Are you a man or a woman?

[User]

2 minutes ago, Scott75 said:

Yes, it's not a recursive acronym, but it works in the same way. I've never seen the term recursive word, but I don't see why it can't be coined if it doens't yet exist. All words were created at some point.

No, it doesn't work the same way. Again... the definition of a word is meaningless nonsense if you are using the word to define it. 

3 minutes ago, Scott75 said:

At this point, this notion you have that -I'm- trying to define these words is just comical. Even the FDA now defines gender as a social construct:

You did try to define the word. You did push the absurd nonsensical definition. I don't care that the FDA defines gender as a social construct. That doesn't change the absurdity of the definition you were pushing here. 

[Nationalist]

6 hours ago, Scott75 said:

Indeed. I suspect you thought that I was responding to a post of yours. As you can see from the nested quotes, I wasn't.

I suspect you're playing games now. You replied to me instead of Deluge for some dumb reason

[CdnFox]

4 hours ago, Scott75 said:

Yes, it's not a recursive acronym, but it works in the same way. I've never seen the term recursive word, but I don't see why it can't be coined if it doens't yet exist. All words were created at some point. At this point, this notion you have that -I'm- trying to define these words is just comical. Even the FDA now defines gender as a social construct:

**

In 1993, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) started to use gender instead of sex to avoid confusion with sexual intercourse.^[28] Later, in 2011, the FDA reversed its position and began using sex as the biological classification and gender as "a person's self-representation as male or female, or how that person is responded to by social institutions based on the individual's gender presentation."^[29]

**

Source:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender

In my search for information on all of this, I believe I've found a category for people like you who refuse to recognize this new reality: the anti-gender movement. Quoting from Wikipedia's page on this movement:

**

The anti-gender movement is a global phenomenon that opposes concepts often referred to as "gender ideology" or "gender theory." These terms lack a clear, consistent definition but are commonly used by the movement to critique a range of issues related to gender equality, LGBT rights, and gender studies. Originating in the late 20th century, the movement has drawn support from far-right and right-wing populist groups, conservative religious organizations, and social conservatives worldwide. It views advances in gender inclusion and LGBT rights as threats to traditional family structures, religious values, and established social norms.

**

Source:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-gender_movement

All your proving is that there is no merit to your attempt to try and change the meaning of words. It's being done to suit a whim and for propaganda purposes.

You're hardly the first person to want to change words for propaganda purposes but most people recognize that as being a pretty disgusting thing to do. Gobels is not well loved in history

[Scott75]

On 12/26/2024 at 10:43 AM, User said:

  

On 12/26/2024 at 7:41 AM, Scott75 said:

That is, I'm beginning to think that it's possible you've never acknowledged that there is more than one definition for terms like male and female.

Possible?

You were the one who made the assertion. You have no evidence for it.

I thought I did. I think part of the issue is that it's hard for me to understand that you can't seem to grasp that different people have different definitions of certain words from your own. 

On 12/26/2024 at 10:43 AM, User said:

On 12/26/2024 at 7:41 AM, Scott75 said:

This, despite the fact that well known sources of information such as Wikipedia make it clear that there is in fact more than one definition. The definitions that you have such a hard time accepting exists is spelled out on Wikipedia articles on male and female:

**

In humans, the word male can also be used to refer to gender, in the social sense of gender role or gender identity.^[7]

**

Source:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Male

 

**

In humans, the word female can also be used to refer to gender in the social sense of gender role or gender identity.^[5][6]

**

Source:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female

I have already played this dumb Wikipedia game with you already. 

I can certainly believe that I've tried to point out to you that large institutions have different definitions of words like male and female than your own. I'm beginning to think we can't make any further progress in this debate, since you refuse to acknowledge what any reasonable person can see- a large group of people have different definitions on terms like gender, male and female than your own. 

Edited December 29, 2024 by Scott75

[Scott75]

On 12/26/2024 at 10:44 AM, Deluge said:

On 12/26/2024 at 2:24 AM, Scott75 said:

No, I'm not. I, along with a lot of other people, have simply separated a person's biological sex with a person's gender. If knowing a person's biological sex is important, one can ask them their biological sex, or, if they have identified as a male or female, by asking them if they are cisgender or transgender. There is also the fact that some people are born intersex. In case you haven't heard of the term:

**

Intersex people are individuals born with any of several sex characteristics, including chromosome patterns, gonads, or genitals that, according to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, "do not fit typical binary notions of male or female bodies".^[1][2]

Sex assignment at birth usually aligns with a child's external genitalia. The number of births with ambiguous genitals is in the range of 1:4,500–1:2,000 (0.02%–0.05%).^[3] Other conditions involve the development of atypical chromosomes, gonads, or hormones.^[4][2] Some persons may be assigned and raised as a girl or boy but then identify with another gender later in life, while most continue to identify with their assigned sex.^[5][6][7] The number of births where the baby is intersex has been reported differently depending on who reports and which definition of intersex is used. Anne Fausto-Sterling and her book co-authors claim the prevalence of "nondimorphic sexual development" in humans might be as high as 1.7%.^[8][9] However, a response published by Leonard Sax reports this figure includes conditions such as late onset congenital adrenal hyperplasia and Klinefelter syndrome, which most clinicians do not recognize as intersex; Sax states, "if the term intersex is to retain any meaning, the term should be restricted to those conditions in which chromosomal sex is inconsistent with phenotypic sex, or in which the phenotype is not classifiable as either male or female", stating the prevalence of intersex is about 0.018% (one in 5,500 births), about 100 times less than Fausto-Sterling's estimate.^[4][10][11]

**

Source:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersex

No, what you're saying is that a man can also be a woman because he identifies as a woman. In other words, you're saying that biological sex is no longer the sole determinant of a person's sex. 

No, I'm not saying that at all. No one can change a person's biological sex. However, for some time now, there has been a definition of a person's -gender- that allows anyone who identifies as a given gender to be that gender. I just found a Wikipedia page called Gender identity that explains all of this in great detail. Quoting from the 2 first paragraphs of their article:

**

Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender.^[1] Gender identity can correlate with a person's assigned sex or can differ from it. In most individuals, the various biological determinants of sex are congruent and consistent with the individual's gender identity.^[2] Gender expression typically reflects a person's gender identity, but this is not always the case.^[3][4] While a person may express behaviors, attitudes, and appearances consistent with a particular gender role, such expression may not necessarily reflect their gender identity. The term gender identity was coined by psychiatry professor Robert J. Stoller in 1964 and popularized by psychologist John Money.^[5][6][7]

In most societies, there is a basic division between gender attributes associated with males and females, a gender binary to which most people adhere and which includes expectations of masculinity and femininity in all aspects of sex and gender: biological sex, gender identity, gender expression, and sexual orientation.^[8][9][10] Some people do not identify with some, or all, of the aspects of gender associated with their biological sex; some of those people are transgender, non-binary, or genderqueer. Some societies have third gender categories.^[11]

**

Source:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_identity

[Scott75]

On 12/26/2024 at 10:44 AM, Deluge said:

On 12/26/2024 at 2:24 AM, Scott75 said:

The American national elections are only evidence that more voting Americans preferred Trump over Kamala.

That's the stupidest conclusion a person can come up with. [snip]

Invective laden diatribes aren't exactly helpful in discussions. At best, the person you hurl them at simply points this out. At worst, they start doing the same, resulting in a flame war.

Edited December 29, 2024 by Scott75

[Scott75]

On 12/26/2024 at 10:56 AM, Deluge said:

On 12/26/2024 at 3:06 AM, Scott75 said:

If this conversation is to move forward, I think we need to agree on what an agenda pusher -is-. I went looking online for a definition and found this one in some small forum:

**

It means that you are forcing/pushing other people to accept your opinions, actions, values while disregarding theirs.

**

Source:

https://hinative.com/questions/20350859

I we can agree to that definition, I would argue that I've done a -lot- of listening to other people's opinions, actions and values, and I've done it -without- resorting to personal attacks. Anyway, given the above definition, I find what you say -after- your above comment to be particularly ironic. Quoting what you said after below:

**

Agenda pushers are aggressive and highly obnoxious, so if you can't handle the pushback then it's best to just walk away and self-insultate.

**

It almost sounds like you know you're an agenda pusher and you just engaged in a freudian slip. 

Oh, you've done a marvelous job of holding back the insults

Thank you :-).

On 12/26/2024 at 10:56 AM, Deluge said:

Oh, you've done a marvelous job of holding back the insults, but that doesn't mean you haven't been pushing your agenda.

What I've been trying to do is explain to you and a few others here why I believe what I believe. You've already acknowledged that I'm not insulting people. I for one like trying to understand why people believe what they believe. It's a large part of why I've listened to you and others who disagree with some of my points of view on this subject. If you don't like listening to what I have to say, you ofcourse don't have to read my posts.

On 12/26/2024 at 10:56 AM, Deluge said:

You've very much been pushing your agenda; it's why you post the same shit over and over again.

Ah, I see. you've started with the insults again. Time to stop reading your post.

[Scott75]

On 12/26/2024 at 11:35 PM, CdnFox said:

On 12/26/2024 at 2:43 AM, Scott75 said:

On 12/16/2024 at 10:53 AM, CdnFox said:

On 12/16/2024 at 3:24 AM, Scott75 said:

On 11/16/2024 at 11:44 AM, CdnFox said:

Do people are just sick of dealing with your dishonesty.

I'm going to assume you meant something like "Dude" instead of "Do".

Hard to say, you clumped so many Quotes together I'm not even a million percent sure who you're talking to. Is this your very first time on a discussion forum junior?

I've been posting in online forums for around 3 decades now. Which has certainly given me enough time to realize when someone is trying to foist the blame for their own typos on me using spurious logic.

Not my typos kiddo and not even your typos.

Explain to me how "Do people are just sick of dealing with your dishonesty" is a proper English sentence and then we can talk about who made a typo.

[Scott75]

On 12/27/2024 at 9:14 AM, CdnFox said:

On 12/27/2024 at 8:00 AM, Scott75 said:

On 12/22/2024 at 12:55 PM, CdnFox said:

They can do whatever they want. They can do that right now. So mission accomplished you're done  

No, they really can't.

Of course they can. This is Canada, this isn't around the world.

First of all, this thread is in the "Federal Politics of the United States" forum. Secondly, while I was born and spent most of my life in Canada, I'm not in it now, I've been living in Mexico for the past 3 years. Thirdly, Deluge's opening post made no mention of this discussion only being about the Canadian experience.

That being said, since you clearly want to focus on the Canadian experience, I do acknowledge that LGTBQ rights in Canada are some of the best in the world:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBTQ_rights_in_Canada

Quoting the introductory paragraph:

**

Canadian lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) rights are some of the most extensive in the world.^[5][6][7] Same-sex sexual activity, in private between consenting adults, was decriminalized in Canada on June 27, 1969, when the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1968–69 (also known as Bill C-150) was brought into force upon royal assent.^[1] In a landmark decision in 1995, Egan v Canada, the Supreme Court of Canada held that sexual orientation is constitutionally protected under the equality clause of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.^[8] In 2005, Canada became the fourth country in the world, and the first in the Americas, that legalized same-sex marriage.^[9] In 2022, Canada was the third country in the world, and the first in North America, that statutorily banned conversion therapy nationwide for both minors and adults, and made it a crime to subject anyone to it, as defined by statutory law in the Criminal Code.

**

 

[Scott75]

On 12/27/2024 at 9:14 AM, CdnFox said:

On 12/27/2024 at 7:42 AM, Scott75 said:

I can agree that my side's been making some erroneous and insulting assertions as well, but as I was taught in grade school, 2 wrongs don't make a right.

And yet you continue it.

I'm not the one who's constantly accusing -you- of being dishonest, as well as using tons of insulting terms to describe you. You really need to take a look at your own behaviour here. I think a certain bible verse applies well here:

"Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?"

[Scott75]

On 12/27/2024 at 9:19 AM, CdnFox said:

On 12/27/2024 at 8:35 AM, Scott75 said:

On 12/22/2024 at 1:04 PM, User said:

You don't get to pretend you are above the fray of making personal comments when you are here accusing someone of transphobia...

I'm just pointing out that you seem to have a case of transphobia.

Here's a classic example. You cannot argue with what @User Has said

I disagree with that on general terms, but in this particular case, I got mixed up- I had told Deluge that it seemed like he had a classic case of transphobia, User came up with his comment above and I didn't realize that he wasn't the one I'd brought up the bit on transphobia. That being said, I suspect that he'd also qualify as having transphobia. Same with you.

[Scott75]

On 12/27/2024 at 9:20 AM, CdnFox said:

On 12/27/2024 at 9:13 AM, Scott75 said:

No, I want individuals to be able to define who they themselves are.

They can do that for themselves but they can't do that for everyone else and considering that you insist that straight people identify as "cis" You pretty much shot yourself in the foot already

I'm beginning to think that I may have reached an impasse for people like you, Deluge, User and Nationalist. You refuse to accept the fact that there are now a good amount of people who define words like male as female as anyone who identifies as such, at least from the perspective of gender. If you can't even recognize this basic fact, I'm beginning to think there is no point in continuing this debate. 

[Scott75]

On 12/27/2024 at 10:12 AM, CdnFox said:

Like I've said before, there are other ways of differentiating between people who are trannies

I think there's no point in going further, because I -suspect- you -know- that trannies is a word that is now generally considered offensive to transgender people. But just in case you don't:

**

Tranny is an offensive and derogatory slur for a transgender individual,^[1] often specifically a transgender woman.^[2]

During the early 2000s, there was some confusion and debate over whether the term was considered as a slur, was considered acceptable, or a reappropriated term of unity and pride, but by 2017, the term had been banned by several major media stylebooks and was considered hate speech by Facebook.^[3][4]

**

Source:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tranny

[Scott75]

On 12/27/2024 at 12:01 PM, User said:

On 12/27/2024 at 8:35 AM, Scott75 said:

I'm just pointing out that you seem to have a case of transphobia.

No, you were accusing someone else of this, now you are accusing me.

I was telling Deluge that he seemed to have a case of transphobia and didn't realize that you weren't the person I'd been talking to. In any case, you also seem to have a case of transphobia.

On 12/27/2024 at 12:01 PM, User said:

Either way, it is a sad pathetic tactic to make this personal.

No, it's just a label that I think fits people like you and Deluge. If you'd like to argue that you aren't transphobic, by all means, present your evidence.

On 12/27/2024 at 12:01 PM, User said:

To my point, you are not above the fray. You may not be calling me stupid or dumb, but saying I have transphobia is no less a pathetic personal smear.

 

I don't think anyone should be called stupid or dumb. I don't see how it helps to understand a person. Calling someone transphobic, on the other hand, can explain a fair amount about a person, especially in a debate on trans issues.

Edited December 29, 2024 by Scott75

[Scott75]

On 12/27/2024 at 11:57 AM, User said:

On 12/27/2024 at 7:50 AM, Scott75 said:

On 12/22/2024 at 11:02 AM, User said:

On 12/21/2024 at 11:36 PM, Scott75 said:

The problem is that different groups of people define men and women differently. You seem to think that ignoring this will just make the problem disappear, but it won't.

Yes, that is your problem. Not mine. Not societies.

Don't kid yourself, it's your problem too. If it wasn't, we'd really have nothing to discuss here. The same goes for society. If this problem didn't exist in society, there wouldn't be court cases dealing with how to deal with people who are born of a given sex but identify with the opposite gender.

Nope. This is only my problem in as much as you are trying to fabricate it into being one for me.

I'm not 'fabricating' court cases, or Wikipedia articles detailing the new uses for terms like gender.

 

[Scott75]

On 12/27/2024 at 11:57 AM, User said:

On 12/27/2024 at 7:50 AM, Scott75 said:

On 12/22/2024 at 11:02 AM, User said:

On 12/21/2024 at 11:36 PM, Scott75 said:

The problem is that different groups of people define men and women differently. You seem to think that ignoring this will just make the problem disappear, but it won't.

Yes, that is your problem. Not mine. Not societies. One you are creating and pushing.

I didn't "create" this problem, it's one that predates my birth. Nor am I "pushing" it. I'm simply pointing it out.

Yes, you are here pushing this. You are not merely pointing it out. You have been making arguments for this. 

In this particular argument, I'm just pointing out that "different groups of people define men and women differently". You can choose to ignore this fact, but the fact remains regardless.

[Scott75]

On 12/27/2024 at 12:01 PM, User said:

On 12/27/2024 at 8:35 AM, Scott75 said:

I said that in -some- ways, they'd fit right in with the KKK. I am happy to report that the person I said this to said they did -not- support the KKK. As I've mentioned, there are some, perhaps most, in the KKK, who are also against many elements of the LGTB community and say so in quite disparaging ways. My goal was to get them to realize that some groups which I had hoped they were -not- into are also quite disparaging of the LGTB community. 

It adds nothing to the discussion other than to lump someone in with an obviously bad group like the KKK. It is a petty and disgusting jab that makes this personal. To the point again... you are not above the fray. 

If you want to lecture people on name calling or personal insults, deal with your own attempts to make things personal here. At least have the honesty to own up to it instead of this pathetic attempt to weasel your way out of it.

I stand by my point that some of the behaviours in the anti-gender movement, of which you clearly seem to be a part of, are quite similar to those taken by groups such as the KKK, although they are perhaps more extreme in their hate for transgender people. An article on a KKK flyer on transgender people can be seen here:

https://www.hrc.org/press-releases/hateful-anti-transgender-flyer-distributed-by-kkk-in-alabama-neighborhood

[Scott75]

On 12/27/2024 at 3:07 PM, Deluge said:

If a person acts like a degenerate then he needs to be called out. The KKK and the Nazis have nothing to do with it.

I think this article is useful in understanding the danger of hateful words used on a group of people:

https://itstartedwithwords.org/statements/

[Scott75]

On 12/27/2024 at 8:51 PM, Deluge said:

On 12/27/2024 at 8:31 PM, Scott75 said:

I suppose I should console myself with the fact that at least you haven't said that you are -sure- I am "lying", as at least one poster here has done. Anyway, let's get to more of what you've said in your post...

You have a link handy for this alleged LGBT agenda?

I suppose some in the trans community decided to make use of this notion that they have an unified agenda :-p. The very first line of text on that page is this:

"The Trans Agenda for Liberation is a community-led guide towards the world we deserve."

That certainly sounds fine, but that definitely doesn't mean that all transgender people on board with their guide, let alone all the people who support transgender people. 

It's not "some" of the trans community; it's ALL of it, including the LGB cultists. 

Check out the link below, and try not to get too excited - this is a public forum, after all. 

https://www.thetaskforce.org/

I asked if you had a link handy for this alleged LGBT agenda. You provided a link to an LGBT activist site. That's not what I'd asked for. I suspect there is no LGBT agenda, just activist sites like the one you provided.

If yet to see any evidence for your notion that "all" of the LGBT community is unified in anything.

[Scott75]

On 12/27/2024 at 11:12 PM, User said:

On 12/27/2024 at 9:47 PM, Scott75 said:

On 12/22/2024 at 10:24 PM, User said:

I quoted you. 

You did, yes.

Glad you agree. 

I agree that you quoted me. You may want to read the rest of my previous post to see where we disagreed.

[Scott75]

On 12/28/2024 at 2:04 AM, CdnFox said:

On 12/27/2024 at 9:47 PM, Scott75 said:

You did, yes. I suspect you didn't even read the rest of what I wrote in the post you're responding to. Heck, you apparently didn't even understand the one line of mine you -did- quote above. Put simply: what you said I said and what your quote from me said are not the same thing. For anyone who'd like to know the details of User's misunderstanding, I invite you to read my post #717.

Looks like he's right you're wrong.

I invite anyone reading this to take a look at my post #717 and see if they agree with CdnFox.

[Scott75]

21 hours ago, Deluge said:

On 12/28/2024 at 6:02 AM, Scott75 said:

I think I may agree with you that pole dancing in front of kids isn't the best idea, but I suspect that this happens rarely anyway. I'm a supporter of Drag Queen Story Hour, though. Wikipedia has a page on it:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drag_Queen_Story_Hour

Again, this is an area where the culture war in the U.S. and other places is clearly ongong. Quoting the final section of the article above makes this clear:

**

Bans on DSH [Drag Queen Story Hour] have been proposed and enacted in several jurisdictions.

Current laws make DSH events illegal in several countries, including Hungary and Russia.

In the United States, DSH is banned in the state of Tennessee (but was blocked by a federal judge) and bans are being considered in several other states.^[75]

**

As to why I'm in favour, here's a good reason that the article mentioned:

**

The New York Times noted "Laura Edwards-Leeper, a clinical psychologist in Oregon who works with queer and trans kids, said that experimenting with gender expression isn't necessarily linked to being queer or trans."^[38] and "It's normal at basically any age for boys to dress up as princesses and girls in male superhero outfits".^[38] She argues that what changed is parenting: "When there's no judgment, kids are more likely to feel free to explore".^[38]

**

Left unsaid, but I think implied, is that it allows kids to express their 'gender' the way they'd like to, without feeling that they need to suppress it because it won't look "normal".

Kids need to be taught who they are, not who they've been told to think who they are, and this is accomplished through biology instruction.

As I've said many times, I have nothing against biology and I'm glad that there is now a distinction for a good amount of people between a person's biological sex and a person's gender identity. Kids need to be taught these differences, so that they can be both accepting of other's diversity and not feel ashamed if they find that they themselves don't conform to gender norms. 

21 hours ago, Deluge said:

When I say the trannies need to stay in their lane

There you go, insulting transgender people again. I think that's enough for this post.

[Scott75]

21 hours ago, Deluge said:

On 12/28/2024 at 6:09 AM, Scott75 said:

For the audience, I dealt with the first sentence in my previous post. As to "No homosexual/transsexual novels or storybooks in libraries", "no pronouns" and "no gender identity bull****", I think I understand where this is all coming from. It seems you're afraid of the LGBT community and think that other people should be too. Fortunately, I think that initiatives like the ones you mention are gaining steam and soon, people who think like you will become a thing of the past. It just takes time.

The same when it comes to bathrooms- it's not that hard to make each bathroom cubile private, as a matter of fact, that's the way female bathrooms are already set up. Simply having unisex bathrooms with private cubicles for everyone might be the solution to this.

As to your final comment on the left wing, it's not just the left wing that's changing as I've mentioned in the past- there's a faction within the Republican party that is also becoming more amenable to these changes as well. Quoting from an article on the subject:

**

There are wide ideological differences within both parties. Two-thirds of conservative Republicans (66%) view the impact of same-sex marriage negatively. Nearly the same share of moderate and liberal Republicans (62%) take a positive view.

** 

Full article:

https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2022/11/15/about-six-in-ten-americans-say-legalization-of-same-sex-marriage-is-good-for-society/

Scott75 believes transsexualism is America's future, and I think he's gotten highly excited about that idea. I wouldn't be surprised if he's already considering gender reassignment surgery.

 

False. As I've mentioned before, I'm a cisgender male. But more than that, I'm not a fan of gender reassignment surgery. Like Michael Hardner, I don't think that minors should be having it done at all and I -suspect- that there are better solutions for many adults who are considering doing it as well. However, I think that adults should be allowed to have it done.

21 hours ago, Deluge said:

He also thinks there aren't enough bathrooms and locker rooms. He wants to increase financial burden on both the private and public sectors in order to fuel the gender fantasy he's developed while researching transsexualism.

No, I just want transgender people to have places to go the washroom or locker room and not be discriminated against. I remember hearing a personal story of a school nurse allowing a transgender student to use a special washroom, presumably to avoid the bullying when they used the washroom that comforms to their biological sex.

21 hours ago, Deluge said:

S75 also hates urinals; he feels they are mysoginistic or bigoted or even racist somehow. 

No, though I highly suspect that a transgender woman who's had surgery would have a hard time being able to use one of those. I personally don't like using urinals myself, especially if they don't have partitions, as I'd rather have more privacy.

21 hours ago, Deluge said:

Scott75 is probably asexual.

Wrong again.

[Scott75]

21 hours ago, Deluge said:

On 12/28/2024 at 7:01 AM, Scott75 said:

In the past, I decided to look up the meaning of an agenda pusher. I found the following definition, which I think fits:

**

It means that you are forcing/pushing other people to accept your opinions, actions, values while disregarding theirs.

**

Source:

https://hinative.com/questions/20350859

I'd say it's -you- who are pushing an agenda, with your continual use of the word tranny, despite the fact that you know that it's an insult to transgender people at this point. You don't want to listen to viewpoints that differ from your own and apparently want to silence those who disagree with you into submission, with insults if necessary.

I actually have very strong moral values. It's one of the reasons I decided to take up this discussion to begin with.

Sorry, pal, my pushing is all pushBACK. I'm arguing to preserve what's already been.

That makes sense. Times change, and there will always be some who don't like the changes. Sometimes, the changes are bad, such as the addition of harmful herbicides and pesticides in our foods. Sometimes, the changes are good. I ofcourse believe that the addition of terms such as gender identity is a good thing. I'm guessing you don't.

21 hours ago, Deluge said:

You have ZERO morals. All you have is a political agenda.

Unsubstantiated assertions are easy to make. What's generally much harder is to back them up with evidence. 

[Scott75]

21 hours ago, Deluge said:

On 12/28/2024 at 8:26 AM, Scott75 said:

I think this is the first time in this thread that Marxists were even mentioned in this thread. I'm drawn to a recent comment made by Michael Hardner:

I suspect he has a good point here. By the same token, conservative republicans would -also- want to ignore the fact that many in their own party are becoming more accepting, because they then wouldn't be able to frame the issue as a right vs. left affair, but rather one where even members of their own party are becoming more accepting.

Oh, you're talking about the RINO's (Republican In Name Only). Yes, I'm sure most, if not all, of those invertebrates are down for whatever the trannies serve up. 

Who determines who is a RINO and who isn't? I took a look at Wikipedia's page on RINO, found these interesting quotes:

**

During Republican primary campaign season, some conservative organizations target Republicans who fail to adopt their stances by referring to them as RINOs. A "RINO Hunters Club" formed by the National Federation of Republican Assemblies has taken political action against those they considered RINOs.^[5][6] The fiscally conservative 501(c)4 organization Club for Growth started the "RINO Watch" list to monitor "Republican office holders around the nation who have advanced egregious anti-growth, anti-freedom or anti-free market policies"; other conservative groups published similar lists.

[snip]

Recently, the term has been used to describe Republican critics of former President Donald Trump, with Trump himself tweeting that Congressional Republicans who recognized Joe Biden as the winner of the 2020 US Presidential election are RINOs. Some Republicans critical of Trump occasionally used the epithet to describe Trump himself, due to his history as a registered Democrat.^[8][9]

**

Source:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_in_name_only

Edited December 29, 2024 by Scott75