant whim. It seems that you, like many other ardent dogmatists here on this forum, are just bothered because this issue touches on taboo subjects that you dislike: sex and gender.
To understand transgender you really have to research it and look at what peer reviewed psychology says about it.
To understand transgender you really have to research it and look at what peer reviewed psychology says about it.
Peer reviewed psychology? That is always changing with the political winds. Homosexuality used to be classified as a disorder according to the DSM, now its not. Did the truth change, or did something else happen?
Something else happened. Science adjusts as new information comes to light. It's why we're not still bleeding people with leeches to balance the humours.
Side note: I am constantly bemused by how difficult some people find it to cope with the idea of knowledge being iteratively progressive.
Really?
HowStuffWorks "Are leeches being used in modern medicine?"
"These days, leeches are used to help heal skin grafts -- the process for treating burns in which blood tissue is transferred from one part of the body to another -- by removing blood pooled under the graft and restoring blood circulation in blocked veins. They've also been used in reattaching fingers and other body parts [sources: MSNBC, PBS]."
I am constantly bemused by how difficult some people find it to cope with the idea of ancient knowledge being based on useful facts.
Yeah, good one. Modern medical use of leeches aren't for "balancing humours", are they? There's plenty of ancient knowledge that has a sound basis and is still used in modern medicine. Take willow bark, for instance. But there is a difference between accepting that sometimes ancient knowledge is correct, and insisting that all ancient knowledge is correct and must never, ever be updated.
Something else happened. Science adjusts as new information comes to light. It's why we're not still bleeding people with leeches to balance the humours.
Side note: I am constantly bemused by how difficult some people find it to cope with the idea of knowledge being iteratively progressive.
Fine. Show me research that says transgender people are better off than they were before they were allowed to mutilate themselves and pretend to be what they are not ie live a lie.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?