I didn't say that. I said I was tolerant of transgendered people- just intolerant of the act- and choose not to recognize their claim of being a different gender.
Gender and sex are not the same thing. Genders are culturally defined and sex is biologically defined. A transvestite or transsexual can not change their sex but they can choose to be a different gender.
Gender and sex are not the same thing. Genders are culturally defined and sex is biologically defined. A transvestite or transsexual can not change their sex but they can choose to be a different gender.
Ugh- can't you see that is the most empty argument ever?
We have friends- The woman works full time and is a regional president for Aetna. The man is a stay at home dad, and very nurturing and raises his 3 sons. So She is a woman, and he is a man. But because our culture has women making less, women staying at home, etc- So his sexual orientation is a man, but his gender is a woman. And likewise, her sexual orientation is a woman, but her gender is a man.
Dumbest, most restricting, stereotyping stance/argument anyone could take.
Ugh- can't you see that is the most empty argument ever?
We have friends- The woman works full time and is a regional president for Aetna. The man is a stay at home dad, and very nurturing and raises his 3 sons. So She is a woman, and he is a man. But because our culture has women making less, women staying at home, etc- So his sexual orientation is a man, but his gender is a woman. And likewise, her sexual orientation is a woman, but her gender is a man.
Dumbest, most restricting, stereotyping stance/argument anyone could take. If this is the Transgender's role- than no one should dislike them more than a feminist.
I underlined a part where you're really going off the deep end. I have no idea how you have jumped to that conclusion. You don't get to tell people what their gender is so you believing that a stay-at-home-dad isn't a "real man" is just bigotry.
Again, sex is determined by biology and gender is cultural. You're only seeing things in terms of your own heteronormativity but there plenty of societies throughout history and today with androgynes. These people don't identify with the strict 1:1 placement of gender and sex that you're trying to ascribe them.
I underlined a part where you're really going off the deep end. I have no idea how you have jumped to that conclusion. You don't get to tell people what their gender is so you believing that a stay-at-home-dad isn't a "real man" is just bigotry.
Again, sex is determined by biology and gender is cultural. You're only seeing things in terms of your own heteronormativity but there plenty of societies throughout history and today with androgynes. These people don't identify with the strict 1:1 placement of gender and sex that you're trying to ascribe them.
I was using "gender characteristics" as a premise for defining a gender. How else would you define your gender? DYI- I also read how the "World Health Organization" defines it and it is similar. See: Gender Characteristics
To make a less clear-cut example. Say you have a person who was born a man (male genitalia, etc) but culturally is very feminine and relates/defines himself as a woman due to his femininity. Then that person dates a man. In the LGBT community- that is defined as a heterosexual relationship due to their self-defined femininity. Yet, if they go to another country- theres a potential they could be in a homosexual relationship. Do you see how ridiculous this sounds?
Screw what the culture says and screw what stereotypes people like to reinforce- it's detrimental to us as a country. If you're born with a penis- you cant play in the WNBA, Use a women's bathroom or changing room, or do anything only women can do. It's not that complicated. "Gender" differentiation is constricting and again- crazy.
In the LGBT community- that is defined as a heterosexual relationship due to their self-defined femininity.
Where do you get that idea? You clearly stated that it was a male was dating a male. Hetero means different and homo means same. They are either the same sex or a different sex. Your mention of gender roles is meaningless to your definition since you're only taking about the same sex (i.e.: homosexual).
Where do you get that idea? You clearly stated that it was a male was dating a male. Hetero means different and homo means same. They are either the same sex or a different sex. Your mention of gender roles is meaningless to your definition since you're only taking about the same sex (i.e.: homosexual).
Incorrect! A man born a man- who now considers himself a woman- and dates a man- is now a heterosexual relationship. Period.
Thats the lunacy of this thing!
If you disagree- then you agree with me- thats not a freakin' woman its a dude who lives in this fantasy world where he thinks he's a woman!
Again- please address the point: Be gay, wear a dress- whatever you want- do it! Just don't call yourself a woman if you were born a man! And if you think you are a woman, you need to be committed.
Incorrect! A man born a man- who now considers himself a woman- and dates a man- is now a heterosexual relationship. Period.
Thats the lunacy of this thing!
If you disagree- then you agree with me- thats not a freakin' woman its a dude pretending to be a woman!
No, they aren't. I don't know how I can be any more clear on the well worn subject regarding sex involving having particular organs. I can't imagine anything more restrictive and insulting to a person than clams that males should all like some archaic notion of men and females should all act like some archaic idea of women. Humans are simply far too diverse for use to say that if you are an effeminate male or a cross dresser than you're defined as a female. You'll always be the sex you were born as, regardless of what gender you identify yourself as.
Here is a very simple usage explanation from the Mac's dictionary: "sex tends to refer to biological differences, while gender refers to cultural or social ones."
No, they aren't. I don't know how I can be any more clear on the well worn subject regarding sex involving having particular organs. I can't imagine anything more restrictive and insulting to a person than clams that males should all like some archaic notion of men and females should all act like some archaic idea of women. Humans are simply far too diverse for use to say that if you are an effeminate male or a cross dresser than you're defined as a female. You'll always be the sex you were born as, regardless of what gender you identify yourself as.
Here is a very simple usage explanation from the Mac's dictionary: "sex tends to refer to biological differences, while gender refers to cultural or social ones."
Then we'll just have to disagree.
If they consider themselves women because of their "gender"- I consider them men with feminine attributes. I won't be calling them women.
I'm Christian, and my understanding is that God intends for people to act in a moral way, and that for sexual activities that is only between a man and a woman who are married to each other. That may sound like discrimination, but it means that homosexual activities are in the same category as fornication and adultery. It's not that we're meant to not have fun and do what feels natural; it's that there is a 'right way' to do things, and that it matters.
That's my belief, and I respect others who have differing beliefs. Some of the people I hold in highest regard have different beliefs than I do.
But here's an interesting thing: others' orientation and preferences (and actions) are not my decision. But my belief system does have something to say about something that is my decision (in addition to my own chastity), and that is a strict injunction to love my neighbor. That is not limited to those who believe and act the way I feel we all should.
I believe all people should be given a chance to receive a job offer based on their ability to do the job well.
People are created equally and should be treated equally.
'Moral' and 'immoral' are not equal, and should not be treated equally. I support actions to treat people fairly. I also support actions to not condone or legitimize wrong behavior. Denying a qualified person a job only because he or she is attracted to the same gender is wrong, as is legalized same-sex marriage.
Jesus didn't condone sin. Nor did he reject sinners (in fact he purposefully ate with them and forgave them and tried to help them get on track). I'm sure he expects the same of us, on both counts.
I honestly don't know whether homosexuality is a choice, or something people are 'born with', or something they didn't choose or were born with but felt as a result of environmental influences. I suspect that there are cases of each, but couldn't even begin to guess the numbers. In the end, acting on it is what's wrong. I think where choice is not involved that there is no moral culpability.
I may be born with (or develop through choice or otherwise) a really hot temper. That may be something I'm faced with in my life. But I am responsible to not act on it. There are appropriate ways to respond with great energy, conviction, passion, indignation, etc. that don't represent succumbing to my hot temper.
A person may be born with a handicap. I believe God intends to 'make all things beautiful in His time'. I believe that includes healing all kinds of things people were born with or that happened to them during their lives that are different than the way that will allow for their greatest happiness.
A temper and being handicapped are not even close to perfect analogues to homosexuality. But these things help me understand it.
I realize that some will see inconsistency in the set of beliefs I've outlined here. I feel they are complementary parts of a consistent belief. In the end I'm imperfect (aren't we all) and hope that others will try to have the same respect for me and my beliefs that I strive for towards them.
Edit: I noticed that the OP said "most employers". Something else I believe is that religious organizations have the right to consider moral (sexual) behavior as part of their job qualification criteria. While I think purely secular businesses don't (or shouldn't) have that right except as relates to sexual harassment, I do think that religious individuals do have the right to run a secular business without being forced as part of that business to support what they consider to be immoral behavior (ie. Hobby Lobby, photographers, bakeries, etc.).
I remember, not long ago, when Apple was known for it's amazing new products and features and not the politically controversial remarks of its CEO. I guess with Jobs gone Cook needs to keep the company in the headlines somehow.
If Apple Insider doesn't do its due diligence in moderating this discussion away from being another soapbox for the heteronormative cheer squad I'm going to stop visiting this site.
So many self-identified experts yet so little insight. And then with the bashing.
I'm Christian, and my understanding is that God intends for people to act in a moral way, and that for sexual activities that is only between a man and a woman who are married to each other. That may sound like discrimination, but it means that homosexual activities are in the same category as fornication and adultery. It's not that we're meant to not have fun and do what feels natural; it's that there is a 'right way' to do things, and that it matters.
That's my belief, and I respect others who have differing beliefs. Some of the people I hold in highest regard have different beliefs than I do.
But here's an interesting thing: others' orientation and preferences (and actions) are not my decision. But my belief system does have something to say about something that is my decision (in addition to my own chastity), and that is a strict injunction to love my neighbor. That is not limited to those who believe and act the way I feel we all should.
I believe all people should be given a chance to receive a job offer based on their ability to do the job well.
People are created equally and should be treated equally.
'Moral' and 'immoral' are not equal, and should not be treated equally. I support actions to treat people fairly. I also support actions to not condone or legitimize wrong behavior. Denying a qualified person a job only because he or she is attracted to the same gender is wrong, as is legalized same-sex marriage.
Jesus didn't condone sin. Nor did he reject sinners (in fact he purposefully ate with them and forgave them and tried to help them get on track). I'm sure he expects the same of us, on both counts.
I honestly don't know whether homosexuality is a choice, or something people are 'born with', or something they didn't choose or were born with but felt as a result of environmental influences. I suspect that there are cases of each, but couldn't even begin to guess the numbers. In the end, acting on it is what's wrong. I think where choice is not involved that there is no moral culpability.
I may be born with (or develop through choice or otherwise) a really hot temper. That may be something I'm faced with in my life. But I am responsible to not act on it. There are appropriate ways to respond with great energy, conviction, passion, indignation, etc. that don't represent succumbing to my hot temper.
A person may be born with a handicap. I believe God intends to 'make all things beautiful in His time'. I believe that includes healing all kinds of things people were born with or that happened to them during their lives that are different than the way that will allow for their greatest happiness.
A temper and being handicapped are not even close to perfect analogues to homosexuality. But these things help me understand it.
I realize that some will see inconsistency in the set of beliefs I've outlined here. I feel they are complementary parts of a consistent belief. In the end I'm imperfect (aren't we all) and hope that others will try to have the same respect for me and my beliefs that I strive for towards them.
Edit: I noticed that the OP said "most employers". Something else I believe is that religious organizations have the right to consider moral (sexual) behavior as part of their job qualification criteria. While I think purely secular businesses don't (or shouldn't) have that right except as relates to sexual harassment, I do think that religious individuals do have the right to run a secular business without being forced as part of that business to support what they consider to be immoral behavior (ie. Hobby Lobby, photographers, bakeries, etc.).
I didn't say that. I said I was tolerant of transgendered people- just intolerant of the act- and choose not to recognize their claim of being a different gender. No different than I chose not to recognize that some blonde lady dressed up like Cinderella at Disney World really was Cinderella. Of course, the difference is, that if that lady genuinely thought she were Cinderella, we'd all think she was nuts. Yet somehow Transgenders get a pass
If somebody wants to have their genitals creatively mutilated and to have their bodies pumped full of hormones from the opposite sex that's their choice. But that is all that happened. A man was not transformed into a woman or vice versa.
Comments
Gays already have equal rights.
Not right now they don't but soon, very soon they will. Sorry but you're on the wrong side of history (not the first time I'm sure).
Overdue.
Gender and sex are not the same thing. Genders are culturally defined and sex is biologically defined. A transvestite or transsexual can not change their sex but they can choose to be a different gender.
Gender and sex are not the same thing. Genders are culturally defined and sex is biologically defined. A transvestite or transsexual can not change their sex but they can choose to be a different gender.
Ugh- can't you see that is the most empty argument ever?
We have friends- The woman works full time and is a regional president for Aetna. The man is a stay at home dad, and very nurturing and raises his 3 sons. So She is a woman, and he is a man. But because our culture has women making less, women staying at home, etc- So his sexual orientation is a man, but his gender is a woman. And likewise, her sexual orientation is a woman, but her gender is a man.
Dumbest, most restricting, stereotyping stance/argument anyone could take.
I underlined a part where you're really going off the deep end. I have no idea how you have jumped to that conclusion. You don't get to tell people what their gender is so you believing that a stay-at-home-dad isn't a "real man" is just bigotry.
Again, sex is determined by biology and gender is cultural. You're only seeing things in terms of your own heteronormativity but there plenty of societies throughout history and today with androgynes. These people don't identify with the strict 1:1 placement of gender and sex that you're trying to ascribe them.
Here is one famous anthropologic example: http://androgyne.0catch.com/2spiritx.htm
I underlined a part where you're really going off the deep end. I have no idea how you have jumped to that conclusion. You don't get to tell people what their gender is so you believing that a stay-at-home-dad isn't a "real man" is just bigotry.
Again, sex is determined by biology and gender is cultural. You're only seeing things in terms of your own heteronormativity but there plenty of societies throughout history and today with androgynes. These people don't identify with the strict 1:1 placement of gender and sex that you're trying to ascribe them.
Here is one famous anthropologic example: http://androgyne.0catch.com/2spiritx.htm
I was using "gender characteristics" as a premise for defining a gender. How else would you define your gender? DYI- I also read how the "World Health Organization" defines it and it is similar. See: Gender Characteristics
http://www.who.int/gender/whatisgender/en/
To make a less clear-cut example. Say you have a person who was born a man (male genitalia, etc) but culturally is very feminine and relates/defines himself as a woman due to his femininity. Then that person dates a man. In the LGBT community- that is defined as a heterosexual relationship due to their self-defined femininity. Yet, if they go to another country- theres a potential they could be in a homosexual relationship. Do you see how ridiculous this sounds?
Screw what the culture says and screw what stereotypes people like to reinforce- it's detrimental to us as a country. If you're born with a penis- you cant play in the WNBA, Use a women's bathroom or changing room, or do anything only women can do. It's not that complicated. "Gender" differentiation is constricting and again- crazy.
Where do you get that idea? You clearly stated that it was a male was dating a male. Hetero means different and homo means same. They are either the same sex or a different sex. Your mention of gender roles is meaningless to your definition since you're only taking about the same sex (i.e.: homosexual).
Where do you get that idea? You clearly stated that it was a male was dating a male. Hetero means different and homo means same. They are either the same sex or a different sex. Your mention of gender roles is meaningless to your definition since you're only taking about the same sex (i.e.: homosexual).
Incorrect! A man born a man- who now considers himself a woman- and dates a man- is now a heterosexual relationship. Period.
Thats the lunacy of this thing!
If you disagree- then you agree with me- thats not a freakin' woman its a dude who lives in this fantasy world where he thinks he's a woman!
Again- please address the point: Be gay, wear a dress- whatever you want- do it! Just don't call yourself a woman if you were born a man! And if you think you are a woman, you need to be committed.
No, they aren't. I don't know how I can be any more clear on the well worn subject regarding sex involving having particular organs. I can't imagine anything more restrictive and insulting to a person than clams that males should all like some archaic notion of men and females should all act like some archaic idea of women. Humans are simply far too diverse for use to say that if you are an effeminate male or a cross dresser than you're defined as a female. You'll always be the sex you were born as, regardless of what gender you identify yourself as.
Here is a very simple usage explanation from the Mac's dictionary: "sex tends to refer to biological differences, while gender refers to cultural or social ones."
Then we'll just have to disagree.
If they consider themselves women because of their "gender"- I consider them men with feminine attributes. I won't be calling them women.
I'm Christian, and my understanding is that God intends for people to act in a moral way, and that for sexual activities that is only between a man and a woman who are married to each other. That may sound like discrimination, but it means that homosexual activities are in the same category as fornication and adultery. It's not that we're meant to not have fun and do what feels natural; it's that there is a 'right way' to do things, and that it matters.
That's my belief, and I respect others who have differing beliefs. Some of the people I hold in highest regard have different beliefs than I do.
But here's an interesting thing: others' orientation and preferences (and actions) are not my decision. But my belief system does have something to say about something that is my decision (in addition to my own chastity), and that is a strict injunction to love my neighbor. That is not limited to those who believe and act the way I feel we all should.
I believe all people should be given a chance to receive a job offer based on their ability to do the job well.
People are created equally and should be treated equally.
'Moral' and 'immoral' are not equal, and should not be treated equally. I support actions to treat people fairly. I also support actions to not condone or legitimize wrong behavior. Denying a qualified person a job only because he or she is attracted to the same gender is wrong, as is legalized same-sex marriage.
Jesus didn't condone sin. Nor did he reject sinners (in fact he purposefully ate with them and forgave them and tried to help them get on track). I'm sure he expects the same of us, on both counts.
I honestly don't know whether homosexuality is a choice, or something people are 'born with', or something they didn't choose or were born with but felt as a result of environmental influences. I suspect that there are cases of each, but couldn't even begin to guess the numbers. In the end, acting on it is what's wrong. I think where choice is not involved that there is no moral culpability.
I may be born with (or develop through choice or otherwise) a really hot temper. That may be something I'm faced with in my life. But I am responsible to not act on it. There are appropriate ways to respond with great energy, conviction, passion, indignation, etc. that don't represent succumbing to my hot temper.
A person may be born with a handicap. I believe God intends to 'make all things beautiful in His time'. I believe that includes healing all kinds of things people were born with or that happened to them during their lives that are different than the way that will allow for their greatest happiness.
A temper and being handicapped are not even close to perfect analogues to homosexuality. But these things help me understand it.
I realize that some will see inconsistency in the set of beliefs I've outlined here. I feel they are complementary parts of a consistent belief. In the end I'm imperfect (aren't we all) and hope that others will try to have the same respect for me and my beliefs that I strive for towards them.
Edit: I noticed that the OP said "most employers". Something else I believe is that religious organizations have the right to consider moral (sexual) behavior as part of their job qualification criteria. While I think purely secular businesses don't (or shouldn't) have that right except as relates to sexual harassment, I do think that religious individuals do have the right to run a secular business without being forced as part of that business to support what they consider to be immoral behavior (ie. Hobby Lobby, photographers, bakeries, etc.).
I remember, not long ago, when Apple was known for it's amazing new products and features and not the politically controversial remarks of its CEO. I guess with Jobs gone Cook needs to keep the company in the headlines somehow.
So many self-identified experts yet so little insight. And then with the bashing.
Just reported @MDCragg for blatant trolling.
What did I say that you consider to be "blatant trolling"? Or are you just trying to silence somebody of whom you are intolerant?
Well said.
I didn't say that. I said I was tolerant of transgendered people- just intolerant of the act- and choose not to recognize their claim of being a different gender. No different than I chose not to recognize that some blonde lady dressed up like Cinderella at Disney World really was Cinderella. Of course, the difference is, that if that lady genuinely thought she were Cinderella, we'd all think she was nuts. Yet somehow Transgenders get a pass
If somebody wants to have their genitals creatively mutilated and to have their bodies pumped full of hormones from the opposite sex that's their choice. But that is all that happened. A man was not transformed into a woman or vice versa.
Read your post again.
Read your post again.
Please point out the example of "blatant trolling" and explain why you are characterizing it that way. If you can't I will dismiss your assertion.