Just Shut Up And Stop Telling Me What To Say
[guest post by Dana]
So, Caitlyn Jenner. The brave, heroic, authentic Caitlyn Jenner. Yeah. Whatever.
Whether you think the celebrity of a celebrity transitioning from male-to-female is an indicator of an ongoing cultural slide or just a big yawn, I think we might all agree that we do not need to be told how to speak when speaking about Caitlyn Jenner. Because we are adults, because we can figure this out ourselves, and mostly because fascist advocates of gender identity politics DO NOT get to set the rules for everyone else.
Words matter and erasing the identity of trans people by calling them by their birth names and birth-assigned sex is an act of hatred — one that is inextricable from the brutal violence that so many trans people, particularly trans women of color, encounter just for existing in the world.
How we talk about trans people sets the tone for the world in which trans people live.
…
When we write about Caitlyn Jenner, her name and narrative will give enough context. There is no need to mention what her name used to be or what sex she was assigned at birth.
And if you’re writing about Jenner:
DO describe people who transition as transgender, and use transgender as an adjective. Caitlyn Jenner is a transgender woman.DON’T use transgender as a noun. For example, don’t say: “Caitlyn Jenner is a transgender.” DON’T use “transgendered.” Transgender never needs an extraneous “-ed” at the end. DON’T use “transsexual” or “transvestite.”
DO refer to her as Caitlyn Jenner. DON’T refer to her by her former name. She has changed it, and should be accorded the same respect received by anyone who has changed their name. Since Caitlyn Jenner was known to the public by her prior name, it may be necessary initially to say “Caitlyn Jenner, formerly known as Bruce Jenner…” However, once the public has learned Jenner’s new name, do not continually refer to it in stories.
DO use female pronouns (she, her, hers) when referring to Caitlyn Jenner.
DO avoid male pronouns and Caitlyn’s prior name, even when referring to events in her past. For example, “Prior to her transition, Caitlyn Jenner won the gold medal in the men’s decathlon at the Summer Olympics held in Montreal in 1976.”
DO refer to Caitlyn Jenner’s female identity as her gender identity, not her sexual orientation. Gender identity is one’s own internal, deeply held sense of being male or female. Sexual orientation is who one is attracted to. They are not the same thing and should not be conflated or confused.
AVOID the phrase “born a man” when referring to Jenner. If it is necessary to describe for your audience what it means to be transgender, consider: “While Caitlyn Jenner was designated male on her birth certificate, as a young child she knew that she was a girl.”
Further, because an electrical shock might be viewed as a bit extreme, two journalists, whose work I now will avoid reading, have created a Twitter-Bot to correct you any time you use an incorrect pronoun:
So a Twitter bot, named @she_not_he, jumped in with a solution: every time Caitlyn was referred to as “he/him,” the bot would automatically tweet a correction.
Developed by Caitlyn Dewey of The Washington Post and Andrew McGill of The National Journal, the bot’s voice is funny but firm, reminding readers of their mistake without completely excoriating them. @She_not_he identifies the error (“*Click, Whirr…It’s she not he,” it writes) before moving on. From its Twitter profile: “I am a bot politely correcting Twitter users who misgender Caitlyn Jenner in their tweets. I might make mistakes reading your tweet!! I’m only human. (Not.)”
With that, as I wrote yesterday, a “new” normal has indeed arrived on America’s doorstep – and it came with its own set of instructions. While we’re being compelled to accept and believe that Jenner is now a woman, we are also simultaneously being instructed on how that acceptance and belief is to manifest itself in this strange new world.
–Dana
Hello.
Dana (86e864) — 6/3/2015 @ 6:07 pmorwell is their how to guide, isn’t it,
narciso (ee1f88) — 6/3/2015 @ 6:10 pmFew things really make me laugh out loud. This statement did: “Prior to her transition, Caitlyn Jenner won the gold medal in the men’s decathlon at the Summer Olympics held in Montreal in 1976.”
Walter Cronanty (f48cd5) — 6/3/2015 @ 6:21 pmOnly a progressive could write and read that sentence with a straight face.
Bruce Jenner certainly is troubled individual. And pumping him full of silicon and female hormones and surgically removing his genitalia and then painting his face with makeup isn’t going to make him any less confused. In fact, it will almost certainly irrevocably harm him. Since when did we begin to deal with delusions by playing into the delusion?
I am not an aardvark. If I said I was an aardvark, I still wouldn’t be an aardvark. If I started digging in ant hills and eating ants, I wouldn’t be an aardvark. But, somehow, if I say “I am a woman” then I magically become one?
I don’t think so, and if I did those things, I might rightfully be committed to a sanatorium.
The world is full of insanity and the lunatics seem to be running the asylum.
WarEagle82 (d35bad) — 6/3/2015 @ 6:26 pmhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMOmB1q8W4Y
narciso (ee1f88) — 6/3/2015 @ 6:31 pmWarEagle82 (d35bad) — 6/3/2015 @ 6:26 pm
I think you’re on to something. From Instapundit:
Walter Cronanty (f48cd5) — 6/3/2015 @ 6:37 pmHow do we refer to Kim Howe, the woman Jenner killed? She was his neighbor, BTW, according to the Hollywood gossip rags.
nk (dbc370) — 6/3/2015 @ 6:39 pmCaitlyn/Bruce and Vanity fair create more Islamic Radicals than any war or cartoon drawing.
Rodney King's Spirit (b31520) — 6/3/2015 @ 6:40 pmunperson, it seems to me:
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-bruce-jenner-lawsuit-in-fatal-malibu-crash-20150528-story.html?track=rss
narciso (ee1f88) — 6/3/2015 @ 6:42 pmSuggestion.
Refer to Jenner as an ex-male. For personal pronoun, use it since Jenner refuses to be a he, but refusing to be a he does not make Jenner a she.
Caitlyn would be appropriate if Jenner has gone through a legal change of name.
And I wonder what that scattering of Soviet female athletes rejected by the Olympics for not being female enough are thinking now.
I am btw firmly in the camp that Jenner needed a good psychiatrist, not a plastic surgeon.
kishnevi (9c4b9c) — 6/3/2015 @ 6:49 pmYou beat me to it, Walter.
While I have no dislike of the athlete formerly called Bruce Jenner,
Caitlyn Jenner in no way won a men’s decathlon in the Olympics. Caitlyn Jenner in her prime would never had had the muscle mass to even bother competing in the men’s decathlon.
Rush had a caller today who stated that since he was 8 yo he has been convinced he is really an African-American trapped in a white person’s body. Now that he is an adult, he has the dilemma of what to do with his biracial children, since his wife is white.
We’re now going into unchartered waters that not even Romans 1 considered.
I think at some level the attempt at forced acceptance reflects an attitude of “I will be and do what I want, and no one can tell me otherwise”, and the only way to justify that is to demand it of anybody else, no matter what they do (except be “normal”, of course).
But I don’t think “they” would let me get by with the claim that I am biologically an obligate heterosexual since birth and do not have the neurological hard wiring to grasp the concept of homosexuality, but “they” will believe that I am neurologically hard wired to think that I am really female.
There is no arguing with that or with people who think that way, the only issue is whether people, not wanting to appear closed-minded, let that become the societal norm.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 6/3/2015 @ 6:49 pmAt least it, I know, I know, had the good sense not to pick the name Loretta.
Gazzer (4aa2e2) — 6/3/2015 @ 6:50 pmyes, I heard that bit,
narciso (ee1f88) — 6/3/2015 @ 6:51 pmWTF, now I’m really confused. Caitlyn Jenner, you know, the woman who won the gold medal in the men’s decathlon, still has her penis. http://pagesix.com/2015/06/03/caityln-jenner-still-has-her-penis/
Walter Cronanty (f48cd5) — 6/3/2015 @ 6:56 pmWhich raises the question … oh, never mind.
When it, he, she kills its, he, she self, it will be our fault and we will be asked to pay for its, he, she reparations. huh!!
mg (31009b) — 6/3/2015 @ 6:59 pmTMI, for an eternity, I put it to you that there has never been a Bruce Jenner, and the ’76 olympics actually happened in Algier. if you’re going full 1984
narciso (ee1f88) — 6/3/2015 @ 7:00 pmSo…perhaps instead of he or she, the proper pronoun is “they”?
Honestly, I’m fine with keeping the original plumbing, that way it will be easier to undue the physical damage down the road should a change of mind take place.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 6/3/2015 @ 7:00 pm9. Actually, Jenner’s legal response is fairly straightforward… adult stepchildren with independent incomes do not usually have the standing to pursue wrongful death claims. Parents suing for the wrongful death of offspring face a similar problem. I don’t remember how the Goldman family got around it when they sued OJ. (Or perhaps California simply does it differently.)
kishnevi (9c4b9c) — 6/3/2015 @ 7:03 pmI was just the right age to appreciate Jenner’s athletic ascendance. It was a joy to witness. I have nothing but warm feelings for him. Now that he has put his brokenness on public display, all I feel is sadness. If he wants me to call him Caitlyn or Ms. Jenner, I will, out of the respect he has earned, but he is no more a woman than I am.
Those idiots trying to police how we view and comment on Jenner, on the other hand, are intellectual thugs and moral cretins. They deserve no respect whatsoever.
ThOR (b81f2a) — 6/3/2015 @ 7:04 pmMD in Philly (f9371b) — 6/3/2015 @ 6:49 pm – You’re correct, but what gets me is the rank hypocrisy:
Walter Cronanty (f48cd5) — 6/3/2015 @ 7:05 pmit was shorthand, one notices how little her life, is valued in the balance, by the right people,
narciso (ee1f88) — 6/3/2015 @ 7:05 pmRush had a caller today who stated that since he was 8 yo he has been convinced he is really an African-American trapped in a white person’s body. Now that he is an adult, he has the dilemma of what to do with his biracial children, since his wife is white.
kishnevi (91d5c6) — 6/3/2015 @ 7:07 pmBill Clinton called in to the Limbaugh show? To wonders there is no end.
Survival action by the decedent’s estate. To recover for pain and suffering, special and general damges (including lost earnings) between the time of injury and death, and in OJ’s case punitive I suppose.
nk (dbc370) — 6/3/2015 @ 7:11 pmwell, I guess one could call it is rank hypocrisy;
I prefer to call it “SSSDD” sin-sick soul delusional disorder, extreme subtype.
Let my clarify and reiterate, I have much more sympathy for Jenner than the vanity fair people and others playing pimp for the sake of their own agendas.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 6/3/2015 @ 7:12 pmSin is inherently irrational in the final sense, and the farther away from God’s norm one roams, the irrationality becomes more apparent, except to those most afflicted with the delusions.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 6/3/2015 @ 7:15 pmCan anyone make a “Twitter-bot”??
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 6/3/2015 @ 7:18 pmA Twitter-bot war. That could crash the net.
Future headlines-
mg (31009b) — 6/3/2015 @ 7:23 pmShe wants her penis back.
MD in Philly (f9371b) 24 and 25. You reflect God’s grace and are a better man than I. I feel sorry for Jenner, but the people going around telling the rest of us how to think, well, they make me lose my religion.
Walter Cronanty (f48cd5) — 6/3/2015 @ 7:31 pmromans and corinthians were written for times like this,
narciso (ee1f88) — 6/3/2015 @ 7:33 pmI am truly taken aback by the furor over this whole thing. I cannot see how the Vanity Fair cover of a celebrity affects me or my life in the slightest. I do not believe as some apparently do that a “new normal” has magically appeared, and I cannot foresee that I will ever need to refer to Bruce/Caitlyn by any sort of pronoun because I cannot foresee Bruce/Caitlyn being embedded in any way shape or form into my vocabulary or into my social milieu or into my viewing habits. In other words, since I think it is all a big yawn, of course I also think that it’s a big yawn that apparently we’re “being told how to speak about it” by annoying nudnik pests in the media whom I neither respect or care about.
Former WW2 era draftee George Jorgensen became Christine Jorgensen in the 1950’s. Our parents survived the shock. Ranked tennis player Dr. Richard Raskin became Dr. Renee Richards in 1975 and the world kept spinning on its axis. I really think we’ll survive this, too.
elissa (12fbe1) — 6/3/2015 @ 7:35 pmWe even had a tranny in 1981 in a bond movie. Tula was its name, if I remember correctly.
Gazzer (4aa2e2) — 6/3/2015 @ 7:46 pmYes, elissa, I agree that we will survive this, and much worse things.
Let the twitter-bot wars begin! (cue Star Wars theme)
felipe (56556d) — 6/3/2015 @ 7:46 pmGazzer, are you sure its name wasn’t Two-fer?
felipe (56556d) — 6/3/2015 @ 7:47 pmhttp://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/06/03/jenners_trail_was_blazed_by_christine_jorgensen_126839.html
elissa (12fbe1) — 6/3/2015 @ 7:48 pmWe survived Rex Reed changing into Raquel Welch and back.
kishnevi (adea75) — 6/3/2015 @ 7:49 pmTo be clear though, I remember my mother thinking that film was the epitome of decadence.
kishnevi (91d5c6) — 6/3/2015 @ 7:51 pmIt was only a few years ago that it was acceptable to think marriage was only between a man and a woman,
now trying to act consistent to that belief can make you lose your business.
Who knows what tomorrow brings.
It is true, though, that “Vanity Fair” by its name has mocked Christians since its founding, so it isn’t new.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 6/3/2015 @ 7:53 pmVictor/Victoria with Julie Andrews?
Gazzer (4aa2e2) — 6/3/2015 @ 7:53 pmwell if anyone knows derangemnt she would, rimshot,
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/2015/06/03/the_beltway039s_clinton_derangement_syndrome_358385.html
narciso (ee1f88) — 6/3/2015 @ 7:54 pmthat was different as with Nrs, Doubtfire, that Australian film, et al,
narciso (ee1f88) — 6/3/2015 @ 7:55 pmDoubtfire was a ringer for my old Nan. Gave me goosebumps. They prolly met by now.
Gazzer (4aa2e2) — 6/3/2015 @ 8:00 pmSo Jenner and the West-Kardashians are hanging out together, and Jenner cannot take his eyes off Kanye’s bulge. Kanye notices and refuses to put up with it. “Look, Jenner”, he says, “don’t get any ideas. Even if I wasn’t married to Kim, I don’t swing that way”. “No, no, Kanye”, says Jenner, “it’s nothing like that. It’s just that I miss mine so much”.
Yes, I’m ashamed of myself.
nk (dbc370) — 6/3/2015 @ 8:06 pmI’m not sure it’s a question of survival.
Dana (86e864) — 6/3/2015 @ 8:08 pmI got to see this weirdness on Reddit with Bradley Manning as the topic. One guy was referring to him as “Manning” and didn’t even bother taking issue with call him him or her. The person arguing with him was insistent on calling him Chelsea and kept repeating the name even when it wasn’t necessary.
Quite comical.
Dejectedhead (4bfcf6) — 6/3/2015 @ 8:11 pmI dunno about “authentic”
steveg (fed1c9) — 6/3/2015 @ 8:17 pm“Policy makers and the media are doing no favors either to the public or the transgendered by treating their confusions as a right in need of defending rather than as a mental disorder that deserves understanding, treatment and prevention. This intensely felt sense of being transgendered constitutes a mental disorder in two respects. The first is that the idea of sex misalignment is simply mistaken—it does not correspond with physical reality. The second is that it can lead to grim psychological outcomes.
The transgendered suffer a disorder of “assumption” like those in other disorders familiar to psychiatrists. With the transgendered, the disordered assumption is that the individual differs from what seems given in nature—namely one’s maleness or femaleness. Other kinds of disordered assumptions are held by those who suffer from anorexia and bulimia nervosa, where the assumption that departs from physical reality is the belief by the dangerously thin that they are overweight. . . .
When children who reported transgender feelings were tracked without medical or surgical treatment at both Vanderbilt University and London’s Portman Clinic, 70%-80% of them spontaneously lost those feelings. Some 25% did have persisting feelings; what differentiates those individuals remains to be discerned.
We at Johns Hopkins University—which in the 1960s was the first American medical center to venture into “sex-reassignment surgery”—launched a study in the 1970s comparing the outcomes of transgendered people who had the surgery with the outcomes of those who did not. Most of the surgically treated patients described themselves as “satisfied” by the results, but their subsequent psycho-social adjustments were no better than those who didn’t have the surgery. And so at Hopkins we stopped doing sex-reassignment surgery, since producing a “satisfied” but still troubled patient seemed an inadequate reason for surgically amputating normal organs.
It now appears that our long-ago decision was a wise one. A 2011 study at the Karolinska Institute in Sweden produced the most illuminating results yet regarding the transgendered, evidence that should give advocates pause. The long-term study—up to 30 years—followed 324 people who had sex-reassignment surgery. The study revealed that beginning about 10 years after having the surgery, the transgendered began to experience increasing mental difficulties. Most shockingly, their suicide mortality rose almost 20-fold above the comparable nontransgender population. This disturbing result has as yet no explanation but probably reflects the growing sense of isolation reported by the aging transgendered after surgery. The high suicide rate certainly challenges the surgery prescription. . . .
At the heart of the problem is confusion over the nature of the transgendered. “Sex change” is biologically impossible. People who undergo sex-reassignment surgery do not change from men to women or vice versa. Rather, they become feminized men or masculinized women. Claiming that this is civil-rights matter and encouraging surgical intervention is in reality to collaborate with and promote a mental disorder.”
http://www.wsj.com/articles/paul-mchugh-transgender-surgery-isnt-the-solution-1402615120
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 6/3/2015 @ 8:19 pmAll times are times like this.
Steve57 (6a0485) — 6/3/2015 @ 8:26 pmIt is far less obnoxious than when everyone insisted that we can the traitor Bradley Manning “Chelsie” and that we provide him/her/it with a free sex change. Why the f–k should getting convicted of treason entitle you to free cosmetic surgery?
Aaron "Worthing" Walker (9c4b9d) — 6/3/2015 @ 8:30 pmFrom now on I want you all to call me Loretta.
papertiger (c2d6da) — 6/3/2015 @ 8:39 pmDoes he keep his pickle in a jar in the fridge?
Because that would be bipartisan crazy.
papertiger (c2d6da) — 6/3/2015 @ 8:44 pmI don’t give a rat’s patootie how Jenner chooses to live, as long as he doesn’t directly cause harm to others or their property or expect me to subsidize him. BUT I am most certainly NOT going to call him “she” or “her” when he still has male equipment, no matter the state of his Adam’s apple, boobs, or makeup.
If he does have the surgery, we can talk. Technically he is still a man, his DNA will prove it. But if you go that far to live out your fantasy, that gets some leeway. As to whether he should be allowed in Ladies Rooms is up to the women AFAIAC.
– –
A recent article by a psychiatrist noted that “transgenders” are damaged people, it is not natural at all. In what sick universe am I required to assent to others’ delusions?
Estragon (ada867) — 6/3/2015 @ 9:35 pmI thought she stopped being brave and heroic the moment they found out she was one of us.
Milhouse (a0cc5c) — 6/3/2015 @ 9:40 pmI’ve got no problem with transsexuals. I know enough of them. If she wants to be treated as a woman I’m willing to do that. But:
1. She doesn’t get to use the ladies’ room until she has surgery.
Milhouse (a0cc5c) — 6/3/2015 @ 9:51 pm2. Neither she nor anyone else gets to dictate to others what they will call her. All she can do is ask nicely. Rude demands deserve to be rebuffed.
I’ll see your Loretta, and raise you a Betty
All this fawning over Jenner’s new-found sexual identity will end when it become common knowledge he identifies as a Republican.
Bill H (2a858c) — 6/3/2015 @ 9:51 pmi’ll continue to use the term “s/he/it” and they can all kiss my grits.
redc1c4 (34e91b) — 6/3/2015 @ 10:18 pmand you can call me Al.
redc1c4 (34e91b) — 6/3/2015 @ 10:23 pmI really don’t understand why everyone is so up in the air over the publicity of a new “reality” show. Regardless of whether Caitlyn gets her weenie whacked off at some point, which I doubt, maybe it’s time to stop paying attention to such shenanigans (or henanigans as the case may be).
I mean, everyone does understand what’s going on here, right?
Do I have to spell it out? Here’s a hint: Bruce Jenner’s psychological problems are not the point.
Ag80 (eb6ffa) — 6/3/2015 @ 10:35 pmMilhouse @ 52,
Brave, heroic and authentic were italicized… not my thoughts, but what I’ve seen Jenner’s transition and coming out described as… my definition of brave, heroic and authentic are somewhat different.
Dana (86e864) — 6/3/2015 @ 10:38 pmTolerance
Acceptance
Participation
Celebration
The 4 stages of a liberal idea. Or else.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 6/3/2015 @ 11:57 pmThis bitch better lop off his weenie pretty soon or he is going to be a liar.
mg (31009b) — 6/4/2015 @ 2:21 amHeartbreaking from Dr. Paul McHugh on sex-change surgery:
Tanny O'Haley (c674c7) — 6/4/2015 @ 3:58 amMale genitalia or not, he is still a he.
Tanny O'Haley (c674c7) — 6/4/2015 @ 4:04 amYeah, I’m just surprised that she’s being called that. I thought they stopped calling her that when they found out she was one of us.
Milhouse (a0cc5c) — 6/4/2015 @ 5:20 amI am repeating what #4 & #6 stated
WarEagle82 (d35bad) — 6/3/2015 @ 6:26 pm
4.Bruce Jenner certainly is troubled individual. And pumping him full of silicon and female hormones and surgically removing his genitalia and then painting his face with makeup isn’t going to make him any less confused.
I think you’re on to something. From Instapundit:
Psychiatrist Paul McHugh had an intriguing take on “accepting” transgendered individuals a few months back in the WSJ that may be worth re-reading in the wake of the Bruce/Caitlyn Jenner revelation:
[P]olicy makers and the media are doing no favors either to the public or the transgendered by treating their confusions as a right in need of defending rather than as a mental disorder that deserves understanding, treatment and prevention. This intensely felt sense of being transgendered constitutes a mental disorder in two respects. The first is that the idea of sex misalignment is simply mistaken—it does not correspond with physical reality. The second is that it can lead to grim psychological outcomes.
When children who reported transgender feelings were tracked without medical or surgical treatment at both Vanderbilt University and London’s Portman Clinic, 70%-80% of them spontaneously lost those feelings. Some 25% did have persisting feelings; what differentiates those individuals remains to be discerned.
We at Johns Hopkins University—which in the 1960s was the first American medical center to venture into “sex-reassignment surgery”—launched a study in the 1970s comparing the outcomes of transgendered people who had the surgery with the outcomes of those who did not. Most of the surgically treated patients described themselves as “satisfied” by the results, but their subsequent psycho-social adjustments were no better than those who didn’t have the surgery. And so at Hopkins we stopped doing sex-reassignment surgery, since producing a “satisfied” but still troubled patient seemed an inadequate reason for surgically amputating normal organs.
Walter Cronanty (f48cd5) — 6/3/2015 @ 6:37 pm
Simply put – this is a mental disorder and should be treated as such
joe (debac0) — 6/4/2015 @ 5:30 amHere’s a question: If a transsexual police officer shoots a black man who was involved in a sexual situation with a white college girl who retroactively withdrew her consent to the sex a year after it occured………what reason do we use for looting the CVS pharmacy & burning it to the ground?
Russ from Winterset (5da4d0) — 6/4/2015 @ 5:51 amI understand objecting when transgenders and others expect everyone to accept their gender change or to immediately use different pronouns. I also understand being upset about the Chelsea Manning case because that involved taxpayer money. But I assume Jenner is paying for his medical procedures. Isn’t that aspect essentially the same as any cosmetic procedure, whether it’s done by a man or a woman?
The issue to me is when do the procedures become more about self-mutilation than self-improvement. It’s hard to know for sure but, when it comes to using surgery to make your dreams come true, Jenner seems more like Kim K than Michael Jackson.
DRJ (e80d46) — 6/4/2015 @ 6:25 amDoes he keep his pickle in a jar in the fridge?
Because that would be bipartisan crazy.
papertiger (c2d6da) — 6/3/2015 @ 8:44 pm
Say… Isn’t “pickle in a jar” the name of a Phish song?
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 6/4/2015 @ 6:32 amIt’s all too Rocky Horror Picture Show for this cowboy…
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 6/4/2015 @ 6:35 am#65, asked, what reason do we use for looting the CVS pharmacy & burning it to the ground?
Looting and burning would be completely justifiable if CVS’s CCTV recorded the peaceful Black Muslim youth brandishing a sawed-off shotgun and threatening to kill another hostage when he was suddenly and without warning shot in the back prior to being given his Miranda Rights by the sneeky trigger-happy white tranny cop.
ropelight (789d53) — 6/4/2015 @ 6:55 amCVS sells Father’s Day cards and Father’s Day cards are patriarchical, cisnormative, transphobic and, worst of all, racist.
nk (dbc370) — 6/4/2015 @ 7:06 amcaity-cakes your 15 minutes ain’t gittin any fresher
you know what they say about trannies and houseguests
happyfeet (a037ad) — 6/4/2015 @ 7:09 amDRJ-
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 6/4/2015 @ 7:11 amI think what Jenner has done is self-mutilation and evidence of a disorder, as described by the Hopkins psychiatrist with lots of experience and of no particular religious background that I can tell.
That said, my main response to Jenner is one of concern for his own welfare, and I would not bother about it at all if it wasn’t for the big propaganda campaign going along with it. The mass media has been more of an instrument of propaganda than truth for decades, and gets worse all of the time. A mere 7-8 years ago one could get elected president while saying “marriage is between a man and a woman”, now to say that gets ostracism and getting put out of business if local laws will allow them to.
Perhaps the concept is the public discussion equivalent of the “broken windows” policy. If one allows “small stuff” to go unchallenged, things just get worse.
I read an article yesterday linked at PowerLine that even lib professors are worried, as the claims that kill a career are no longer fact and content based that can be evaluated and potentially defended against, but the claim of emotional harm by something one was “exposed to” in class and there is no defense against a claim of emotional harm except to say “hogwash” to the notion of it.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 6/4/2015 @ 7:19 amBut no one wants to wash the hog. The libs are starting to feel the wrath of the monster they have birthed and nurtured.
I read this, in a short story, yesterday. And although the news was very sad, I just had to laugh, and laugh, and laugh:
MRS. LUBE had a cousin, a young man who had done well for himself. He was in fact an educated man, being one of those teachers at elementary schools who do so much to imbue the young with ultra- Socialistic principles.
The story was published in 1926.
nk (dbc370) — 6/4/2015 @ 7:29 amForget Loretta.
I now believe I’m a 1,200 year old magical cat, and anyone who doesn’t agree to my right to be a cat, is an otherkin-phobic bigot.
papertiger (c2d6da) — 6/4/2015 @ 8:12 amI demand you all respect my right to be called “Whiskers” and wear nothing but a pink collar in public.
you’re salem from the Sabrina show,
narciso (ee1f88) — 6/4/2015 @ 8:14 amAlso I demand a litterbox be provided in the cisgender corner of the ladies room.
whiskers (c2d6da) — 6/4/2015 @ 8:18 amI forgot how much I hate change. For a minute.
papertiger (c2d6da) — 6/4/2015 @ 8:33 amMD,
The discussion of transgenders by the Johns Hopkin’s psychiatrist and the London and Swedish studies are convincing, so I would argue against it if I had a family member wanting to do this. But … all cosmetic surgeries look a little like self-mutilation if they are elective. I’m too cheap to pay for them but I’ve thought about a couple of procedures to make me look like my younger self, since I still feel like that’s the real me. How different is that, really, than Jenner wanting to look like the real him/her?
DRJ (e80d46) — 6/4/2015 @ 8:33 amWhy do some people think that Jenner matters? Jenner mattered at the Olympics and for a short while afterwards. Appearance on reality television is no substitute for credibility. If all, including our gracious host, would simply stop writing about Jenner, then Jenner would very quickly become a footnote in history. Jenner matters no more than the transgender child of a friend of mine. That child received zero press for the transformation. Jenner matters no more and no less than my friend’s child.
LTMG (94c4c3) — 6/4/2015 @ 8:34 ambecause GLAAD is involved, and they are bankrolled by mayor players, because ESPN is involved, and the entire sports-media complex,
narciso (ee1f88) — 6/4/2015 @ 8:38 amEven if he lops off his pickle, he is still a man. He isn’t going to sprout a vagina and ovaries.
JD (c24322) — 6/4/2015 @ 8:40 amwrong, JD. they hollow out the banana, keeping the peel intact and surgically implant that. Jenner will then become… MECHAVAGINA!!!!!!!!!!
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 6/4/2015 @ 8:45 amI demand you all respect my right to be called “Whiskers” and wear nothing but a pink collar in public.
papertiger (c2d6da) — 6/4/2015 @ 8:12 am
Permission granted and I’d even pay to see that, ‘tiger!
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 6/4/2015 @ 8:48 amhttp://pjmedia.com/richardfernandez/2015/06/03/my-name-is-hannibal/
narciso (ee1f88) — 6/4/2015 @ 9:02 amBig applause for this post. What someone wants to call themselves doesn’t affect you, me or anybody.
carlitos (c24ed5) — 6/4/2015 @ 9:13 amBig applause for this post. What someone wants to call themselves doesn’t affect you, me or anybody.
Up until the moment we are criticized and accused of foul intent for using the wrong name or the wrong pronoun when describing this person. That was the original point of the post. Very few people are saying that Jenner shouldn’t be allowed to pursue his weird ideas, but we’ll be dammed if we have to be “supportive” by catering to the Orwellian demands of the Social Justice Warriors like that dipstick at the ACLU.
JVW (8278a3) — 6/4/2015 @ 9:21 amDRJ,
To reiterate, the reason I am discussing this in a public format is not in regard to Jenner per se, but because of the propaganda machine eager to make use of him. Sure, he is eager to be on the cover of Vanity Fair because he wants to be affirmed and make money. But I think people who really loved him would advise him to work out his issues in private.
My overall philosophy of medicine is that something is appropriate when it furthers a person living out their responsibilities to love God and love others. The classic examples I think of are medications for pain and anxiety. If a person is debilitated by one or the other (pain or anxiety), use of a medicine is a wonderful thing, especially when it is part of an overall approach for a more fundamental “healing”. If the use of such medicines is to avoid facing life’s responsibilities in some fashion, that is bad.
I think the opposing ends of the spectrum on that are pretty easy to see,
and in between it can sometimes get quite murky.
I would say the same for cosmetic surgery. If the surgery is for cleft palate, of course, for a facial scar that dominates one’s interactions with the public, sure. To look younger, well if it is an actress or other public figure for the sake of her career, I am sure there are cases it is a great option. If it is the 3rd facelift for a 65 yo actress still trying to look 35, well, maybe she would be better served by working on the reality of aging. Breast reduction for a young woman whose body is just out of proportion for social comfort, fine.
There are a lot of cases I would suspend giving an opinion on.
In fact, I am not going to say that Jenner should not have had the surgery,
I am going to say that the claim there is a medical and moral “settled opinion” that this approach is the preferred approach to something that is totally normal,
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 6/4/2015 @ 9:33 amis not at all true, and is a mistake at best, perhaps a delusion, and maybe an outright lie (for some who know better).
Carlitos -‘like with every other issue, were it just the case they wanted to be left alone and do what they will, most would have no issue with it. But they are literally rewriting history, and publishing rules and guides about what are the acceptable ways to address said topic. Should you stray, you are a transphobic bigot full of hate. So it is not really about being left alone.
JD (3b5483) — 6/4/2015 @ 9:33 amAnd it is objectively anti-science 😉
JD (3b5483) — 6/4/2015 @ 9:34 amBruce Jenner is an “entertainer”, and if we find his dressing up as a woman entertaining — like the bearded lady, the half-man/half-woman or the chicken-head biting geek at a carnival sideshow — it may be a reflection of our low tastes but no more so than watching 22 guys in tight spandex crouch behind each others’ behinds and wrestle over a pigskin ovoid.
nk (dbc370) — 6/4/2015 @ 9:35 amyou’re not supposed to slap trannies unless you have a really good reason is my understanding
happyfeet (a037ad) — 6/4/2015 @ 9:38 am85. I started reading that link wondering how Hannibal Lechter fit in to this.
And a link for a link
kishnevi (91d5c6) — 6/4/2015 @ 9:41 amhttp://rechovot.blogspot.com/2015/06/bruce-caitlyn-and-death-of-neutrality.html
Jenner matters for the same reason some same sex couple 20 years ago wanted to get married.
That was fine if two people of the same sex wanted to make a lifelong commitment to each other and call it marriage.
Some where along the line it has become near obligatory for all of us to agree, at least out loud, upon risk of livelihood.
“What difference does it make to your marriage if two gays want to get married?”
Oh yeah, remember that one? I bet we can find plenty of examples here on this website.
Also, for any medical professional, and for any truly compassionate person, one would not want to see the promotion of something that has been demonstrated to be of no help and maybe harmful to people.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 6/4/2015 @ 9:42 amThe social justice warriors and the dipstick at the ACLU have affected your life how, exactly? Please be specific.
carlitos (c24ed5) — 6/4/2015 @ 9:44 amWhile it sounds cliché, sometimes the key is to stay on the right side of the street. Copacabana, Guadalajara, Hamburg, etc. If you have the Reais / Pesos / Euros, slapping is not really a problem.
carlitos (c24ed5) — 6/4/2015 @ 9:47 amgood tip!
happyfeet (a037ad) — 6/4/2015 @ 9:49 amThe social justice warriors and the dipstick at the ACLU have affected your life how, exactly? Please be specific.
carlitos (c24ed5) — 6/4/2015 @ 9:44 am
We cross-posted, but I think I answered that.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 6/4/2015 @ 9:52 am79 DRJ (e80d46) — 6/4/2015 @ 8:33 am
As restated many times above, the real issue is the thought police on the left who insist on telling us what is acceptable thought and speech – not Jenner’s surgery. But since you brought it up – if you can’t tell the difference between face lift and a 65 year old man turning his scrotum into his vagina, I doubt that we have much to discuss.
By the way, when typing “Bruce Jenner” into a Bing web search, the first thing that pops up is this:
This truly is Stalin rewriting history. Caitlyn Jenner was never a “Track and Field Athlete” and “she” did not win the gold medal in the decathlon. In keeping with all good Stalinists everywhere, I denounce myself for stating objective facts.
Walter Cronanty (f48cd5) — 6/4/2015 @ 9:57 amremember the ’76 olympics happend in algiers, and rene delon won the track in field,
narciso (ee1f88) — 6/4/2015 @ 10:00 amI don’t see it, but to be fair, I was asking JVW. If youd like to respond, that would be great. Bruce Jenner self-identifying as a female has affected you and your life how, exactly?
carlitos (c24ed5) — 6/4/2015 @ 10:04 amyou’d Grr,
carlitos (c24ed5) — 6/4/2015 @ 10:06 amYes, this man calling himself a woman is exactly like Stalin. Good point.
carlitos (c24ed5) — 6/4/2015 @ 10:06 amThe social justice warriors and the dipstick at the ACLU have affected your life how, exactly? Please be specific.
carlitos (c24ed5) — 6/4/2015 @ 9:44 am
Bruce Jenner self-identifying as a female has affected you and your life how, exactly?
carlitos (c24ed5) — 6/4/2015 @ 10:04 am
Do you think that is the same question?
Do you think it makes no difference?
Did you not read the comment, make a mistake about the comment I was referring to?
Do you think I’m an idiot?
I’m not sure.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 6/4/2015 @ 10:15 amUmm, no. It’s groups like GLAAD and the HRC that are behaving exactly like Stalinists.
But other than that, like a blind squirrel, you’ve stumbled on a truth. It’s just beyond your ability to grasp it.
Steve57 (6a0485) — 6/4/2015 @ 10:17 amactually it’s orwellian, as in the non existent malabar front, for which I’ve substituted Algiers,
narciso (ee1f88) — 6/4/2015 @ 10:22 amThis is interesting to read. I reiterate I get why people are concerned there seems to be pressure to endorse Jenner’s decision. It’s no longer enough to be willing to live and let live. I also get the concern about unnecessary medical procedures.
What surprises me is how strong the negative reactions are. I didn’t care for Michael Jackson’s serial surgeries but it made me sad for him, not mad at him. Maybe that’s how people feel about Jenner, too, but there seems to be an anger when it comes to Jenner. If so, is it because we’ve seen so many examples of liberal pressure to accept different lifestyle choices, or is it because of the choice itself?
DRJ (e80d46) — 6/4/2015 @ 10:28 amGood questions, MD 104.
DRJ (e80d46) — 6/4/2015 @ 10:30 amMy guess is most if not all agree with JVW that what’s bothersome here is the idea we have to support Jenner’s decision. I agree.
DRJ (e80d46) — 6/4/2015 @ 10:33 amMy vote, DRJ, is that the anger isn’t about Jenner or even what surgery he had,
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 6/4/2015 @ 10:37 amit’s all about being told what we are supposed to…allowed to, think about it
and,
as I commented above,
history shows that what the libs do a full court press on for acceptance turns into a mandate,
here they are just going straight to the mandated approval phase
i’m glad i’m not a tranny
thank you jesus
happyfeet (a037ad) — 6/4/2015 @ 10:40 amIt’s worse than bothersome. It’s dangerous and oppressive. The state is interested in empowering the state, not Bruce Jenner. And what greater power can the state have than the power to construct and enforce reality? Unapproved reality, i.e. what you perceive through your own senses, is not reality and illegal.
Steve57 (6a0485) — 6/4/2015 @ 10:41 amTo clarify my post (which I thought was fairly simple and obvious): I am not angry with. Jenner. Why would anyone be? I am angry that we are being told by those who speak for the media and influence culture, what to say and how to say it. I don’t like anyone usurping my decision-making rights regarding “what” and “how” to say something. Words matter? Darn right! And I’ll pick and choose those words that I see fit.
Dana (0290c1) — 6/4/2015 @ 10:42 amSteve57, to make it clear, you aren’t upset at Jenner per se, either, right?
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 6/4/2015 @ 10:44 amNo, doc, I’m not upset with Jenner at all. I’m upset with the forces using Jenner to advance their totalitarian agenda.
Steve57 (6a0485) — 6/4/2015 @ 10:46 amOh. I’d pay not to.
papertiger (c2d6da) — 6/4/2015 @ 10:46 amThis is how cults operate, Dana. They use various techniques to draw people in, and then when the person values approval from the cult they shatter that person’s sense of self, their confidence in their ability to perceive reality, indeed their belief that there is such a thing as objective reality, and then through a combination of draconian punishments for wrongthink and rewards for rightthink compel that person to accept the cult’s version of reality and causality.
Of course when the cult is the government they don’t need to work to gain the subject’s buy-in. They just assert a property right to your mind. We see this in communist China where the government is forcing Muslim shop owners to sell alcohol and other haram products. And the Obama administration has apparently seized upon that as a model with their HHS mandate.
Thinking for yourself? Believing your own lying eyes? Why that’s hompophobic, transphobic, Islamophobic, cisnormative, hetoronormative, racist, sexist, militaristic, imperialistic, patriarchal colonialism.
Steve57 (6a0485) — 6/4/2015 @ 10:59 amI remember the 76 Olympics being in Germany.
– like the bearded lady, the half-man/half-woman or the chicken-head biting geek at a carnival sideshow – Had to hear it again.
This truly is Stalin rewriting history. Caitlyn Jenner was never a “Track and Field Athlete” and “she” did not win the gold medal in the decathlon. – And yet she did. She sort of looks like Martina Navritalova
papertiger (c2d6da) — 6/4/2015 @ 11:02 amMy guess is most if not all agree with JVW that what’s bothersome here is the idea we have to support Jenner’s decision.
Not just “support” it. I’m fine with the idea that he wants to have his surgery and if it is going to make him happier (as we have been discussion, there are studies that suggest it won’t) then I wish him luck. Makes no difference to me if he wears female clothes and makeup and calls himself by a different name. I had a high school friend who joined a weird hippie cult and changed her name to something more “earthy.” More power to her.
What I object to is the notion that if I absentmindedly refer to her as “Bruce” or use the masculine pronoun, then I have committed some heinous thought-crime (according to the ACLU twit I have engaged in “an act of hatred“), and if I continue to assert that Bruce Jenner — not Caitlyn Jenner — won the decathlon at the 1976 Summer Olympics then I don’t need some ninny from GLADD taking to his fainting couch at my insensitivity. Bruce/Caitlyn is free to identify with whatever gender, but he/she doesn’t get to rewrite history and I am under no obligation to take part in the flights of rhetorical fancy of the social justice warrior crowd.
JVW (8278a3) — 6/4/2015 @ 11:20 amAerosmith – Dude.
Does anybody remember the name of Bruce Jenner’s American rival on the Olympic decathlon squad?
papertiger (c2d6da) — 6/4/2015 @ 11:24 amHe was a black guy. Pulled a hammy in the qualifiers or something
I wasn’t trying to offend anyone but I’ve read this website a long time and the tone seems more angry than usual. I’m also more frustrated about how intolerant people seem to be about social issues.
DRJ (e80d46) — 6/4/2015 @ 11:28 amDRJ (e80d46) — 6/4/2015 @ 10:28 am
The choice itself is rather sad because, as pointed out above, it is likely to be rued 10 years down the road, whereas less invasive practice, such as psychiatric treatment, would be better practice. Yet, the left would have us accept sex-change surgery as “normal.” It is not.
The latest comprehensive survey I can find is from 2011 [from Gary Gates at the Williams Institute of the UCLA School of Law]. According to that survey, 0.3% of the population is transgender, with “…a majority have[n] taken some steps to transition from one gender to another.” Thus, we’re looking at much less than 0.15% of the population who have actually gone through all of the steps, culminating with sex change surgery http://www.timesunion.com/local/article/Transgender-by-the-numbers-2342726.php. This is not the “norm.”
The same holds true for the gay/lesbian population. The same survey cited above finds that only 1.7% of the population identifies as gay/lesbian. Yet:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/147824/Adults-Estimate-Americans-Gay-Lesbian.aspx
I believe the disparity between what the general population thinks the gay/lesbian/transgender population is and the actual population is caused by the left’s persistent projection, especially in television and other popular media, of large numbers of gay/lesbian/transgenders in “normal” life. This is part and parcel of its campaign for everyone to view the g/l/t/ population as “normal.” It’s also part of its campaign to denigrate the nuclear family.
And, no offense, but the false equivalency of face lifts and sex change surgery aids the left in its quest.
Walter Cronanty (f48cd5) — 6/4/2015 @ 11:33 amNo offense taken, as long as none was intended. I didn’t say they were equivalent but I do see similarities. Why is it a false comparison?
DRJ (e80d46) — 6/4/2015 @ 11:37 amAren’t they both elective surgery, at least for now and for most purposes? Don’t they both involve self-perception and body image?
DRJ (e80d46) — 6/4/2015 @ 11:39 amAnd yes, I’m angry at the left for denigrating the nuclear family.
Walter Cronanty (f48cd5) — 6/4/2015 @ 11:42 amDRJ (e80d46) — 6/4/2015 @ 11:39 am
Lifting weights and abusing anabolic steroids “…both involve self-perception and body image.” Can you see the difference, or are they the same?
Walter Cronanty (f48cd5) — 6/4/2015 @ 11:50 amAren’t they both elective surgery, at least for now and for most purposes? Don’t they both involve self-perception and body image?
The problem is that the social justice warriors would tell you that Bruce Jenner has always been a woman, she was just trapped in a big athletic man’s body that was capable of winning one of the most coveted prizes in the Olympic Games. Imagine someone getting a big ol’ hawk nose pared back by a rhinoplastic surgeon into something more dainty and elegant, then telling everyone that he was born with the dainty & elegant nose but it was wrongly trapped inside of the big ol’ hawk nose. Would any of us fall for that line?
JVW (8278a3) — 6/4/2015 @ 11:51 amwe can’t let caitlyn turn us against each other
this is all part of her evil scheme
happyfeet (a037ad) — 6/4/2015 @ 11:51 amWalter,
I guess I’m slow. By do you think sex changes are like steroid abuse and face lifts are like weight lifting?
DRJ (e80d46) — 6/4/2015 @ 11:55 amJVW,
I can see someone saying they have always felt like a dainty-nosed person trapped in a big-nosed body.
DRJ (e80d46) — 6/4/2015 @ 11:56 amI can see someone saying they have always felt like a dainty-nosed person trapped in a big-nosed body.
Sure. Just like I am a world-class athlete trapped in an ordinary athlete’s body.
JVW (8278a3) — 6/4/2015 @ 11:59 amI blame no-fault divorce, Walter, but that ship has sailed.
DRJ (e80d46) — 6/4/2015 @ 12:00 pmealter may have some weightlifting tips, JVW.
DRJ (e80d46) — 6/4/2015 @ 12:02 pmWalter, not ealter.
DRJ (e80d46) — 6/4/2015 @ 12:03 pmWalter may have some weightlifting tips, JVW.
Ha! He’d probably want me to adjust my diet too. No thanks! I’ll continue to be a legend in my own mind.
JVW (8278a3) — 6/4/2015 @ 12:12 pmSorry, but referring to the mentally ill Bruce Jenner as Caitlyn is just as medically unethical and cowardly as agreeing to refer to an equally mentally ill person who insists they are really Jesus Christ, or Napoleon, or Quetzlcoatl the Aztec White Bearded God in the flesh.
To hell with the insane PC thugs who call us ‘hateful’ for refusing to say “2+2=5” – which is exactly what this entire exercise is about.
Shame on the butchers who agree to surgically mutilate mentally ill people – and good for Johns Hopkins for recognizing this as mental illness and refusing to perform such Mengelian abominations.
Even greater shame on the psychiatric field for encouraging the mentally disturbed in these bizarre denials of reality.
I pity Bruce Jenner in that no one in his life is there to support him in dealing with reality, rather than being surrounded by parasites using his delusions for fame and money selling magazines and TV shows.
Were Suetonius alive today to write the history of our modern culture, it embarasses me to think that the old Roman would find us more pathetic, debauched and demented than those of whom he has already written. It sickens me to think I, along with all my comrades in arms, sacrificed so many years defending this country only to see us sink into such a pit of perverse insanity that the cultural elites demand craven acceptance of whatever filth they produce.
Pete (ceb4bf) — 6/4/2015 @ 12:13 pmcarlitos (c24ed5) — 6/4/2015 @ 10:06 am
Intellectual dishonesty in making arguments is what I expect from a leftist. As pointed out by Steve57, it is not Jenner requesting that he be called a woman that I object to and label Stalinism. It is leftist in the media lying. Caitlyn Jenner did not win the gold medal in the men’s decathlon. As pointed out by MD in Philly at post 11:
Thus, “she” did not win the gold medal. Saying “she” did is like Stalin rewriting history:
As stated by Professor Reynolds: “‘1984’ is a cautionary tale, not a how-to manual.”
Walter Cronanty (f48cd5) — 6/4/2015 @ 12:14 pmI’m with ya Pete. It saddens me to think I’ve probably killed better men than thee in the jungles of Nam. And to what end? So Bruce can become Catlyn and declare “a new normal”? I think not!
Hoagie (b482c1) — 6/4/2015 @ 12:19 pmBetter men than these, not thee, sorry.
Hoagie (b482c1) — 6/4/2015 @ 12:20 pmDemonstrating why, if there is to be a DRJ fan club, I want to be its first president.
Steve57 (6a0485) — 6/4/2015 @ 12:25 pmDRJ (e80d46) — 6/4/2015 @ 12:02 pm
I have no weight-lifting tips. My body is like a temple – after ISIS has marched through.
JVW (8278a3) — 6/4/2015 @ 12:12 pm
And absolutely no need to adjust your diet, or undergo elective plastic surgery, either, you look fine to me.
And yes, I’m comparing sex-change surgery to abusing anabolic steroids.
Walter Cronanty (f48cd5) — 6/4/2015 @ 12:27 pmBertolt Brecht’s poem wasn’t supposed to be a road map to the future.
But it is. Now.
Steve57 (6a0485) — 6/4/2015 @ 12:28 pm132.I blame no-fault divorce, Walter, but that ship has sailed.
DRJ (e80d46) — 6/4/2015 @ 12:00 pm
That was the start. But leftists will not be satisfied until the state is the “family.”
Walter Cronanty (f48cd5) — 6/4/2015 @ 12:39 pmBut hopefully not comparing either to weightlifting. I’m a huge fan of body weight exercises. Push-ups, pull-ups, rope climbing, etc. But at some point artificial weights must be involved if you’re going to improve functional strength.
http://www.amazon.com/DeMarini-Bat-Weight-Red-16-Ounce/dp/B005EZ3ABW/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1433447240&sr=8-1&keywords=baseball+bat+weights
Steve57 (6a0485) — 6/4/2015 @ 12:49 pmThe above were my questions. The quotes below are from MD in Philly.
No.
Do I think that what makes no difference?
At this point, I have no idea. If anyone would like to answer one of my two questions above, I’d be thrilled.
No, but I can’t always follow your train of thought, so sometimes I ask for clarification. As Dennis Prager often says, I prefer clarity to agreement.
carlitos (c24ed5) — 6/4/2015 @ 1:14 pmI’ll take non-sequiturs for $200, Alex. Who’s the leftist? What intellectual dishonesty?
I will ask you the same question that I asked JVW above. This issue has affected you personally, how? I’m certain that you and I consume different media, but no one anywhere is telling me to rewrite history or what I should think.
carlitos (c24ed5) — 6/4/2015 @ 1:21 pmcarlitos demands that Poland demonstrate how the Nazi’s annexation of the Sudetenland had affected them personally before they can gear up.
Steve57 (6a0485) — 6/4/2015 @ 1:25 pmWhose penis will be next?!
Hide ya kids, hide ya wife, they be transgenderin’ errbody out here
Leviticus (f9a067) — 6/4/2015 @ 1:25 pmheads is spinnin
happyfeet (a037ad) — 6/4/2015 @ 1:27 pmmens is wimmin?
it’s like that one direction video except that was opposed to just be for fun
they said that was opposed to just be for fun
they were very clear on this point
now you have to wonder
nothing is real anymore
and it all smells like neosporin
carlitos, how does Putin’s annexation of the Crimea affect Lithuania or Estonia personally?
Steve57 (6a0485) — 6/4/2015 @ 1:30 pmWalter:
I assumed that was what you were doing, but I’m trying to figure out why you consider sex-change surgery abusive (and illegal?) but not face-lifts.
Walter, I’m not trying to be argumentative or dense. I understand asserting that sex-change surgery is not effective because it can’t actually change someone’s gender, so it’s not worth the risk associated with surgery. I assume that’s your point although you haven’t said it specifically. I also understand asserting that a face-lift can be effective at making people feel more youthful, so it may be worth the risk of surgery.
However, it seems to me that cosmetic surgeries — other than surgeries for cleft palates and similar medical issues — are about making people happy or content with their appearance. They provide a psychological benefit more than a medical or physical benefit. The information from the Johns Hopkin’s doctor and from the London and Swedish studies suggest most people are not benefited in the long run from sex-change surgery. But most is not all, and if someone wants to use their own money to do this procedure because they think it will make them happy, then I think we should view it like a face-lift procedure. I don’t want it but it doesn’t bother me if other people want it — as long as I don’t have to pay for it or applaud it.
DRJ (e80d46) — 6/4/2015 @ 1:34 pmLeviticus used to be interesting.
JD (3b5483) — 6/4/2015 @ 1:35 pmSimilarly, sex-change surgery may not be able to change someone’s gender but face-lifts can’t make someone more youthful.
DRJ (e80d46) — 6/4/2015 @ 1:37 pmThey can only change someone’s appearance, not their underlying sex or age.
DRJ (e80d46) — 6/4/2015 @ 1:37 pmMy experience suggests that figure of <2% is an underestimate, but by how much I won't pretend to guess. I live in an area with an above average proportion of homosexuals, which of course distorts things, but at least 10% percent of the people I meet in daily life (including customers, meaning the public at large) are gay.
People's perception of the number of gays may be distorted that a high number of them find careers in the arts (a trend centuries old. One Renaissance painter was known to his contemporaries as Il Sodomo.)
And yes, face lifts are the same as sex change…they are foubded in the attitude that we can deny reality. Face lifts yry to deny the reality of aging. Ultimately they are the claim that God did not know what It was doing when It created us.
kishnevi (9c4b9c) — 6/4/2015 @ 1:39 pmThis is what photoshop is for. Bruce Jenner is now not only a woman, per the Vanity Fair cover he/she is also in his/her mid-thirties.
Steve57 (6a0485) — 6/4/2015 @ 1:40 pmdoubded = founded
kishnevi (adea75) — 6/4/2015 @ 1:42 pmyry = try
“Leviticus used to be interesting.”
– JD
So did this website. It looks we’ve all settled for “whiny.”
Leviticus (f9a067) — 6/4/2015 @ 1:50 pm“carlitos, how does Putin’s annexation of the Crimea affect Lithuania or Estonia personally?”
– Steve57
Steve57, on a scale of 1 to 10, how concerned are you that Caitlyn Jenner is going to try to annex your penis?
Leviticus (f9a067) — 6/4/2015 @ 1:51 pmI will ask you the same question that I asked JVW above. This issue has affected you personally, how? I’m certain that you and I consume different media, but no one anywhere is telling me to rewrite history or what I should think.
I don’t think we are destined to reach accord on this, carlitos, but let me try one last time: the jackass from the ACLU called it “an act of hatred” to peg Jenner by the wrong first name or the wrong gender. He didn’t say that it would be a faux pas or inconsiderate or boorish; he said it would be “an act of hatred.” Pass blithely by that if you would like, but to me it signifies that the left is about to play their usual game of forcing you to accept whatever social crusade they are currently riding on. Imagine the ACLU — the American Civil Liberties Union! — saying that you are committing an act of hatred if you don’t toe the line on acceptable speech. This is bizarro world here.
And no, it doesn’t currently affect me. Not today, probably not tomorrow, probably not even a few months from now. But make no mistake that the social justice warriors are attempting to narrow the boundaries in which we are free to conduct debate and we are marching headlong towards the day when our “betters” will define for us exactly which opinions we are allowed to hold in order to be accepted in polite society. I hope you never have a child or grandchild who is suspended from school because he accidentally called Jennifer a “she” when everyone knows that Jennifer now identifies as Marcus and prefers to be a “he.” Act of hatred, don’t you know.
JVW (8278a3) — 6/4/2015 @ 1:52 pmWalter,
I think we agree on some things. Like you, I oppose the Democrats’ attempt to replace the family with the secular state. Like you and others, I don’t like the left’s desire to make conservatives support social/cultural norms that we think are wrong.
I wonder if the anger on this issue is like the straw that broke the camel’s back: A result of the parade of recent events in which conservatives have been criticized for their views on SSM so that our frustration boils over with each new cultural straw that liberals want conservatives to applaud. It’s especially ironic to me that gays seem uninterested in how the transgender community is treated.
DRJ (e80d46) — 6/4/2015 @ 1:53 pmLeviticus, missing the point since birth.
Steve57 (6a0485) — 6/4/2015 @ 1:55 pmI’ll mark you down at a 7.
Leviticus (f9a067) — 6/4/2015 @ 1:57 pmThis issue hurts me by undermining the traditional culture that my middle class life is built on and that I wanted my children and future grandchildren to have. Discussing and celebrating sex changes and related topics in general society — and not solely among adults — alters the views of today’s children and future generations in ways that I can’t correct or counteract. And the left knows this, which is why they are doing it.
DRJ (e80d46) — 6/4/2015 @ 1:59 pmI wonder if the anger on this issue is like the straw that broke the camel’s back: A result of the parade of recent events in which conservatives have been criticized for their views on SSM so that our frustration boils over with each new cultural straw that liberals want conservatives to applaud.
I think that’s an insightful point, DRJ, and I think it also has a lot to do with the fact that the political left now understands that it is a laughingstock where economic and foreign policy are concerned. If you are a Democrat in 2016 are you going to run on the wonderful economy that Obama’s stimulus and massive debt have bequeathed us, or the wonderful efficiency and cost-effectiveness of Obamacare, or the image of might that we project to Iran, China, Russia, ISIS, and other malevolent actors around the world? Or are you going to assemble a coalition of gays, minorities, single women, and people who have been browbeat into supporting their agenda and insist to that group that they are a GOP President away from being put on the freight train to the concentration camp? Democrats always used to sniff about “wedge issue” politics when the GOP talked about crime, welfare policy, and the breakdown of the family; now they are all about the wedge issue politics of sex, sex, and sex when it means motivating their grievance-mongering base.
JVW (8278a3) — 6/4/2015 @ 2:02 pmtranny tranny tranny tranny
SWING
tranny
happyfeet (a037ad) — 6/4/2015 @ 2:10 pmIt’s an interesting question: If individuals who seek sex reassignment surgery are suffering from a treatable mental disorder – a form of body dysmorphic disorder – that could allow them to recover without invasive surgery, shouldn’t society encourage the less intrusive psychological therapy rather than the more intrusive (and irreversible) surgery? Indeed, if the surgery does not improve–but amplifies–underlying psychological disorders such as depression, would not the surgery constitute an unethical harm? Why is society so eager to lump “transgendered” individuals into the same category with homosexual or bisexual individuals? I know LGBT makes a nice-sounding acronym and all, but is there a principled, medical reason to treat the LGBs differently from the Ts? Where is the psychiatric community on this question?
Posted at 4:04 pm by Elizabeth Price Foley
happyfeet (a037ad) — 6/4/2015 @ 2:16 pmcarlitos (c24ed5) — 6/4/2015 @ 1:21 pm
What in the name of all that’s holy is your point? That I shouldn’t comment on something unless it affects me personally?
If so, then what is it about my comment about Stalinism that affected you personally? How?
Walter Cronanty (f48cd5) — 6/4/2015 @ 2:17 pmJVW,
Good points. The left can’t win on anything but social issues so that’s all we hear about. It would be so much better if society could have a serious discussion about the pros and cons of things like the family, abortion, sex changes, SSM, and other subjects. But that isn’t possible now. The left’s academic, media and entertainment juggernaut has made it about scare-mongering and celebrity, and we can’t win that “debate.”
DRJ (e80d46) — 6/4/2015 @ 2:21 pmLeviticus – could you point out even ONE instance of someone expressing that concern here? Or has law school simply taught you how to perfect the art of taking a blow torch to a strawman. Dammit. Straw thing.
JD (eea907) — 6/4/2015 @ 2:21 pmDRJ – appropriate use of “debate”. As you know, like with everything else, they prefer lecture to debate.
JD (eea907) — 6/4/2015 @ 2:23 pmi’m over the inane vapid commentary of people what share choice babblings like “I wasn’t a big Kardashian fan but I watched a little and Bruce always seemed like such a genuinely nice person I really think he’s a lot different from them”
i have to just walk away cause i just can’t have that moment with them
happyfeet (a037ad) — 6/4/2015 @ 2:34 pmOr has law school simply taught you how to perfect the art of taking a blow torch to a strawman. Dammit. Straw thing.
The strawthing now self-identifies as being made of aluminum.
JVW (8278a3) — 6/4/2015 @ 2:40 pmDRJ (e80d46) — 6/4/2015 @ 1:34 pm
I agree. But it’s not as simple as a face lift, and it’s not the norm. Having a man turn his scrotum into his vagina is not the same as a nip here [here, not there] and a tuck there [there, not here]. I think you over simplify a procedure that is life-altering and, in about 50% of the cases, is not medically beneficial. In making this oversimplification, I think you are normalizing a procedure that is not normal and shouldn’t be considered as normal – and in doing so play into the left’s propaganda that transgendered is normal and a person’s sex is inconsequential and can be changed on a whim. You want to use the women’s room because you feel oh so pretty today? Be my guest, whatever you choose. I’m sorry, but I think that’s just wrong.
DRJ (e80d46) — 6/4/2015 @ 1:53 pm
I think you’re right, although the straw that broke my camel’s back was the grandmother who owned a florist shop and had to go out of business because she wouldn’t participate in a mockery of her religious beliefs. It wasn’t enough that she served the gay man on a regular basis. It wasn’t enough that she considered him a friend. It wasn’t enough that she referred him to anothher florist who would fulfill his request. No, in order to satisfy the leftists – who used the power of the state – she had to celebrate a denial her religious beliefs or go out of business. Again, that’s just wrong.
DRJ (e80d46) — 6/4/2015 @ 1:59 pm
Well said.
Walter Cronanty (f48cd5) — 6/4/2015 @ 2:47 pmSo did this website. It looks we’ve all settled for “whiny.”
Leviticus (f9a067) — 6/4/2015 @ 1:50 pm
Not me. I’m trying to settle for humorous. Edgar Wallace wrote that humor is the preventative for hypocrisy, but I think he meant sanctimony.
nk (dbc370) — 6/4/2015 @ 2:49 pm167 happyfeet (a037ad) — 6/4/2015 @ 2:16 pm
Holy crap. I started reading this comment, then looked at the bottom and saw your name. I thought, when did Mr. Feet start writing so lucidly? Then I saw it was a repost. Next time, give me a trigger warning.
Walter Cronanty (f48cd5) — 6/4/2015 @ 2:50 pmTrigger warning. Good one.
DRJ (e80d46) — 6/4/2015 @ 2:58 pmsorry sorry
happyfeet (a037ad) — 6/4/2015 @ 3:03 pmTelling us what we should think or how we should behave is by no means the exclusive province of the Left. Here is yet another piece of patronizing instruction by the numbnuts over at Hot Air, this time regarding more questionable behavior by Marilyn Mosby:
“From what I can see, there’s no reason to suspect that there’s any sort of conspiracy or malevolence going on at the office of the State’s Attorney. Assuming that Mosby harbors some sort of anti-cop bias without hard proof of it is unfair. But at a minimum we may be seeing a lack of experience leading to some very poor decision making under a great deal of scrutiny and national media pressure.”
ThOR (b81f2a) — 6/4/2015 @ 3:15 pmWalter:
Normal isn’t the issue anymore. It stopped being the issue when gays succeeded in their agenda of having government recognize SSM.
The reason gays are so worried about transgenders — why they want a “principled, medical reason to treat the LGBs differently from the Ts” — is that the public might accept gays as normal but they aren’t ready to accept transgenders. Gays desperately want to be considered normal and people like Jenner are the biggest threat to that status.
DRJ (e80d46) — 6/4/2015 @ 3:19 pmIf all I cared about were Republican politics, I would say the GOP should try to make Jenner about getting the government out of personal health care decisions. Why? Because an attractive transgender Republican does more to undermine the left’s social morality than anything I can think of.
DRJ (e80d46) — 6/4/2015 @ 3:26 pmIt’s not fair to use Jenner that way but he’s putting himself out there with his Vanity Fair cover and reality show, so he might welcome it.
DRJ (e80d46) — 6/4/2015 @ 3:27 pmIf all I cared about were Republican politics, I would say the GOP should try to make Jenner about getting the government out of personal health care decisions. Why? Because an attractive transgender Republican does more to undermine the left’s social morality than anything I can think of.
I think we have an early favorite for keynote speaker at the 2016 GOP Convention.
JVW (8278a3) — 6/4/2015 @ 3:42 pmIt’s not fair to use Jenner that way but he’s putting himself out there with his Vanity Fair cover and reality show, so he might welcome it.
I had a great deal of sympathy for Jenner until it became obvious that this whole “coming out trans” thing has been so carefully orchestrated by PR firms. The clinching factor for me was when it was reported that Jenner (along with probably that god-awful wife of his) was shopping around his story for a reality TV series. That’s just pathetic.
JVW (8278a3) — 6/4/2015 @ 3:45 pmLeviticus -‘have you found anyone here expressing the concerns that you made up?
JD (3b5483) — 6/4/2015 @ 3:54 pmI think Jenner could be an example of how the GOP wants to let people live their lives without government support or interference, but I’m not sure how to do that. Fortunately there are people who do know and a couple may even work for the Republicans.
DRJ (e80d46) — 6/4/2015 @ 3:55 pmJVW@186.
I thought the Քարտաշեան* family was a reality TV show already?
*Which is how you say stonecarver in Armenian
kishnevi (9c4b9c) — 6/4/2015 @ 4:13 pmThat should have been JVW@184.
In regard to the real 186, having Jenner give a speech at the Republican Convention would certainly blow some Democratic fuses. But it might blow too many Republican fuses at the same time.
And did you know that Jenner’s oldest son is married to the daughter of Don Felder (Eagles)?
kishnevi (adea75) — 6/4/2015 @ 4:18 pmMy advice to the GOP would be to have Carly Fiorina give the keynote and have NM Gov Susana Martinez, SC Gov Nikki Haley, Utah Rep Mia Love, and SD Rep Kristi Noem speak during prime time on the other nights. I would also put Sarah Palin front and center, but that’s just me.
DRJ (e80d46) — 6/4/2015 @ 4:24 pmSo did this website. It looks we’ve all settled for “whiny.”
Leviticus (f9a067) — 6/4/2015 @ 1:50 pm
I hope, Leviticus, that you are not referring to me as the writer of this post. I don’t care for whining, in myself or others. I also don’t care for a hit-and-run snark without even entering the conversation to coherently layout your disagreement with those you see as settling for “whiny” at this site.
As a future lawyer, this seems a perfect opportunity to practice the argument of persuasion and to convince of that your views – whatever they may be – are sound and reasonable, as well as perhaps widen our views. That being if you see responses here as unreasonable. Indicators point to that.
I, for one, would like to know your thoughts and understand what whining you are referring to. And I would also like the opportunity to agree or disagree and give my reasons why, as well.
Dana (86e864) — 6/4/2015 @ 4:24 pmThe Republicans don’t need Jenner to speak at a convention. All the GOP has to do is frame the debate as ‘private health care decision’ every time any semi-related LGBT issue comes up.
DRJ (e80d46) — 6/4/2015 @ 4:26 pmIt’s my understanding that Leviticus is a lawyer now.
DRJ (e80d46) — 6/4/2015 @ 4:27 pmI thought the Քարտաշեան* family was a reality TV show already?
This would be yet another reality show for that family, kidshnevi. There would be the one about the airheaded broads and then — uh, um — the one about the airheaded broad. But two different shows it would be so that you can sell twice the advertising rates and the family can reap twice the payday! God our culture has gone to the toilet.
JVW (8278a3) — 6/4/2015 @ 4:32 pmRegarding the issue of plastic surgery v. gender reassignment surgery: I don’t see them as quite the same. While similar in that one’s body is cut and rearranged to present a “better you”, cosmetic surgery does not come with the massive adjustment of changing persona as one becomes another gender entirely and it is not accompanied by the same level of personal, social and physical issues/stigmas/aftermath. Further, the psychological impact of gender reassignment surgery certainly exceeds that of a routine cosmetic surgery. And regarding the risk: what if the patient – after all is said and done (including genitalia) realizes too little, too late that they don’t want to live their lives “trapped” in their new assigned gender? Then what? The repercussions are completely different. The risk is far different.
I know a number of people who have had cosmetic surgery and frankly, never has anyone been upset with the results. To the contrary, they usually start lists of what body part they next want nipped and tucked, tightened and raised. (This, of course, excludes botched jobs).
Dana (86e864) — 6/4/2015 @ 4:35 pmIt’s my understanding that Leviticus is a lawyer now.
Then shame on him even more for his opting to snark rather than engage. I would have expected, or at least hoped for more from him.
Dana (86e864) — 6/4/2015 @ 4:36 pmsometimes you snark sometimes you engage this is the way of the whirl
let this not cause you anguish but instead look at it as an opportunity
i know i do
happyfeet (831175) — 6/4/2015 @ 4:42 pmThe reason gays are so worried about transgenders
i haven’t seen any evidence gays are worried about trannies
if they were worried about it they’d say go away you stupid trannies get your own umbrella good luck with the self-mutilation okey dokey bye bye
but they haven’t said that
happyfeet (831175) — 6/4/2015 @ 4:44 pmSarah Palin and the dippy bread bag lady need to stay far far away from the convention
if we want corn pone populism we got huckabee
we do not want corn pone populism
happyfeet (831175) — 6/4/2015 @ 4:46 pmlet this not cause you anguish but instead look at it as an opportunity
No anguish here, happyfeet. I am genuinely interested to his what he has to say. And I think it’s beneath him to not stop and engage. I’m also interested in hearing from a young person how they view this ever-changing world.
Dana (86e864) — 6/4/2015 @ 4:47 pmyes yes he’s interesting when he chooses to be
speaking of young people did you catch the Drake Bell thing i don’t think we talked about that
happyfeet (831175) — 6/4/2015 @ 4:50 pmHere is the Drake Bell issue:
Today he apologized:
Dana (86e864) — 6/4/2015 @ 4:56 pmAs an actor, how great do you think his job options would be if hadn’t apologized?
Sorry … I’m still calling him “tranny”. Not to be confused with my car’s tranny which is, actually, a transaxle.
nk (dbc370) — 6/4/2015 @ 4:59 pmI agree there are differences, Dana, but I submit one of the reasons people are so happy with most cosmetic surgery is that it is largely handled by the patient and doctor directly, without government or sometimes even insurance interference. In addition, doctors in this field have decades of experience with cosmetic surgery techniques, demand is increasing every year, and the techniques improve as doctors compete to please their clients. Doctors in the sex change field don’t have anywhere near the experience, and my guess is that ‘practice makes perfect’ is important in this area of medicine.
Conversely, that happiness may not be true in Britain where a survey indicates one in five patients are unhappy with their results. This is similar to the sex change statistics in the London and Swedish studies, isn’t it? I think many cosmetic procedures are handled by the NHS in Britain. If these survey results are accurate, that may be part of the reason why.
Of course, the main problem in this industry is unqualified practitioners, so IMO there is a role for government in health care licensing at the State level — but not in delivery.
DRJ (e80d46) — 6/4/2015 @ 5:05 pmDana,
Let me clarify that I certainly concede these aren’t the same procedures. There are differences and they may be material. My point is there are many similarities, too.
DRJ (e80d46) — 6/4/2015 @ 5:07 pmthis is what passes for news for CNN
speaking of which Erin Burnett needs to lay off the buffet table
she’s getting all candy crowley
happyfeet (831175) — 6/4/2015 @ 5:13 pmoh.
somebody knocked her up
happyfeet (831175) — 6/4/2015 @ 5:14 pmhappyfeet:
. I have. There’s even a name for it: Transphobia.
DRJ (e80d46) — 6/4/2015 @ 5:17 pmAnd no, it doesn’t currently affect me. Not today, probably not tomorrow, probably not even a few months from now. But make no mistake that the social justice warriors are attempting to narrow the boundaries in which we are free to conduct debate and we are marching headlong towards the day when our “betters” will define for us exactly which opinions we are allowed to hold in order to be accepted in polite society. I hope you never have a child or grandchild who is suspended from school because he accidentally called Jennifer a “she” when everyone knows that Jennifer now identifies as Marcus and prefers to be a “he.” Act of hatred, don’t you know.
JVW (8278a3) — 6/4/2015 @ 1:52 pm
I think you’re right, although the straw that broke my camel’s back was the grandmother who owned a florist shop and had to go out of business because she wouldn’t participate in a mockery of her religious beliefs. It wasn’t enough that she served the gay man on a regular basis. It wasn’t enough that she considered him a friend. It wasn’t enough that she referred him to anothher florist who would fulfill his request. No, in order to satisfy the leftists – who used the power of the state – she had to celebrate a denial her religious beliefs or go out of business. Again, that’s just wrong.
Walter Cronanty (f48cd5) — 6/4/2015 @ 2:47 pm
For carlitos and anyone else interested:
I’m not going to rehash our interchange above, but I will make the point I thought I already made (did anyone understand, or were all confused with my logic as carlitos states? no answer necessary)
The question, “What does Caitlyn Jenner have to do with you?”
is no more the important question than,
“How does my SSM bother your marriage?”
was 5, 10, 15, and 20 years ago!!!!
Now, if I threw a bunch of swearing in there (to colorfully describe the type of question this is) to get people’s attention would it be helpful?
The question originally asked by you carlitos, that I said we cross posted on, was when were any of us personally affected by the ACLU.
Well, I don’t have to wait to see a child deal with being called a transsexual hater in the future,
I’ve got a child going into public high school where she will be told to think SSM is wonderful and shut up.
And I knew this was going to happen years ago, when some of you (you among them, carlitos?) were asking the &%^&&%^&^&R*&^(*^(!!!! pat non-thinking disinformation propaganda campaign question,
“But how is Jimmy and Johnny’s wedding going to hurt you???”
Of course I would rather not be personally annoyed by the slide of our culture into the abyss,
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 6/4/2015 @ 5:20 pmbut hey, I know who survives happily in the end,
But it angers me to see how easily the lambs are stupidly led to the slaughter,
and the wickedness of those who feed them lies,
saying,
“Hey, the grass is greener over here….”
I would not have chosen the word “whiny”. I do think the images of pearl clutching and lace hankie twisting are appropriate descriptions for a surprising lot of the commenters here on this thread, however. I’m sorry. But I do think that.
The only way any person here is “being told what to say or what pronouns to use” about Bruce/Caitlyn is if they give someone else that power over them. So don’t. Why do so many of you smart independent-minded people appear to be so scared and angry and intimidated by the magazine cover and this obviously manufactured PR campaign? Jenner has the right to be photographed and to print that crap and we all have the right to ignore that crap. I don’t normally pay attention to what Southern Poverty Law Center, or ACLU, or Center for Science in the Public Interest, etc. and their ilk say, and most of you have stated you don’t either.
DRJ is asking some good questions and raising some good points, BTW. Thank you JRJ.
elissa (b44a09) — 6/4/2015 @ 5:23 pmtransphobia means you have a rational and prudent fear of trannies getting their tranny juice on you
happyfeet (831175) — 6/4/2015 @ 5:27 pmYet from the beginning, the inclusion of T in this movement has rung hollow.
marvelously succinct, that
happyfeet (831175) — 6/4/2015 @ 5:29 pmThe best estimates are that 2-3% of the American population is homosexual. What can the percentage of Trannies be? .5-1.5% maybe? Why are we indulging the fantasies of these troubled people? These people need therapy. The result of all this will be just the same as when the Left turned the institutionalized into the homeless. Misery.
Funeral Guy (2b0c22) — 6/4/2015 @ 5:29 pmyou’re completely overestimating the tranny pop
there was one on my train this evening btw
as far as I could tell i was the only one what noticed
this makes TWO (2) trannies i seen on the brown line
i was all chill about it, but i made sure none of that tranny juice got on me
happyfeet (831175) — 6/4/2015 @ 5:31 pmElissa, since we cross posted, I would be interested if you have any comment after reading my comment at 5:20.
BTW, see this:
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 6/4/2015 @ 5:31 pmhttps://patterico.com/2015/06/04/hillary-clinton-my-speech-will-be-my-interview/#comment-1766968
for additional reason to think things are bad.
I don’t have any pearls to clutch, but I guess if I just shut up and get with the program I can find some…
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 6/4/2015 @ 5:33 pmI’m told one can start without having any surgery…
First they said SSM was the same as hetero,
so I said, “OK, it doesn’t affect me”.
Then they said I had to not only say
“Ok, live and let live”
but that I had to agree
and if I didn’t,
shut up and act like it
or there will be consequences.
Now they say,
“Transexualism is normal, encourage the kids who think that way to stay with it,
(ignore the data)
and applaud the heroism of those who get the surgery
(again, ignore the data).
How many times do we need to see this repeated?
At times all of history seems to be nothing more than a prelude of things to come.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 6/4/2015 @ 5:44 pm1984 and Brave New World were how to manuals
just like To Serve Man
TRANSGENDER TROOPS NEXT?: The NYT editorial board, “Let Transgender Troops Serve Openly.” Magic 8-Ball says, “Reply hazy. Try again.”
– Instapundit
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 6/4/2015 @ 6:35 pmHi Kishnevi
Can you not say this about almost any medical procedure?
Gil (27c98f) — 6/4/2015 @ 6:35 pmFor example there are children born with heart defects resulting in murmurs. Some are surgically corrected. Did God not know what he was doing when he created them?
Left… Left… Left Left Left
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 6/4/2015 @ 6:37 pmNo all she had to do was sell some flowers.
Gil (27c98f) — 6/4/2015 @ 6:42 pmGil…Aging is part and parcel of human experience. Heart defects are not.
kishnevi (adea75) — 6/4/2015 @ 6:44 pmThat sounds like special pleading to me. They were part of the human experience for thousands of years before we knew about them.
Gil (27c98f) — 6/4/2015 @ 6:46 pmelissa (b44a09) — 6/4/2015 @ 5:23 pm
Just as we have the right to ignore Jenner, the ACLU, the SPLC, etc., you have the right to ignore me clutching my pearls. So why have you got your lace hankie in a knot over it?
It’s not Jenner having his belated epiphany that angers me. It’s the normalization, indeed the celebration of that which is untrue that angers me. It’s the propaganda fed our young that Jimmy and Johnny getting married is natural and normal – and the fact that if the young question that, they will be branded bigots and haters – that angers me. It’s the propaganda fed our young that the physical attributes of a particular gender are irrelevant, that you are whatever sex you feel like today – and the fact that if the young question that, they will be branded bigots and haters – that angers me. It is the pervasive pop culture of lies, where 52% of adults think that at least 25% of the population is gay or lesbian, when only 1.7% of the population identifies as being gay or lesbian – that angers me.
Walter Cronanty (f48cd5) — 6/4/2015 @ 6:56 pmYour choosing to ignore those lies is just sad.
Why do so many of you smart independent-minded people appear to be so scared and angry and intimidated by the magazine cover and this obviously manufactured PR campaign?
I’m not worried about me, elissa. When the SJWs try to harass me into using their proscribed language, I can tell them to go commit an auto-sexual act.
But I do worry about that schoolkid, pre-teen or teenager, who is going to be bullied into having all of the “correct” positions on these matters. It will be led by the educrats who will cluck with disapproval if little Juan or Shima doesn’t show the requisite elation about the fact that Timmy now has two different home lives with his divorced parents, one with two daddies and another with two mommies and a daddy. All lifestyle choices deserve celebration and love can’t be defined by uptight society’s outdated norms, Juan and Shima will be told. And when one of Timmy’s daddies decides to become a mommy, and one of Timmy’s mommies decides that she doesn’t want to be considered either a daddy or a mommy just an androgynous “parent,” why, Juan and Shima will be told that they have to accept and celebrate that as perfectly normal and healthy or else they are bigoted haters and there’s no way the school’s teachers will ever write them a recommendation letter to Stanford.
Haven’t you seen that this is how the SJW left operates? Forget trying to appeal to adults, the real payoff is in indoctrinating children. They brag that same-sex marriage and transgenderism is highly supported by the under 30 crowd. Well no s*** Sherlock, that group has only had these ideas drilled into their heads since they started in school and the teacher read to them “Heather Has Two Mommies.” And, as you’ve no doubt noticed, today’s young social justice warriors are all about trying to restrict speech they don’t like by blathering on about “triggers” and “micro aggressions” and “hate speech.” You think they are going to chill out once they start taking jobs in education and as government bureaucrats?
JVW (8278a3) — 6/4/2015 @ 6:59 pmWalter Cronanty and I were thinking the same thoughts at the same moment. I am pleased to be in such august company
JVW (8278a3) — 6/4/2015 @ 7:01 pmGil (27c98f) — 6/4/2015 @ 6:42 pm
She sold flowers to the gay man, she just wouldn’t participate in his wedding to another man. If you think florists only “sell some flowers” when they do a wedding, you’re misinformed.
Walter Cronanty (f48cd5) — 6/4/2015 @ 7:03 pm222.
kishnevi (9c4b9c) — 6/4/2015 @ 7:15 pmGil, we all know people with heart defects and people who do not have heart defects.
We all know people who get older, and people who do not get older…wait, we don’t because everyone gets older. Or dies.
IOW aging is universal, heart defects are not.
JVW (8278a3) — 6/4/2015 @ 7:01 pm
Walter Cronanty (f48cd5) — 6/4/2015 @ 7:17 pmI think you said it well, I think MD in Philly said it well more than once, and I think DRJ, at 164, said it exceedingly well:
Awaiting replies from carlitos and elissa.
I can see and understand someone disagreeing, thinking that SSM is fine and to disagree is being a discriminating bigot and should be punished,
and ditto for encouraging transsexuals,
but I’m starting to think I’m being played by people who want to act as it they understand the concern but they poo-poo it.
Many of us seem to think this is a pretty obvious trajectory. I can understand disagreement, I am frankly puzzled by disregard for the obvious.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 6/4/2015 @ 7:41 pm“I’m starting to think I’m being played by people who want to act as it they understand the concern but they poo-poo it.”
Doc, I once said we were kindred spirits, and you replied “perhaps.” we are on the same page again.
felipe (56556d) — 6/4/2015 @ 7:46 pmOK. So, JVW, Walter, and Doc–Did you formally contact or tweet GLAAD, Vanity Fair, ValJar, Bruce Jenner’s agent, your congressman, select presidential candidates, and ACLU to express your anger at the normalization or legitimizing of gender dysphoria? Did you write a letter to the editor of your newspaper? Have you asked to meet with your local administration, PTO, or school board to discuss the ramifications of sexual indoctrination of children and how they plan to handle any potential issue of gender transitions and bathrooms? Have you posted the WSJ article about the John Hopkins study on your facebook page or on your neighborhood listserv?
Or is kvetching and handwringing on a right leaning blog the more effective way to fight the good fight?
elissa (b44a09) — 6/4/2015 @ 7:46 pmCrocodile Dundee offering to buy Bruce Jenner a beer at the pub.
Trigger warning – Has a moment of pearl clutching and possibly the tranny juice.
We have no need for a Bruce at the GOP convention. He is a poster child for people letting the Wookie win.
A phony, a counterfeit, a prop, a tool, a strump for money, anything for a buck loser, who lets the girls push him around because it’s easier than taking a stand for something. Anything. even his balls are negotiable rather than face the slightest bit of Mother K’s ire.
Be a man you willowing simp.
papertiger (c2d6da) — 6/4/2015 @ 7:59 pmOk, elissa, are you now saying we have a very legitimate concern that we are voicing, and you want to know what we are doing about it in addition to discussing it here?
or,
are you trying a diversion after an attempt at subterfuge has been called out?
Previously you did not say we had a point but were just fiddling with our pearls instead of doing something about it,
but you chastised us for being scared and intimidated for no real reason:
The only way any person here is “being told what to say or what pronouns to use” about Bruce/Caitlyn is if they give someone else that power over them. So don’t. Why do so many of you smart independent-minded people appear to be so scared and angry and intimidated by the magazine cover and this obviously manufactured PR campaign?
It seems like carlitos’ question switching when he knew I had already answered.
Doc, I once said we were kindred spirits, and you replied “perhaps.” we are on the same page again.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 6/4/2015 @ 8:01 pmI don’t remember the details of the exchange, I certainly didn’t mean to create an unpleasant divide.
felipe (56556d) — 6/4/2015 @ 7:46 pm
Good heavens, no, doc! I have never felt a divide. I meant “we are on the same page YET again.”
felipe (56556d) — 6/4/2015 @ 8:10 pmWe can only do what we can, elissa. For my part, I looked at my parts and solemnly promised them that I was keeping them.
nk (dbc370) — 6/4/2015 @ 8:13 pmelissa, I have contacted my elected representatives about my concerns. The sum total of which amounts to I am now on Sam Johnson’s (Republican 3rd district) fund raising list.
As far as contacting GLAAD or Vanity Fair and telling them to stop winning cuz it’s not fair, you’re kidding, right?
Steve57 (6a0485) — 6/4/2015 @ 8:13 pmelissa (b44a09) — 6/4/2015 @ 7:46 pm
Walter Cronanty (f48cd5) — 6/4/2015 @ 8:15 pmI will admit that most of my kvetching, and I hope not too much handwringing, have been done on right leaning blogs. I have, however, gotten bolder lately, posting on Politico, WaPo, and even the NYT [talk about pearls before swine], and a couple of other sites I can’t remember now, but are generally centrist, like, say, Politico, and I got into a pretty good argument over at Real Clear Politics.
Probably the boldest thing I did was contradict a “friend” on Facebook, a former colleague [I just retired about 9 months ago] at the Cuyahoga County Prosecutor’s Office. We have several “mutual friends” who are also former colleagues. To say Cuyahoga County is D land is an understatement, and my former colleague [who I still consider a friend] is quite liberal, as are the vast majority of our mutual friends. I didn’t get flamed or unfriended, but I’m used to keeping my political views to myself around here, especially when I was employed by Cuyahoga County.
Consider it brainstorming.
If you’re looking for an effective way to push back against the media narrative I thought up a way.
MG alluded to the weakest point of Bruce’s claim to have found his authentic self.
Let us fully indulge his psychosis by sending a reasonably priced tool, care of the station hosting the Bruce Jenner Show, so he can complete the transition.
papertiger (c2d6da) — 6/4/2015 @ 8:19 pm233 MD in Philly (f9371b) — 6/4/2015 @ 8:01 pm
Walter Cronanty (f48cd5) — 6/4/2015 @ 8:20 pmVery good point.
Need I remind you that I am still the President of the MD fan club? Time for a reminder to all our cohort.
Md fan club official song (sung to the tune of “Hard rock candy mountain.” (with gentle corrections)
In the great big MD fan club
our clinics will make you grin
where you can walk right out again
as soon as you are in.
No rectal examinations
no scalpels, saws, nor pricks
You get to have your way
where you sleep all day
’cause we hung the jerk
that invented work
in the great big MD fan club!
felipe (56556d) — 6/4/2015 @ 8:23 pm236. At least you are not on a Democratic fundraising list.
(He is fundraising? Guess he does not believe in retirement.)
The only thing I can do about my Congressperson (Debbie!) is to hope she gets offered ambassadorship to Israel or something.
kishnevi (9c4b9c) — 6/4/2015 @ 8:30 pmPlease, just bark up the right tree. I get that you’re pissed off in general. But when in posts your’re seemingly trying to conflate things like SSM, and cake bakers and Chelsea Manning’s in the brig taxpayer “treatment”, and Bruce Jenner’s reality show, and an 8 year old “transgender” being facilitated by his parents and school, as if all those situations are one “thing” and have a single cause. or a single solution– that is not productive argumentation. It’s not subterfuge or diversion or denial on my part to say I’m not going to play that game with you. Sorry.
elissa (b44a09) — 6/4/2015 @ 8:39 pmWhat exactly do people have the right to be concerned about? What topics are okay for people to get their lace undergarments in a bunch, or clutch their pearls over?
JD (28ecb0) — 6/4/2015 @ 8:50 pmElissa, what do you think of this:
Dana (86e864) — 6/4/2015 @ 8:51 pmDana – quit clutching your pearls.
JD (28ecb0) — 6/4/2015 @ 8:52 pmYou keep clutching your pearls and your face will get stuck that way.
papertiger (c2d6da) — 6/4/2015 @ 8:54 pm==As far as contacting GLAAD or Vanity Fair and telling them to stop winning cuz it’s not fair, you’re kidding, right?==
Steve57-No I am not kidding. Jim Treacher, Ace, Patterico, IowaHawk, Instapundit and others less well known have burned up the twitters on a variety of subjects with mocking and witty push backs against our leftist overlords and their memes. It gets noticed!
****
== I looked at my parts and solemnly promised them that I was keeping them.==
nk, ah yes. “From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs.” Really, it’s all we can ask of you. 🙂
***
==Probably the boldest thing I did was contradict a “friend” on Facebook, a former colleague [I just retired about 9 months ago] at the Cuyahoga County Prosecutor’s Office. We have several “mutual friends” who are also former colleagues. To say Cuyahoga County is D land is an understatement, and my former colleague [who I still consider a friend] is quite liberal, as are the vast majority of our mutual friends. I didn’t get flamed or unfriended, but I’m used to keeping my political views to myself around here, especially when I was employed by Cuyahoga County.==
Walter, good on you. This takes courage. By formulating and perfecting such contrarian arguments you are also likely to produce more effect that contributing to a circular love fest where everybody basically agrees.
elissa (b44a09) — 6/4/2015 @ 8:58 pmJD–obtuse much, darling? It’s not the “concern” or the “topic”– it’s the manner in which one addresses or confronts the topic, or in some cases simply decides that the topic does not meet a level for outrage that particular day.
Playing the eternal victim, the “ooooh” poor us” “they’re at it again”, “the sky is falling”, “they’re telling me how to think”, “we’re helpless babes against the progressive onslaught”, “we’re doomed, DOOMED”, that makes me nuts. I do consider pearl clutching to be rather charming in certain circumstances, but not a terribly effective counter tactic or a conservative trait in general when trying to influence change or meet a challenge. Andrew Breitbart was a genius and understood how this game needed to be played. I miss him.
elissa (b44a09) — 6/4/2015 @ 9:25 pmSo to sum up. You stated that face lifts try to deny the reality of aging and therefore claim God did not know what he was doing during creation. You’ve clarified above.
How about reading glasses or Lasik surgery to correct far sightedness which naturally occurs in all humans as they age? Are those too claiming God didnt know what he was doing? What about confinement to Earth? That used to be universal. Were the first astronauts claiming God didnt know what he was doing or were they using tools that God put here as he intended? Why cant the same be said about face lifts? How do you know God didnt intend for us to perform facelifts?
Seem absurd? Maybe. Im just doing something our good friend Rush does. Pointing out absurdity by being absurd.
Gil (27c98f) — 6/4/2015 @ 9:29 pmWhile being told how to talk and think about Jenner, SSM and its mandate of participation, and an 8 year old “transgender” being facilitated by his parents and school are not a “single thing,” they emanate from the same source and are aimed at obtaining the same goal.
You don’t want to play? I don’t think you’ll have a choice.
Walter Cronanty (f48cd5) — 6/4/2015 @ 9:32 pmIf push back didn’t work Huffpo wouldn’t have moderators.
papertiger (c2d6da) — 6/4/2015 @ 9:48 pmCan’t we all be friends? Really, you guys.
Ag80 (eb6ffa) — 6/4/2015 @ 9:56 pmIf God didn’t want us to do facelifts or cosmetic surgery, He’d either have told us not to, or made it impossible. He made a world in which such surgeries are possible, and let us discover how to do them; that’s proof enough that He’s OK with them.
Milhouse (a0cc5c) — 6/4/2015 @ 9:58 pmThe same goes for genetic engineering and space travel: if He didn’t want us to do it it wouldn’t work.
Milhouse (a0cc5c) — 6/4/2015 @ 9:59 pmGil is pig ignorant
JD (3b5483) — 6/4/2015 @ 10:01 pmYes I have a choice. We all do.
elissa (b44a09) — 6/4/2015 @ 10:07 pmI’m not being obtuse, elissa. I am trying to figure out how exactly you propose we address this, if at all. Maybe you can explain it to me, Sweetie. How should i explain it to my 13 year old when she asks about it? Do you agree that Caitlyn Jenner won a gold medal in the decathalon? Do you think a man can appropriate womanhood by claiming to be a woman? If he cuts off his junk, do you think he is no longer a man? What makes someone a woman? Or is that pearl clutching, honey?
JD (3b5483) — 6/4/2015 @ 10:10 pmThe ACLU is calling the use of the wrong pronoun a hate crime,’comparable to actual violence. It is surreal.
JD (3b5483) — 6/4/2015 @ 10:12 pmIm not the one claiming to know that an omnipotent, timeless all knowing sky god created us with the intent that we age naturally and to perform a face lift is to claim he doesnt know what he is doing.
And also, Millhouse is on my side! Well at least he isnt claiming that the aforementioned skygod is against face lifts.
Gil (27c98f) — 6/4/2015 @ 10:22 pmJD-I think you are smart and articulate and perfectly capable of explaining it all to your daughter in your own way and that you will do a great job. Parents have been doing this sort of intervention and teaching kids about their family’s beliefs and values for centuries–often having had to counteract or contradict outside pressure and influence from their peers. Ultimately as a free thinking person our kids eventually decide for themselves about a lot of things including religion and politics. When one is actively addressing something–like teaching values and historical context to their children– that is the farthest thing possible from what I consider to be pearl clutching.
elissa (b44a09) — 6/4/2015 @ 10:26 pmI think if a man has surgery and now looks like a woman under her clothes, and acts like a woman, and walks and quacks like a woman, then she’s a woman, or close enough to make no difference. But he doesn’t become one just by waking up one morning and deciding. And nobody gets to dictate to other people what they should be called.
And yes, Caitlyn Jenner did win gold in the men’s decathlon at Montreal, just as Billie Jean King won the women’s double at Wimbledon in 1961, when her name was Moffitt, and Margaret Court won a grand slam in 1962, when her name was Smith, and Pope Benedict XVI deserted from the German army when his name was Joseph. It is standard practise to refer to a person by their current name, even when mentioning things they did when they had a different name.
Milhouse (a0cc5c) — 6/4/2015 @ 10:36 pmelissa,
I’m still interested in hearing your views on this:
I believe there is a big-picture to look at, with long-term consequences. To me, that is what is concerning. Not Jenner or the hoopla, but to see the momentum of the pendulum and the strength of the left in propelling it further. What’s being hijacked will have very long term consequences on our society and it will certainly impact that which if far more than just social media, reality television or the interwebs.
And honestly, elissa, I’m surprised to hear the vehemence in your accusations of victimhood, whining and pearl clutching. It doesn’t sound like you. It’s emotional and bordering on flippancy. I guess I don’t see the pearl clutching. Adults are discussing a unique subject and its implications. Responses from ranging from a dismissive who cares? to a deep concern. All interesting to me.
You asked others what they have done about the problem, aside from their supposed kvetching and hand wringing. I wrote a post about. A post that I thought about and attempted to express my concerns with word police taking advantage of a situation. Does that pass the credibility standard? Because I really don’t know where the bar is set in order to receive your approval of my concerns.
Dana (86e864) — 6/4/2015 @ 10:44 pmEn, not “approval”… Can’t think of the right word, it’s late. But I trust you get my drift.
Dana (86e864) — 6/4/2015 @ 10:50 pmOMG. Fireworks at the fairgrounds. The rubber meets the road where Justice meets mercy.
felipe (56556d) — 6/4/2015 @ 10:51 pmAnd so at Hopkins we stopped doing sex-reassignment surgery, since producing a “satisfied” but still troubled patient seemed an inadequate reason for surgically amputating normal organs.
That about sums up the reality not colored or distorted by do-gooder, I’m-okay-you’re-okay sentiment.
I wonder how Jenner would deal with gender differences if he suddenly found himself among primitive tribal people in, say, the jungles of South America? In a place where modern-day trappings associated with the two basic genders amongst humans don’t exist? Simply put, some of the framework of male or female — including clothing and facial decoration, if you will — is heightened due to modern-day Western culture.
Mark (a11af2) — 6/4/2015 @ 10:59 pmMark, this happens every time Bruce urinates. You are your own worst critic.
felipe (56556d) — 6/4/2015 @ 11:15 pmIf you ever visit the Jenner household don’t eat the pickles.
papertiger (c2d6da) — 6/4/2015 @ 11:59 pmMy opinions mean no more and no less than any other person’s here. I feel I have answered and yes, defended myself in far more posts this evening than anyone else. I have no problem with your original post or you. I have no problem with JD or Walter or Doc. I am sorry if I have disappointed you. I am sorry that all my attempts to explain here and elsewhere have failed. I accept that I have apparently been so inarticulate that my thoughts are still not able to be understood. I don’t think at this point and at this late hour there will be much value in continuing.
Now, what is left to say about this :
It is a beautifully written and poignant statement. It tugs at us from the get go because we all here I think want America to still be the America we grew up in for our progeny. We conservatives do not like change in general . But as beautifully as it’s written do you deny that it also reads of defeatism and victimhood? Do you deny that it suggests it’s already too late to fix? Does “discussing” sex changes and “related topics” really have to be the same as “celebrating” them? Is all of our country really that gullible? What about all the other factors that are part of modern society that have altered the views of today’s children as well? Do responsible parents and grandparents not still have considerable influence on their children’s morals and values? Is this *really* the tipping point some people seem to think it is?
elissa (b44a09) — 6/5/2015 @ 12:01 amYes it is. Buy a bunker. Did you hear gays are marrying in Europe somewhere?
Steve started the doomsday clock already.
Now some dude wants to lop off his penis!
In my day you fell asleep and your wife cut it off and threw it on the side of the road (Hat tip John W Bobbit)
And then some newspaper has the nerve to print “You know that dude with the missing penis, well its not cool if you call him a “He”” So now as you can tell we are forced into making our children gay.
Its over. Its the end times.
Gil (27c98f) — 6/5/2015 @ 12:21 amGood news though. Jesus is coming back! March on Christian soldiers!
No, ellisa,our country is not that gullible. It is only represented that way by the msm.
felipe (56556d) — 6/5/2015 @ 12:25 amJesse James was no sissy, although Evelyn Waugh likely was (he was British and it’s the same thing). Still, they were men. So ok, what’s in a name? But circus strongman turned bearded lady Caitlyn nee Bruce Jenner is not a woman.
nk (dbc370) — 6/5/2015 @ 4:54 amAmericans and American reporters voluntarily do what the Nazi and Communist parties had to order.
ErisGuy (76f8a7) — 6/5/2015 @ 5:03 amBruce Jenner self-identifying as a female has affected you and your life how, exactly?
None, of course. Just Polanski’s raping a girl hasn’t effect my life either.
ErisGuy (76f8a7) — 6/5/2015 @ 5:05 amWe will only know what the tipping point is some point after we have passed it. I actually think we passed it sometime ago before Caitlyn arrived on the scene, barring a significant spiritual revival. Maybe it was when the public supported Bill Clinton staying in office when any other CEO in the nation would have been forced to resign. Maybe it was before that, and the Clinton episode was when the ship started seriously listing. Maybe it was somewhere between 0 and 10 million babies legally killed by abortion.
Actually discussing the issue on websites like this is exactly what we need to do, Elissa. I don’t see much point in arguing with the self-proclaimed intellectual and moral elite 1-5% of the country driving these things, they are not going to change their mind.
If anything is to be done, it is not to repeat the mistake of the last 20 years, which was to let a small minority redefine marriage. People could have said same sex couples can have freedom to do what they want, but you can’t change the definition of marriage.
But no, everyone fell for the “they just want to do what they want, who will it hurt?” lie.
“Lucy, where’s the football?”
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 6/5/2015 @ 5:15 amIs all of our country really that gullible?
elissa (b44a09) — 6/5/2015 @ 12:01 am
Ask Brendan Eich.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 6/5/2015 @ 5:18 amGil – thanks for being so predictable.
JD (80704a) — 6/5/2015 @ 5:32 amhttp://www.nationalreview.com/article/419347/liberals-now-find-gender-identity-itself-oppressive-jonah-goldberg
narciso (ee1f88) — 6/5/2015 @ 6:46 amI think the turning point in the modern culture war was Bill Clinton and his definition of sex, but I’m not sure it matters when it happened. America will never go back to traditional family values because the changes we’re seeing aren’t just changing cultural and sexual norms that ebb and flow through history. These changes have been institutionalized under the law.
I agree with elissa that families can still share our values with our children and grandchildren, but I disagree that will be enough. The schools, media, culture and now the law will work against us instead of supporting us, making it much harder to sustain those values. Further, the millions of children who don’t have strong families will be at the whim of the latest cultural fad, scam, outrage or magazine cover. That is a poor way to instill values, and I think values are a part of what made America great.
But I haven’t given up on our lives even though I am not optimistic about our culture, elissa. We still have capitalism, a powerful force that I hope a Republican President can unburden from Obama’s excessive regulations. Also, I think we have a more energized populace working in their communities and States across this country, and that could also be a turning point for America.
DRJ (e80d46) — 6/5/2015 @ 7:30 amanother fallacy – you really aren’t on your game lately, DRJ.
http://www.logicallyfallacious.com/index.php/logical-fallacies/43-appeal-to-tradition
http://www.logicallyfallacious.com/index.php/logical-fallacies/43-appeal-to-tradition
carlitos (c24ed5) — 6/5/2015 @ 7:34 amI like discussions like this and it’s what drew me to this website many years ago. It’s not a conservative echo chamber. Disagreeing about topics and looking for common ground isn’t always pleasant, but it can be a good way to generate ideas and find answers.
DRJ (e80d46) — 6/5/2015 @ 7:37 amWhy would your child hate transsexuals??? Is this something you taught her? If so, why?
And? How did Jimmy and Johnny’s wedding hurt you?
MD – I hope you realize that I really do like you, but the above is not a coherent argument for anything. You being “personally annoyed” is kind of OK in my America.
carlitos (c24ed5) — 6/5/2015 @ 7:42 amI believe Judeo-Christian values are a large part of American success, carlitos. They may be old values but they are good ones.
DRJ (e80d46) — 6/5/2015 @ 7:45 amSeriously, carlitos? Who says appeal to tradition is a fallacy? Somebody who denies accumulated knowledge and experience because it conflicts with his delusion of what the world should be?
nk (dbc370) — 6/5/2015 @ 7:45 amPlease share a source for this claim. Thanks.
carlitos (c24ed5) — 6/5/2015 @ 7:46 am“The question originally asked by you carlitos, that I said we cross posted on, was when were any of us personally affected by the ACLU.
Well, I don’t have to wait to see a child deal with being called a transsexual hater in the future,
I’ve got a child going into public high school where she will be told to think SSM is wonderful and shut up.
Why would your child hate transsexuals??? Is this something you taught her? If so, why?”
You are better than this. Nobody said their child hated transsexuals.
JD (80704a) — 6/5/2015 @ 7:49 amFurthermore, carlitos, you are still a jerk because you said I threatened you. You are the one person at this website to whom I have no interest in talking.
DRJ (e80d46) — 6/5/2015 @ 7:49 amcarlitos – The Southern Poverty Law Center has declared Caitlyn Jenner a Hate Group.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 6/5/2015 @ 7:49 amhttp://www.gallup.com/poll/147824/adults-estimate-americans-gay-lesbian.aspx
JD (80704a) — 6/5/2015 @ 7:50 amEveryone who understands informal logic, including some Greek dudes from 2000 years ago. I think maybe Aristotle, but I’m not positive.
carlitos (c24ed5) — 6/5/2015 @ 7:50 amthey probably thought they could keep their doctor too, I bet,
narciso (ee1f88) — 6/5/2015 @ 7:54 amGallup: US adults estimate 25% of Americans are gay, with “those with lower incomes, the less educated, women, and young people” giving the highest estimates. The actual percentage of gays is unknown but probably 3.5% or less.
DRJ (e80d46) — 6/5/2015 @ 7:54 amWould you give me your permission to post the entirety of the email exchange I had with Patterico on this? I still believe that you are mis-remembering this episode.
carlitos (c24ed5) — 6/5/2015 @ 7:59 amDude, your understanding of Rhetoric 101 is sophomoric, not to say ridiculous:
nk (dbc370) — 6/5/2015 @ 8:01 am— nk, why do you walk by putting one foot in front of the other?
— That’s how everybody’s always done it, carlitos.
— Aha, argument by tradition. That’s a fallacy, nk. The Ministry of Silly Walks begs to differ and I think you should have an open mind. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iV2ViNJFZC8
So it’s just about misplaced name-calling? Who is calling whom a “transsexual hater” and why?
There has been misplaced name-calling about every cause in recent history. Witness the oft-used sarcastic “racist” comment here, which hits home because of its truthiness in how misapplied the label is by the PC crowd.
carlitos (c24ed5) — 6/5/2015 @ 8:01 am“Everyone who understands informal logic, including some Greek dudes from 2000 years ago. I think maybe Aristotle, but I’m not positive.”
carlitos – Please share sources for these claims.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 6/5/2015 @ 8:01 amThanks DRJ – that’s kind of shocking. Then again, less-educated Americans believe in a lot of crazy stuff. But 25%? Wow. Off by an order of magnitude. People suck at statistics.
carlitos (c24ed5) — 6/5/2015 @ 8:04 amDaley – I have a call with my boss in 25, but will get back to you later.
carlitos (c24ed5) — 6/5/2015 @ 8:05 amCarlitos – as we have learned in the last few days, using an incorrect name or even pronoun is considered a hate crime. He never suggested his child hated anyone. Being accused of hatred and actually hating are topics that usually are completely divorced from reality.
JD (80704a) — 6/5/2015 @ 8:05 amwhy do they believe this drivel, because one in four characters on practically any show are gay, they even started on the teansgender path some years ago,
narciso (ee1f88) — 6/5/2015 @ 8:09 amWho knew Milhouse hated science?
JD (80704a) — 6/5/2015 @ 8:10 amConsidering that the entertainment industry has always been the haven of homosexuals and worse, narciso ….
nk (dbc370) — 6/5/2015 @ 8:14 ammeanwhile back on planet earth:
http://legalinsurrection.com/2015/06/baltimore-mayors-staffers-jumping-ship/
narciso (ee1f88) — 6/5/2015 @ 8:17 am274 MD in Philly (f9371b) — 6/5/2015 @ 5:15 am
I totally agree, and I don’t see a spiritual revival coming.
I believe in a grand, over-arching theory that is as old as Lucifer’s fall and says we, meaning the US and the society/culture we had, are ultimately doomed. I’ve thought about this for some time and have at various times tried to put it in writing, but have failed. Nonetheless, here goes.
Man has always searched for, or believed in, some sort supreme being or beings. In the US, we largely believed in a Judeo-Christian God, in a broad sense of that concept. Our society/government was set up so that differences in our beliefs would be, for the most part, allowed as our founders knew that a government set up as a theocracy is not only bad government, but also bad theology [the Islamist Caliphate obviously doesn’t believe that absolute power corrupts absolutely]. Thus, there was a hierarchy of “rulers” if you will. There was the Creator spoken of in our Declaration of Independence who gave humans certain inalienable rights, and then there was government, which was created to protect those inalienable rights.
Our God was a just God, who set forth some basic laws, with more complex rules and regulations for the Jews, which, if one broke those laws, one committed a sin for which he must seek atonement. Thus, there was a supreme being who would mete out justice, even if government didn’t. So for believers, the fact that the government didn’t catch you doing something wrong, or if what you did was morally wrong, but not legally wrong, you likely skated today. But, the fact remained that if not atoned for, your sin would lead punishment down the road. This was a deterrent to “sinning.”
Then came, for want of a better word, the “leftists” who claimed not to believe in God. But, of course, they were lying. They merely removed the top tier of the hierarchy and government became god. This was attractive for several reasons, but I believe its largest attraction was what caused Lucifer’s fall – the leftists, through government, want to become god.
In the leftists’ eyes, if one controls the government, then one controls what is “sin.” No more having to obey what some deity says – there are no absolute truths. Instead, the leftists get to dictate what is right or wrong, moral or immoral.
Now this is powerful stuff. No more worrying about some supreme being judging you at some time in the future. Now, you are judged exclusively by the government. And if you control the government and if you determine what is right and what is wrong, then you will forever be sinless and never be judged to have fallen short. Not only that, you get to dictate to non-believers in your god what they must believe, what they may say how they must live.
The attractiveness of being god leads to the ends justifying the means. If you lie, cheat and steal to become god, and are successful, who will judge you? What is there to judge? You’re god.
In the process of becoming god, you must disabuse others of the notion that there is some other supreme being. Thus, the leftists claim God is dead, all the while hiding the fact that their goal is to become god. The moral teachings of the Bible are relentlessly attacked and belittled, while the new bible of government laws, rules and regulations – written by leftists and multiplying like the loaves and fishes – takes its place.
I remember when the left said you couldn’t legislate morality. Yet, look at what they’ve done to Brendan Eich, the grandmother florist, etc. They’ve leaked confidential IRS documents to gay/lesbian groups. They’ve sicced the IRS, OSHA, FTA and FBI on a woman who had the temerity to ensure only legal voters vote – what a quaint notion that. An upper echelon IRS official takes the 5th before Congress for targeting conservative groups [Nixon wishes he could have had such pliant IRS]. But when the objective is to be god, there are no rules of combat.
As believers in God, but not in god, we are ill-equipped to fight such a battle. A basic belief in honesty in this war is a major impediment [remember when Obama said of gay marriage: “I believe that marriage is the union between a man and a woman. Now, for me as a Christian — for me — for me as a Christian, it is also a sacred union. God’s in the mix” at the Saddleback Presidential Forum? What a crass, despicable lie]. When you don’t believe in coming to power by buying votes through government giveaways of other citizens money, you are at a severe strategic disadvantage. When you believe in free speech and the free interchange of ideas, you are tactically handcuffed against an enemy who believes in speech codes that they write and who will smear you as a bigot, a hater, and try to ban your speech as hate speech because it doesn’t comport with the morality they’ve created.
So, I believe we are doomed here in the US to become a nightmarish, leftist hell hole. It won’t happen tomorrow, or next year, but the slide into the abyss is quickening. There is no doubt in my mind that my grandsons will never experience the freedom or have the opportunities that I had. Sad.
Walter Cronanty (f48cd5) — 6/5/2015 @ 8:21 ambut the above is not a coherent argument for anything. You being “personally annoyed” is kind of OK in my America.
carlitos (c24ed5) — 6/5/2015 @ 7:42 am .
I see JD that you have already disputed with carlitos about his take on what I thought was the OBVIOUS point that I was not talking about “hatred” in any way other than the idea that to not be in 100% lockstep with the approved thinking and references out loud was to be considered “hateful”.
Seriously, for my sanity check of the week.
was my argument coherent to the rest of you?
nk, Simon, what do you say?
As I said above, I actually thought it was quite obvious, like 3 coming after 1 and 2;
one could disagree, or agree with what I suggest but think it would be a good thing.
I don’t think I’m either that incoherent or that brilliant that I can’t be followed.
Besides, this is through a keyboard with a standard font, you can’t claim it is my handwriting.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 6/5/2015 @ 8:21 amif we just had one day each year to reflect on the unsung role trannies play in all of our lives
one of those days where we don’t get no mail
we could call it Tranny Day!
and have parties with bean dip and corn chips
and hallmark cards and everyone could just pay it forward
Happy Tranny Day the smiling people would say to each other
back atcha neighbor!
happyfeet (a037ad) — 6/5/2015 @ 8:27 amI understood what you were saying, MD. The “responses” to what you said not so much. They were “coherent” in the sense that “hater, shut up” is coherent — but using a lot more words.
BTW, elissa, “Each according to his ability” is just as much a social obligation as “to each according to his need”.
nk (dbc370) — 6/5/2015 @ 8:29 amAgreed, Walter.
A version of Romans 1
Societies have revived, then they coast along on the influence of revival for awhile, and then they either die or have another Great Awakening.
The one hopeful thing about Great Awakenings is that they do not come because they are deserved, but because they are needed.
I remember growing up in the 70’s, then even into the 80’s. Sure there was sex outside of marriage, but in many parts of the culture it was still frowned upon and seen as second best.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 6/5/2015 @ 8:34 amFor years now to believe sex is appropriate only within marriage makes one Amish in the eyes of the larger culture.
Thanks, nk.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 6/5/2015 @ 8:36 am“Description: Using historical preferences of the people (tradition), either in general or as specific as the historical preferences of a single individual, as evidence that the historical preference is correct.”
carlitos – The problem with your excerpts from pop-psychologist self-help guru Bo Bennett is that DRJ did provide explanations of why she thought the traditions made sense, which you conveniently ignored. That places them outside the definition of your self-help buddy’s definition of the fallacy.
Very intellectually dishonest of you to ignore the substance of DRJ’s comments and then insult her as well. After all, from the same page on Bennett’s website comes:
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 6/5/2015 @ 8:38 amremember how Iraq made them do it, was the pretext, well shoddy crime control, was the proximate answer:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/06/04/how-france-let-the-charlie-hebdo-killers-go-free.html
narciso (ee1f88) — 6/5/2015 @ 8:45 amonce we start celebrating National Tranny Day we’ll have oodles of new traditions Mr. daley!
parades and bunting I’m telling you it’s gonna be a New Day
happyfeet (a037ad) — 6/5/2015 @ 8:45 amFreud the basis for most of the this, studied the deranged in Vienna society, and extrapolated that as the norm, the category error goes from there on,
narciso (ee1f88) — 6/5/2015 @ 8:49 amOk, genius. If referring to accumulated knowledge and tradition is a “fallacy,” then why does our legal system refer to customs and tradition to determine whether or not something is actually a fundamental right?
Here are a couple of examples.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/law-jan-june10-guns1_06-28/
Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972)
The latter is a not-so-random example as the court decision had to do with a parent’s ability to direct the education of his or her own progeny. Which is the basis for JD’s objection to what his child will be taught as the “new normal.” And as the court has ruled it is beyond debate that he has that right.
Pierce v. Society of Sisters (1925)
The recent events in Virginia’s Fairfax county school system show beyond a shadow of a doubt that things have flipped 180 degrees. Whereas once a government would have to show that parent was harming a child by teaching them something that was wrong and dangerous, now the now the government itself through its public schools is a form of systematic child abuse. The feds forced Fairfax county to allow “transgendered” children to choose the bathrooms, locker rooms, and showers of their choice, screw the privacy interests of all the other children. And since no such children exist, they forced the Fairfax county schools to adopt a curriculum of “gender fluidity.” I.E. a course of instruction designed to invent such children, contrary to their parents’ wishes.
So, JD’s concerns are well founded. Your criteria, that one must wait until personally harmed, is a fallacy. Poland didn’t need to wait until the Wehrmacht crossed its borders to be justifiably concerned; it only needed to see the Wehrmacht in the Czechoslovakia’s Sudetenland. The Baltic states don’t need to wait until Putin’s army is crossing their borders, they can see what it’s doing in Ukraine.
But why is it a “fallacy” for our legal system to defer to tradition when determining whether or not something is a fundamental right, carlitos? You think you’re the only guy who ever heard of Aristotle?
Steve57 (6a0485) — 6/5/2015 @ 8:51 amCorrect me if I’m wrong, JD. I was outlining the basis for what I understood to be your objection. Your right to determine and direct the education of your child.
Steve57 (6a0485) — 6/5/2015 @ 8:56 amthey have become Bradbury’s ‘firemen’, and robin’s analysis of where these new fangled behavioral approaches originated, behind the Iron Curtain,
narciso (ee1f88) — 6/5/2015 @ 8:56 amBut why is it a “fallacy” for our legal system to defer to tradition when determining whether or not something is a fundamental right, carlitos? You think you’re the only guy who ever heard of Aristotle?
Aristotle did not have a clue about the scientific method. He thought hands on experimentation was labor, and labor was for slaves and the working poor not philosophers. A true philosopher, according to him, only needed to think about the world to know how it worked. Thought came from the heart; the purpose of the brain was to cool the blood. Women had smaller brains and therefore were more emotional than men because their blood ran hotter. But my favorite is his assertion that women had two teeth fewer than men. He was married twice — he could not be bothered to count his wives’ teeth?
Anyway .. “The life of the law has not been logic; it has been experience.” — Oliver Wendell Holmes
nk (dbc370) — 6/5/2015 @ 8:57 am“Ok, genius. If referring to accumulated knowledge and tradition is a “fallacy,” then why does our legal system refer to customs and tradition to determine whether or not something is actually a fundamental right?”
– Steve57
Because our legal system is built on a fallacious premise?
I’m not fully sure I believe that, but it is the most obvious possible answer.
Leviticus (f9a067) — 6/5/2015 @ 8:59 amIt’s beyond tiresome that liberal jerks make unsubstantiated claims, then demand that everyone who counters those unsubstantiated claims, substantiate their claims.
I hereby assert my right to tell you to (blank) me, carlitos, when you do this again in the future. And every other liberal jerk who pulls this stunt.
Steve57 (6a0485) — 6/5/2015 @ 9:02 amLeviticus @317,
stare decisis et non quieta movere
I’m actually prepared to tackle that possible answer.
Steve57 (6a0485) — 6/5/2015 @ 9:08 am“It’s beyond tiresome that liberal jerks make unsubstantiated claims, then demand that everyone who counters those unsubstantiated claims, substantiate their claims.”
Steve57 – I should have asked for peer reviewed sources to be consistent with the current commenting style of carlitos.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 6/5/2015 @ 9:11 amI think we are seeing evidence of deliberate manipulation and wasting of time.
Satan, Alinsky’s patron spirit, originated the subtle approach,
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 6/5/2015 @ 9:13 am“Did God really say…”
nk (dbc370) — 6/5/2015 @ 8:57 am
That is why the argument can be made that it was the Judeo-Christian world view that gave rise to science, contrary to those who claim that religion is anti-science.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 6/5/2015 @ 9:22 amPeople who believed that a wise and loving God created an orderly universe thought therefore that systematic study would be fruitful and that to understand it one must go and see how God made it to work.
http://quotes.dictionary.com/By_this_unprincipled_facility_of_changing_the_state
We wouldn’t have a Supreme Court but for the customs and traditions of the society which preexisted it. The court used to respect the basis for its very existence and authority. The above, by the way, is the basis for my objection to the redefinition leading to the diminution and probable ultimate destruction of marriage. Respect for marriage as the fundamental institution by which society reproduces itself, and therefore is fundamental to our system of ordered liberty, used to be such an obvious point that no court would dare to disturb it.
But redefining marriage as a temporary arrangement that simply affirms affection between two people, to last only as long as it suits the whims of the adults (adults as determined by age only) is better suited to the flies of the summer.
It’s also better suited to desires of the totalitarians running the state who think JD’s kid, and all other children, are the mere creatures of the state. That there is nothing outside the reach of government, and nothing natural or preexisting upon which it rests.
It appears more people are catching on now that the above is growing increasingly obvious.
http://acecomments.mu.nu/?post=357129
SSM, which I believe the SCOTUS will impose because black robe fever is exactly in line with the above trend, is just the first step in reversing the roles established by the Constitution. The government is rebelling against the fundamental principle that it is a creation of the people of the United States. Instead, the people of the United States will be a creation of the government. Witness our illegal and unconstitutional de facto immigration policies. Leftist progressives speak about our changing demographics in the passive voice, as if it’s a natural occurrence, when it’s the deliberate result of their unlawful social engineering.
By constantly changing the rules the leftist progs are asserting their self-anointed ownership rights over their inferiors. The are also establishing the basis to claim ever increasing police powers over the same subject population. For their own good, the bitter clingers to their guns and religion and customs and tradition. Also, the first step in indoctrinating new members into a cult is to destabilize their world. This mental instability, where one can never be sure of anything, increases their suggestibility and their dependance on the cult’s leadership.
And since there is no objective nature or reality or even society, just ever changing law with which everyone must conform from moment to moment, the cult leaders will be able to claim they are doing exactly what the Constitution compels them to do.
This is of course why DHS has preemptively declared veterans and conservatives the real terrorist threat.
See? The beauty of it all is that this PC dictatorship will have been the American way all along, once the thought police are in the position to rewrite history. See Judge Vaughn Walker’s absurd Prop 8 ruling for an example of the new normal.
Steve57 (6a0485) — 6/5/2015 @ 9:59 amthe reason we call it ‘state run media’
http://freebeacon.com/politics/democratic-oppo-firms-fingerprints-on-nyt-rubio-hit/
narciso (ee1f88) — 6/5/2015 @ 10:09 am“I’m actually prepared to tackle that possible answer.”
– Steve57
Tackle away. There are very few right answers, but yours may well be compelling.
Leviticus (f9a067) — 6/5/2015 @ 10:14 amOr was #323 the tackling? Lemme read real quick.
Leviticus (f9a067) — 6/5/2015 @ 10:15 amOkay, tackle away.
Leviticus (f9a067) — 6/5/2015 @ 10:17 amLeviticus – did you ever find anyone, other than yourself,’expressing this opinion?
“Whose penis will be next?!
Hide ya kids, hide ya wife, they be transgenderin’ errbody out here”
Or did you ever find anyone concerned that their penis might get annexed, other than you?
JD (3b5483) — 6/5/2015 @ 10:22 amThere is actually no other argument to be made. At least not an argument grounded in historical fact.
One of the unfortunate results of the Enlightenment is that scientists became hostile to religion, not the other way around. They hated their debt to Christianity, once they decided that since no one can prove God exists via the scientific method therefore there is no God, and have been working overtime ever since to deny and conceal it in order to establish their independence. It’s an adolescent attitude.
There are religions that are anti-science. Islam being the primary example. Muslims are, what, a quarter of the world’s population? See how many Nobel prizes for science that quarter of the population has been found worthy of. Two. And I would argue that in reality none have, since most Muslims consider Ahmadis to be heretics, not Muslims. In fact, the only Pakistani born nobel laureate for Physics had to flee his country when his government declared his sect un-Islamic.
The Pakistani government allowed Mohammad Abdus Salam to be buried in his home country. But people objected to the inscription on his tombstone. It read, First Muslim Nobel Laureate.” By a local court order the word “Muslim” was obscured so now it reads, “First Nobel Laureate.” I’ll accept the verdict of the Pakistani court, which leaves only one possible Muslim Nobel Laureate in the sciences.
That would be an Egyptian born chemist who grew up, received all his eduction, and did all his work in the US. His work would not have been possible in Egypt. In fact, academics have been forced to flee Egypt by the courts when they’ve been accused by rivals of apostasy.
Steve57 (6a0485) — 6/5/2015 @ 10:24 amThere is actually no other argument to be made. At least not an argument grounded in historical fact.
One of the unfortunate results of the Enlightenment is that scientists became hostile to religion, not the other way around. They hated their debt to Christianity, once they decided that since no one can prove God exists via the scientific method therefore there is no God, and have been working overtime ever since to deny and conceal it in order to establish their independence. It’s an adolescent attitude.
There are religions that are anti-science. Islam being the primary example. Muslims are, what, a quarter of the world’s population? See how many Nobel prizes for science that quarter of the population has been found worthy of. Two. And I would argue that in reality none have, since most Muslims consider Ahmadis to be heretics, not Muslims. In fact, the only Pakistani born nobel laureate for Physics had to flee his country when his government declared his sect un-Islamic.
The Pakistani government allowed Mohammad Abdus Salam to be buried in his home country. But people objected to the inscription on his tombstone. It read, First Muslim Nobel Laureate.” By a local court order the word “Muslim” was obscured so now it reads, “First Nobel Laureate.” I’ll accept the verdict of the Pakistani court, which leaves only one possible Muslim Nobel Laureate in the sciences.
That would be an Egyptian born chemist who grew up, received all his eduction, and did all his work in the US. His work would not have been possible in Egypt. In fact, academics have been forced to flee Egypt by the courts when they’ve been accused by rivals of apostasy. While these scientists and academics never directly stated they had apostatized, the courts would look at their body of work and from that gleaned the supposed fact that they were apostates. The Quran and Ahadith had settled certain matters of science, according to Islam. In fact, one of the reasons Ahmadis are considered heretics is the fact they accept western science. Egypt is one of those “moderate” muslim countries in that they won’t kill you for apostasy. They’ll just impose long prison sentences and, in the case of men, force a divorce since a muslim woman can not marry a non-muslim man (the reverse is permitted).
Since academics and scientists have been forced to flee Egypt to get out of Dodge before being sentenced to prison as apostates for less, I’d argue that Ahmed Zewail isn’t actually a muslim, either.
Then look at how many Jews have won a Nobel prize for science, and contrast that to the percentage of the world’s population they comprise. That will demonstrate the absurdity of lumping all religions together as anti-science.
All religions do not preach the same thing.
Steve57 (6a0485) — 6/5/2015 @ 10:32 amthis is what divining and alchemy looks like:
http://dailycaller.com/2015/06/04/noaa-fiddles-with-climate-data-to-erase-the-15-year-global-warming-hiatus/
narciso (ee1f88) — 6/5/2015 @ 10:57 amThis and your next several points are ridiculous. I won’t be addressing them.
carlitos (c24ed5) — 6/5/2015 @ 11:06 amGiven that it’s such an obvious and well-accepted fallacy, I assume that you don’t need sources for the “everyone who understands informal logic” claim. Please correct me if I am wrong and I will share a bizillion links.
As for the Greek dudes from 2000 years ago?
carlitos (c24ed5) — 6/5/2015 @ 11:16 amcarlitos,
You should check with Patterico if you want permission to publish private emails you exchanged with him, not with me. I’ve never seen them and don’t care what they say. What I care about is what you published online.
Frankly, though, what I really care about is that you are a Johnny One-Note. You respond to almost every debate by attacking the messenger instead of the message. You do it when you refuse to consider anything that isn’t peer-reviewed, as if only peer-reviewed science is relevant to things like climate change. Allegations of fraud in climate change data collection isn’t peer-reviewed but IMO it’s relevant. You also do it when you use ad hominem attacks to discredit comments, saying things like “you aren’t on your game lately, DRJ.”
So from now on I’m going to respond to you the way you respond to people here, Mr. Johnny One-Note. In that vein, you are still a jerk.
DRJ (e80d46) — 6/5/2015 @ 11:24 amWhat’s cool about Judeo-Christian values is that you can pick the ones you like.
Shopping on Sunday? no problem.
Eating delicious shrimp? sure.
Stoning a woman for adultery? umm, no.
Thou shalt not make any graven images? bathtup madonna in your front yard is OK, if you are a redneck.
More relevant to this conversation – Deuteronomy 23:1 “No one whose testicles are crushed or whose male organ is cut off shall enter the assembly of the Lord.”
carlitos (c24ed5) — 6/5/2015 @ 11:31 amIf they’re ridiculous it’s because they illustrate the absurdity of your bizarre arguments.
Just because they haven’t gotten around to you personally, to tell you what to think and say, is an inane criteria for ignoring the trend.
Steve57 (6a0485) — 6/5/2015 @ 11:31 amSo because Jews and Christians don’t always live up to their values, they shouldn’t have any at all?
DRJ (e80d46) — 6/5/2015 @ 11:32 amAnd our country shouldn’t either?
DRJ (e80d46) — 6/5/2015 @ 11:33 amgod i effing love shrimp
happyfeet (a037ad) — 6/5/2015 @ 11:34 amNo, you can’t. More stupidity from carlitos. This is what I was talking about @318. Cite a source that is accepted by Christians and/or Jews as authoritative that tells them they can pick and choose their values.
Or quit spouting your empty-headed BS.
Steve57 (6a0485) — 6/5/2015 @ 11:36 amJust don’t do it in the street and scare the horses. Make sure you close the drapes when you are effin’ loving the Arthropoda.
Steve57 (6a0485) — 6/5/2015 @ 11:40 amoh i do i do
then i melt the butter
happyfeet (a037ad) — 6/5/2015 @ 11:44 amHi DRJ – Because you brought this up the other day, I took a quick look through my gmail and found an exchange between me and Patterico that was not me accusing you of threatening me. I also did a cursory google search of this site, and that did not result in evidence of me accusing you of threatening me. A jerk though I may be, perhaps you could share with me what I published online. I can’t find it. As ever, please feel free to prove me wrong. In this case in particular, I would welcome this information.
carlitos (c24ed5) — 6/5/2015 @ 11:45 amNo. That wasn’t in any small way my point. Please re-read my comment.
carlitos (c24ed5) — 6/5/2015 @ 11:48 amHi Steve,
carlitos (c24ed5) — 6/5/2015 @ 12:03 pmI apologize for intimating that you could pick and choose your values. Your life as a true Christian must be tough though. After you gave away all of your belongings to the poor, the next time you were in church, did your wife have her hair covered? Have you ever trimmed your beard? When you begged for food (having no belongings), did you refuse shrimp? Did you ever give the wife the high hard one while her “friend” was visiting for that time of the month? Did you murder your family members who thought that another religion was OK? Since we are all sinners, I’m guessing that you cut off your hand and are typing this lefty? Please do tell me about my empty-headed BS, and how every single Christian isn’t a ‘cafeteria’ Christian, who indeed picks and chooses their rules to follow.
carlitos,
Tell us, please, what you intend to say to God when you see Him face to face.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 6/5/2015 @ 12:07 pmStart at comment 253 hereand continue reading. After that, if you’re interested, I would like to call a truce because I don’t like to attack other commenters to make my point.
DRJ (e80d46) — 6/5/2015 @ 12:07 pm@345, in which carlitos proves my point.
The first rule of holes, carlitos, is when you find yourself in one, stop digging.
I am perfectly fine with you ignoring that rule. And I am amused when you periodically hit yourself in the face with the shovel.
Steve57 (6a0485) — 6/5/2015 @ 12:10 pm“carlitos demands that Poland demonstrate how the Nazi’s annexation of the Sudetenland had affected them personally before they can gear up.
Steve57 (6a0485) — 6/4/2015 @ 1:25 pm
This and your next several points are ridiculous. I won’t be addressing them.”
– carlitos
This was actually the analogy that made me think Steve was concerned that They might be coming for his penis next.
Leviticus (f9a067) — 6/5/2015 @ 12:27 pmI’ve been thinking a lot about David’s eight wives and Solomon’s 700 wives and 300 concubines lately. Seriously. I don’t think those verses discredit anything but dogma, so I’m fine with them. What’s the point of a sacred text? To make us think about sacred things. It’s engaging the questions that matters, not the answers that are reached.
Leviticus (f9a067) — 6/5/2015 @ 12:36 pmOuch. That’s hitting him right in the ovaries.
papertiger (c2d6da) — 6/5/2015 @ 12:50 pmIn response to ;
papertiger (c2d6da) — 6/5/2015 @ 12:57 pmYou’re using mostly examples of laws that were specifically for the Hebrews, which is a common tactic non-Christians like to use against Christians. Christians have never followed those things for reasons that come from an understanding of the New Testament. All you’re doing is demonstrating your ignorance of that. It’s absurd how people are always throwing that stuff in Christians’ faces in what they think is some kind of gotcha moment.
Now if you were addressing those to Jews maybe you would have a point, although they come up with reasons why they don’t apply any more, essentially because the Talmud and other later documents are supposed to supersede those laws somehow.
The moral laws of the Old Testament do in fact apply to everyone, but of course those are not examples of that.
Gerald A (9d7d51) — 6/5/2015 @ 1:07 pmThere are religions that are anti-science. Islam being the primary example.
That needs two qualifications.
1)Modern Islamic society is anti-science, but not premodern society. I suspect the modern antipathy is a reflex of antiWestern attitudes, with western science being seen as yet another avenue of Western attack on Muslim society. Earlier Islam was much more positive and inventive in terms of svurntific achievement. The movement away from science came about the time the Mongols and the Turkic peoples invaded and came to dominate Southwest Asia, and Arab power per se started to wilt. (Cause? Coincidence?) Fortunately for science Europe had organized itself out of the Dark Ages and was already trekking down Science Road. But there were a few centuries when Islam led Christendom in science, and Islam itself is no more antiscience than Judaism or Christianity.
2) There are strands in modern Christianity and Judaism. Judaism can in fact give worse examples than Christianity of antiscience, among the ultra Orthodox…it would be easy to find similar attitudes and reasons to the examples you cited in reference to Pakistan and Egypt. Just replace Quran and Hadith with Bible and Talmud/Midrash, and adjust for the fact that rabbis do not have the apparatus of a state to use against “heresy”. One way to define the difference between ” Modern Orthodoxy ” and Ultra Orthodox or Haredi is the attitude to science.
BTW, if you narrowed the list of Jewish Nobel Prize winners to those who were traditionally religious, and leave out folks like Einstein who were simply atheist or agnostic or deist but were ethnically Jewish, the number would be much smaller. (But besides the economic laureates, you can add in two laureates for the literature prize: Agnon was Orthodox and Singer started out in a traditional setting even if he did not stay there.)
kishnevi (9c4b9c) — 6/5/2015 @ 1:08 pmThose lines don’t even discredit “dogma,” as you put it since Solomon’s many wives ran counter to Jewish law, caused a great deal of trouble, and are a lesson against multiple marriages. Particularly for Christians, as Jesus himself defines marriage as one man and one woman. When he then goes on and says whoever divorces his wife and remarries commits adultery. When the Pharisees ask him why the Mosaic law permits divorce, Jesus responds that it was because their hearts were hard that Moses allowed divorce. But it was never God’s plan, and Christians would argue the same goes for multiple marriages.
But even Jews have a problem with Solomon’s wives, and see it as the reason the golden age of Israel came to an end.
http://www.aish.com/jl/h/cc/48937102.html
http://jwa.org/encyclopedia/article/women-of-solomon-bible
So if you’re going to criticize Biblical “dogma” you should at least understand what it is you are criticizing.
Steve57 (6a0485) — 6/5/2015 @ 1:23 pmNow if you were addressing those to Jews maybe you would have a point, although they come up with reasons why they don’t apply any more, essentially because the Talmud and other later documents are supposed to supersede those laws somehow.
kishnevi (9c4b9c) — 6/5/2015 @ 1:27 pmNone of those which come from the Torah (he mixed in a bunch of Jesus’s counsels of perfection) have been superseded.
Because there is no functioning Temple in Jerusalem, no Sanhedrin and the Jews mostly do not live in the Land of Israel as defined by the Torah ( not identical to the modern state of Israel… the Biblical boundaries take in most if not all of Lebanon and Jordan and part of Syria, but do not include most of the Negev) many commandments do not apply or can not be enforced, but will be applicable in the Messianic Era. Certain others were redefined so early (eye for an eye is the famous one, redefined as monetary compensation) that the tradition views them as never being meant literally…and in fact while you will find various Torah laws being taken for granted in the Prophets and Writings the Bible itself does not refer to eye for an eye being put into practice, at least as far as I can remember.
I understand all of that about Solomon – the pain and suffering his practices caused, how his foreign wives turned his heart away from God and whatnot. Solomon is also held up as one of God’s beloved, and the purported author of Ecclesiastes (which is one of the most amazing pieces of wisdom I’ve ever read).
And a discussion of David’s wives is noticeably absent from your comment. We can even set aside Bathseba and talk about the other seven.
Leviticus (f9a067) — 6/5/2015 @ 1:30 pmYes the fact that someone in the bible did something doesn’t automatically turn it into dogma. Duh. The Mormons have used that same illogical argument in justifying polygamy.
Gerald A (9d7d51) — 6/5/2015 @ 1:35 pmWhat is the relevance of what any of them did? In general, Christian doctrines, or even Jewish doctrines, don’t flow from an analysis of the behavior of people in the bible, with the exception of Jesus, for reasons that don’t apply to anyone else.
Gerald A (9d7d51) — 6/5/2015 @ 1:39 pmI’m not talking about doctrine. I’m talking about thinking about the behavior of people in the Bible held up as God’s beloved, and grappling with the implications of their behavior in our own lives.
Leviticus (f9a067) — 6/5/2015 @ 1:45 pmLike, for instance:
1. David is held up as one of God’s true beloved.
2. David had eight wives.
3. The Old Testament talks about having one wife, not eight.
So, what do we make of that? We could say:
1. It was wrong of David to have eight wives, but he was still one of God’s true beloved.
2. The Old Testament discussions of having one wife are nuanced.
3. It was okay for David to have eight wives, as a product of the times.
4. David was not in fact one of God’s true beloved because he had eight wives.
Each of those conclusions has a variety of implications for modern faith practice.
Leviticus (f9a067) — 6/5/2015 @ 1:51 pmActually, Leviticus,
what you point out is indicative of the Bible being a book about what is true.
Had it been a work of fiction, it would have been more likely that the “heroes” of the Bible would have had uniformly “heroic” lives.
Where can you point out that God approved and endorsed all David ever did? In fact it is clear God was very angry about a number of things David did and David had some severe consequences to live through.
Here’s a hint at where to start, read the beginning of Job and then the last chapters starting where Elijuh shows up.
God does not entertain fools.
He is happy to tolerate those humble enough to recognize they are foolish and in need of His mercy,
but answering questions put to Him by someone who plays the role of God’s judge.
Nope.
I am really not interested in engaging you in dialogue, leviticus,
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 6/5/2015 @ 2:11 pmjust taking the opportunity to interject some truth into the discussion,
not because I say so, but because it is consistent with what one who will humbly seek truth will be blessed to find.
BTW, the NT has some very harsh and unflattering words for people who think it’s fun to debate about important topics yet never reach any conclusions.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 6/5/2015 @ 2:13 pmDavid was king, so special considerations did apply in his case. But the Bible does not flat out reject polygamy although it subtly regulates it, and rabbinic tradition discouraged it. It was not officially banned among Ashkenazim until c. 1000 CE, and among Sephardim only when that ban came up for its thousand year renewal about twenty years ago. The rabbis felt compelled to explain why Jacob married two sisters (later banned by the Torah), but not why he had two official wives and two concubines. They did find evidence of family tensions linked to multiple wives in the story of Joseph and his brothers…and plenty to reflect on in the family drama of David, his wives and children.
kishnevi (adea75) — 6/5/2015 @ 2:15 pmgrappling with the implications of their behavior
The clear implication is that all have sinned and fall short of the glory God and that no one can be saved by their own righteousness, but salvation is a gift that can be responded to, not a status that can be earned.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 6/5/2015 @ 2:19 pmAnd because one who trusts God today has the incredible advantage of the Holy Spirit being poured out upon all who believe,
it is possible to live a life that reflects more of God’s character than in the past.
But in a rationalistic society we have a hard time grasping that reality and living it out.
The Torah does forbid one rather special case of polygamy… marrying a woman while married to her mother or daughter was a capital crime, with both the man and whichever woman he married second being executed (the woman he married first was viewed as an innocent party). But it was banned as a special form of depravity.
kishnevi (adea75) — 6/5/2015 @ 2:22 pm“Here’s a hint at where to start, read the beginning of Job and then the last chapters starting where Elijuh shows up.
God does not entertain fools.
He is happy to tolerate those humble enough to recognize they are foolish and in need of His mercy,
but answering questions put to Him by someone who plays the role of God’s judge.
Nope.”
– MD in Philly
I’ve read all of Job, several times – enough times to know that one of its greatest lessons is the rejection of pat answers to difficult questions. Life is suffering, and the reduction of the self to a dependence on God’s grace. Paradoxically, the realization of how little we control, and how much is in God’s hands, gives us great power to live our own lives, and to reach our own answers. The struggle is faith; the struggle is everything. I don’t claim, and don’t need to claim, that God approved and endorsed everything that David ever did, in order to claim that God loved David and found him to be a man after God’s own heart.
I’m not questioning God. I’m questioning you (apparently). Speaking of humility, there’s a big difference.
Leviticus (f9a067) — 6/5/2015 @ 2:28 pm“The clear implication is that all have sinned and fall short of the glory God and that no one can be saved by their own righteousness, but salvation is a gift that can be responded to, not a status that can be earned.”
– MD in Philly
I think that’s absolutely right, and well put. I’m sorry for the acrimonious barb at the end of my last comment. I got defensive. I agree that salvation is a gift to be responded to, absolutely – I’m just trying to discuss a good response.
Leviticus (f9a067) — 6/5/2015 @ 2:30 pmLeviticus,
If you are thinking with about the behavior of people in the Bible held up as God’s beloved, and grappling with the implications of their behavior in your own life, clearly you believe others behaviors imwhy is it something to snark at when others are doing essentially the same thing as with this post? The behaviors of people, who’s standing before God is not known by me, are certainly having an impact, whether directly or indirectly, on me and society at large.
Dana (0290c1) — 6/5/2015 @ 2:33 pmIf you were seriously questioning me about what I did with the fact that people God loved did evil things, I answered you above.
One of your earlier comments in this latest exchange was this:
What’s the point of a sacred text? To make us think about sacred things. It’s engaging the questions that matters, not the answers that are reached.
Leviticus (f9a067) — 6/5/2015 @ 12:36 pm
That does not appear to be true according to what is written in the Scriptures, and it appeared you were bringing up some quandaries as examples of things we should be engaging questions on, instead of getting on with following the answers.
If I was mistaken in those conclusions, then maybe my comments were simply unnecessary.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 6/5/2015 @ 2:36 pmIn any event, I have other things to do.
Apologies for messing that up. On a phone…
If you are thinking with about the behavior of people in the Bible held up as God’s beloved, and grappling with the implications of their behavior in your own life, clearly you believe others behaviors impact your lfe to some degree, which then begs the question, why snark at others are doing essentially the same thing as with this post? The behaviors of people (those telling is what to say) and whose standing before God is not known by me, are certainly having an impact, whether directly or indirectly, on me and society at large as well.
Dana (0290c1) — 6/5/2015 @ 2:41 pm“The behaviors of people, who’s standing before God is not known by me, are certainly having an impact, whether directly or indirectly, on me and society at large.”
– Dana
Are they? I think that’s been the core debate throughout this entire thread: has your ability to assess the behavior of others as you fit been affected thus far? I understand the fear of the slippery slope, but tend to lean more toward elissa in thinking that this particular episode has been blown way, way out of proportion.
Leviticus (f9a067) — 6/5/2015 @ 2:44 pmBy both sides, I should clarify.
Leviticus (f9a067) — 6/5/2015 @ 2:44 pmWell, I know I’m a hateful bigot and denounce myself, but this “trans” thing is running off the rails. What’s next in the “trans” parade?
I’m sure the ACLU will soon tell us that this is normal, and that not referring to “One Hand Jason” as “One Hand Jason” is a hate crime:
http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/becoming-disabled-by-choice-not-chance-transabled-people-feel-like-impostors-in-their-fully-working-bodies
Walter Cronanty (f48cd5) — 6/5/2015 @ 2:46 pmAnd, just as the LGBs doesn’t want to add the Tg [transgendered] to it’s club, the Tgs don’t want to add the Tas [transabled] to their club:
Walter Cronanty (f48cd5) — 6/5/2015 @ 3:07 pmI understand the fear of the slippery slope, but tend to lean more toward elissa in thinking that this particular episode has been blown way, way out of proportion.
Leviticus (f9a067) — 6/5/2015 @ 2:44 pm
Lest my main point, true or false, reasonable or not,
be lost in the verbiage,
the slippery slope done gave away as a mudslide when
the claim that Jim and John’s marriage would have no affect on “me”, the non-gay person,
evaporated with Brandon Eich,
the people in WA with the flower shop, etc., etc.,
and some of our children in public schools where to not be 100% cool with SSM is to be anathema.
Is this really so hard to understand?
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 6/5/2015 @ 3:08 pmHuh? What’s that in reference to?
Milhouse (a0cc5c) — 6/5/2015 @ 3:26 pmLeviticus:
Maybe that’s because you are further down the slope, so it doesn’t look like a big distance to you. Please don’t take that as a criticism because it isn’t, only that I suspect you live in a community or a generation where these cultural changes seem more normal to you than they do to others. In that case, it’s not going to concern you as much as it might others.
DRJ (e80d46) — 6/5/2015 @ 3:30 pmThis may seem like a joke or not a big deal to some, and it may seem like a big deal to others. However, the spirited discussion and widespread disagreement tells me this isn’t a simple or easy topic.
DRJ (e80d46) — 6/5/2015 @ 3:33 pmIslam takes a lot of credit for scientific achievement in the premodern Islamic world, but you must remember that the premodern Islamic world was inhabited by non-muslims. They were able to rescue the books that the muslims were hell bent on burning, as 1) the muslims could not read them since they weren’t written in Arabic 2) the muslims disdained (and still disdain) whatever preceded Islam as belonging to the age of Jahiliya, the pre-Islamic “days of ignorance” 3) because the non-muslims were now a conquered people they couldn’t possibly have anything to teach muslims and 4) if something was worth knowing it was in the Quran and if it wasn’t in the Quran it wasn’t worth knowing.
Now, Christian, Hindu and Jewish scholars, doctors, etc., were able eventually to convince their muslim overlords otherwise. But the fact remains that if the early muslims were as open to science as the the current hagiographic rewrite of Islamic history would have you believe we’d have 90% of the books in the libraries from Alexandria to Delhi.
I will defer to you on the issue of the ultra-Orthodox and their bias against science. Although I don’t concede it invalidates my point that even if one were to limit the list of Nobel laureates in the sciences to observant Jews, Jews are still greatly over represented on that list as a percentage of the world’s population than Muslims. As far as Christianity is concerned you will find nothing in the New Testament that is in any way hostile to science. In fact orthodox Christianity (small “o” orthodox) teaches that the universe was created by a rational God, that we were created as rational beings. and that using our ability to reason to explore creation is a way to pay tribute to God. This is why the early Catholic church supported the sciences, and why so many priests were scientists.
You will find anti-scientific strains of Christianity. But, like the supposed “Christian” argument against mixed-race marriages, you will not find scriptural support for their case against science.
This makes it unlike Islam. Here’s one example.
Surat Al-Kahf (The Cave) 18:83 – 86
Note that the words “as if” are in brackets. That’s because they’re not in the original text, and the transliterators were embarrassed by the obvious impossibility that you can travel to a point on the Earth where the sun sets. So they added (many if not most foreign language versions of the meaning of the Quran do as well) words such as “as if” because they would rather say Dhul-Qarnayn (widely accepted by muslim scholars to be a pseudonym for Alexander the Great, although there are minority opinions that it refers so some other historical figure such as Cyrus the Great, emperor of Persia) had never seen a sunset before. So that he was mistakenly describing the sun setting in a pool of dark mud or murky water, when he was being fooled by what was only an optical illusion.
The problem for these muslims is that their prophet couldn’t keep his mouth shut. It is a tenet of the faith that Muhammad is the ultimate authority when it comes to interpreting the Quran. And as the Quran states, once Muhammad has decided a matter, the matter is closed. There can be no further discussion.
Surat An-Nisā’ (The Women) 4:65
Surat Al-‘Aĥzāb (The Combined Forces) 33:36
So, what did the ultimate authority on the Quran, who once he decided a matter closes off any choice in it for obedient muslims, have to say about the meaning of verses 18:83 – 86?
http://www.sunnah.com/abudawud/32
Case closed. It sets in a pool of warm water/mud (depending on the transliteration). You must believe this to be a muslim, as every single school of Islamic jurisprudence, Shia and Sunni, have decreed that you are an apostate if you reject one single verse of the Quran. I could provide a link, but I’m cautious about going link-heavy as that puts my comments into moderation. The reasoning behind this unanimity is simple, though. Muslims hold that the Quran is the unalterable word of Allah, as dictated to Muhammad by the angel Gabriel. It is an exact copy of the divine Quran that is inscribed on a tablet in paradise, that is eternal and existed before creation.
So, muslims must reject any scientific proof that the sun does not set at a point on the Earth.
There are numerous other scientific “miracles” that are “revealed” in the Quran that muslims are required to believe as well. Which is why muslim religious authorities issue fatwas such as:
No link; just paste that headline into your favorite search engine.
When science conflicts with the Quran, muslims must reject science. This is opposite of what the Catholic church held even back when it was supposedly persecuting Galileo because (according to the uninformed) the church was/is anti-science.
http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/galileo/letterbellarmine.html
Cardinal Roberto Bellarmine wqs the Church’s chief theologian at when he wrote that letter (he was already deceased when Galileo was tried). These people were not ignorant not anti-science. They knew that not made his case. The proof that the solar system was heliocentric rather then geocentric was well known; there would be a parallax shift in the apparent position in the stars. Nobody, not even Galileo, could conceive of the fact that due to the vast distances involved and the inadequacy of their instruments no such parallax shift would be observable until the 19th century.
Galileo was flat wrong about what he offered as evidence of the Earth’s orbit around the sun; the fact that water was sloshing about in the oceans like water in a bucket in a moving cart. Galileo himself ridiculed the idea that moon had any relationship to the tides.
Had Galileo been able to offer proof of his heliocentric theory then the Church would have changed its interpretation of Biblical verses that appeared to conflict with science.
So I don’t see how I need to qualify anything, at least when comparing and contrasting Islam and Christianity, as I am not writing about what some particular muslims and Christians happen to do or believe, but rather what the religions actually preach.
Steve57 (cd65ef) — 6/5/2015 @ 3:46 pmAnd the issue is NOT “this particular episode”, being “Caitlyn” Jenner herself,
but the fascist thought police telling us what to think and say lest we be committing hate speech.
How many times will we need to go through the same issue with another individual who jumps in and knowingly or unknowingly ignores what has been said before?
It looks to me like a purposeful attempt to waste time/ undermine common sense moral clarity. Death of civilization by a thousand million cuts.
I don’t think the original post and early comments were so cryptic or brilliant for otherwise intelligent people to not understand. The left and Alinsky way since Rules for Radicals came out was to not be direct in their efforts, but infiltrate and subterfuge.
In one way it seems ridiculous to suggest such behavior on this site, but a lot of things that I thought were ridiculous have become the norm.
Just like the complaints about businesses that would choose to not be part of a SSW- none of it was random, activists sought out targets. Small town folk all of a sudden in the midst of some legal battle well funded by outsiders and spewed all over national news.
It is warfare. Concentrate assets in space and time to overwhelm your opponent.
It sounds crazy, but I think it is more likely than multiple otherwise intelligent people missing the obvious.
Although nk said it already with clarity and brevity:
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 6/5/2015 @ 3:46 pm“It’s the same as just shut up, but with more words.”
trannypocalypse
oh my goodness
happyfeet (a5397c) — 6/5/2015 @ 3:52 pmDRJ- I think the thing that makes this thread as unwieldy as it has been is dishonesty.
The issues are clear, are you upset about Jenner or about the thought police?
Thought police, should have been obvious.
Do you think transexualism and sex change operations are just part of normal or not, why and is there data?
That was discussed, same points needing to be repeated.
Has society really been changed by things like this?
Yes.
Are you happy that society has been changed?
Should be simple.
No reason to revisit it all. Especially when much of it is pretty clear and otherwise intelligent seeming people ignore the obvious.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 6/5/2015 @ 3:54 pmTo make sure I was not misunderstood,
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 6/5/2015 @ 3:57 pmI was not suggesting you were dishonest, DRJ, and my use of the term “you” in my comment was the generic “you”.
Got to go.
Nope. That’s not the one. It doesn’t say not to do this, just gives the status of someone to whom it’s been happened, whether by design or by accident. The relevant verse is Leviticus 22:24 “24[Any animal whose testicles were] squashed, crushed, pulled out, or severed, you shall not offer up to the Lord, and in your land, you shall not do [it].” This prohibits M2F surgery, exactly as it does fixing cats or farm animals.
Milhouse (a0cc5c) — 6/5/2015 @ 4:06 pmActually David maxed out at 18. I think you’ve got Solomon’s count reversed, but in any case he was wrong, having violated Deuteronomy 17:17. What is your point, though?
Milhouse (a0cc5c) — 6/5/2015 @ 4:13 pmUm, no. 1) The laws do still apply. 2) Nothing can supersede the law. 3) The oral law is contemporaneous with the written.
Milhouse (a0cc5c) — 6/5/2015 @ 4:16 pmIt’s actually impossible to read “X for X” in that passage literally, because that would make 24:18 and 24:21 contredict each other. The only possible way to read the whole paragraph consistently is to take “X for X” to mean that the defendant must pay the plaintiff “[the value of] X for [the loss of] X”. So the tradition is correct; the passage never meant anything else, and was never redefined.
Milhouse (a0cc5c) — 6/5/2015 @ 4:26 pmWhat about them? He stayed within the limit.
Milhouse (a0cc5c) — 6/5/2015 @ 4:27 pmNo, it doesn’t. Problem solved.
Milhouse (a0cc5c) — 6/5/2015 @ 4:28 pmMyth.
Milhouse (a0cc5c) — 6/5/2015 @ 4:29 pmIt also forbids marrying ones wife’s (or ex-wife’s) sister during her life. Once the first wife is dead, marrying her sister is OK.
Milhouse (a0cc5c) — 6/5/2015 @ 4:33 pmMilhouse, this is why I defer to kishnevi or you when it comes to my understanding of what Jews are supposed to be. Of course, anyone can pretend to be what they want thanks to the anonymity of the internet. So it isn’t that I think either of you are infallible sources. But I certainly am not going to hold myself out as an expert.
Actually I have a pretty good relationship with a local Rabbi, and I run things by him when I have questions about matters of Jewish faith or laws.
Like I had a question about these verses of the Quran that refer to the Jews and their rejection of Jesus:
Surat An-Nisā’ (The Women) 4:155
Seriously, when isn’t the Allah of the Quran cursing the Jews? Answer: when he’s cursing the Christians.
It’s like a bad vaudeville act.
Surat An-Nisā’ (The Women) 4:156 – 160
Yeah, no, that highlighted bit never happened according to the rabbinical wing of my personal posse.
I was already 98.5% sure of the answer before I asked it but I wanted to make sure I had all my i’s dotted and t’s crossed and my doo-doo squared away in one nice neat little pile before going public with that particular critique of the Quran.
A sus caballos, amigos! Viva, cabalgamos!
The Spanish tossed in for the benefit of muslims still upset over the loss of Al Andalus.
Who can find instruction about what they can do about their hurt feelings in my comment to carlitos @318.
Steve57 (cd65ef) — 6/5/2015 @ 4:41 pmMD,
Sometimes comments go far afield and sometimes they stay on track. This may have been one of those threads that went off the rails. I don’t mind when that happens but I realize not everyone feels that way.
DRJ (e80d46) — 6/5/2015 @ 4:44 pmNot really. And Steve is right about Galileo; the Church had no problem with Copernicus’s theory, because he presented it as a theory, not as established fact. Galileo’s offense was presenting it as firm fact, without being able to prove it either by experiment or from the Bible, and then defying a specific order to submit his work for approval before publication.
Milhouse (a0cc5c) — 6/5/2015 @ 4:51 pmNo, he got it right.
Milhouse (a0cc5c) — 6/5/2015 @ 4:54 pm@daleyrocks, with apologies, work got the best of me, and tonight is date night. We’re going to see Mad Max.
— surely you can’t dispute that “argument from tradition” isn’t generally recognized as a logical fallacy. A simple google search is all you need to confirm this.
— as for the first instance of this fallacy being recognized, I will have to do this research another time.
Happy weekend, everyone.
carlitos (c24ed5) — 6/5/2015 @ 5:01 pmCarlitos, I dispute the authority of those who call the argument from tradition a fallacy.
Milhouse (a0cc5c) — 6/5/2015 @ 5:03 pmhappy weekend, tranny-lover
happyfeet (831175) — 6/5/2015 @ 5:03 pmAll this proves is that one does not need to be perfect to be beloved by God. As Paul put it in 1 Timothy 1:14 – 16:
As an interesting (to me at least, and certain others, but perhaps not to you) it is precisely because the Jewish and Christian texts do not treat prophets as perfect, infallible beings that they conclude these sources must be corrupt. Because the Quran in one of its great unforced own-goals (see my comment about the famous non-punishment never delivered to the Jews after Jesus was crucified) stupidly demands Muhammad and his adherents refer to prior revelation to determine the truth of Muhammad’s revelation.
They had no idea that not only is there nothing to support the idea that what Muhammad preached was in the Abrahamic tradition, but that what is in there declares Muhammad a false prophet.
Naturally they were PO’d. Naturally, they invented excuses. Which just created further problems for themselves. Wouldn’t an omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent Allah know the Christians and Jews had corrupted their scriptures? And then not commanded Muhammad to defer to their authority? Things like that.
You can trace the developing idea over time that started out as Muhammad was just a man who was no stranger to sin than any other man to the idea that Muhammad was the perfect moral example in line with the muslim discovery that prior revelation did not support the claims of Islamic legitimacy as earlier advertised.
If you want I can provide chapter and verse. But that will take a lot of work, and a special dispensation from Patterico so I can link heavily to my footnotes.
Or, you could take my word, Leviticus. You can also not take my word and do your own research. That’s also a possibility.
Steve57 (cd65ef) — 6/5/2015 @ 5:21 pmOne would think this would be obvious from the fact that the Church had no problem with Copernicus.
In fact, Copernicus sought papal patronage, and received it, because he was worried about the assault of scientific consensus.
It’s also important to note that the Pope wasn’t just a religious authority but a temporal ruler as well. There was no way that Galileo could get away with his undisguised contempt for the Pope as the Simplicio (Simpleton) of his Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems.
No prince at the time was expected to put up with that crap. Where was anybody supposed to find such an example? The king of France wouldn’t have been so restrained as the pope. House arrest in a comfortable villa. Neither, if you examine the evidence honestly, would the Shogun. Nor any ruler at any points in between.
It’s cheap and easy to judge people by standards that didn’t exist when they made decisions that we wouldn’t make now.
Steve57 (cd65ef) — 6/5/2015 @ 5:46 pmThe tranny went out on my ’76 Olympic.
papertiger (c2d6da) — 6/5/2015 @ 6:04 pmyes yes Mr. tiger
but for reals i think a lot of people are getting pop culture and for reals culture dreadfully confuzzled
happyfeet (831175) — 6/5/2015 @ 6:10 pmI thought I put this topic to bed with the Crocodile Dundee clip 200 comments ago.
And somehow you sneak back in here with God.
Jesus.
papertiger (c2d6da) — 6/5/2015 @ 6:10 pmHappy. Lets make fun of she/he/it some more.
Damn, were has the time gone.
Have to take a raincheck.
papertiger (c2d6da) — 6/5/2015 @ 6:14 pmRULE 5: “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.” — Alinsky.
Probably the Trident ICBM is mankind’s most potent weapon, but ridicule works well enough against Jenner’s publicists.
nk (dbc370) — 6/5/2015 @ 6:31 pmso over the whole tranny moment thing
did hillary do even a single tweet about caity-cakes?
i bet she didn’t
whore
happyfeet (831175) — 6/5/2015 @ 6:47 pm@ 403. Tora doshi desu,
I was born in the year of the tiger.
Maybe they weren’t exactly wrong.
Steve57 (cd65ef) — 6/5/2015 @ 6:56 pmdid hillary do even a single tweet about caity-cakes?
Check out Hillary’s Twitter feed, Mr. feets. It is dominated by tweets regarding her belief that everyone who is likely to vote Democrat ought to be automatically enrolled at the polls, and they ought to have 30 days in which to cast their vote. Or something like that. Maybe she just wants every non-voter to have his or her (or Caitlyn’s!) vote to automatically be credited to the Democrats. Anyway, the Twitter feed is like someone with OCD or Tourette’s — nothing but voting, voting, voting. She’s a weird one.
JVW (8278a3) — 6/5/2015 @ 7:10 pmI learned long ago not to mock that which I do not understand.
I respect Jenner’s pursuit of happiness, even if the choice turns out to be a bad one in retrospect. Is is really that hard to have the common courtesy to refer to her as a her? There are people who changed their names from what I thought were perfectly good names. Mohammed Ali, Elton John, and World B. Free come to mind. I’m not a fan of hyphenated names, either. However, I have no problem extending a social grace and referring to someone as they wish to be referred.
I’m agnostic, but when I read the New Testament I was impressed by the magnanimity and mercy conveyed in Jesus’s words. I doubt he would have a problem with Jenner.
norcal (ac0cd1) — 6/5/2015 @ 7:43 pmoh for the love of pete you’re just encouraging them Mr. norcal
happyfeet (831175) — 6/5/2015 @ 7:46 pmNot trying to bait anybody. Just how I feel.
norcal (ac0cd1) — 6/5/2015 @ 7:50 pmIs is really that hard to have the common courtesy to refer to her as a her?
Nope, it isn’t that hard. But let me ask you: Do you agree with the jerkoff from the ACLU who says that if you continue to call Jenner “Bruce” or address Jenner with a masculine pronoun that you are guilty of hate speech?
JVW (8278a3) — 6/5/2015 @ 8:00 pmJVW,
I think “hate speech” is too strong a term, and I oppose any effort to legislate against “hate speech”.
I would just call it rude, the same way it would be rude to refer to Muhammed Ali as Cassius Clay.
norcal (ac0cd1) — 6/5/2015 @ 8:09 pmNorcal…I will gladly let the Jenner person use whatever pronouns it prefers in referring to itself, as long as the Jenner person (and others) extend the same courtesy to me.
And, as I said way way before in this thread, since the Jenner person has renounced the masculine pronoun, and will never qualify biologically for the female pronoun, the most appropriate pronoun is the neuter pronoun.
kishnevi (91d5c6) — 6/5/2015 @ 8:10 pmThe graven images refer to more than just idols, but other things that take the place of god, shockingly the prophet misses that detail.
narciso (82cec7) — 6/5/2015 @ 8:16 pmRenaissance rulers from the tutors to the borgia’s were not nice folk.
narciso (82cec7) — 6/5/2015 @ 8:18 pm@417, but neither were the descendants of Tokugawa Ieyasu or Shaka Khan nice folk. Why the special rule?
Steve57 (cd65ef) — 6/5/2015 @ 8:33 pmSneezing in the presence of the Amandabele (northern branch of the zulu) king Lobenguela was a crime that would warrant your brains beaten out with knobkerries.
Where’s the outrage, carlitos? Leviticus?
Steve57 (cd65ef) — 6/5/2015 @ 8:40 pmI don’t. And while it’s easy for someone to take the opposite position I don’t beliefe a a true friend of Bruce Jenner’s would do so.
No. That’s the easiest thing in the world; to fold. But if I were really Bruce Jenner’s friend I’d let him know I think he’s making a mistake, and I’ll be there for him when his world caves in.
http://thefederalist.com/2014/11/11/trouble-in-transtopia-murmurs-of-sex-change-regret/
No, I don’t think the world is doing Bruce Jenner a huge favor.
Steve57 (cd65ef) — 6/5/2015 @ 8:58 pmWithout the link, as that seems to have sent my last comment into moderation.
As I said, I don’t think the country or the world is doing this guy any favors.
Steve57 (cd65ef) — 6/5/2015 @ 9:01 pmnorcal,
perhaps you have missed what has been said clearly multiple times.
Few, if any of us, would be rude to Jenner if we were face to face with “her”.
Just as I would not be rude to any gay individual I was with, or with a “married” SS couple,
unless they thought it to be rude that I disagreed with them about SS “marriage” being identical to hetero marriage when they asked me my opinion.
What we object to is being told that if we don’t tow the line of accepted PC thought and nomenclature and rejoice in the acceptance of transexualism, we are haters.
This is in spite of medical evidence that says such surgery generally is not of benefit, and that 75% of children who voice such feelings at some point “grow out of them”.
What Caitlyn Jenner wants to do with life is “her” business, and I’m not going to tell her she’s making a mistake, (unless she asks me),
but,
I disagree with a vocal propaganda campaign that will mislead people and possible do more harm than good.
I have made the analogy to the previous campaign to normalize SS marriage. Once upon a time we were told “Jim and John’s marriage will not affect you”. Well, maybe this was true about Jim and John’s marriage, but in the aftermath a large number of people have been affected, from Brendan Eich to small business owners of bakeries, florist shops, and pizzerias, and millions of people who were fine with Jim and John to do their own thing in their privacy,
but who are no longer able to think their own thoughts.
This is not about Caitlyn Jenner,
it is about the 75% of children who would grow out of their transsexual thoughts if left alone instead of having it reinforced,
it is about all of the children in schools who will be forced to go along with people’s delusions,
it is about the doctors and nurses who will be the brunt of attack if they do not go along
it is about whether any individual person or family will be able to hold their own views of sexual morality.
This is the 4th time with the 4th commenter that we have had to point his out.
At least now I have this summary to refer to with the 5th, 6th, and 7th who come along.
Now, I understand many people will disagree with what I see as good outcomes and bad outcomes.
Fine.
If you think Brendan Eich deserved to get fired, small businesses should be punished for not willing to participate in a SS wedding (no, not refusing to serve a gay person, but to decline an event), that Johnny should be encouraged to dress as a girl and use the girls bathroom at school, and any girl that has a problem with that gets sent to reeducation classes, and if her parents make a fuss they will become the center of condemnation,
that’s fine,
we disagree.
But don’t tell me, “It will not affect you”.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 6/5/2015 @ 9:01 pmhttp://thefederalist.com/2014/11/11/trouble-in-transtopia-murmurs-of-sex-change-regret/
Steve57 (cd65ef) — 6/5/2015 @ 9:01 pmMy comments related to the previous link are in moderation.
Steve57 (cd65ef) — 6/5/2015 @ 9:02 pmWhen confronted about issues of sexual sin,
Jesus was very forgiving.
He also said, “Go, and sin no more”.
Jesus often answered questions with, “It is written…”
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 6/5/2015 @ 9:09 pmas in male and female created He them.
I am confident that He would kindly tell Jenner that he/she has some issues to deal with,
and ask if he/she would like to talk about it.
And Jenner could say, “Yes”, and they would have a conversation,
or Jenner could say, “No”, and Jesus would walk away sad.
When has the media/Jenner/Hollywood axis ever been anything but rude, hostile, and denigrating to me?
Let me think about it for a minute.
F***ing never. — there’s your answer.
Lately it’s the insurance “advice” handed out by One Direction fans.
Silence!
papertiger (c2d6da) — 6/5/2015 @ 9:25 pmLately it’s the insurance “advice” handed out by One Direction fans.
kishnevi (adea75) — 6/5/2015 @ 9:32 pmI admit to not being totally current on pop music (I do know what One Direction is, at least), but I have no idea of what you mean there.
MD at 420,
You are debating points I didn’t make.
norcal (ac0cd1) — 6/5/2015 @ 9:34 pmnorcal,
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 6/5/2015 @ 9:39 pmYou made a comment that had little to do with the previous discussion.
Remembering Midway.
http://www.usni.org/heritage/york-town-midway
He was entirely too modest. It was a masterful attack, from beginning to end.
It never does to underestimate the “JV team.” I-168’s attack on the Yorktown was essentially flawless.
By the same token so was the American dive bomber attack on the Hiryu, Soryu, Kaga, and Akagi. Moreover, the Japanese should have known that American SBD pilots could hit what they were aiming at from the results of prior engagements. Instead, the aviators of the Kido Butai were forced to watch an American force attack their carriers from the deck of those carriers, not from the cockpit as they would have if they were ready, and their practiced eye told them that they were finally dealing with professionals.
Not the J.V.
Yorktown didn’t die until the seventh of June 1942. If that matters.
Steve57 (cd65ef) — 6/5/2015 @ 9:41 pm“Go and sin no more”
steveg (fed1c9) — 6/5/2015 @ 10:00 pmBruce/Caitlyn is under admonishment, just like the rest of us.
I don’t know what Jesus would say, or is saying to Jenner, but I believe that forgiveness is there regardless the type of sin. Also believe that there are consequences and if a sex change which reverses God’s order of creation is a sin, then Jenner will probably face some unique challenges even after being granted forgiveness.
I think changing your body this way is a mistake and the “sin” to me would be the example he is setting, telling the world that mutilating your body is OK.
MD,
My comment was in response to the original post. Is that not allowed?
norcal (ac0cd1) — 6/5/2015 @ 10:01 pmVenenum in auro bibitur. Poison is drunk out of gold [cups]. We have the problems of a wealthy society.
nk (dbc370) — 6/5/2015 @ 10:02 pmsteveg @ 429,
Matthew 19:12 has this verse:
For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother’s womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.
I’m no Biblical scholar, but Jesus seems to condone some form of genital mutilation in this verse.
norcal (ac0cd1) — 6/5/2015 @ 10:09 pmhttp://www.navyhistory.org/2012/06/photographer-remembers-sinking-of-uss-yorktown-cv-5/
Some things never change.
http://www.casematepublishing.com/dlc/9781935149361/America's First …
Sorry. Bruce Jenner is boring me. Firefighting, though, is a different story. I don’t know if you could say I have phobia about it, like I’m accused of Islamophobia and homophobia. Because a fire at sea is no s*** scary. So a fear of it is by no means irrational. A rational fear is not a phobia. Especially when metal starts to burn and it hits 3000dg. Water from your firehose flashes to steam on contact. You could go over the side but, getting picked up later? Who’s to know where you are.
Steve57 (cd65ef) — 6/5/2015 @ 10:37 pmhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oXnVbJNM4Is
Jumping around, throwing knives, what’s not to like?
All of a sudden I’m a fan of ballet.
Steve57 (cd65ef) — 6/5/2015 @ 11:56 pmhttp://ftp.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/OnlineLibrary/photos/events/wwii-pac/midway/mid-10a.htm
That’s the Mikuma. If you look carefully, you will see people. The last pictures of them alive.
http://albumwar2.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/39099.jpg
LCDR Saruwatari Masayushi, damage control officer in the more heavily damaged Mogami, would save his ship. And live with it.
http://hamptonroadsnavalmuseum.blogspot.com/2014/10/a-casualty-of-leyte-october-25-1944.html
Steve57 (cd65ef) — 6/6/2015 @ 4:48 amThe wikipedia entry for the Stark dryly notes:
Yeah. Someone had to go into those spaces where men were cooked alive and clean up the mess. Scrub the unspeakable off the bulkheads. Repaint.
Somehow I think that took more courage than Bruce Jenner needed for his/her vaunted transition.
Steve57 (cd65ef) — 6/6/2015 @ 5:13 amjoin ABC stars George Fapfapolous and Viola Davis tonight at nine eastern 7 central LIVE from the Kennedy Center as they host a very special ALL STAR TRANNY SALUTE TO THE ARMED FORCES!
They’ll be joined by special musical guests Faith Hill and the entire cast of ABC’s new MUPPET EXTRAVAGANZA!
Brought to you by Walmart, Taco Bell, and The NFL.
Me I’m gonna DVR that sh!t for sure
happyfeet (831175) — 6/6/2015 @ 5:29 amI gave at the office, Mr. feets.
Steve57 (cd65ef) — 6/6/2015 @ 6:33 amnorcal,
As I read it, and just read it again, the original post was not so much about what to say in a face to face meeting where Jenner says, “Call me Caitlyn”.
It was about being told by “them” not only what the polite thing to say to Jenner was, but what we were allowed to say in any conversation and what the accepted thinking was, vocally expressing disagreement liable to punishment.
Once upon a time such admonishments would likely have been ignored by most of us, but in very obvious instances that was a mistake, unless one agrees with the current state of affairs. At least one gay colleague of Eich spoke up and said he had encountered nothing but polite and friendly interactions with Eich, to no avail.
I think most of us would politely say, “Hello, Napolean” to someone who extended their hand and said, “I’m Napoleon Bonaparte, you may dispense with the title of ‘Emperor’ and call me Napoleon.” Most of us would also think we hope the person gets help.
In the case of Jenner, we are being told not only what the polite thing to say to Jenner is, but what to think about the situation, which we are told is completely normal and should be encouraged. In addition, it is a preemptive strike against anyone who would dare to point out the experience of medical professionals and individuals who had gone through such surgery and then regretted it (to their credit, it is my understanding that doctors who do this transformational surgery do not complete it by removing the penis and testicles for an additional year of “living life as a woman”).
Now, I have freely stated that I may be wrong in my opinion, and I am not of firm enough conviction to give a name or names, but I am thinking that there are people who deliberately distort such discussions here and elsewhere to undermine the will of people to maintain some claim of “normalcy”. As I gave in the example above, I am sure there were people who honestly believed that one couple’s (or thousands of couples’) same sex marriage would not effect anyone else.
But I also believe (and did at the time) that many people were being deliberately disingenuous with the purpose of changing the culture.
I personally know people who identified themselves as gay or lesbian in their youth who later “became heterosexual” and have lived a married life with children with its ups and downs like anyone. People are actively encouraged now not to even consider that, and that in many, if not most quarters, to professionally assist someone in making this change is seen as unprofessional or worse. In some states it is now against the law to offer this to a minor even if the youth and parents all want to explore the possibility; just like it is now the law in some states and localities that a self-identified transgender child be allowed to use the bathroom facilities, and even join the sports teams and use the locker rooms of the self-identifying sex.
You may have been unaware of all of that, or aware and in approval. You may have taken the topic as a simple matter of personal politeness to another human being, which I can completely understand and agree with.
So, maybe you will still say I am debating points (unnecessarily) that were not brought up. I can understand that. But I am going to debate the points while it is still possible, and before 75% of confused 10 year olds are encouraged to accept something as “normative” that isn’t, and before professionals who would like to help them are forced out of their profession.
I believe the saying is, “Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me”.
If someone wants to ask me if I believe the Christian faith as described in the writings of the NT, and that I believe it is true, and that I believe that everyone should investigate and hopefully come to faith,
I will say yes, that is who I am and what I believe.
I’m just asking those who wish to undermine our culture by changing definitions that have existed for millennia to be honest as well.
You may have innocently walked into the conversation and gave your first impression response. I have certainly done that at times.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 6/6/2015 @ 7:12 amYay Mr 57 you’re even more braver than the tranniest tranny in trannyville!!
FAILMERICA IS HAVING A TRANNY MOMENT
happyfeet (da3caf) — 6/6/2015 @ 7:12 am(carry that weight)
happyfeet (da3caf) — 6/6/2015 @ 7:13 amhttp://blog.usni.org/2009/09/26/flightdeck-friday-smoke-and-the-battle-of-midway
F***in’ eh.
After the Stark I always wondered what good my flashlight would do me. The power goes out, and all I see is thick smoke everywhere. I’ll just feel my way to the flight deck, thank you.
Nota bene: you will get kicked in the head.
Steve57 (cd65ef) — 6/6/2015 @ 7:13 amI doubt I am worthy of the honor. I will note that you’ve managed to comment at #442, which happens to be my favorite Oldsmobile.
http://www.collectorcarads.com/Picture2/1964442PicsinMay001.jpg
Which is something, I think.
Steve57 (cd65ef) — 6/6/2015 @ 7:19 amThis sort of thing does affect people personally. Now that Walter is retired, he is able to speak. When he was working, probably for fear of being fired he kept his mouth shut.
I’m a web developer. The web community is very liberal. At one job I had, I was told on my review that my work was great but that everyone was upset by my homophobic comments and because of those comments I could be fired. I was confused because I had never made any comments about homosexuality or my Christianity. I asked my boss specifically what I had said that was homophobic. He said that someone asked me if I had been to Chick-fil-A and I had answered yes. Apparently they found out I was a Christian and decided that I was homophobic.
The gay graphics guy then refused to work with me and demanded that I be fired. He was upset that I was a homophobic Christian. I had never mentioned I was a Christian and prior to this we had worked well on projects together. He had actually said that I produced the best work out of all the programmers.
Being told how to speak does affect me personally. I have to be silent about my beliefs while everyone else is free to speak for fear of losing my job. I have to be silent for fear of being punished.
You can say, just get another job. Well it’s not that easy. I’ve been looking for a job since the beginning of the year when they outsourced the IT group and though being more than qualified I’m still out of work. Maybe I need to remove the fact I went to bible college from the education part of my resume.
Name Withheld (c674c7) — 6/6/2015 @ 7:51 amWhat about the woman who objected to a male in the women’s locker room? She paid for her gym membership, yet when she complained, she was told to leave. She was affected personally.
Up is down, down is up, cats and dogs…
Name Withheld (c674c7) — 6/6/2015 @ 8:01 ami bring chik fil a breakfast sammiches in for a couple of my obamawhore friends at work sometimes and the programmer chick calls it hate-fil-a and i say yes yes yes but it’s delicious
and then I say plus I drove all the way to Indiana to get them!
hahahahaha
happyfeet (831175) — 6/6/2015 @ 8:28 amUp is down, down is up,
Name Withheld (c674c7) — 6/6/2015 @ 8:01 am
Thank you for taking the time to comment, though sad for your experience. Don’t know if you’ve followed here for awhile or came upon the site for the first time.
I guess for some getting food at Chick-fil-A is a micro-, or even a macro-, aggression.
I think once upon a time some places of employment were labeled and listed as “gay friendly”. I don’t think a business can get away with being listed as “homophobe friendly”.
Maybe one needs to ask a Chick-fil-A manager if they have any businesses that order from them as a group. It would be the dog-whistle for “homophobe friendly”. (Which does NOT mean anti-gay, to some of us anyway.) Though I guess the anti-“homophobe” lobby could pose and find out businesses to attack.
Sad to think one would need to take Bible college off of your CV to get considered for a job.
This is a good opportunity to learn to love one’s enemies. Anybody who wants to pick you out and ruin you for stepping out of line is not a friend. One can recognize an enemy and engage in a conflict without being evil oneself. Besides, as in the case with Jenner, in many ways the individual people involved are not the enemy, they are the hostages, in a conflict that is not only against flesh and blood.
Maybe apply to Koch Industries and keep Bible college on your CV.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 6/6/2015 @ 9:05 amPeople wanted you fired for eating at Chick-fil-A, and I imagine the same people were all supportive of the CEO of the most powerful organization in the world keeping his job in spite of gross misconduct with a subordinate.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 6/6/2015 @ 9:11 amAnd these are the people we have let takeover the country.
I like Mark Steyn’s take. These culture changes do affect people personally. For those that don’t see it, have a little compassion even though you don’t see or feel their pain. http://www.steynonline.com/6991/birth-of-the-new
And
A new normal?
Tanny O'Haley (c674c7) — 6/6/2015 @ 9:19 ampoor Miss Steyn needs to adjust her hormone regimen she’s hyper-emotional and overwrought
happyfeet (831175) — 6/6/2015 @ 9:24 amMaybe Hillary should follow Jenner and come out as rich.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nE7IemdLrMU
Tanny O'Haley (c674c7) — 6/6/2015 @ 9:56 amHitlery!
It’s a variation of the spelling I insist upon ever since she instructed the LHMFM to consider her monologue to be a dialogue.
And they complied.
Steve57 (cd65ef) — 6/6/2015 @ 10:10 amMr. Feets – I feel your pain, that Caitlyn is diverting attention from your favorite causes. This cannot stand!
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 6/6/2015 @ 11:02 amBruce is just a flash in the pan Mr. daley – a bon bon of E! trash for fat-ass failmerican divorcees
happyfeet (831175) — 6/6/2015 @ 11:09 amI’ve decided to let science determine who I vote for in 2016.
Robin Olds, Air Force Brigadier General, epic mustache.
https://likeafighterpilot.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/robin-olds.jpg
Imi Lichtenfeld, IDF hand-to-hand combat instructor, father of Krav Maga, epic mustache.
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-BuMsGfFXK_E/U5H9FRJMooI/AAAAAAAADKE/8I56Hf2Jrxw/s1600/founder-krav-maga-imi-lichtenfeld.jpg
Science can not be denied. Vote for John Bolton.
Discuss as I head out to wax my mustache.
Steve57 (cd65ef) — 6/6/2015 @ 11:19 am444. Name Withheld (c674c7) — 6/6/2015 @ 7:51 am
I just did it again. It’s rather liberating.
Just so I’m clear on proper protocol, if someone causes a “notification” from Facebook to be sent to my personal e-mail, and I click on it and it’s a post of left-wing claptrap with several left-wing comments posted below by “friends” declaring how wonderful the post is and how awful conservatives and/or Rs are, I’m allowed to “comment” contra, right? I never use Facebook, have no profile, and only “joined” to get 2% of a $2,000 piece of furniture by “liking” or “friending” the store.
As an aside, when I signed up, I didn’t know what I was doing [still don’t] and clicked a button allowing Facebook to take all the contacts in my personal e-mail and request, on my behalf, that they be my “friend.” When the list of names of those who agreed to be my “friend” started rolling in, there were names I didn’t recognize. When I asked my wife who one of persons was who was now one of my “friends,” she replied in a somewhat louder and higher pitch than normal: “That’s the 16 yr. old daughter of my friend. What are you doing?” Apparently, my wife’s friend had used her daughter’s e-mail to e-mail my wife, who uses my e-mail. I really haven’t done much on Facebook since.
Walter Cronanty (f48cd5) — 6/6/2015 @ 12:23 pmpeople what whore their lives out to Mark Zuckerberg are not mindful
they’re just not
let us pray
Please God help all the people what have whored their lived out to Mark Zuckerberg reclaim what they have lost so they can walk with You once more and be whole and clean.
Amen!
happyfeet (831175) — 6/6/2015 @ 12:30 pm*lives* out I mean
happyfeet (831175) — 6/6/2015 @ 12:30 pmThank you Mr. Feet.
Walter Cronanty (f48cd5) — 6/6/2015 @ 12:47 pmpeace be with you Mr. C
happyfeet (831175) — 6/6/2015 @ 12:48 pmAnd also with you.
Walter Cronanty (f48cd5) — 6/6/2015 @ 12:49 pmWhere are my mustaches!
Steve57 (cd65ef) — 6/6/2015 @ 1:13 pmDragons.
Steve57 (cd65ef) — 6/6/2015 @ 1:14 pmEagles.
Steve57 (cd65ef) — 6/6/2015 @ 1:14 pmWhatevs,
Steve57 (cd65ef) — 6/6/2015 @ 1:14 pmBy demanding that my presidential candidate have a luxurious mustache I am in fact leveling the playing field. Given the fact that with sufficient funding from the Saudis and the Gulf states Hillary! would grow one.
Take that, Carly Fiorina!
Steve57 (cd65ef) — 6/6/2015 @ 1:19 pmJohn Bolton isn’t even running.
Rick Perry is and he’s gonna where them glasses what help trick people into thinking he’s smart.
happyfeet (831175) — 6/6/2015 @ 1:36 pm*wear* them oh my goodness I need to order me some nespresso i think
happyfeet (831175) — 6/6/2015 @ 1:37 pm457-happyfeet
mg (31009b) — 6/6/2015 @ 1:56 pmzuck sucks
I have a tradition of showering and shaving before going to work. I’ve been doing it a long time now and am sure there are others who share the same tradition. We who perform such ablutions before work must all be lost in the grip of a logical fallacy according to carlitos.
Because REASON or SCIENCE or Peer Reviewed Research, or something.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 6/6/2015 @ 2:26 pmoh my goodness that’s too much shaving
happyfeet (831175) — 6/6/2015 @ 2:27 pmtalk about missing the point:
http://biblehub.com/matthew/19-12.htm
re the Stark, the folks who urged to play the Iraq card, against Iran don’t seem so wise now, do they, the junior officers in the regime, now staff the top ranks of IS
narciso (ee1f88) — 6/6/2015 @ 2:43 pmHomer Lea predicted the Japanese command staff’s plan in the 20s, Billy Nitchell showed them the method,
narciso (ee1f88) — 6/6/2015 @ 2:57 pmironically the after action report on Pearl, seemed to have ‘this failure of imagination,’
That contributes helpful commentary.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 6/6/2015 @ 2:58 pmthanks, narciso
though I have no idea what the 2nd part of your comment is about, but that’s ok
I have permission to not get it.
the Stache would make a fine Secretary of State, we could do worse, and likely will,
narciso (ee1f88) — 6/6/2015 @ 2:59 pmanother commenter up above, who was unclear on context, not you MD
the message is clearly, yet this world tells us somehow something is lost in translation, which it is, plain sanity and common sense,
narciso (ee1f88) — 6/6/2015 @ 3:01 pmYou will understand more better when you reach puberty, Mr. Feets.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 6/6/2015 @ 3:06 pmif you say so
happyfeet (831175) — 6/6/2015 @ 3:11 pmand one wonders why it supplies the largest jayvee contingent from W. Europe,
http://swedenreport.org/2015/06/02/goodbye-sweden/
narciso (ee1f88) — 6/6/2015 @ 3:12 pmOh, I understand that, narciso. I ignored it up above, as I wasn’t up to responding to it. Discussing something to promote mutual understanding is a joy. Answering proof-texting trying to make a point is work, and I obviously had already pressed my welcome in the thread.
I was just saying I was glad you referenced it and I found it helpful. I did remember the episode with Origen, though I did not remember it was him who did it.
I recently read Lennox’s Seven Days that Divide the World, it is worth reading just for his commentary on how one needs to simply read something and observe what it says (and doesn’t say) before jumping ahead with interpretation, and how interpretation needs to be first based on common experience.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 6/6/2015 @ 3:12 pmtrue, the problem is there are too many now with that common base of knowledge, they only know war is bad, and the black legend of America, propounded by the likes of Stone, Moore, et al,
narciso (ee1f88) — 6/6/2015 @ 3:29 pmand some are just ignorant of everything:
http://twitchy.com/2015/06/06/quick-anti-spin-fact-constitutional-expert-chris-cuomo-now-teaching-islamic-law-to-geller-fans/
narciso (ee1f88) — 6/6/2015 @ 3:37 pmseeing as this second iteration of christopher boyce, snowman, snowden has run it’s course:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2015/06/05/fox-newss-dana-perino-launches-absurd-twitter-attack-on-nyt-for-running-snowden-piece/
narciso (ee1f88) — 6/6/2015 @ 4:05 pmRe the Post article, apparently the best way to avoid inspection of one’s own facts and logic in the propaganda wars is to launch a preemptive assault on your opponent. Never, ever, entertain the idea that maybe a criticism of an ally has some merit.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 6/6/2015 @ 4:18 pmReally, how could anyone not rejoice with the NYT jumping at the opportunity to give a platform for that patriotic hero in hiding in the USSR (yes, meant that)?
crimethink, about SORM’s man of the year 2013, is not allowed,
narciso (ee1f88) — 6/6/2015 @ 4:24 pmCan you please stop talking about me?
Steve57 (cd65ef) — 6/6/2015 @ 4:32 pmthe only time, ‘needs must’ I have to listen to Cuomo, is in a captive setting, and gnawing one’s foot,
narciso (ee1f88) — 6/6/2015 @ 4:36 pmisn’t an optioo,
You’re way back in that line, Steve57.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 6/6/2015 @ 4:37 pmIt took the fags one year to destroy the 126 year tradition of Tournament of Roses parade.
What cherished aspect of American culture will be defiled by this new category of degenerate?
papertiger (c2d6da) — 6/6/2015 @ 10:21 pmBeating Snoop Dogg up on the internet?
Over something he said? It’s like beating up on a cripple.
What next? Tip the Big Lebowski out of his wheelchair?
papertiger (c2d6da) — 6/7/2015 @ 12:37 amI’d pay money to see a celebrity cage match, Snoop Dogg vs. Caitlyn Jenner.
Or better yet Bruce vs. Caitlyn. Two go in, only one comes out.
er… only one emerges?
papertiger (c2d6da) — 6/7/2015 @ 2:21 amWay to take stuff out of context. Neither of these advisories was aimed at the general public. They were aimed at audiences predisposed to be sympathetic to Caitlyn. They were not attempts to convert the great unwashed masses.
Ron (dae2ea) — 6/20/2015 @ 9:34 amthen they need to take showers Mr. Ron
and for the love of pete don’t skimp on the bodywash people
happyfeet (831175) — 6/20/2015 @ 9:49 amCaitlyn in particular should take a shower and wash off all that neosporin stank
she looks like she has that not so fresh feeling
happyfeet (831175) — 6/20/2015 @ 9:55 am