OT "I'm Dealing With A Few Transgender Issues"

[Phatguysrule]

Try to keep up.

Despite the various (incredibly wrong) labels against me, I had begun asking more questions. They're all legitimate ones in my estimation.

But you refuse to accept any answer. Simply asking questions isn't enough.

It comes off as a facade.

And I'm not trying to offend you at all.

 

[Phatguysrule]

Though, being called a racist, gay and/or trans hater is way over the top. And, quite frankly, ugly. As a moderator, you of all people should know that. I've said NOTHING that would warrant those ugly labels. Nothing.

You have admitted to (in fact bragged about) supporting programs, policies and leaders which are racist and anti gay/trans.

Then you refuse to entertain explanations as to why those things are harmful...

 

[crandc]

At age 8 I knew who Nazis were and what they did to the Jews. Can you really think gay and trans people are scarier for children to learn about than telling a little Jewish girl about Nazi Germany?

 

[Chris Craig]

Though, being called a racist, gay and/or trans hater is way over the top. And, quite frankly, ugly. As a moderator, you of all people should know that. I've said NOTHING that would warrant those ugly labels. Nothing.

They are ugly labels. They represent ugly things. Things you have aligned yourself with through politicians, laws, policies, etc that you support.

You have left people to make their own conclusions.

Clarify your stance. Don't be afraid to have the conversation.

I offer to have a conversation here with you about this, free of judgement.

 

[ABM]

I keep up just fine.

You don't offer a clear idea of where you stand on LGBTQ. You offer vague links to controversial articles that lead people to build their own picture.

You say your religion tells you that you have to see being gay or queer as wrong, but are not for laws against it, but then are for some of the laws, but aren't, but are for the politicians who are for the laws, but aren't, but are.

This is some of the vagueness I'm talking about. Don't be obscure.

Clarify your stance man.

omg, Chris.

So, having legitimate questions means being so-called obscure and automatically necessitates being labeled a racist and/or bigot? The links I post generally involved abuses. We've already discussed many of those ad nauseum. Show me otherwise.

Look, when it comes to religion, the bible even identifies pre-marital hetero sex as a sin. It's called fornication. LGBTQ folks certainly aren't singled out in that regard. And, hey, I've been guilty of that. In terms of gay marriage, the bible doesn't speak of it, it describes marriage as a coenenat with God between a man and a woman. Therefore, I'm not in support of gay marriage. If you want to call me a name for that, it's your call.

As a moderator, though, despite your personal beliefs on the matter(s), simply condoning someone calling me a racist and/or hater is laziness in my opinion. I'm not certain of you've liked any of those posts, but Sly certainly has. Irresponsible.

 

[ABM]

At age 8 I knew who Nazis were and what they did to the Jews. Can you really think gay and trans people are scarier for children to learn about than telling a little Jewish girl about Nazi Germany?

You're skirting. I asked you if you believe these discussion should be between parents and their children and left out of (or not) school discussions/teaching.

 

[ABM]

You have admitted to (in fact bragged about) supporting programs, policies and leaders which are racist and anti gay/trans.

Bull.

 

[andalusian]

How can a religion be against people using the brain god gave them to decide what they are and who they love? That's heresy. That's telling god she/he/they (*) made a mistake giving people a brain.

(*) have not had a conversation with god recently, not sure how they identify now.

In other words, if you can not say Gay in school or discuss transgender people, you should not say Christian or God or Jesus either.

Fucking hypocrites.

 

[Chris Craig]

omg, Chris.

So, having legitimate questions means being so-called obscure and automatically necessitates being labeled a racist and/or bigot? The links I post generally involved abuses. We've already discussed many of those ad nauseum. Show me otherwise.

Look, when it comes to religion, the bible even identifies pre-marital hetero sex as a sin. It's called fornication. LGBTQ folks certainly aren't singled out in that regard. And, hey, I've been guilty of that. In terms of gay marriage, the bible doesn't speak of it, it describes marriage as a coenenat with God between a man and a woman. Therefore, I'm not in support of gay marriage. If you want to call me a name for that, it's your call.

As a moderator, though, despite your personal beliefs on the matter(s), simply condoning someone calling me a racist and/or hater is laziness in my opinion. I'm not certain of you've liked any of those posts, but Sly certainly has. Irresponsible.

I'm not calling you anything or condoning anyone calling you anything. I was merely offering reasoning why such labels might be coming your way.

Having questions is a good thing. It's how we learn. Certain questions, or how certain questions are formed can be controversial. Asking questions in themselves should perhaps not automatically necessitate certain labels.

All I was saying was because you rely on links to get your point of views across without context, it leaves people to make conclusions.

I get that your religion limits you in terms of supporting LGBTQ folks. Premarital sex is wrong, as is gay marriage...per your religion, thus gay people are screwed (no pun intended) in that way of thinking. Again, not judging, just looking at it analytically.

From what I have gathered through your posts here, and you can tell me if I'm wrong, is that you aren't against gay people per say, just the idea of being gay....because of your religion.

Does your feelings then conflict with what you are mandated by via your religion? How do you reconcile that if so?

 

[Phatguysrule]

Bull.

See what I mean?

 

[Shaboid]

omg, Chris.

So, having legitimate questions means being so-called obscure and automatically necessitates being labeled a racist and/or bigot? The links I post generally involved abuses. We've already discussed many of those ad nauseum. Show me otherwise.

Look, when it comes to religion, the bible even identifies pre-marital hetero sex as a sin. It's called fornication. LGBTQ folks certainly aren't singled out in that regard. And, hey, I've been guilty of that. In terms of gay marriage, the bible doesn't speak of it, it describes marriage as a coenenat with God between a man and a woman. Therefore, I'm not in support of gay marriage. If you want to call me a name for that, it's your call.

As a moderator, though, despite your personal beliefs on the matter(s), simply condoning someone calling me a racist and/or hater is laziness in my opinion. I'm not certain of you've liked any of those posts, but Sly certainly has. Irresponsible.

You need to get over the liking of posts thing, in my opinion. People can like a post for any number of reasons so reading into that will lead you into conjecture.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

 

[Chris Craig]

Not only is that a rocket launcher blast to women's rights, it's a move to try and get Dems to move away.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Not only is that a rocket launcher blast to women's rights, it's a move to try and turn Handmaid's Tale into a documentary.

FTY

 

[crandc]

You're skirting. I asked you if you believe these discussion should be between parents and their children and left out of (or not) school discussions/teaching.

What is the point of school if students can't learn anything their parents don't teach them? If they can't ever learn anything controversial?
If the don't say gay bill was just about parental involvement, why did spokesperson for governor you admire say anyone who opposes it supports homosexuals recruiting children? Combine don't say gay law with don't talk about anything that makes white people uncomfortable law and you have Make America Ignorant Again. Which is probably the point.

 

[crandc]

ABM says he is not antigay, he just doesn't think we should have marriage equality because it's not in his bible. What is in his bible are polygamy, forcing rape victims to marry the rapist, murdering brides who aren't virgins. And of course slavery. Should I assume ABM likes all these?

We have a little thing in this country called the First Amendment. Civil law, which includes marriage, is not supposed to be based on anyone's interpretation of their holy book.
That was before the current radical right Supremacist Court decided they don't like the Constitution very much.

 

[Lanny]

Idaho now considering a bill that would imprison doctors who provide health care to transgender youth. Also a bill that would jail librarians if library contains books on LGBTQ issues written for young people.
Patrick Robertson, who blamed the 9/11 attacks on gays and legal abortion, came out of retirement to praise Russian invasion of Ukraine because Russia is a godly nation that persecutes gay and trans and gender nonconforming people.

I would think that bill if passed would soon be thrown out by the court.

 

[Lanny]

Hmmm..I thought in Florida they're just wanting these types of discussions left out of the schools pre thru 3rd grade as to totally be left in the hands of the parents?

Parents often fall down on the job. Teachers are trained in these matters whereas some parents are ignorant about it.. The child deserves to be properly taught.

 

[Lanny]

Trying to pretend LGBTQ people don't exist, will not stop them from existing.

You would think even the person with the lowest IQ would realize this.

 

[Lanny]

ABM says he is not antigay, he just doesn't think we should have marriage equality because it's not in his bible. What is in his bible are polygamy, forcing rape victims to marry the rapist, murdering brides who aren't virgins. And of course slavery. Should I assume ABM likes all these?

We have a little thing in this country called the First Amendment. Civil law, which includes marriage, is not supposed to be based on anyone's interpretation of their holy book.
That was before the current radical right Supremacist Court decided they don't like the Constitution very much.

The Bible does not say anything about being homosexual as far as I know.
Here's the best source on the subject that I could find:
https://www.hrc.org/resources/what-does-the-bible-say-about-homosexuality

 

[Orion Bailey]

What is the point of school if students can't learn anything their parents don't teach them? If they can't ever learn anything controversial?
If the don't say gay bill was just about parental involvement, why did spokesperson for governor you admire say anyone who opposes it supports homosexuals recruiting children? Combine don't say gay law with don't talk about anything that makes white people uncomfortable law and you have Make America Ignorant Again. Which is probably the point.

are the boys in school allowed to discuss abortion?

you censored that discussion topic in here. Do you feel the same for kids in school? Only girls are allowed to discuss it, but not the boys? If so, then you have no right to complain about anyone else's want of censorship…period.

 

[Lanny]

are the boys in school allowed to discuss abortion?

you censored that discussion topic in here. Do you feel the same for kids in school? Only girls are allowed to discuss it, but not the boys? If so, then you have no right to complain about anyone else's want of censorship…period.

When you say 'censor' I assume you're using the correct definition.
crandc has no power to censor, nor do I. Only a mod can censor in here.

 

[crandc]

Anyone can discuss anything but people's personal business is just that. An individual's health care decisions, sexual orientation and gender identity are that person's alone. No one has the right to dictate such decisions to others or give unwanted uninformed "advice".
The sole exception is public health, where decisions impact others. Which is why I support vaccination.

 

[Orion Bailey]

When you say 'censor' I assume you're using the correct definition.
crandc has no power to censor, nor do I. Only a mod can censor in here.

she wants it. She advocates for it. Thats all that matters. On one side she doesn't want men to discuss abortion. But then complains when someone else wants a similar choke off of a others opinion.

 

[Orion Bailey]

Anyone can discuss anything but people's personal business is just that. An individual's health care decisions, sexual orientation and gender identity are that person's alone. No one has the right to dictate such decisions to others or give unwanted uninformed "advice".
The sole exception is public health, where decisions impact others. Which is why I support vaccination.

If we are all paying into a universal health care then all people should have a say.

You told me to fuck off for trying to discuss abortion….

yeah no double standard there…

 

[Lanny]

she wants it. She advocates for it. Thats all that matters. On one side she doesn't want men to discuss abortion. But then complains when someone else wants a similar choke off of a others opinion.

Censor implies some sort of official regulation of what is said. Only a mod has that power in here although we can enlist a mod to apply to censor anything in here objectionable to the rules.
What crandc has done, from my perspective, is appeal to common decency to modify the discussion. Nothing wrong with that although you could persist until perhaps you might violate some rule. You've also got the weight of public opinion in here on what is decent and what is not. I would honor any request to adhere to someone's sensitivity since I think that's decent or as I define it, politically correct. When you get into crandc's personal life it is only decent that we honor her boundaries and, without realizing it, it looks like you have come across her boundary.
You are a good person and I'm sure you mean her no harm or hurt feelings.

 

[Orion Bailey]

Censor implies some sort of official regulation of what is said. Only a mod has that power in here although we can enlist a mod to apply to censor anything in here objectionable to the rules.
What crandc has done, from my perspective, is appeal to common decency to modify the discussion. Nothing wrong with that although you could persist until perhaps you might violate some rule. You've also got the weight of public opinion in here on what is decent and what is not. I would honor any request to adhere to someone's sensitivity since I think that's decent or as I define it, politically correct. When you get into crandc's personal life it is only decent that we honor her boundaries and, without realizing it, it looks like you have come across her boundary.
You are a good person and I'm sure you mean her no harm or hurt feelings.

semantics lanny.
I was told to fuck off for trying to discuss abortion. Was told i don't have the right.

The fact is she thinks i should be muffled from discussing abortion because im a man.
But then complains when others want to muffle other people.
There. I removed censorship. Point remains the same.
No one got into crandc personal life. I certainly didn't. I simply tried to discuss abortion and the male perspective with her. I was told i have no right and i can fuck off for thinking i do have a right to discuss abortion.
If the double standard isnt clear, im not sure what to tell ya.

but you are right. I would never wish anything negative on crandc or anyone else here, even though there are some here that openly do and its supported by others.

 

[ABM]

I'm not calling you anything or condoning anyone calling you anything. I was merely offering reasoning why such labels might be coming your way.

Having questions is a good thing. It's how we learn. Certain questions, or how certain questions are formed can be controversial. Asking questions in themselves should perhaps not automatically necessitate certain labels.

All I was saying was because you rely on links to get your point of views across without context, it leaves people to make conclusions.

I get that your religion limits you in terms of supporting LGBTQ folks. Premarital sex is wrong, as is gay marriage...per your religion, thus gay people are screwed (no pun intended) in that way of thinking. Again, not judging, just looking at it analytically.

From what I have gathered through your posts here, and you can tell me if I'm wrong, is that you aren't against gay people per say, just the idea of being gay....because of your religion.

Does your feelings then conflict with what you are mandated by via your religion? How do you reconcile that if so?

Look, again, me being called a racist and hater is offensive to me. Can I deal with it? Sure, but it's a personal insult and has no place in this forum.

Sure, I rely on links in here.....just like most everyone else. Big whoop. That said, I've ALSO shared personal (and, frankly, some of them very vulnerable) stories which lend to back my personal beliefs, values, journeys, and so on. So, please don't simply say I provide no context in matters. You'd be incorrect in that assessment.

Regarding gay people, what I've maintained is that I don't support gay marriage. I believe marriage is a union....before God....between and man and a woman. Simple. Period. Does this mean that I hate gays? Absolutely not! So, please, everyone, stop with those accusations. The basis for those claims are baseless and ludicrous to me.

Regarding transgenders, same applies. There's flat-out no hate there, either. Does that mean I don't have questions? No. Sure, I've had questions questions. Still do....even in my own family, as shared and discussed in this thread numerous times. Does that mean I don't have issues with potential abuses? No. READ MY POSTS IN THIS THREAD...AND OTHERS! But, again. Hate?! Strong and uncalled for word. The mods allow it, though, so, so be it. It's your prerogative.

In my Bible....we're ALL sinners....only saved through the Grace of God through Jesus. The Bible is clear on that. It also says, get the board out of your own eye before calling out the speck in someone else's. We're called to love each other. I do my best to do that. As a believer, I'm also called to stand for righteousness, God's righteousness. There is no other standard. If that means supporting certain statutes/laws that reflect God's standards, I'll unabashedly do that.

These are my beliefs. If someone wants to come in here and say there is no God, and I'm full of it. No problemo. That's happened numerous times in here and I'm certain will happen again and again. That's quite OK with me. That said, my recent beef has only been as it relates to me being called a racist/hater, etc. I know you get that, Chris. I really do.

 

[crandc]

Oi gvalt, what a couple of victims.

 

[RR7]

I don't hate you, I just feel that you should have less rights than I do because of a book I read. And I will unabashedly vote for and support those laws that look to limit your freedoms and also potentially punish you for who god made you. lol