Matthew Posted February 10 Report Posted February 10 (edited) 7 hours ago, User said: Many of those states also have convoluted laws around only allow certain beverages in private homes with a lower alcohol content or revolve around religious / medical exceptions, not that you are just letting your kids drink a bottle of Jack Daniels... never mind the complications with letting them drink to drunkenness conflicting with child abuse and neglect laws then either. To the spirit of this discussion, there certainly are a host of laws around not allowing minors to purchase, possess or drink alcohol because we as a society have found that they are children and that harms them. The fact that you can let them drink a sip of wine at communion, have exceptions for cooking classes, or that older archaic laws allow them to drink with their parents their home-brewed beverages with a low ABW % than most anything you can buy over the counter is not the argument you think it is. I don't know where you're from, but here in Iowa the law says parents are allowed to let their children drink alcohol for beverage purposes so long as the parents are present and give their consent (see Iowa Code §123.47 subsection 3). There is no differentiation on alcohol content. I'm sure there are stricter states out there but it would not be unusual for a teenager at a party here with their parents to get drunk. 7 hours ago, User said: if a parent in their own home wants to convert their daughter into a boy... that isn't what we are talking about here either. We are talking about the medical profession not being allowed to do so or the schools or other resources. That's a fair point, though medical decisions are by default a private matter. State interventions where the government decides what health decisions you and your doctor can and cannot make ARE authoritarian and are sometimes justified if the intervention will substantially impact public health, which I don't think can be said if this since a gender treatment isn't going to directly impact the health of anyone else beyond the person choosing to do it. 7 hours ago, User said: you are doing an awful lot of twisting and contorting here to support something you claim to be opposed to. I am opposed to the idea that anyone is inherently transgender. I'm also opposed to people being picked on for their beliefs by those in power, unless their beliefs are directly doing harm to others in society. I think the transgender subculture comes pretty close to that line and sometimes crosses it. But mostly this is a story about teenagers and their parents making life choices which are theirs to make. 7 hours ago, User said: So... they can perform mental health evaluations, with parental consent. You just spent all that time arguing about parental consent... now you oppose it? Well for example at the beginning of the school year parents can consent or deny consent to many things up front during registration. In this way almost all parents are asked. But in this case republicans have decided that mental health screening can't be asked up front during registration and has to be a letter mailed home and then replied to in writing. So this, perhaps by design, vastly cuts the percentage of students screened. So yes, parental consent is great. But doing it in a way to most dramatically minimize participation is harmful. 7 hours ago, User said: Do you support laws / policies that prohibit forcing girls to have to compete with boys or forcing women to have to compete against men? I don't care about that at all, either way. I oppose any taxpayer money going towards sports. So how they do their sports is up to them. 7 hours ago, User said: Forcing girls / women to have to share their locker room spaces, bathrooms, or other private areas traditionally off limits to boys/men with boys/men? Mainly I think it should default to one's current primary sex characteristics / external reproductive organs. I think this is relevant for schools. But realistically an alternate changing/restroom area is going to be necessary in a high school changing situation. But overall i don't see the bathroom / locker room thing as a significant policy issue because public policy is meant to fix problems and there is no noteworthy problem with women being assaulted by transgender men in bathrooms. Women are sexually assaulted by regular straight / non-trans guys in bathrooms and elsewhere all the time for centuries (90% of the time it's by family members). So if safety for women in bathrooms is an actual concern, these bathroom laws seem rather useless at confronting it. 7 hours ago, User said: Do you support schools enacting policies or states enacting laws that say parents have no right to know if they are affirming their child in a gender they are not? Using pronouns or calling their child by something they are not? A law saying parents have no right to know? Nope i don't support that nor laws that try to mandate certain ponoun. On the flip side, a law requiring teachers to out students to parents if they ask to be called by a different name/pronoun? I don't support that either. I do think teenagers ought to have some minimal right to informally go by a different name. Teachers shouldn't be compelled hide this, nor be compelled to inform. If the kid doesn't trust their parent enough to let them in on it, that's the parent's fault. If the parent outright objects to an alternate name being used, teachers should respect the parents wish. But I think the general principle should default to maximum freedom for self determination. If any person in my life asks me to call them by a certain name or to use a certain ponoun, basic human politeness would compel me to do that regardless of my opinion about their ideas. Edited February 10 by Matthew Quote
User Posted February 11 Report Posted February 11 3 hours ago, Matthew said: I don't know where you're from, but here in Iowa the law says parents are allowed to let their children drink alcohol for beverage purposes so long as the parents are present and give their consent (see Iowa Code §123.47 subsection 3). There is no differentiation on alcohol content. I'm sure there are stricter states out there but it would not be unusual for a teenager at a party here with their parents to get drunk. The law in Iowa makes the point I just did, that it is for medicinal purposes. It is not so that minors can drink alcohol just to drink and party or get drunk. Even then... I am highly dubious that the Child Protective laws would not apply to getting drunk with your parents. 3 hours ago, Matthew said: That's a fair point, though medical decisions are by default a private matter. State interventions where the government decides what health decisions you and your doctor can and cannot make ARE authoritarian and are sometimes justified if the intervention will substantially impact public health, which I don't think can be said if this since a gender treatment isn't going to directly impact the health of anyone else beyond the person choosing to do it. No, medical decisions are not by default a private matter when we are dealing with those medical decisions being carried out by a highly regulated professional health care industry. The medical industry is not anarchy. We have many laws regarding this and standards of care. Just because you want to kill yourself... you can't. Parents are also prevented from doing harm to their kids... they can't just decide to let them die, prevent care, etc... And again... we are talking about CHILDREN. They do not have the capacity to consent to such things, nor are parents allowed to harm their children in many ways. 3 hours ago, Matthew said: I am opposed to the idea that anyone is inherently transgender. I'm also opposed to people being picked on for their beliefs by those in power, unless their beliefs are directly doing harm to others in society. I think the transgender subculture comes pretty close to that line and sometimes crosses it. But mostly this is a story about teenagers and their parents making life choices which are theirs to make. No, not mostly at all. That is maybe 10% of the discussion, but allowing children to be mutilated is certainly one of the most impactful aspects of this. As I said before, these are children, they do not have the capacity to consent to these choices nor do parents have the capacity to consent to harming their children either. 3 hours ago, Matthew said: Well for example at the beginning of the school year parents can consent or deny consent to many things up front during registration. In this way almost all parents are asked. But in this case republicans have decided that mental health screening can't be asked up front during registration and has to be a letter mailed home and then replied to in writing. So this, perhaps by design, vastly cuts the percentage of students screened. So yes, parental consent is great. But doing it in a way to most dramatically minimize participation is harmful. You are conflating general mental health issues with very specifically talking about gender affirming care. No one is "screened" for being transgender and I would 10000000% oppose such nonsense. That is no longer providing care when needed, it is absurdity in search of a problem. How exactly is this harmful? This is a law specifically dealing with the madness going on in schools where teachers and administrators are hiding that they are providing gender affirmation or care to their children without their consent. And schools should not be providing any kind of mental health care without parental consent. Most schools require signed permission slips just to give a kid Tylenol, but sure, they should totally be allowed to engage in changing a kids gender without telling the parents. 3 hours ago, Matthew said: I don't care about that at all, either way. I oppose any taxpayer money going towards sports. So how they do their sports is up to them. So... your issue with with tax payer funded schools then? Meanwhile, in reality, schools have sports and they are funded by taxes as part of a kids education. So, you are just fine with passing laws that stipulate in these programs, that boys who think they are girls can't compete with the girls (e.g. girls are not forced to play against boys?) Do you support any of the Title 9 legislation meant to level the playing field in sports to give girls equal opportunities? 3 hours ago, Matthew said: Mainly I think it should default to one's current primary sex characteristics / external reproductive organs. I think this is relevant for schools. But realistically an alternate changing/restroom area is going to be necessary in a high school changing situation. But overall i don't see the bathroom / locker room thing as a significant policy issue because public policy is meant to fix problems and there is no noteworthy problem with women being assaulted by transgender men in bathrooms. Women are sexually assaulted by regular straight / non-trans guys in bathrooms and elsewhere all the time for centuries (90% of the time it's by family members). So if safety for women in bathrooms is an actual concern, these bathroom laws seem rather useless at confronting it. This is a strawman. I made no argument about assualts, but there are examples of this happening. The point is privacy. The problem being fixed is that the folks pushing the transgender madness are insisting on changing those policies and laws to force boys who think they are girls into those traditionally girl only spaces. 3 hours ago, Matthew said: A law saying parents have no right to know? Nope i don't support that nor laws that try to mandate certain ponoun. Good, because that is exactly what left wing places are doing. 3 hours ago, Matthew said: On the flip side, a law requiring teachers to out students to parents if they ask to be called by a different name/pronoun? I don't support that either. Ah... this is the same game being played by those pushing this madness, they are equating transgenders to being gay and you are once again betraying yourself. You claim to not believe this stuff... but now you are here pushing the position that does. No one is being "outed" if you really believe what you claim you do. These are kids with a mental issue and it is not the schools place to hide that from their parents and "affirm" those kids in a delusion. Do you support a school actually going through with a students request here or just not telling parents the request was made? 3 hours ago, Matthew said: But I think the general principle should default to maximum freedom for self determination. If any person in my life asks me to call them by a certain name or to use a certain ponoun, basic human politeness would compel me to do that regardless of my opinion about their ideas. Moving forward, you shall henceforth refer to me in all of your responses as Your Royal Highness and my pronouns are "The Amazing" 1 Quote
Matthew Posted February 11 Report Posted February 11 (edited) 11 hours ago, User said: The law in Iowa makes the point I just did, that it is for medicinal purposes. It says "for beverage or medicinal purposes" 11 hours ago, User said: You are conflating general mental health issues with very specifically talking about gender affirming care. No one is "screened" for being transgender and I would 10000000% oppose such nonsense. Yup, exactly. It was part of a package of anti trans laws, which really is a vulnerability for republicans to do stupid things. 11 hours ago, User said: No, medical decisions are not by default a private matter when we are dealing with those medical decisions being carried out by a highly regulated professional health care industry. Diagnoses and treatment decisions are by default a private decision, naturally within a context of professional standards and government safety requirements. Obviously the government CAN step in and say that a certain treatment is illegal for non-medical political or moral reasons of those in power. But when doing so is purely just targeting a certain disliked population, it's unlikely to be a longstanding policy. 11 hours ago, User said: Meanwhile, in reality, schools have sports and they are funded by taxes as part of a kids education. So, you are just fine with passing laws that stipulate in these programs, that boys who think they are girls can't compete with the girls (e.g. girls are not forced to play against boys?) Nah I do not care about these laws, or really most of the anti-trans laws. Reasonable people could conclude either direction and it will all be a topic of shifting winds. Older people who are more triggered by the whole transgender thing will die off and eventually these alternate gender ideas will gradually be normalized. Laws like this are more likely to speed up that process and a whole generation or two of right wing policy making will be wasted fixated on a cultural trend on which they can't actually affect long-term change. 11 hours ago, User said: The problem being fixed is that the folks pushing the transgender madness are insisting on changing those policies and laws to force boys who think they are girls into those traditionally girl only spaces. I agree. The thing about bathrooms is it needs to be simple. It's extremely difficult to make a simple policy on this. So unless an actual problem emerges, it's probably best to just let people pee wherever they feel comfortable and focus on ways making the public bathroom designs safe and private. 11 hours ago, User said: You claim to not believe this stuff... but now you are here pushing the position that does. "This stuff?" Sloppy thinking. Also what kind of dork asks someone's opinion and then when they answer accuses them of pushing a belief? 11 hours ago, User said: Do you support a school actually going through with a students request here or just not telling parents the request was made? If a student (or any person) asks to go by a certain name or pronoun, then the simple and normal human thing to do is to do that. If a student asks to not tell their parents, that's not a promise a teacher can make should the issue of their name arise. But there is no reason to actively betray a student's trust. A teacher has a higher responsibility for protecting their student than they do for informing the parent of non-academic insights they have about the student's personal life. Edited February 11 by Matthew Quote
User Posted February 11 Report Posted February 11 55 minutes ago, Matthew said: Yup, exactly. It was part of a package of anti trans laws, which really is a vulnerability for republicans to do stupid things. There you go again... "anti trans" So... this is all proving to be very one way with you. You claim to not support the idea of a kid being trans... and oppose everything that is being done from the right to protect kids and parents rights here from this stuff being pushed onto their kids... but you don't seem to have any of this sentiment towards the left pushing it. 57 minutes ago, Matthew said: Diagnoses and treatment decisions are by default a private decision, naturally within a context of professional standards and government safety requirements. Obviously the government CAN step in and say that a certain treatment is illegal for non-medical political or moral reasons of those in power. But when doing so is purely just targeting a certain disliked population, it's unlikely to be a longstanding policy. Yet again, no they are not. The medical industry is highly regulated with many laws and restrictions on what they can do and how they can do it. Here you are again, using leftist language saying they are targeting a disliked population. You betray yourself yet again. How is it you sit here saying "While I don't think transgender identity is a real thing beyond individuals imagination" but now you refer to them as a "disliked population" This is all just an illogical attack on motives either way. 1 hour ago, Matthew said: Nah I do not care about these laws, or really most of the anti-trans laws. Reasonable people could conclude either direction and it will all be a topic of shifting winds. Older people who are more triggered by the whole transgender thing will die off and eventually these alternate gender ideas will gradually be normalized. Laws like this are more likely to speed up that process and a whole generation or two of right wing policy making will be wasted fixated on a cultural trend on which they can't actually affect long-term change. Except... you do care. Only, your care only goes one way here, in opposing anything that is opposed to the various trans the kids efforts while you don't care that those things are being pushed from the left onto the kids and parents. 1 hour ago, Matthew said: I agree. The thing about bathrooms is it needs to be simple. It's extremely difficult to make a simple policy on this. So unless an actual problem emerges, it's probably best to just let people pee wherever they feel comfortable and focus on ways making the public bathroom designs safe and private. Then, you don't agree, if your position is to just let people pee where they feel comfortable. In the meantime, you want to wait around for an entire civilization to redesign all their bathrooms to accommodate the less than 1% of people you claim are just imagining things. 1 hour ago, Matthew said: "This stuff?" Sloppy thinking. Also what kind of dork asks someone's opinion and then when they answer accuses them of pushing a belief? What kind of dishonest person claims to mostly agree with someone and then proceeds to make arguments and comments that clearly show they don't? What kind of dishonest person tries to claim they don't care or that it is about taxes, or about liberty and freedom, but then they don't really hold those positions consistently beyond pushing transgenderism onto kids? 1 hour ago, Matthew said: If a student (or any person) asks to go by a certain name or pronoun, then the simple and normal human thing to do is to do that. You claimed this was all just people imagining things... so why is it the "simple and normal" thing to pretend with them? To change language for them? If you really believe this, why did you ignore my request? 1 hour ago, Matthew said: If a student asks to not tell their parents, that's not a promise a teacher can make should the issue of their name arise. It isn't even a matter of it being a promise they can or can't make. These are things parents should know and be informed of. 2 hours ago, Matthew said: But there is no reason to actively betray a student's trust. A teacher has a higher responsibility for protecting their student than they do for informing the parent of non-academic insights they have about the student's personal life. Teachers are employees of the state there to educate children. The public bargain being made is that parents hand of their kids to receive that education. Teachers are not priests, they are not there to have the trust of students beyond their role in educating them. There is no "higher responsibility" there. What do you base this on? 1 Quote
CdnFox Posted February 11 Report Posted February 11 1 hour ago, User said: So... this is all proving to be very one way with you. You claim to not support the idea of a kid being trans... and oppose everything that is being done from the right to protect kids and parents rights here from this stuff being pushed onto their kids... but you don't seem to have any of this sentiment towards the left pushing it. We often see this with regards to this issue from the left. They both in equal amounts demand That they are acting in the interests of the children safety but also don't want any regulation that protects children safety. At the same time they want to pretend they are including the families wow simultaneously insisting that families should have no say. And meanwhile they insist that sex and gender are the same thing, except that sex and gender are also not the same thing depending on what we're discussing and then sex and gender are not actually a thing at all followed by male and female are the same thing but we shouldn't call a female male a male because it's not the same thing. It's like they live in a weird world where everything can be two things at once. Basically they're Schrodinger's twat. 2 Quote There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data
User Posted February 11 Report Posted February 11 5 minutes ago, CdnFox said: It's like they live in a weird world where everything can be two things at once. Basically they're Schrodinger's twat. Most of it is just a dishonest tactic. They can't really win on the ideas or their merits, they know how absurd it is to force girls to have to compete against boys, that it is fundamentally wrong to watch a girl not get a medal or trophy, standing there having to watch a boy win in their place. So... instead, they just pretend like it is not happening, there is no issue, why are we making such a big deal out of this... 1 Quote
Matthew Posted February 11 Report Posted February 11 (edited) 6 hours ago, User said: to protect kids and parents rights here from this stuff being pushed onto their kids Who do you propose is "pushing it onto kids?" The policies you've mentioned don't seem to be strongly related to the process by which these ideas would be obtained and internalized. 6 hours ago, User said: Here you are again, using leftist language saying they are targeting a disliked population. You betray yourself yet again. Well duh, I am a leftist. I also have no reason to believe that anyone is inherently transgender. There is no contradiction here. People who identify as transgender exist and are actively discriminated against, which I oppose. 6 hours ago, User said: Except... you do care. Only, your care only goes one way here, in opposing anything that is opposed to the various trans the kids efforts while you don't care that those things are being pushed from the left onto the kids and parents. A. I don't even have an opinion about trans people in sports, that's what i mean about not caring. The other policies we've mentioned I do have some opinions on but even those are mostly superficial issues. B. I have yet to ever see a political proposal that is based upon gender nonconformity being inherent to a person and if i did I would not support that. Mostly I see movements to support people who feel as though they are under asssult by the far right, which I agree they are. 6 hours ago, User said: What kind of dishonest person claims to mostly agree with someone and then proceeds to make arguments and comments that clearly show they don't? I have explained several times the one specific core thing that I agree with you on here in this topic. 6 hours ago, User said: You claimed this was all just people imagining things... so why is it the "simple and normal" thing to pretend with them? An imaginary thing that is important to someone's identity means that if i care about them I will show it by calling them what they wish to be called. Basic human reciprocity. 6 hours ago, User said: These are things parents should know and be informed of. A good parent should know about what is important to their kid. Why is the kid afraid to tell them? 6 hours ago, User said: There is no "higher responsibility" there. What do you base this on? Really? What do you think is more important than the safety of a teachers students? Edited February 11 by Matthew Quote
WestCanMan Posted February 11 Report Posted February 11 59 pages of this now 🤣 I'm gonna start a new thread called "How many syllables in the word blessed" and see if it eventually spirals into death threats. Quote If CNN gave an infinite number of monkeys an infinite number of typewriters, leftists would believe everything they typed. If you missed something on the Cultist Narrative Network, don't worry, the dolt horde here will make sure everyone hears it. Ex-Canadian since April 2025
Deluge Posted February 14 Author Report Posted February 14 On 2/11/2025 at 2:59 PM, WestCanMan said: 59 pages of this now 🤣 I'm gonna start a new thread called "How many syllables in the word blessed" and see if it eventually spirals into death threats. It may trigger some kind of conflict if "blessed" doesn't have pronouns. 1 1 Quote
Legato Posted February 14 Report Posted February 14 On 2/11/2025 at 4:59 PM, WestCanMan said: 59 pages of this now 🤣 I'm gonna start a new thread called "How many syllables in the word blessed" and see if it eventually spirals into death threats. Okay....one if you actually mean it Two if it's mentioned as a religious saying Forty nine if you are a left wing argumentized jumped up never come down with a cherry on top. 1 1 Quote
User Posted February 14 Report Posted February 14 On 2/11/2025 at 3:52 PM, Matthew said: Who do you propose is "pushing it onto kids?" The policies you've mentioned don't seem to be strongly related to the process by which these ideas would be obtained and internalized. Oh great. Now we are back to these dumb games of acting like it is not happening and you have no clue who is doing it. On 2/11/2025 at 3:52 PM, Matthew said: Well duh, I am a leftist. I also have no reason to believe that anyone is inherently transgender. There is no contradiction here. People who identify as transgender exist and are actively discriminated against, which I oppose. Yes, you keep saying you don't believe these people are trans and that it is just imagined, but then you keep using language like this as if they are a group of people to be discriminated against. It is in fact contradictory. You are both saying they do not exist as a distinct group and then using the leftist language as if they are. On 2/11/2025 at 3:52 PM, Matthew said: A. I don't even have an opinion about trans people in sports, that's what i mean about not caring. The other policies we've mentioned I do have some opinions on but even those are mostly superficial issues. This is an opinion. Your opinion is that you don't care that girls are being forced to compete against boys and losing out to them. They are not superficial issues to the girls impacted. On 2/11/2025 at 3:52 PM, Matthew said: B. I have yet to ever see a political proposal that is based upon gender nonconformity being inherent to a person and if i did I would not support that. Mostly I see movements to support people who feel as though they are under asssult by the far right, which I agree they are. What people? Yet again, you claim this is all imagined and now you are saying they are a group of people. They don't think it is just imagined. You are here assaulting them too. On 2/11/2025 at 3:52 PM, Matthew said: An imaginary thing that is important to someone's identity means that if i care about them I will show it by calling them what they wish to be called. Basic human reciprocity. And yet you keep ignoring my request. Why? Because you know it is absurd, which is my point. On 2/11/2025 at 3:52 PM, Matthew said: A good parent should know about what is important to their kid. Why is the kid afraid to tell them? This is a non-sequitur. You are avoiding the point and changing the subject. Your whole schtick here is this kind of dishonest tactic. On 2/11/2025 at 3:52 PM, Matthew said: Really? What do you think is more important than the safety of a teachers students? Yes, really. You are changing the subject. We are not talking about safety being important. Once again, more dishonest tactics to avoid the point. Quote
Matthew Posted February 14 Report Posted February 14 (edited) 2 hours ago, User said: acting like it is not happening and you have no clue who is doing it. No you're saying that it's being pushed onto kids and implying that these three policies you've mentioned (vis-a-vis sports, bathrooms, and name used at school) are therefore going to help alleviate the issue. Seems a little simplistic. So asking who exactly is doing the "pushing" in your imagination will help see how these policy ideas may or may not connect. 2 hours ago, User said: Yes, you keep saying you don't believe these people are trans and that it is just imagined, but then you keep using language like this as if they are a group of people to be discriminated against. It is in fact contradictory. You are both saying they do not exist as a distinct group and then using the leftist language as if they are. Being transgender is a different than identifying as such. I don't think anyone actually has a relationship with a god named Jesus Christ. But I certainly recognize that people believe they do and as such are an actual group of people. 2 hours ago, User said: Your opinion is that you don't care that girls are being forced to compete against boys and losing out to them. That is correct. I also don't care about laws made to exclude trans people from sports. 2 hours ago, User said: They don't think it is just imagined. You are here assaulting them too. It's true that my position would be only slightly less offensive than yours to those who believe in gender essentialism. Oh well. I'm not in favor of legal discrimination and that's a big difference to me. 2 hours ago, User said: And yet you keep ignoring my request. Why? Because you know it is absurd, which is my point. It's reductio ad absurdum pseudo-reasoning. 2 hours ago, User said: This is a non-sequitur. Again, I agree that no law should require or allow teachers to hide information about a student from parents. But nor should a law mandating that they share personal info. The idea that parents should be tuned in to their own kids lives to know what's happening with them and what they care about is the actual solution to your problem, not a non sequitur. 2 hours ago, User said: We are not talking about safety being important I am. Revealing potentially inflammatory unsolicited information about teenagers personal lives will put some students at risk of abuse. Again, if a parent asks, it is their right to know. But teachers have an interest in not maximizing the risk to students. Edited February 14 by Matthew Quote
User Posted February 14 Report Posted February 14 1 hour ago, Matthew said: No you're saying that it's being pushed onto kids and implying that these three policies you've mentioned (vis-a-vis sports, bathrooms, and name used at school) are therefore going to help alleviate the issue. Seems a little simplistic. So asking who exactly is doing the "pushing" in your imagination will help see how these policy ideas may or may not connect. Yes, very simplistic. You guys push boys who think they are girls into girls sports, we stop doing that. Very simple indeed. Not my imagination, these are all the things happening around this issue right now: -Politicians working to normalize kids being trans -Putting trans books in schools, the curriculum, policies to "affirm" children being trans in schools, even worse policies to hide this from parents, laws enacting these things -Putting trans kids into girls sports, telling girls they have to compete against boys -Putting trans kids into traditional girl spaces like bathrooms, locker rooms, etc... -Putting these messages into DEI training that is mandated into all government agencies -Changing policies in the military to openly accept trans AND then also cover for their surgeries and other "affirming" care -Putting trans prisoners into prisons with women where they are sexually assaulted and forcing tax payers to pay for their "affirming" care -Forcing public officials to use any of the 1 million pronouns someone can choose for themselves, changing drivers licenses and other official documentation like birth certificates and passports to reflect a sex someone is not Who is doing the pushing? Leftists like you where they have enough power and control to do so, just like Biden was doing with every bit of Executive power he had and leftists in California are doing at the state level. 1 hour ago, Matthew said: Being transgender is a different than identifying as such. I don't think anyone actually has a relationship with a god named Jesus Christ. But I certainly recognize that people believe they do and as such are an actual group of people. Then your notions of them imagining this are meaningless in any way other than in your head. 1 hour ago, Matthew said: It's true that my position would be only slightly less offensive than yours to those who believe in gender essentialism. Oh well. I'm not in favor of legal discrimination and that's a big difference to me. Discrimination... how? Give me an example for what you are opposed to here. 1 hour ago, Matthew said: It's reductio ad absurdum pseudo-reasoning. Exactly. Your point of being kind or human is BS and you know it. 1 hour ago, Matthew said: Again, I agree that no law should require or allow teachers to hide information about a student from parents. But nor should a law mandating that they share personal info. The idea that parents should be tuned in to their own kids lives to know what's happening with them and what they care about is the actual solution to your problem, not a non sequitur. Negative. Kids are trusted with teachers in a school system that they will be a part of for most of their day, not with their parents. You don't get to say that parents should know everything going on with their kids while at the same time a teacher is spending a significant amount of time with their kids while they are not around. Not possible. You are just making excuses to avoid having to support what is obviously right here, that parents have a right to know and public servants should rightfully be mandated to inform them of these things. But hey, do you support school choice? Vouchers, Tax Credits, Education Savings accounts then, that if parents want no part of the system you support here, they can take their kids to a private one that will provide them the services they desire? 1 hour ago, Matthew said: I am. Revealing potentially inflammatory unsolicited information about teenagers personal lives will put some students at risk of abuse. Again, if a parent asks, it is their right to know. But teachers have an interest in not maximizing the risk to students. Once again, this is another bogus excuse. If a teacher has any valid reasons to suspect parents are or would abuse their children, we have protective services to deal with that. Quote
CdnFox Posted February 14 Report Posted February 14 On 2/11/2025 at 1:59 PM, WestCanMan said: 59 pages of this now 🤣 I'm gonna start a new thread called "How many syllables in the word blessed" and see if it eventually spirals into death threats. LOL you're killing me! Oh! well i guess that counts. That didn't take long at all. 1 Quote There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data
Matthew Posted February 15 Report Posted February 15 3 hours ago, User said: You guys push boys who think they are girls into girls sports, we stop doing that. You keep trying to make me care about sports. I still do not. 3 hours ago, User said: working to normalize kids being trans -Putting trans books in schools, the curriculum, policies to "affirm" children being trans in schools, even worse policies to hide this from parents, laws enacting these things -Putting trans kids into girls sports, telling girls they have to compete against boys -Putting trans kids into traditional girl spaces like bathrooms, locker rooms, etc... -Putting these messages into DEI training that is mandated into all government agencies -Changing policies in the military to openly accept trans AND then also cover for their surgeries and other "affirming" care -Putting trans prisoners into prisons with women where they are sexually assaulted and forcing tax payers to pay for their "affirming" care -Forcing public officials to use any of the 1 million pronouns someone can choose for themselves, changing drivers licenses and other official documentation like birth certificates and passports to reflect a sex someone is not So you figure that these kinds of government actions cause a teenager to think they are transgender? 3 hours ago, User said: Then your notions of them imagining this are meaningless in any way other than in your head. Not necessarily. But as meaningless as anything in society based upon created shared meanings. 3 hours ago, User said: Discrimination... how? Give me an example for what you are opposed to here. Well for example firing someone, kicking someone out of housing, refusing someone service, denial of civil liberties. Are you in favor of protecting the civil rights of everyone including people who think they are transgender? 3 hours ago, User said: Exactly. I'm glad you agree your point is a logical fallacy. Gee, that was easy. 3 hours ago, User said: Kids are trusted with teachers in a school system that they will be a part of for most of their day, not with their parents. You don't get to say that parents should know everything going on with their kids while at the same time a teacher is spending a significant amount of time with their kids while they are not around. Not possible. This is your excuse for not knowing what name your kid goes by? 3 hours ago, User said: If a teacher has any valid reasons to suspect parents are or would abuse their children, we have protective services to deal with that. Should protective services dealing with a possible abuse victim be required to inform the parents when a teenager under their care is asking to use different pronouns? Quote
CdnFox Posted February 15 Report Posted February 15 (edited) and the backlash continues Google defends removing Pride, Black History month from Calendar app This is what happens when the woke tries to force itself and it's ideology on people in a confrontational manner. Eventually people get sick of it and there's a backlash. And the activists like the ones in this thread were told that. You started the trans wars and now it's the revenge of the cis. well done. Edited February 15 by CdnFox 1 Quote There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.