Florda_mike said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Florda_mike said:

---

I'm starring ANYONE willing to even respond to TS, the clueless DIMCRAT

---

Spoken like a mindless loyal tribal cult member.

---

Sam called republicans a "cult" earlier too like you just did

Don't worry, no one suspects you and Sam are same person

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Canon said:

---

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

Quote:

---

Cheney isn't a conservative. No one who advocated impeachment is a conservative. Conservatives don't advocate violating the constitution.

---

Whut??

---

Unconstitutional
adjective
unconstitutional | \ n-kn(t)-st-t-shnl, -ty-, -sh-nl
Definition of unconstitutional: not according or consistent with the constitution of a body politic (such as a nation).

https://www.cnsnews.com/blog/michael-w-chapman/dershowitz-its-unconstitutional-impeach-trump-constitutionally-protected

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2020/01/why_trumps_impeachment_is_effectively_unconstitutional_.html

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ken-starr-trumps-second-impeachment-unconstitutional-process

https://townhall.com/capitol-voices/congressmanbillposey/2021/02/06/trump-impeachment-is-unconstitutional-and-reeks-of-political-revenge-n2584331

---

Yep, Trump is the embodiment of unconstitutional. On the other hand impeachment is a constitutional process that a majority of the House determines.

---

"Because I don't like him" does not define unconstitutionality, TS.

---

His actions, like trying to steal an election define him.

---

I hope you have been drinking, because the alternative is much worse in what it says about you, TS.

---

We have a dangerous person out of office, who through his own antics lost the election. Now we're faced with replacing a socialist with a real conservative. The only way to do that is win back the people Trump turned off.

---

So it's the second alternative.

Pity.

---

J.B.Katz said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

It's silly to act like that's a major issue ... or even a significant part of the trans rights conversation.

And perhaps if the religious right could start in a place of acknowledgment that transgender people deserve basic human dignity and respect, we could have a more nuanced conversation on how to handle rare and specific cases like those you reference here.

---

It's a major issue because of the precedent it sets. %A0It's a Pandora's box, and could eventually lead to the door being closed to many women who wish to play sports. %A0See the girls in Connecticut who claim they had scholarship opportunities squelched because two biological men who identified as women took first and second in the state track championship's 100m.

I don't know many on the right who think that trans people don't deserve respect and dignity. %A0But often times those terms are code words used by people to mean special rights for people who suffer from mental disorders that cause them to believe they are the opposite sex. %A0And now it is being used by misguided parents to abuse children, in the form of puberty blockers that cause permanent and lasting damage to children. %A0

History has shown that civilizations begin to decline when rampant immorality (particularly, sexual) infects the civilization. %A0The idea that standing up for a moral code is silly, is an idea that is in and of itself silly.

---

The good old slippery slope fallacy -- a favorite of the church and most others desiring to stall change they're afraid of and/or don't understand.

And your second paragraph is proven false both by the daily verbiage on this board and by your own post here. Referring to transgender as a mental disorder, when the medical and mental health community do not, is not treating those individuals with dignity or respect. It's doing quite the opposite.

---

Tell me, in what way do I not understand transgenderism? %A0Please enlighten me.

And it's not a logical fallacy if what I described is actually happening, which of course it is.

As for my second paragraph, just FYI, until very recently transgenderism was indeed classified as a mental disorder, and still is by that little medical organization known as the WHO. %A0So how did that designation change? %A0A number of transgender advocates and activists began lobbying medical organizations to label it as something other than what it actually is, which of course they did, succumbing to the pressure from the woke crowd which denies biology, and believes that one can choose their gender. %A0Sorry, but medical organizations that more closely resemble political organizations, and can be lobbied to deny science, don't hold as much weight for me as they do you.

I respect transgender people's ability to live their lives as I do. %A0I simply don't deny science by classifying their behavior as normal, as you do. %A0That, it is not.

I know you are very bitter toward the church my friend, and Christianity in general, but it is the role of the church to be counter-cultural, not to conform to the ways of the world. %A0If that's silly, well, I guess it's been silly for around 2,000 years. %A0

---

Wrong.

https://time.com/5596845/world-health-organization-transgender-identity/

And the fact that you continue to conflate sex and gender is proof that you don't have a very firm grasp of this issue and have no desire to gain one.

And it is is the church's role to love and serve in a way that is counter-cultural. The fact that it has so badly missed this point is why I'm so bitter towards it.

---

No, I am right.%A0 They voted on the change in May 2019, but it does not go into effect until January of 2022.%A0 As of right now, it's still listed as a mental disorder by the WHO.%A0 Look it up.

As for sex vs. gender, I simply do not agree that there is a difference.%A0 The idea that gender is a social construct that can be changed, regardless of sex, is a recent (and unscientific) belief that denies biology.

With respect to your last point, your error is your belief that loving someone is not telling them about sin.%A0 This is the opposite of love, and leads them down a primrose path to destruction.%A0 But the fact it is a stumbling block for you is no surprise.%A0 It has been to people for centuries, and especially in today's culture where people don't want to be told their decisions and lifestyles are immoral.

---

Calling conclusions drawn and decisions made by the scientific community "unscientific" without a science background or any expertise whatsoever on this subject reeks of hubris IMO.

And play the semantics game all you want, but the WHO has made and announced the decision to drop gender dysphoria as a mental disorder. The organization no longer views it as such, as you suggested above.

---

Sad considering treatment for gender dysphoria had a very high success rate.

---

Republicans have made this a political issue

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Canon said:

---

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

Quote:

---

Cheney isn't a conservative. No one who advocated impeachment is a conservative. Conservatives don't advocate violating the constitution.

---

Whut??

---

Unconstitutional
adjective
unconstitutional | \ n-kn(t)-st-t-shnl, -ty-, -sh-nl
Definition of unconstitutional: not according or consistent with the constitution of a body politic (such as a nation).

https://www.cnsnews.com/blog/michael-w-chapman/dershowitz-its-unconstitutional-impeach-trump-constitutionally-protected

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2020/01/why_trumps_impeachment_is_effectively_unconstitutional_.html

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ken-starr-trumps-second-impeachment-unconstitutional-process

https://townhall.com/capitol-voices/congressmanbillposey/2021/02/06/trump-impeachment-is-unconstitutional-and-reeks-of-political-revenge-n2584331

---

Yep, Trump is the embodiment of unconstitutional. On the other hand impeachment is a constitutional process that a majority of the House determines.

---

"Because I don't like him" does not define unconstitutionality, TS.

---

His actions, like trying to steal an election define him.

---

I hope you have been drinking, because the alternative is much worse in what it says about you, TS.

---

We have a dangerous person out of office, who through his own antics lost the election. Now we're faced with replacing a socialist with a real conservative. The only way to do that is win back the people Trump turned off.

---

So it's the second alternative.

Pity.

---

No, just cold sober reality my friend.

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Canon said:

---

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

Quote:

---

Cheney isn't a conservative. No one who advocated impeachment is a conservative. Conservatives don't advocate violating the constitution.

---

Whut??

---

Unconstitutional
adjective
unconstitutional | \ n-kn(t)-st-t-shnl, -ty-, -sh-nl
Definition of unconstitutional: not according or consistent with the constitution of a body politic (such as a nation).

https://www.cnsnews.com/blog/michael-w-chapman/dershowitz-its-unconstitutional-impeach-trump-constitutionally-protected

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2020/01/why_trumps_impeachment_is_effectively_unconstitutional_.html

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ken-starr-trumps-second-impeachment-unconstitutional-process

https://townhall.com/capitol-voices/congressmanbillposey/2021/02/06/trump-impeachment-is-unconstitutional-and-reeks-of-political-revenge-n2584331

---

Yep, Trump is the embodiment of unconstitutional. On the other hand impeachment is a constitutional process that a majority of the House determines.

---

"Because I don't like him" does not define unconstitutionality, TS.

---

His actions, like trying to steal an election define him.

---

I hope you have been drinking, because the alternative is much worse in what it says about you, TS.

---

We have a dangerous person out of office, who through his own antics lost the election. Now we're faced with replacing a socialist with a real conservative. The only way to do that is win back the people Trump turned off.

---

So it's the second alternative.

Pity.

---

No, just cold sober reality my friend.

---

Not. Even. Close. To. True.

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Canon said:

---

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

Quote:

---

Cheney isn't a conservative. No one who advocated impeachment is a conservative. Conservatives don't advocate violating the constitution.

---

Whut??

---

Unconstitutional
adjective
unconstitutional | \ n-kn(t)-st-t-shnl, -ty-, -sh-nl
Definition of unconstitutional: not according or consistent with the constitution of a body politic (such as a nation).

https://www.cnsnews.com/blog/michael-w-chapman/dershowitz-its-unconstitutional-impeach-trump-constitutionally-protected

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2020/01/why_trumps_impeachment_is_effectively_unconstitutional_.html

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ken-starr-trumps-second-impeachment-unconstitutional-process

https://townhall.com/capitol-voices/congressmanbillposey/2021/02/06/trump-impeachment-is-unconstitutional-and-reeks-of-political-revenge-n2584331

---

Yep, Trump is the embodiment of unconstitutional. On the other hand impeachment is a constitutional process that a majority of the House determines.

---

"Because I don't like him" does not define unconstitutionality, TS.

---

His actions, like trying to steal an election define him.

---

I hope you have been drinking, because the alternative is much worse in what it says about you, TS.

---

We have a dangerous person out of office, who through his own antics lost the election. Now we're faced with replacing a socialist with a real conservative. The only way to do that is win back the people Trump turned off.

---

So it's the second alternative.

Pity.

---

No, just cold sober reality my friend.

---

Not. Even. Close. To. True.

---

^^^^ - Example of the type of thinking that led to the loss of the WH, House and Senate, and for the foreseeable future.

---

So much projection, you should work in a movie theater, TS.

---

J.B.Katz said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Canon said:

---

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

Quote:

---

Cheney isn't a conservative. No one who advocated impeachment is a conservative. Conservatives don't advocate violating the constitution.

---

Whut??

---

Unconstitutional
adjective
unconstitutional | \ n-kn(t)-st-t-shnl, -ty-, -sh-nl
Definition of unconstitutional: not according or consistent with the constitution of a body politic (such as a nation).

https://www.cnsnews.com/blog/michael-w-chapman/dershowitz-its-unconstitutional-impeach-trump-constitutionally-protected

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2020/01/why_trumps_impeachment_is_effectively_unconstitutional_.html

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ken-starr-trumps-second-impeachment-unconstitutional-process

https://townhall.com/capitol-voices/congressmanbillposey/2021/02/06/trump-impeachment-is-unconstitutional-and-reeks-of-political-revenge-n2584331

---

Yep, Trump is the embodiment of unconstitutional. On the other hand impeachment is a constitutional process that a majority of the House determines.

---

"Because I don't like him" does not define unconstitutionality, TS.

---

His actions, like trying to steal an election define him.

---

I hope you have been drinking, because the alternative is much worse in what it says about you, TS.

---

We have a dangerous person out of office, who through his own antics lost the election. Now we're faced with replacing a socialist with a real conservative. The only way to do that is win back the people Trump turned off.

---

Biden's not a socialist.

He is, however, being forced further to the left by Republicans refusal to work toward the center even on basic things like infrastructure that most Americans know we need to invest in.

If he has to go to the left to gain enough support to pass things because moderate Republcians with common sense are either afraid to vote outside party lines or no longer present in Congress, that's what he'll do. If moderate Republicans show up, he'll work toward the center.

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Booray said:

---

BearFan33 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

I liked Trump.

Kicking out Liz because she doe not like Trump is stupid.

Kicking out Liz because she is a piece of **** war monger and corporate money worshiping ***** is absolutely correct.

---

Liz is a never trump idiot that falls for and participates in false media narratives. %A0She can be in congress if her constituents want her, but in no way should be in any kind of leadership position. %A0

---

I wonder how many of the same posters who are arguing that Liz Cheney is a "war monger" who wants to keep us involved in endless conflicts also were all for the invasions post 9/11, argued Obama was an idiot for continuing the Iraq drawdown and think that maintaining stability in the Mid-East is of vital importance for energy reasons and to help Israel?

Also amazing that people who continually whine about politicians not sticking to their guns based on careerism will castigate someone for taking a position that is obviously the opposite of careerism.

---

Yep

---

is it really? %A0 Is she really going to get hurt if she loses her seat? %A0is she really in it for Wyoming? %A0

She lands on her feet no matter what. %A0It's the people of Wyoming who finally get someone who represents them, and the GOP caucus in Congress who gets a leader who knows how to team-build rather than virtue posture.

---

The problem is the GOP not tolerating differences of opinion. %A0If you don't line up with Trump you're out

---

Yeah. This is not the way to team-build.

---

Particularly when you're already fighting an uphill battle both demographically and in your silly religious culture war.

From a purely political standpoint, the Republicans' decision-making since 2015 has been utterly baffling.

---

Is it really silly to suggest that biological men should not be competing against biological women in sport? %A0That's it in a nutshell. %A0I can think of a number of non-religious reasons for opposing same.

---

It's silly to act like that's a major issue ... or even a significant part of the trans rights conversation.

And perhaps if the religious right could start in a place of acknowledgment that transgender people deserve basic human dignity and respect, we could have a more nuanced conversation on how to handle rare and specific cases like those you reference here.

---

It's a major issue because of the precedent it sets. %A0It's a Pandora's box, and could eventually lead to the door being closed to many women who wish to play sports. %A0See the girls in Connecticut who claim they had scholarship opportunities squelched because two biological men who identified as women took first and second in the state track championship's 100m.

I don't know many on the right who think that trans people don't deserve respect and dignity. %A0But often times those terms are code words used by people to mean special rights for people who suffer from mental disorders that cause them to believe they are the opposite sex. %A0And now it is being used by misguided parents to abuse children, in the form of puberty blockers that cause permanent and lasting damage to children. %A0

History has shown that civilizations begin to decline when rampant immorality (particularly, sexual) infects the civilization. %A0The idea that standing up for a moral code is silly, is an idea that is in and of itself silly.

---

The good old slippery slope fallacy -- a favorite of the church and most others desiring to stall change they're afraid of and/or don't understand.

And your second paragraph is proven false both by the daily verbiage on this board and by your own post here. Referring to transgender as a mental disorder, when the medical and mental health community do not, is not treating those individuals with dignity or respect. It's doing quite the opposite.

---

Tell me, in what way do I not understand transgenderism? %A0Please enlighten me.

And it's not a logical fallacy if what I described is actually happening, which of course it is.

As for my second paragraph, just FYI, until very recently transgenderism was indeed classified as a mental disorder, and still is by that little medical organization known as the WHO. %A0So how did that designation change? %A0A number of transgender advocates and activists began lobbying medical organizations to label it as something other than what it actually is, which of course they did, succumbing to the pressure from the woke crowd which denies biology, and believes that one can choose their gender. %A0Sorry, but medical organizations that more closely resemble political organizations, and can be lobbied to deny science, don't hold as much weight for me as they do you.

I respect transgender people's ability to live their lives as I do. %A0I simply don't deny science by classifying their behavior as normal, as you do. %A0That, it is not.

I know you are very bitter toward the church my friend, and Christianity in general, but it is the role of the church to be counter-cultural, not to conform to the ways of the world. %A0If that's silly, well, I guess it's been silly for around 2,000 years. %A0

---

Wrong.

https://time.com/5596845/world-health-organization-transgender-identity/

And the fact that you continue to conflate sex and gender is proof that you don't have a very firm grasp of this issue and have no desire to gain one.

And it is is the church's role to love and serve in a way that is counter-cultural. The fact that it has so badly missed this point is why I'm so bitter towards it.

---

No, I am right.%A0 They voted on the change in May 2019, but it does not go into effect until January of 2022.%A0 As of right now, it's still listed as a mental disorder by the WHO.%A0 Look it up.

As for sex vs. gender, I simply do not agree that there is a difference.%A0 The idea that gender is a social construct that can be changed, regardless of sex, is a recent (and unscientific) belief that denies biology.

With respect to your last point, your error is your belief that loving someone is not telling them about sin.%A0 This is the opposite of love, and leads them down a primrose path to destruction.%A0 But the fact it is a stumbling block for you is no surprise.%A0 It has been to people for centuries, and especially in today's culture where people don't want to be told their decisions and lifestyles are immoral.

---

Calling conclusions drawn and decisions made by the scientific community "unscientific" without a science background or any expertise whatsoever on this subject reeks of hubris IMO.

And play the semantics game all you want, but the WHO has made and announced the decision to drop gender dysphoria as a mental disorder. The organization no longer views it as such, as you suggested above.

---

Sad considering treatment for gender dysphoria had a very high success rate.

---

... if suicide is your standard for success.

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Booray said:

---

BearFan33 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

I liked Trump.

Kicking out Liz because she doe not like Trump is stupid.

Kicking out Liz because she is a piece of **** war monger and corporate money worshiping ***** is absolutely correct.

---

Liz is a never trump idiot that falls for and participates in false media narratives. %A0She can be in congress if her constituents want her, but in no way should be in any kind of leadership position. %A0

---

I wonder how many of the same posters who are arguing that Liz Cheney is a "war monger" who wants to keep us involved in endless conflicts also were all for the invasions post 9/11, argued Obama was an idiot for continuing the Iraq drawdown and think that maintaining stability in the Mid-East is of vital importance for energy reasons and to help Israel?

Also amazing that people who continually whine about politicians not sticking to their guns based on careerism will castigate someone for taking a position that is obviously the opposite of careerism.

---

Yep

---

is it really? %A0 Is she really going to get hurt if she loses her seat? %A0is she really in it for Wyoming? %A0

She lands on her feet no matter what. %A0It's the people of Wyoming who finally get someone who represents them, and the GOP caucus in Congress who gets a leader who knows how to team-build rather than virtue posture.

---

The problem is the GOP not tolerating differences of opinion. %A0If you don't line up with Trump you're out

---

Yeah. This is not the way to team-build.

---

Particularly when you're already fighting an uphill battle both demographically and in your silly religious culture war.

From a purely political standpoint, the Republicans' decision-making since 2015 has been utterly baffling.

---

Is it really silly to suggest that biological men should not be competing against biological women in sport? %A0That's it in a nutshell. %A0I can think of a number of non-religious reasons for opposing same.

---

It's silly to act like that's a major issue ... or even a significant part of the trans rights conversation.

And perhaps if the religious right could start in a place of acknowledgment that transgender people deserve basic human dignity and respect, we could have a more nuanced conversation on how to handle rare and specific cases like those you reference here.

---

It's a major issue because of the precedent it sets. %A0It's a Pandora's box, and could eventually lead to the door being closed to many women who wish to play sports. %A0See the girls in Connecticut who claim they had scholarship opportunities squelched because two biological men who identified as women took first and second in the state track championship's 100m.

I don't know many on the right who think that trans people don't deserve respect and dignity. %A0But often times those terms are code words used by people to mean special rights for people who suffer from mental disorders that cause them to believe they are the opposite sex. %A0And now it is being used by misguided parents to abuse children, in the form of puberty blockers that cause permanent and lasting damage to children. %A0

History has shown that civilizations begin to decline when rampant immorality (particularly, sexual) infects the civilization. %A0The idea that standing up for a moral code is silly, is an idea that is in and of itself silly.

---

The good old slippery slope fallacy -- a favorite of the church and most others desiring to stall change they're afraid of and/or don't understand.

And your second paragraph is proven false both by the daily verbiage on this board and by your own post here. Referring to transgender as a mental disorder, when the medical and mental health community do not, is not treating those individuals with dignity or respect. It's doing quite the opposite.

---

Tell me, in what way do I not understand transgenderism? %A0Please enlighten me.

And it's not a logical fallacy if what I described is actually happening, which of course it is.

As for my second paragraph, just FYI, until very recently transgenderism was indeed classified as a mental disorder, and still is by that little medical organization known as the WHO. %A0So how did that designation change? %A0A number of transgender advocates and activists began lobbying medical organizations to label it as something other than what it actually is, which of course they did, succumbing to the pressure from the woke crowd which denies biology, and believes that one can choose their gender. %A0Sorry, but medical organizations that more closely resemble political organizations, and can be lobbied to deny science, don't hold as much weight for me as they do you.

I respect transgender people's ability to live their lives as I do. %A0I simply don't deny science by classifying their behavior as normal, as you do. %A0That, it is not.

I know you are very bitter toward the church my friend, and Christianity in general, but it is the role of the church to be counter-cultural, not to conform to the ways of the world. %A0If that's silly, well, I guess it's been silly for around 2,000 years. %A0

---

Wrong.

https://time.com/5596845/world-health-organization-transgender-identity/

And the fact that you continue to conflate sex and gender is proof that you don't have a very firm grasp of this issue and have no desire to gain one.

And it is is the church's role to love and serve in a way that is counter-cultural. The fact that it has so badly missed this point is why I'm so bitter towards it.

---

No, I am right.%A0 They voted on the change in May 2019, but it does not go into effect until January of 2022.%A0 As of right now, it's still listed as a mental disorder by the WHO.%A0 Look it up.

As for sex vs. gender, I simply do not agree that there is a difference.%A0 The idea that gender is a social construct that can be changed, regardless of sex, is a recent (and unscientific) belief that denies biology.

With respect to your last point, your error is your belief that loving someone is not telling them about sin.%A0 This is the opposite of love, and leads them down a primrose path to destruction.%A0 But the fact it is a stumbling block for you is no surprise.%A0 It has been to people for centuries, and especially in today's culture where people don't want to be told their decisions and lifestyles are immoral.

---

Calling conclusions drawn and decisions made by the scientific community "unscientific" without a science background or any expertise whatsoever on this subject reeks of hubris IMO.

And play the semantics game all you want, but the WHO has made and announced the decision to drop gender dysphoria as a mental disorder. The organization no longer views it as such, as you suggested above.

---

Sad considering treatment for gender dysphoria had a very high success rate.

---

... if suicide is your standard for success.

---

What is the lopper suicide rate for comparison?

Further, why change policy because a fraction of the the already small population of loppers might kill itself?

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Booray said:

---

BearFan33 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

I liked Trump.

Kicking out Liz because she doe not like Trump is stupid.

Kicking out Liz because she is a piece of **** war monger and corporate money worshiping ***** is absolutely correct.

---

Liz is a never trump idiot that falls for and participates in false media narratives. %A0She can be in congress if her constituents want her, but in no way should be in any kind of leadership position. %A0

---

I wonder how many of the same posters who are arguing that Liz Cheney is a "war monger" who wants to keep us involved in endless conflicts also were all for the invasions post 9/11, argued Obama was an idiot for continuing the Iraq drawdown and think that maintaining stability in the Mid-East is of vital importance for energy reasons and to help Israel?

Also amazing that people who continually whine about politicians not sticking to their guns based on careerism will castigate someone for taking a position that is obviously the opposite of careerism.

---

Yep

---

is it really? %A0 Is she really going to get hurt if she loses her seat? %A0is she really in it for Wyoming? %A0

She lands on her feet no matter what. %A0It's the people of Wyoming who finally get someone who represents them, and the GOP caucus in Congress who gets a leader who knows how to team-build rather than virtue posture.

---

The problem is the GOP not tolerating differences of opinion. %A0If you don't line up with Trump you're out

---

Yeah. This is not the way to team-build.

---

Particularly when you're already fighting an uphill battle both demographically and in your silly religious culture war.

From a purely political standpoint, the Republicans' decision-making since 2015 has been utterly baffling.

---

Is it really silly to suggest that biological men should not be competing against biological women in sport? %A0That's it in a nutshell. %A0I can think of a number of non-religious reasons for opposing same.

---

It's silly to act like that's a major issue ... or even a significant part of the trans rights conversation.

And perhaps if the religious right could start in a place of acknowledgment that transgender people deserve basic human dignity and respect, we could have a more nuanced conversation on how to handle rare and specific cases like those you reference here.

---

It's a major issue because of the precedent it sets. %A0It's a Pandora's box, and could eventually lead to the door being closed to many women who wish to play sports. %A0See the girls in Connecticut who claim they had scholarship opportunities squelched because two biological men who identified as women took first and second in the state track championship's 100m.

I don't know many on the right who think that trans people don't deserve respect and dignity. %A0But often times those terms are code words used by people to mean special rights for people who suffer from mental disorders that cause them to believe they are the opposite sex. %A0And now it is being used by misguided parents to abuse children, in the form of puberty blockers that cause permanent and lasting damage to children. %A0

History has shown that civilizations begin to decline when rampant immorality (particularly, sexual) infects the civilization. %A0The idea that standing up for a moral code is silly, is an idea that is in and of itself silly.

---

The good old slippery slope fallacy -- a favorite of the church and most others desiring to stall change they're afraid of and/or don't understand.

And your second paragraph is proven false both by the daily verbiage on this board and by your own post here. Referring to transgender as a mental disorder, when the medical and mental health community do not, is not treating those individuals with dignity or respect. It's doing quite the opposite.

---

Tell me, in what way do I not understand transgenderism? %A0Please enlighten me.

And it's not a logical fallacy if what I described is actually happening, which of course it is.

As for my second paragraph, just FYI, until very recently transgenderism was indeed classified as a mental disorder, and still is by that little medical organization known as the WHO. %A0So how did that designation change? %A0A number of transgender advocates and activists began lobbying medical organizations to label it as something other than what it actually is, which of course they did, succumbing to the pressure from the woke crowd which denies biology, and believes that one can choose their gender. %A0Sorry, but medical organizations that more closely resemble political organizations, and can be lobbied to deny science, don't hold as much weight for me as they do you.

I respect transgender people's ability to live their lives as I do. %A0I simply don't deny science by classifying their behavior as normal, as you do. %A0That, it is not.

I know you are very bitter toward the church my friend, and Christianity in general, but it is the role of the church to be counter-cultural, not to conform to the ways of the world. %A0If that's silly, well, I guess it's been silly for around 2,000 years. %A0

---

Wrong.

https://time.com/5596845/world-health-organization-transgender-identity/

And the fact that you continue to conflate sex and gender is proof that you don't have a very firm grasp of this issue and have no desire to gain one.

And it is is the church's role to love and serve in a way that is counter-cultural. The fact that it has so badly missed this point is why I'm so bitter towards it.

---

No, I am right.%A0 They voted on the change in May 2019, but it does not go into effect until January of 2022.%A0 As of right now, it's still listed as a mental disorder by the WHO.%A0 Look it up.

As for sex vs. gender, I simply do not agree that there is a difference.%A0 The idea that gender is a social construct that can be changed, regardless of sex, is a recent (and unscientific) belief that denies biology.

With respect to your last point, your error is your belief that loving someone is not telling them about sin.%A0 This is the opposite of love, and leads them down a primrose path to destruction.%A0 But the fact it is a stumbling block for you is no surprise.%A0 It has been to people for centuries, and especially in today's culture where people don't want to be told their decisions and lifestyles are immoral.

---

Calling conclusions drawn and decisions made by the scientific community "unscientific" without a science background or any expertise whatsoever on this subject reeks of hubris IMO.

And play the semantics game all you want, but the WHO has made and announced the decision to drop gender dysphoria as a mental disorder. The organization no longer views it as such, as you suggested above.

---

Sad considering treatment for gender dysphoria had a very high success rate.

---

... if suicide is your standard for success.

---

What is the lopper suicide rate for comparison?

Further, why change policy because a fraction of the the already small population of loppers might kill itself?

---

"Lopper"?

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

"The name of the tool is derived from the verb "to lop", meaning to cut off"

I know the tool, using it in this context is a bit crass.

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

"The name of the tool is derived from the verb "to lop", meaning to cut off"

I know the tool, using it in this context is a bit crass.

---

Better than dick cutters.

---

bear2be2 said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Booray said:

---

BearFan33 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

I liked Trump.

Kicking out Liz because she doe not like Trump is stupid.

Kicking out Liz because she is a piece of **** war monger and corporate money worshiping ***** is absolutely correct.

---

Liz is a never trump idiot that falls for and participates in false media narratives. %A0She can be in congress if her constituents want her, but in no way should be in any kind of leadership position. %A0

---

I wonder how many of the same posters who are arguing that Liz Cheney is a "war monger" who wants to keep us involved in endless conflicts also were all for the invasions post 9/11, argued Obama was an idiot for continuing the Iraq drawdown and think that maintaining stability in the Mid-East is of vital importance for energy reasons and to help Israel?

Also amazing that people who continually whine about politicians not sticking to their guns based on careerism will castigate someone for taking a position that is obviously the opposite of careerism.

---

Yep

---

is it really? %A0 Is she really going to get hurt if she loses her seat? %A0is she really in it for Wyoming? %A0

She lands on her feet no matter what. %A0It's the people of Wyoming who finally get someone who represents them, and the GOP caucus in Congress who gets a leader who knows how to team-build rather than virtue posture.

---

The problem is the GOP not tolerating differences of opinion. %A0If you don't line up with Trump you're out

---

Yeah. This is not the way to team-build.

---

Particularly when you're already fighting an uphill battle both demographically and in your silly religious culture war.

From a purely political standpoint, the Republicans' decision-making since 2015 has been utterly baffling.

---

Is it really silly to suggest that biological men should not be competing against biological women in sport? %A0That's it in a nutshell. %A0I can think of a number of non-religious reasons for opposing same.

---

It's silly to act like that's a major issue ... or even a significant part of the trans rights conversation.

And perhaps if the religious right could start in a place of acknowledgment that transgender people deserve basic human dignity and respect, we could have a more nuanced conversation on how to handle rare and specific cases like those you reference here.

---

It's a major issue because of the precedent it sets. %A0It's a Pandora's box, and could eventually lead to the door being closed to many women who wish to play sports. %A0See the girls in Connecticut who claim they had scholarship opportunities squelched because two biological men who identified as women took first and second in the state track championship's 100m.

I don't know many on the right who think that trans people don't deserve respect and dignity. %A0But often times those terms are code words used by people to mean special rights for people who suffer from mental disorders that cause them to believe they are the opposite sex. %A0And now it is being used by misguided parents to abuse children, in the form of puberty blockers that cause permanent and lasting damage to children. %A0

History has shown that civilizations begin to decline when rampant immorality (particularly, sexual) infects the civilization. %A0The idea that standing up for a moral code is silly, is an idea that is in and of itself silly.

---

The good old slippery slope fallacy -- a favorite of the church and most others desiring to stall change they're afraid of and/or don't understand.

And your second paragraph is proven false both by the daily verbiage on this board and by your own post here. Referring to transgender as a mental disorder, when the medical and mental health community do not, is not treating those individuals with dignity or respect. It's doing quite the opposite.

---

Tell me, in what way do I not understand transgenderism? %A0Please enlighten me.

And it's not a logical fallacy if what I described is actually happening, which of course it is.

As for my second paragraph, just FYI, until very recently transgenderism was indeed classified as a mental disorder, and still is by that little medical organization known as the WHO. %A0So how did that designation change? %A0A number of transgender advocates and activists began lobbying medical organizations to label it as something other than what it actually is, which of course they did, succumbing to the pressure from the woke crowd which denies biology, and believes that one can choose their gender. %A0Sorry, but medical organizations that more closely resemble political organizations, and can be lobbied to deny science, don't hold as much weight for me as they do you.

I respect transgender people's ability to live their lives as I do. %A0I simply don't deny science by classifying their behavior as normal, as you do. %A0That, it is not.

I know you are very bitter toward the church my friend, and Christianity in general, but it is the role of the church to be counter-cultural, not to conform to the ways of the world. %A0If that's silly, well, I guess it's been silly for around 2,000 years. %A0

---

Wrong.

https://time.com/5596845/world-health-organization-transgender-identity/

And the fact that you continue to conflate sex and gender is proof that you don't have a very firm grasp of this issue and have no desire to gain one.

And it is is the church's role to love and serve in a way that is counter-cultural. The fact that it has so badly missed this point is why I'm so bitter towards it.

---

No, I am right.%A0 They voted on the change in May 2019, but it does not go into effect until January of 2022.%A0 As of right now, it's still listed as a mental disorder by the WHO.%A0 Look it up.

As for sex vs. gender, I simply do not agree that there is a difference.%A0 The idea that gender is a social construct that can be changed, regardless of sex, is a recent (and unscientific) belief that denies biology.

With respect to your last point, your error is your belief that loving someone is not telling them about sin.%A0 This is the opposite of love, and leads them down a primrose path to destruction.%A0 But the fact it is a stumbling block for you is no surprise.%A0 It has been to people for centuries, and especially in today's culture where people don't want to be told their decisions and lifestyles are immoral.

---

Calling conclusions drawn and decisions made by the scientific community "unscientific" without a science background or any expertise whatsoever on this subject reeks of hubris IMO.

And play the semantics game all you want, but the WHO has made and announced the decision to drop gender dysphoria as a mental disorder. The organization no longer views it as such, as you suggested above.

---

Sad considering treatment for gender dysphoria had a very high success rate.

---

... if suicide is your standard for success.

---

What is the lopper suicide rate for comparison?

Further, why change policy because a fraction of the the already small population of loppers might kill itself?

---

A better question would be why do you care about policy that doesn't impact you in any material way that might actually reduce the insane depression and suicide rates among this particular population?

The current policy approach to trans rights and health care is a direct response to a failed approach that resulted in consistent and demonstrably poor outcomes.

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Calling conclusions drawn and decisions made by the scientific community "unscientific" without a science background or any expertise whatsoever on this subject reeks of hubris IMO.

And play the semantics game all you want, but the WHO has made and announced the decision to drop gender dysphoria as a mental disorder. The organization no longer views it as such, as you suggested above. That 2022 date merely provides a deadline for noncompliant member countries to make the necessary changes. Neither the research nor the conclusions have changed since that 2019 announcement and nor will they between now and Jan. 1. If having seven more months to pretend the science is on your side makes you feel better, knock yourself out.

To your last paragraph, My belief is that we're all (largely unrepentant) sinners who live immoral lifestyles. Every last one of us. And we will be until the day we die because we were born flawed and our nature guarantees it. Acknowledging that, I'll focus on the love and grace part of the gospel. You can keep your judgment. Let me know how many souls you save.

---

Mothra said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Calling conclusions drawn and decisions made by the scientific community "unscientific" without a science background or any expertise whatsoever on this subject reeks of hubris IMO.

And play the semantics game all you want, but the WHO has made and announced the decision to drop gender dysphoria as a mental disorder. The organization no longer views it as such, as you suggested above. That 2022 date merely provides a deadline for noncompliant member countries to make the necessary changes. Neither the research nor the conclusions have changed since that 2019 announcement and nor will they between now and Jan. 1. If having seven more months to pretend the science is on your side makes you feel better, knock yourself out.

To your last paragraph, My belief is that we're all (largely unrepentant) sinners who live immoral lifestyles. Every last one of us. And we will be until the day we die because we were born flawed and our nature guarantees it. Acknowledging that, I'll focus on the love and grace part of the gospel. You can keep your judgment. Let me know how many souls you save.

---

You're smarter than your first paragraph suggests. Can you tell me what science changed in 2019 that caused the WHO to make the decision to say transgenderism is no longer a mental disorder? You and I both know the science has not changed.

As for the last paragraph, unfortunately it appears you only focus on part of the Gospel message, instead of focusing on the entire Gospel, including why love and grace are necessary. In so doing, you unwittingly distort the Gospel, and it's call to Christians.

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Calling conclusions drawn and decisions made by the scientific community "unscientific" without a science background or any expertise whatsoever on this subject reeks of hubris IMO.

And play the semantics game all you want, but the WHO has made and announced the decision to drop gender dysphoria as a mental disorder. The organization no longer views it as such, as you suggested above. That 2022 date merely provides a deadline for noncompliant member countries to make the necessary changes. Neither the research nor the conclusions have changed since that 2019 announcement and nor will they between now and Jan. 1. If having seven more months to pretend the science is on your side makes you feel better, knock yourself out.

To your last paragraph, My belief is that we're all (largely unrepentant) sinners who live immoral lifestyles. Every last one of us. And we will be until the day we die because we were born flawed and our nature guarantees it. Acknowledging that, I'll focus on the love and grace part of the gospel. You can keep your judgment. Let me know how many souls you save.

---

You're smarter than your first paragraph suggests. Can you tell me what science changed in 2019 that caused the WHO to make the decision to say transgenderism is no longer a mental disorder? You and I both know the science has not changed.

As for the last paragraph, unfortunately it appears you only focus on part of the Gospel message, instead of focusing on the entire Gospel, including why love and grace are necessary. In so doing, you unwittingly distort the Gospel, and it's call to Christians.

---

I focus on the parts of the gospel Christ did. I have little use for much else.

---

Mothra said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Calling conclusions drawn and decisions made by the scientific community "unscientific" without a science background or any expertise whatsoever on this subject reeks of hubris IMO.

And play the semantics game all you want, but the WHO has made and announced the decision to drop gender dysphoria as a mental disorder. The organization no longer views it as such, as you suggested above. That 2022 date merely provides a deadline for noncompliant member countries to make the necessary changes. Neither the research nor the conclusions have changed since that 2019 announcement and nor will they between now and Jan. 1. If having seven more months to pretend the science is on your side makes you feel better, knock yourself out.

To your last paragraph, My belief is that we're all (largely unrepentant) sinners who live immoral lifestyles. Every last one of us. And we will be until the day we die because we were born flawed and our nature guarantees it. Acknowledging that, I'll focus on the love and grace part of the gospel. You can keep your judgment. Let me know how many souls you save.

---

You're smarter than your first paragraph suggests. Can you tell me what science changed in 2019 that caused the WHO to make the decision to say transgenderism is no longer a mental disorder? You and I both know the science has not changed.

As for the last paragraph, unfortunately it appears you only focus on part of the Gospel message, instead of focusing on the entire Gospel, including why love and grace are necessary. In so doing, you unwittingly distort the Gospel, and it's call to Christians.

---

I focus on the parts of the gospel Christ did. I have little use for much else.

---

So Christ was not focused on since and repentance?

---

Canon said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

The medical community disagrees with you ... not that that matters to a people who have based their understanding of science on a centuries old religious text.

---

The DSM has been a political document for decades. There's nothing medical about their embracing self evident fantasy. The only religion at play here is the leftist worship of everything deconstructionist in hopes of destroying western culture and implementing Marxism in its place.

You asked, "why do you care about policy that doesn't impact you in any material way?" You've been provided an answer. You then switch tactics to an appeal to authority, where authorities clearly aren't applying any objective criteria, rather simply making political pronouncements...just like you and those you agree with.

You care about Tran nies in exactly the measure you can use them to attack western culture.

---