And their age too. Couldn't ask them how old they considered themselves to be.
I guess you would have to throw out weight, height, and ethnicity too.
Is Biological Sex Real?
- Thread starter glassjester
- Start date
I guess you would have to throw out weight, height, and ethnicity too.
I've asked similar questions. It seems like wanting to change their biology affirms the stereotypes and roles that progressives generally fight against. Part of it may be to avoid stigma, criticism, and abuse. Part of it may be that they accept the traditional roles themselves and want their gender identity to match their biology.
You've no other reason for your objection.
Then you have no qualms about a transgender individual using the bathroom of their choice...etc?
Of course you do.
You're not fooling me...so why on earth are you trying to fool yourself. It's nonsensical...though the right has been quite successful at nonsense...as of late. :think:
I kinda like truth.
Ok.
Trangenders aren't being truthful?
Is exposing them worth the trouble of objecting....whatever for then?
Like the old song goes " it's just "Feelings...NOTHING MORE than FEELINGS."
Kind of like Chemical Depression.
Emotions being chemical, that is.
Some people are born blind.
Others "go blind."
Most people appear to be born straight.
Others appear to be born with one chemical imbalance or another.
Too much over production of one chemical over others.
All the result of The Fall in all its' manifestations of "the bondage of corruption" this entire world was plunged into "as by one man's sin; and death by sin..."
It's why "Bad Things Happen to Good People" too (storms, earthquakes, and so on) - the WHOLE creation is under "the bondage of corruption."
As a result, it is possible to "go gay."
And just as possible to "go straight."
As possible as it's obviously been that some on here have long since gone "toxic" in one form or another :chuckle:
For their "trying to forget" what?
"FEELINGS..."
It is why the Believer is to "walk by faith, and not by sight" (the physical senses of perception, including...FEELINGS..."
NOTHING MORE THAN...feelings.
glassjester
Well-known member
Similarly, if I feel like I'm 65 years old, can I collect social security money?
glassjester
Well-known member
My point in the above post being that we do not grant legal status, or public recognition to someone's feelings.
We cannot demand that others "play along."
I can feel 65 years old all I want, but the government will not recognize my feeling as objectively true, and will not grant me a social security check.
We cannot demand that others "play along."
I can feel 65 years old all I want, but the government will not recognize my feeling as objectively true, and will not grant me a social security check.
Sure we do: "we the people....declare all created equal.." was brought about by extremely felt emotion.
glassjester
Well-known member
Are you citing the Declaration or the Constitution? Sounds like a mixture.
Either way, the statement in the Declaration that goes, "We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal," is a statement not of feeling, but of reason. Hence the term "self-evident."
glassjester
Well-known member
Maybe offering a definition of "man" or of "woman" would help.
Of course...but what of their motivation to write thusly? You can't simply divorce the two quite so easily
Apparently, slave Master: Thomas Jefferson, "felt" otherwise while writing those words.
glassjester
Well-known member
No, he originally included a condemnation of slavery in the Declaration. The other delegates at the second continental congress didn't agree, and so it didn't make the final cut.
glassjester
Well-known member
I don't understand what you're saying. Because Jefferson felt like writing the Declaration, we should base legislation on feelings? I don't get it.
Seriously...no I mean seriously?!
You've never felt passion for a cause...and put it into action?
So he was condeming his own ongoing practice; interesting.
glassjester
Well-known member
Yep.
glassjester
Well-known member
There's a difference between a law that is motivated by a feeling, and a law based on a feeling.
For example, abolitionists felt strongly about ending slavery, but reason demanded it. It's quite likely that those for slavery felt just as strongly, but who cares about their feelings?
Yes. That's why I stated you cant divorce feelings from fact so easily. Now by what feeling are you disqualifying the feelings of trangenders with their fight for acceptance and equality?