• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

When "gender fluidity" means "take off your clothes in front of this opposite-sex person, or else"

Re: When "gender fluidity" means "take off your clothes in front of this opposite-sex person, or els

Bodhisattva said:
I NEVER called you weak minded and stupid. I never called anybody that. I said that believing in religion is weak minded an stupid.
Click to expand...

Splitting hairs here. I believe in religion. And it is something that is deeply important to me. Socially/culturally. That is what religion is to many many many people. It is a foundation for their morals and their values. It is vital to their being. Without mine? I can’t say that I would be here today. So you are calling something THAT fundamentally important to mine and other people’s lives: weak minded and stupid.

It is insulting. Belittling. And you can try to split hairs if you like. But that really doesn’t work. Had you called it irrational? That would be one thing. Illogical? Sure. If you like. But weak minded and stupid is a different ball park. And I willing to bet you know that. I mean if I went around claiming people who didn’t have religion had no moral fiber and were not to be trusted? I’d bet you would take that personally right? You might find it a touch? Off base? Insulting? Even if it wasn’t “worth your time.” You probably wouldn’t appreciate it.

And yea. You have a right to say it. But that really isn’t the point here. You can’t pretend to be magnanimous and above the petty bull**** when you engage in it yourself using name calling. Then pretend it is all kosher because your name calling isn’t really name calling because you were “talking about beliefs.” You weren’t. You were talking about more than that. It isn’t about your favorite football team or even your school choice. It is more than that. Like I said. For some people it is a reason to keep walking. Even when everything else has gone to ****.

Yeah, but I don't have a problem with them...
Click to expand...

See above.

Rules change... as they should
Click to expand...

So the rules for respect and love should change? Supporting freedom?

That is argumentative...
Click to expand...

In what way? As in you think it is something other than insulting and belittling? If you are over the age of 14 you know better. So you either know the comment was insulting and you don’t care. In which case be an adult an own it. At least have the courage to out yourself. Or you stopped maturing at 14.
 
Re: When "gender fluidity" means "take off your clothes in front of this opposite-sex person, or els

Bodhisattva said:
Ecofarm's point was very clear... you seemed to avoid it by discussing intolerance.
Click to expand...

No. His point was to tell me how important and educated he was and how that made his view more valid than the ACLU and religious accommodation. It doesn’t invalidate the facts. Him being an expert on gender is irrelevant. If he were a lawyer? Specifically constitutional law? It would be valid. And even then? He needs to support his argument with something more than a “I’m an expert.”

I provided the link to the ACLU on prisoner rights in regards to religion. You want to provide me something else? Neither one of you has constructed an argument to invalidate someone’s religious freedom. And i am guessing it is because both of your arguments come from a position of simple lack of intolerance of religion. And yes. I’m using the word correctly as you are both seeking to shut down a view because you dislike it. Not because of the legality.
 
Re: When "gender fluidity" means "take off your clothes in front of this opposite-sex person, or els

roguenuke said:
It is not a disease. It is a disorder, but still natural. How is it unhealthy?
Click to expand...
Ahh, the "natural = healthy" argument. Try a tall glass of all-natural hemlock infusion and get back to me on the merits of this argument.
 
Re: When "gender fluidity" means "take off your clothes in front of this opposite-sex person, or els

Grizzly Adams said:
Ahh, the "natural = healthy" argument. Try a tall glass of all-natural hemlock infusion and get back to me on the merits of this argument.
Click to expand...

Didn't make that argument. Those were two separate lines. One was a statement that it was natural, and the other a question for you to show how it is unhealthy. Not tied together, except by someone who perhaps doesn't know the difference between correlating two things and talking about two things that were both brought up.
 
Re: When "gender fluidity" means "take off your clothes in front of this opposite-sex person, or els

roguenuke said:
And anatomy can be changed, just as DNA can be wrong.
Click to expand...
Anatomy can be altered to make you look like a cat. But you are not a cat. You will never be a cat.

DNA cannot be "wrong," as there is no "correct" DNA to have. There can be errors and mutations, and those can lead to disorders, but the DNA itself is not "wrong."
 
Re: When "gender fluidity" means "take off your clothes in front of this opposite-sex person, or els

Grizzly Adams said:
Anatomy can be altered to make you look like a cat. But you are not a cat. You will never be a cat.

DNA cannot be "wrong," as there is no "correct" DNA to have. There can be errors and mutations, and those can lead to disorders, but the DNA itself is not "wrong."
Click to expand...

Our body can naturally develop into either male or female or a combination of the two without any sort of "mutation" and with any sort of DNA combination. Mutations are not bad things either, nor do they always lead to "disorders". In fact, during gestation, the average person goes through about 100-250 genetic mutations. Even identical twins (which is why technically even they are not completely identical). Our bodies though cannot naturally develop into a cat or any combination with cat DNA.

If someone develops physically into a female person but has mostly or all male DNA, then their DNA is considered "wrong" when it is compared to their genitals, physical makeup. It is not morally wrong nor is it a bad thing. It simply does not match, which is a natural thing. It can easily be the same for our conscience image of ourselves developing wrong compared to our physical selves, something like that can occur naturally.
 
Re: When "gender fluidity" means "take off your clothes in front of this opposite-sex person, or els

roguenuke said:
Didn't make that argument. Those were two separate lines.
Click to expand...
As you can see in the quote, they were actually on the same line. If you wish to make two arguments that are independent of each other, different paragraphs is a better indicator than are different sentences.

One was a statement that it was natural, and the other a question for you to show how it is unhealthy.
Click to expand...
What is the relevance of it being natural, if not to imply that there is no problem with it?

As for it not being healthy, your own link discusses common complications associated with the disorder and accepted treatments for it. Healthy conditions do not require treatment.

And I forgot to mention earlier that I am quite amused by your ability to distinguish between a disease and a disorder, but differentiating a man and a woman is just too much for you.
 
Re: When "gender fluidity" means "take off your clothes in front of this opposite-sex person, or els

Grizzly Adams said:
As you can see in the quote, they were actually on the same line. If you wish to make two arguments that are independent of each other, different paragraphs is a better indicator than are different sentences.


What is the relevance of it being natural, if not to imply that there is no problem with it?

As for it not being healthy, your own link discusses common complications associated with the disorder and accepted treatments for it. Healthy conditions do not require treatment.

And I forgot to mention earlier that I am quite amused by your ability to distinguish between a disease and a disorder, but differentiating a man and a woman is just too much for you.
Click to expand...

You called it "not normal or healthy", which is what I was responding to. You also called it a disease, which it isn't. Even being intersexed isn't a disease. Just like being intersexed is not normal, can be considered a disorder, but still be healthy. Being a chimera can be considered as having a disorder, but one where people are completely healthy and it is natural. Just because someone says something is "natural" does not mean that they are saying it is either healthy or unhealthy. And something doesn't have to be normal to be accepted or unaccepted. You started out with a failed statement that transgender were not normal or healthy. You do not know how healthy any transgender is, and whether something is normal or not has no bearing on whether it is right or wrong, healthy or unhealthy, good or bad.

Treatment is only required when a person has gender dysphoria, not simply for being transgender. If people were allowed to live as they are without any pressure or legal separation, then it would not need any sort of treatment at all, even to transition.

Please provide a scientific distinction between a man and a woman that fits every single person and is accepted universally by scientists. It gets even harder when discussing gender rather than sex, which is what is being discussed.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1414656/

Because it occurs naturally in nature, which means that we need to look deeper. We should look at how it affects the person and the best shown way to help them if there is a problem with their feeling that way. That best way has been shown to be transition in some way for most people. The least healthy way to deal with those who suffer from gender dysphoria has been shown to simply ignore them or to force them to live as the opposite gender they feel they are when that goes against their nature.

Is that a better explanation for you?
 
Re: When "gender fluidity" means "take off your clothes in front of this opposite-sex person, or els

tac138777 said:
Splitting hairs here. I believe in religion. And it is something that is deeply important to me. Socially/culturally. That is what religion is to many many many people. It is a foundation for their morals and their values.
Click to expand...

Morals existed prior to religion... socially and culturally religion might be important to many... that is cool, it is in believing in a supernatural being like God that is ridiculous.

It is vital to their being. Without mine? I can’t say that I would be here today. So you are calling something THAT fundamentally important to mine and other people’s lives: weak minded and stupid.
Click to expand...

Pretty much... but see more below.

It is insulting. Belittling. And you can try to split hairs if you like. But that really doesn’t work. Had you called it irrational? That would be one thing. Illogical? Sure. If you like. But weak minded and stupid is a different ball park. And I willing to bet you know that. [/QUOTE]

Irrational... Illogical... weak minded... stupid... all mean the same thing to me. No big difference...

I mean if I went around claiming people who didn’t have religion had no moral fiber and were not to be trusted? I’d bet you would take that personally right? You might find it a touch? Off base? Insulting? Even if it wasn’t “worth your time.” You probably wouldn’t appreciate it.
Click to expand...

I don't take anything personally that does not come from close friends or family... even then I have learned to not let much bother me. People that are not family that have shown loyalty and trustworthiness are essentially untrustworthy.

And yea. You have a right to say it.
Click to expand...

Correct...
But that really isn’t the point here. You can’t pretend to be magnanimous and above the petty bull**** when you engage in it yourself using name calling.
Click to expand...

You think that I am pretending to be magnanimous?

Then pretend it is all kosher because your name calling isn’t really name calling because you were “talking about beliefs.” You weren’t. You were talking about more than that.
Click to expand...

I was talking about beliefs. It is not my fault that you think that you and your beliefs are one and the same...

It isn’t about your favorite football team or even your school choice. It is more than that. Like I said. For some people it is a reason to keep walking. Even when everything else has gone to ****.
Click to expand...

That is great... that somebody can latch onto something to keep them going when **** gets tough, I never said that religion, or things that people latch onto, were worthless... just that believing in God was stupid.

So the rules for respect and love should change? Supporting freedom?
Click to expand...

The transgender person is doing a job... treating that person like trash by hiding behind a hateful religious belief and trying to coin that as freedom or respect is idiotic.

In what way? As in you think it is something other than insulting and belittling? If you are over the age of 14 you know better. So you either know the comment was insulting and you don’t care. In which case be an adult an own it. At least have the courage to out yourself. Or you stopped maturing at 14.
Click to expand...

In that you think that it is belittling and insulting when that is simply your opinion...

In the end the trangender person is being insulted and treated as less than a person all because this guy is using religious hate. That is it. There is nothing else to it and all you talk about freedom and being disrespected personally over my comments regarding the stupidity of believing in God do not contradict this fact.
 
Re: When "gender fluidity" means "take off your clothes in front of this opposite-sex person, or els

thank goodness women don't really believe in equality and ask us if we just want to practice.
 
Re: When "gender fluidity" means "take off your clothes in front of this opposite-sex person, or els

Bodhisattva said:
Morals existed prior to religion... socially and culturally religion might be important to many... that is cool, it is in believing in a supernatural being like God that is ridiculous.



Pretty much... but see more below.

It is insulting. Belittling. And you can try to split hairs if you like. But that really doesn’t work. Had you called it irrational? That would

Irrational... Illogical... weak minded... stupid... all mean the same thing to me. No big difference...



I don't take anything personally that does not come from close friends or family... even then I have learned to not let much bother me. People that are not family that have shown loyalty and trustworthiness are essentially untrustworthy.



Correct...


You think that I am pretending to be magnanimous?



I was talking about beliefs. It is not my fault that you think that you and your beliefs are one and the same...



That is great... that somebody can latch onto something to keep them going when **** gets tough, I never said that religion, or things that people latch onto, were worthless... just that believing in God was stupid.



The transgender person is doing a job... treating that person like trash by hiding behind a hateful religious belief and trying to coin that as freedom or respect is idiotic.



In that you think that it is belittling and insulting when that is simply your opinion...

In the end the trangender person is being insulted and treated as less than a person all because this guy is using religious hate. That is it. There is nothing else to it and all you talk about freedom and being disrespected personally over my comments regarding the stupidity of believing in God do not contradict this fact.
Click to expand...

Rather than addressing your colossal failures to understand simple definitions of illogical, irrational, stupid, and weak minded (ok I’m addressing them a little because words actually have meanings and you clearly do not understand the difference between them), I am going to move back to topic.

Can you tell me if the transgender was FIRED? Was the Transgender removed from work? Did he go a single day without pay? Would he have lost pay for not being able to fondle the Muslim? This is a simple non trick question that you won’t respond to because it is the entire point of the issue.

You would prefer to ram YOUR beliefs and the transgender be allowed to ram HIS beliefs down other people’s throats. And your justification is you don’t like religion. Not the constitution. Not case law. And further. I cannot control the beliefs of the Muslim. What he believes is morally wrong in my view. But he HAS HIS RIGHTS. He is not violating anyone else’s rights by requesting a different guard. The guard does NOT have a right to search him. The guard has a right to do the job. And the guard is allowed.

Ps

Don’t try to muddy the waters with your inability to understand common decency. I understand what is right and wrong to say to others. I wouldn’t treat the transgender any differently. You are the one that insults people simply for having religion and knowing nothing else about them.
 
Last edited:
Re: When "gender fluidity" means "take off your clothes in front of this opposite-sex person, or els

tac138777 said:
Rather than addressing your colossal failures to understand simple definitions of illogical, irrational, stupid, and weak minded (ok I’m addressing them a little because words actually have meanings and you clearly do not understand the difference between them), I am going to move back to topic.
Click to expand...

I understand them quite nicely, thank you very much! :lol:

If you are unable to make a decent argument against what I am typing the worst thing to do is to toss out a feeble insult and bail...

Can you tell me if the transgender was FIRED? Was the Transgender removed from work? Did he go a single day without pay?
Click to expand...

Irrelevant. The transgender guy was discriminated against for trying to do his job

Discriminate - make an unjust or prejudicial distinction in the treatment of different categories of people, especially on the grounds of race, sex, or age.

https://www.google.com/search?safe=...-ab..3.11.1624...0i67k1j0i131k1.0.yyfLJZ1K0qI

Would he have lost pay for not being able to fondle the Muslim? This is a simple non trick question that you won’t respond to because it is the entire point of the issue.
Click to expand...

Sorry... this is a trick question and a perfect example of how it is you that is not understanding and using terms correctly...

Fondle - stroke or caress lovingly or erotically.
"he kissed and fondled her"

https://www.google.com/search?q=fondle&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b-ab

The guard was trying to do his job... not jack off the prisoner. Your dislike of transgender people is becoming more clear as we talk.

You would prefer to ram YOUR beliefs and the transgender be allowed to ram HIS beliefs down other people’s throats.
Click to expand...

I want the guy to be allowed to do his job free of discrimination.

You disagree and think that discrimination is fine while you mask it under the guise of "freedom". Good for you.

And your justification is you don’t like religion.
Click to expand...

No. My argument is that discrimination is wrong and thankfully illegal.

Not the constitution. Not case law. And further. I cannot control the beliefs of the Muslim. What he believes is morally wrong in my view. But he HAS HIS RIGHTS. He is not violating anyone else’s rights by requesting a different guard. The guard does NOT have a right to search him. The guard has a right to do the job. And the guard is allowed.
Click to expand...

The guard apparently does not have the right to do the job according to you... the prisoner can request special treatment due to his religious hatred of a person.

Ps

Don’t try to muddy the waters with your inability to understand common decency. I understand what is right and wrong to say to others. I wouldn’t treat the transgender any differently. You are the one that insults people simply for having religion and knowing nothing else about them.
Click to expand...

I have never insulted people for having a religion. I would never do that. I said that believing in religion/God is stupid.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom