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.
If you want to stretch the grotesque example and ask a monstrously ridiculous question then...yes. With parental agreement and with medical advice and supervision. And the same applies to the male equivalent.What if she wants it because believes it's the right thing to do?
Yes when Mary as a biological male enters the private space of biological wwomen. Or when Mary competes against biological women and denies them or harms them physically.Reasonable arguments. Let's say Mary wants to be known as 'she' and 'he' even though she was born a male. Can there possibly be an argument that says 'I will be harmed if I do that'.
Oh sorry. Under normal circumstances there is no problem. So long as Mart doesn't expect everyone else to go along the accountant can be whatever they want to be so long as they are the best candidate for the job.Mary from accounts was used as an example of transgenderism and use of pronouns.
Thats a different issue to cutting off or mutilating genitals. Perhaps your just forcing Western morality onto other cultures. Doesn't secular moral relativism claim that each culture has a different set of moral truths and that we should not judge other cultures because we don't live in that culture or understand their relative position.If you think that holding down a young girl and excising part of her genitalia against her will is in any way comparable to a decision make by transgender people to undergo surgery then we have a huge problem.
There's a unisex toilet. And she has been selected as the new accounts person because she was the best person for the job. There is no harm. And what I said was being claimed as harm was one person in the office saying that calling her 'she' was harmful to that person. That is plainly absurd.Yes when Mary as a biological male enters the private space of biological wwomen. Or when Mary competes against biological women and denies them or harms them physically.
It's wrong because harm is being done.The West only thinks its immoral because its different to Western morals but not because its ultimately immoral because there is no absolute morals.
In that situation maybe. But what if its not that situation. What if there are seperate toilets and change room like we have seen in sports. It gets more complicated when we have to take this idea that a male can be a female into the wider community. Its usually at this level that we determine whats best for society as a whole.There's a unisex toilet. And she has been selected as the new accounts person because she was the best person for the job. There is no harm.
So what if its the persons belief that its harmful. Does there belief count for anything. Should not the person have the right to express their belief. What if some believe that calling a biological male a female causes harm in that applying that idea generally and especially to children is harmful to their psychological development.And what I said was being claimed as harm was one person in the office saying that calling her 'she' was harmful to that person. That is plainly absurd.
Harm being wrong by whose measure. The culture that practices the percieved harm from a Western relative position thinks its not doing anything wrong. They truely believe it. In fact they believe it saves the soul of the women. Not just saves her mortal life but her eternal soul which they regard as a much greater value as far as harm is concerned.It's wrong because harm is being done.
Then it wasn't difficult to determine harm.In that situation maybe.
No, it doesn't. They need to show that harm has been done. In this case actual harm to the person who refuses to use the pronouns as requested. You may not agree with it, but there's no way that you could convince anyone that you've been harmed.So what if its the persons belief that its harmful. Does there belief count for anything.
If you can't see that holding down a young child, slicing away parts of her genitalia with a razor and then sewing her up to allow just enough room for urine or menstruation, then this discussion can end. Just tell me that in your considered opinion that it is not harmful and we will end it here.Harm being wrong by whose measure.
I feel pain when I am feeling forced to use incorrect pronouns.Then it wasn't difficult to determine harm.
No, it doesn't. They need to show that harm has been done. In this case actual harm to the person who refuses to use the pronouns as requested. You may not agree with it, but there's no way that you could convince anyone that you've been harmed.
Then you'd have a problem. To be honest, I would suggest that if that's true then you should seek help.I feel pain when I am feeling forced to use incorrect pronouns.
Or maybe just respect my lifestyle choices and respect my use of pronouns.Then you'd have a problem. To be honest, I would suggest that if that's true then you should seek help.
So heres an arguement why using pronouns may be harmful to society. This can be determined by some questions. After all if we are to determine whether harm is being caused then we need to as you say investigate this and not just take it at face value.Then it wasn't difficult to determine harm.
No, it doesn't. They need to show that harm has been done. In this case actual harm to the person who refuses to use the pronouns as requested. You may not agree with it, but there's no way that you could convince anyone that you've been harmed.
Don't be silly. Third person pronouns are there for a reason. You either use them or you don't. Refusing to do so on the basis that it somehow harms you is a nonsensical position.So heres an arguement why using pronouns may be harmful to society. This can be determined by some questions. After all if we are to determine whether harm is being caused then we need to as you say investigate this and not just take it at face value.
Why does someone want others to use their pronouns?
Imagine an atheist and a Christian are in a sinking lifeboat built for one and the sharks are circling. Which one has a moral compass that is more likely to permit tossing the other overboard? Is that really "winning"?... a showdown brewing between Christain and traditionalist and the Secularist and the Left and I think the Left is winning.
No I agree, I think its wrong. But the point is the culture doing it doesn't think its wrong from their relative position. Who are you to say they are wrong if morals are relative. You have no way of telling they are objectively wrong. You only have your relative position and though you really believe you are right and they are wrong so do they in thinking you are wrong and they are right.If you can't see that holding down a young child, slicing away parts of her genitalia with a razor and then sewing her up to allow just enough room for urine or menstruation, then this discussion can end. Just tell me that in your considered opinion that it is not harmful and we will end it here.
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?