TrojanMoondoggie said:

---

Jack Bauer said:

---

Man dating a "trans woman" (male) justifies himself to his best friend:

"I’m not gay. I'm an alpha male attracted to femininity and that's what I got." pic.twitter.com/D53eKCGqhs

— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) January 2, 2024

---

I hate to tell this dude, but there are alpha males who are gay too.
In fact, most gay guys I know are not anything like the stereotypes you see portrayed in the media. While all of them may not be alpha, they are masculine enough to pass as "straight."

I read a study on these dudes who dig trannies, and of all the guys who claimed to like trannie women (M to F), 1/2 ended up admitting they were at least bisexual if not gay. The other 1/2 who asserted they WERE straight, well, the article acknowledged this, but there was a "but" or "however"-type of caveat which followed. And it left their "straightness" open to question too.
As for this dude in the video, who knows? He seems masculine, or alpha enough.
But again, there are gay guys who are alpha too.
I would just wonder why, if he likes femininity, he wouldn't just date a chick? Why does it have to be a man who looks like a chick?

---

If his transwoman friend has not cut off his manhood, the dude is 100% gay.

I decided to google reassignment surgery.

Quote:

---

How common is gender reassignment surgery?

Gender reassignment (confirmation) surgery is more common in transgender men (42 to 54%) than transgender women (28%). Top (chest gender confirmation) surgery is performed approximately twice as often as bottom (genital) surgery. In studies that assessed transgender men and women as an aggregate, top surgery accounts for 8 to 25% and bottom (genital) surgery accounts for 4 to 13%. Review study details.

---

So the likelyhood this transwoman still has man parts is very very high.

Forest Bueller_bf said:

---

TrojanMoondoggie said:

---

Jack Bauer said:

---

Man dating a "trans woman" (male) justifies himself to his best friend:

"I’m not gay. I'm an alpha male attracted to femininity and that's what I got." pic.twitter.com/D53eKCGqhs

— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) January 2, 2024

---

I hate to tell this dude, but there are alpha males who are gay too.
In fact, most gay guys I know are not anything like the stereotypes you see portrayed in the media. While all of them may not be alpha, they are masculine enough to pass as "straight."

I read a study on these dudes who dig trannies, and of all the guys who claimed to like trannie women (M to F), 1/2 ended up admitting they were at least bisexual if not gay. The other 1/2 who asserted they WERE straight, well, the article acknowledged this, but there was a "but" or "however"-type of caveat which followed. And it left their "straightness" open to question too.
As for this dude in the video, who knows? He seems masculine, or alpha enough.
But again, there are gay guys who are alpha too.
I would just wonder why, if he likes femininity, he wouldn't just date a chick? Why does it have to be a man who looks like a chick?

---

If his transwoman friend has not cut off his manhood, the dude is 100% gay.

I decided to google reassignment surgery.

Quote:

---

How common is gender reassignment surgery?

Gender reassignment (confirmation) surgery is more common in transgender men (42 to 54%) than transgender women (28%). Top (chest gender confirmation) surgery is performed approximately twice as often as bottom (genital) surgery. In studies that assessed transgender men and women as an aggregate, top surgery accounts for 8 to 25% and bottom (genital) surgery accounts for 4 to 13%. Review study details.

---

So the likelyhood this transwoman still has man parts is very very high.

---

That is why much of the current transvestite movement is both misogynistic and anti-gay. 99.99% of contemporary (new) transvestites are just gay men LARPing in Girlface since gay has become normie. There definitely is a significant portion of gay men that over index on flamboyance and attention-seeking. Now that plain old pheg is boring need a new way to stand out, so transvestite. 99.99% of these dudes will be back to basic gay in five years.

If they don't commit suicide. I've read that both communities have a significantly higher rate compared to the rest of society.

ATL Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

historian said:

---

Immediately after your question are the applicable passages from Psalm 19 and Romans 1. The existence of God is self-evident to everyone who opens their eyes and pays attention.

It might not be the job of science to disprove the supernatural but it is the job of real science to prove their own theories or "assertions". If those assertions are contrary to God's word then any attempts to prove them are the same thing as disproving the supernatural.

---

The job of science is not disprove the supernatural (although as a happy by product science dismisses superstition and the supernatural). Historian, you are trying to use science to prove the supernatural. Science could give a pfft about the supernatural.

it is the job of real science to prove their own theories or "assertions". If those assertions are contrary to God's word then any attempts to prove them are the same thing as disproving the supernatural.

Because supernatural entities (i.e. the "God" of conservatives) are not a part of nature, supernatural entities cannot be investigated by science. In this sense, science and religion are separate and address aspects of human understanding in different ways. Attempts to pit science and religion against each other create controversy where none needs to exist.

The realm of faith is not science but love as in God is love and You shall love God and your neighbor as yourself. This is purview of the Christian faith. Challenge me on the witness of love in our world but not superstition and the supernatural.
My faith stance stumps you because you want to engage in a nonsensical debate about the supernatural. I would invite you to consider and live into the love commandment and ways you and I can share the good news of Jesus Christ.
The invitation to love alongside me is somehow foreign to you but we are Christian brothers in the faith.

---

And here we go again with the same incoherent, contradictory nonsense where you repeatedly reject the supernatural but then espouse concepts that are completely supernatural.

Time and time again you've been shown this, but your response is either to pile even more incoherent, contradictory nonsense on top, or you choose not to respond all, completely ignoring people's questions that illustrate the fact.

But you've invited a challenge to your "witness of love", so here's a start:

Question: Is "love" a product of physics, or is it beyond physics?

---

Beyond physics. Love is here and now. For example Physics nor science can determine if you love your wife.

---

If it's beyond physics, then it's supernatural. That's what supernatural means.

So you DO believe in the supernatural, correct?

---

Premise 1 -- We have laws of nature and physics. True
Apparently You think it is God. therefore your conclusion is
Conclusion: A supernatural God created the laws and physics

---

What and why is their origin? Again, prove that God created these laws and physics. Your proof is the Bible? Who says your supernatural is correct as opposed say to the Toltecs

---

"The more I study nature, the more I stand amazed at the work of the Creator. Science brings men nearer to God." ~ Louis Pasteur

"Every one who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the Universe-a spirit vastly superior to that of man, and one in the face of which we with our modest powers must feel humble." ~ Albert Einstein

"When I began my career as a cosmologist some twenty years ago, I was a convinced atheist. I never in my wildest dreams imagined that one day I would be writing a book purporting to show that the central claims of Judeo-Christian theology are in fact true, that these claims are straightforward deductions of the laws of physics as we now understand them. I have been forced into these conclusions by the inexorable logic of my own special branch of physics." ~ Frank J. Tipler

"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." ~ Albert Einstein

"The impossibility of conceiving that this grand and wondrous universe, with our conscious selves, arose through chance, seems to me the chief argument for the existence of God." ~ Charles Darwin

"What I have done is to show that it is possible for the way the universe began to be determined by the laws of science. In that case, it would not be necessary to appeal to God to decide how the universe began. This doesn't prove that there is no God, only that God is not necessary." ~ Stephen Hawking

"I find it as difficult to understand a scientist who does not acknowledge the presence of a superior rationality behind the existence of the universe as it is to comprehend a theologian who would deny the advances of science." ~ Wernher von Braun

"A commonsense interpretation of the facts suggests that a superintellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question." ~ Fred Hoyle

"Here is the cosmological proof of the existence of God - the design argument of Paley - updated and refurbished. The fine tuning of the universe provides prima facie evidence of deistic design. Take your choice: blind chance that requires multitudes of universes or design that requires only one.... Many scientists, when they admit their views, incline toward the teleological or design argument." ~ Edward Robert Harrison

Waco1947 said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

historian said:

---

Immediately after your question are the applicable passages from Psalm 19 and Romans 1. The existence of God is self-evident to everyone who opens their eyes and pays attention.

It might not be the job of science to disprove the supernatural but it is the job of real science to prove their own theories or "assertions". If those assertions are contrary to God's word then any attempts to prove them are the same thing as disproving the supernatural.

---

The job of science is not disprove the supernatural (although as a happy by product science dismisses superstition and the supernatural). Historian, you are trying to use science to prove the supernatural. Science could give a pfft about the supernatural.

it is the job of real science to prove their own theories or "assertions". If those assertions are contrary to God's word then any attempts to prove them are the same thing as disproving the supernatural.

Because supernatural entities (i.e. the "God" of conservatives) are not a part of nature, supernatural entities cannot be investigated by science. In this sense, science and religion are separate and address aspects of human understanding in different ways. Attempts to pit science and religion against each other create controversy where none needs to exist.

The realm of faith is not science but love as in God is love and You shall love God and your neighbor as yourself. This is purview of the Christian faith. Challenge me on the witness of love in our world but not superstition and the supernatural.
My faith stance stumps you because you want to engage in a nonsensical debate about the supernatural. I would invite you to consider and live into the love commandment and ways you and I can share the good news of Jesus Christ.
The invitation to love alongside me is somehow foreign to you but we are Christian brothers in the faith.

---

And here we go again with the same incoherent, contradictory nonsense where you repeatedly reject the supernatural but then espouse concepts that are completely supernatural.

Time and time again you've been shown this, but your response is either to pile even more incoherent, contradictory nonsense on top, or you choose not to respond all, completely ignoring people's questions that illustrate the fact.

But you've invited a challenge to your "witness of love", so here's a start:

Question: Is "love" a product of physics, or is it beyond physics?

---

Beyond physics. Love is here and now. For example Physics nor science can determine if you love your wife.

---

If it's beyond physics, then it's supernatural. That's what supernatural means.

So you DO believe in the supernatural, correct?

---

Premise 1 -- We have laws of nature and physics. True
Apparently You think it is God. therefore your conclusion is
Conclusion: A supernatural God created the laws and physics

---

What and why is their origin? Again, prove that God created these laws and physics. Your proof is the Bible? Who says your supernatural is correct as opposed say to the Toltecs

---

---

Do you believe that the universe had a beginning?

Waco, what would you call an entity which created the Universe and the laws by which it operates?

Why is 'Supernatural' not a correct descriptor of that Entity?

nein51 said:

---

Because he likes d8ck. And he's not straight. Hes in denial though.

---

That would be my opinion too.

Waco1947 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

historian said:

---

Immediately after your question are the applicable passages from Psalm 19 and Romans 1. The existence of God is self-evident to everyone who opens their eyes and pays attention.

It might not be the job of science to disprove the supernatural but it is the job of real science to prove their own theories or "assertions". If those assertions are contrary to God's word then any attempts to prove them are the same thing as disproving the supernatural.

---

The job of science is not disprove the supernatural (although as a happy by product science dismisses superstition and the supernatural). Historian, you are trying to use science to prove the supernatural. Science could give a pfft about the supernatural.

it is the job of real science to prove their own theories or "assertions". If those assertions are contrary to God's word then any attempts to prove them are the same thing as disproving the supernatural.

Because supernatural entities (i.e. the "God" of conservatives) are not a part of nature, supernatural entities cannot be investigated by science. In this sense, science and religion are separate and address aspects of human understanding in different ways. Attempts to pit science and religion against each other create controversy where none needs to exist.

The realm of faith is not science but love as in God is love and You shall love God and your neighbor as yourself. This is purview of the Christian faith. Challenge me on the witness of love in our world but not superstition and the supernatural.
My faith stance stumps you because you want to engage in a nonsensical debate about the supernatural. I would invite you to consider and live into the love commandment and ways you and I can share the good news of Jesus Christ.
The invitation to love alongside me is somehow foreign to you but we are Christian brothers in the faith.

---

And here we go again with the same incoherent, contradictory nonsense where you repeatedly reject the supernatural but then espouse concepts that are completely supernatural.

Time and time again you've been shown this, but your response is either to pile even more incoherent, contradictory nonsense on top, or you choose not to respond all, completely ignoring people's questions that illustrate the fact.

But you've invited a challenge to your "witness of love", so here's a start:

Question: Is "love" a product of physics, or is it beyond physics?

---

Beyond physics. Love is here and now. For example Physics nor science can determine if you love your wife.

---

If it's beyond physics, then it's supernatural. That's what supernatural means.

So you DO believe in the supernatural, correct?

---

Prove the supernatural exists?

---

Prove you're not a Russian bot

historian said:

---

If they don't commit suicide. I've read that both communities have a significantly higher rate compared to the rest of society.

---

I wonder how the suicide rate in the trans community compares to the suicide rate among other types of untreated mental illness.

Good question. My guess is at they are similar but it's a guess

historian said:

---

Good question. My guess is at they are similar but it's a guess

---

I do not believe there is any evidence there is particular high suicide rates among so-called trans people. Nor is there any evidence there is disproportionately high violence directed at so-called trans folks because they're trans.

Scattershooting while wondering if there are unlimited genders why does there continue to be a "B" in the Gaystapo since two genders is a racist, sexist, construct of white supremancy?

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

historian said:

---

Immediately after your question are the applicable passages from Psalm 19 and Romans 1. The existence of God is self-evident to everyone who opens their eyes and pays attention.

It might not be the job of science to disprove the supernatural but it is the job of real science to prove their own theories or "assertions". If those assertions are contrary to God's word then any attempts to prove them are the same thing as disproving the supernatural.

---

The job of science is not disprove the supernatural (although as a happy by product science dismisses superstition and the supernatural). Historian, you are trying to use science to prove the supernatural. Science could give a pfft about the supernatural.

it is the job of real science to prove their own theories or "assertions". If those assertions are contrary to God's word then any attempts to prove them are the same thing as disproving the supernatural.

Because supernatural entities (i.e. the "God" of conservatives) are not a part of nature, supernatural entities cannot be investigated by science. In this sense, science and religion are separate and address aspects of human understanding in different ways. Attempts to pit science and religion against each other create controversy where none needs to exist.

The realm of faith is not science but love as in God is love and You shall love God and your neighbor as yourself. This is purview of the Christian faith. Challenge me on the witness of love in our world but not superstition and the supernatural.
My faith stance stumps you because you want to engage in a nonsensical debate about the supernatural. I would invite you to consider and live into the love commandment and ways you and I can share the good news of Jesus Christ.
The invitation to love alongside me is somehow foreign to you but we are Christian brothers in the faith.

---

And here we go again with the same incoherent, contradictory nonsense where you repeatedly reject the supernatural but then espouse concepts that are completely supernatural.

Time and time again you've been shown this, but your response is either to pile even more incoherent, contradictory nonsense on top, or you choose not to respond all, completely ignoring people's questions that illustrate the fact.

But you've invited a challenge to your "witness of love", so here's a start:

Question: Is "love" a product of physics, or is it beyond physics?

---

Beyond physics. Love is here and now. For example Physics nor science can determine if you love your wife.

---

If it's beyond physics, then it's supernatural. That's what supernatural means.

So you DO believe in the supernatural, correct?

---

Premise 1 -- We have laws of nature and physics. True
Apparently You think it is God. therefore your conclusion is
Conclusion: A supernatural God created the laws and physics

---

What and why is their origin? Again, prove that God created these laws and physics. Your proof is the Bible? Who says your supernatural is correct as opposed say to the Toltecs

---

---

Do you believe that the universe had a beginning?

---

Who knows?

Women don't want to date short, bald or poor men but you don't see a shame campaign like this..

If you’re a man and don’t want to sleep with someone who has a p*nis, you’re traphobic. G*nit*l preference is transphobic. pic.twitter.com/4nDZTWBjbL

— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) January 9, 2024

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

historian said:

---

Immediately after your question are the applicable passages from Psalm 19 and Romans 1. The existence of God is self-evident to everyone who opens their eyes and pays attention.

It might not be the job of science to disprove the supernatural but it is the job of real science to prove their own theories or "assertions". If those assertions are contrary to God's word then any attempts to prove them are the same thing as disproving the supernatural.

---

The job of science is not disprove the supernatural (although as a happy by product science dismisses superstition and the supernatural). Historian, you are trying to use science to prove the supernatural. Science could give a pfft about the supernatural.

it is the job of real science to prove their own theories or "assertions". If those assertions are contrary to God's word then any attempts to prove them are the same thing as disproving the supernatural.

Because supernatural entities (i.e. the "God" of conservatives) are not a part of nature, supernatural entities cannot be investigated by science. In this sense, science and religion are separate and address aspects of human understanding in different ways. Attempts to pit science and religion against each other create controversy where none needs to exist.

The realm of faith is not science but love as in God is love and You shall love God and your neighbor as yourself. This is purview of the Christian faith. Challenge me on the witness of love in our world but not superstition and the supernatural.
My faith stance stumps you because you want to engage in a nonsensical debate about the supernatural. I would invite you to consider and live into the love commandment and ways you and I can share the good news of Jesus Christ.
The invitation to love alongside me is somehow foreign to you but we are Christian brothers in the faith.

---

And here we go again with the same incoherent, contradictory nonsense where you repeatedly reject the supernatural but then espouse concepts that are completely supernatural.

Time and time again you've been shown this, but your response is either to pile even more incoherent, contradictory nonsense on top, or you choose not to respond all, completely ignoring people's questions that illustrate the fact.

But you've invited a challenge to your "witness of love", so here's a start:

Question: Is "love" a product of physics, or is it beyond physics?

---

Beyond physics. Love is here and now. For example Physics nor science can determine if you love your wife.

---

If it's beyond physics, then it's supernatural. That's what supernatural means.

So you DO believe in the supernatural, correct?

---

Premise 1 -- We have laws of nature and physics. True
Apparently You think it is God. therefore your conclusion is
Conclusion: A supernatural God created the laws and physics

---

What and why is their origin? Again, prove that God created these laws and physics. Your proof is the Bible? Who says your supernatural is correct as opposed say to the Toltecs

---

---

Do you believe that the universe had a beginning?

---

Who knows?

---

I didn't ask who knows. I asked what you believe.

---

47 answered correctly, nobody including himself knows whether 47 believes if the universe had a beginning

I'm pretty sure I've seen statistics pointing out that both groups have a much higher suicide rate than the general population. Actually it's kinda silly to separate them because trans people are essentially homosexuals with advance delusions. A fake woman is really a man and if he is attracted to other males he's homosexual.

It's the definitions of words. The problem is our Leftists take Newspeak to stupid levels every time they try to redefine something into something it most definitely is not such as marriage, man, woman, etc.

Scotland will jail you for up to 7 years if you don't validate your child's gender identity.

Waco47 - stunning and brave!!!!

But....this is just like seeing bikinis at the beach!!!

Anyone who brings children or performs at these events should be jaiIed

pic.twitter.com/Eu0WDnYmpf

— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) January 10, 2024

Waco1947 said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

historian said:

---

Immediately after your question are the applicable passages from Psalm 19 and Romans 1. The existence of God is self-evident to everyone who opens their eyes and pays attention.

It might not be the job of science to disprove the supernatural but it is the job of real science to prove their own theories or "assertions". If those assertions are contrary to God's word then any attempts to prove them are the same thing as disproving the supernatural.

---

The job of science is not disprove the supernatural (although as a happy by product science dismisses superstition and the supernatural). Historian, you are trying to use science to prove the supernatural. Science could give a pfft about the supernatural.

it is the job of real science to prove their own theories or "assertions". If those assertions are contrary to God's word then any attempts to prove them are the same thing as disproving the supernatural.

Because supernatural entities (i.e. the "God" of conservatives) are not a part of nature, supernatural entities cannot be investigated by science. In this sense, science and religion are separate and address aspects of human understanding in different ways. Attempts to pit science and religion against each other create controversy where none needs to exist.

The realm of faith is not science but love as in God is love and You shall love God and your neighbor as yourself. This is purview of the Christian faith. Challenge me on the witness of love in our world but not superstition and the supernatural.
My faith stance stumps you because you want to engage in a nonsensical debate about the supernatural. I would invite you to consider and live into the love commandment and ways you and I can share the good news of Jesus Christ.
The invitation to love alongside me is somehow foreign to you but we are Christian brothers in the faith.

---

And here we go again with the same incoherent, contradictory nonsense where you repeatedly reject the supernatural but then espouse concepts that are completely supernatural.

Time and time again you've been shown this, but your response is either to pile even more incoherent, contradictory nonsense on top, or you choose not to respond all, completely ignoring people's questions that illustrate the fact.

But you've invited a challenge to your "witness of love", so here's a start:

Question: Is "love" a product of physics, or is it beyond physics?

---

Beyond physics. Love is here and now. For example Physics nor science can determine if you love your wife.

---

If it's beyond physics, then it's supernatural. That's what supernatural means.

So you DO believe in the supernatural, correct?

---

Premise 1 -- We have laws of nature and physics. True
Apparently You think it is God. therefore your conclusion is
Conclusion: A supernatural God created the laws and physics

---

What and why is their origin? Again, prove that God created these laws and physics. Your proof is the Bible? Who says your supernatural is correct as opposed say to the Toltecs

---

---

https://frankscottage.blog/2015/01/24/the-comforting-lack-of-proof/

Jack Bauer said:

---

Women don't want to date short, bald or poor men but you don't see a shame campaign like this..

If you’re a man and don’t want to sleep with someone who has a p*nis, you’re traphobic. G*nit*l preference is transphobic. pic.twitter.com/4nDZTWBjbL

— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) January 9, 2024

---

This dude is just trolling.

Not the pedos. That might be a litmus test. At the very least it should be viewed with some suspicion and when it happens it's borderline child abuse.

historian said:

---

I'm pretty sure I've seen statistics pointing out that both groups have a much higher suicide rate than the general population. Actually it's kinda silly to separate them because trans people are essentially homosexuals with advance delusions. A fake woman is really a man and if he is attracted to other males he's homosexual.

It's the definitions of words. The problem is our Leftists take Newspeak to stupid levels every time they try to redefine something into something it most definitely is not such as marriage, man, woman, etc.

---

I also have read there is no evidence to back that up ... honestly, it is such a high charged issue, not sure you could get published unless you had those results. I know the Trevor Project pushed a lot of this narrative, but many of its studies have been DEBUNKED!

Agreed ... every "transgender" woman is just a gay man. It's a stupid term vs. the scientific transexual, which will not perfect at least gets close. If a person has a tallywhacker, he's a man no matter what he pretends.

Jack Bauer said:

---

Scotland will jail you for up to 7 years if you don't validate your child's gender identity.

Waco47 - stunning and brave!!!!

---

I thought the LWNJ's wanted government out of health care?

1 million views 🚀 https://t.co/e5Ksn7OC0y

— Christopher F. Rufo ⚔️ (@realchrisrufo) January 11, 2024