(07-27-2017, 10:41 AM)HURRICANE!!! Wrote: [ -> ] (07-26-2017, 05:12 PM)jagibelieve Wrote: [ -> ]I started to have a discussion with my very liberal and gay brother about the ban on transgenders in the military and something came to mind.
When it comes to discussing global warming climate change, liberals are always quick to point out and cite "science" regarding this.
If a debate and/or discussion comes up regarding creationism vs. evolution, the main argument from the left is "science".
When it comes to transgender issues, they are quick to cite "feelings" or "identity" and basically ignore science. After all, when a person is born, science determines their gender not how they "feel".
I would love for some of our liberal friends on here to explain what the difference is.
I don't understand why you are attempting to tie the 3 subject matters together?
... unless I'm missing something like Adam (Eve's boyfriend) got a boob job and the silicon is now adversely impacting the ozone layer, I don't see how you can group climate change, evolution, and transgenders into a single grouping.
.
I'm not grouping or trying to tie the 3 subject matters together at all. I'm just illustrating the fact that many on the left use "science" as their justification regarding certain issues while they ignore science for others.
So you're insinuating science should be used as rationale for everything then
Of course people are going to use science as their rationale to prove out things
related to the universe since Science is actually defined as the following:
*** Science (from Latin scientia, meaning "knowledge")[1][2]:58 is a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe ***
As such, it's only logical that someone would use science to prove out climate change and evolution (e.g. bing bang theory) and use use science to prove out ones desire to turn transgender.
If this is still too difficult to comprehend, I'll simplify for you .... One may use science to debate the distance of staturn from earth but they will most likely not use science to explain why people cry when they watch sad movies.
I couldn't even read all of the nonsense.
If a person has a difference in the brain that makes them have multiple personalities, touch little kids, obsess, etc it is a disorder and is treated as such with medicine and therapy.
But if the same is said of gender identity or something in that vein, then it is NOT any form of disability. It is normal?
These mother truckers really want it both ways don't they?
Here's what I say... it is either a mental defect that could be or should be treated as such or it is a choice that is different from what nature intended.
I'm not some neo conservative... if you want to change from a boy to a girl or vice versa... I'm OK with it. That's your choice. But don't try to tell me it is 'normal'.
If you are a man and want to marry a man... I'm OK with that. That is your choice, but don't tell me you were born that way. Somewhere down the road, you made your mind up that is who you wanted to be. And if not, if it was forced on you by your brain, then it is a defect from normal.
What is normal? Well... if two men can not procreate... then one should be able to assume it isn't normal. If everyone chose to be gay, human kind would cease to exists. And that isn't normal.
The choice is yours. But don't expect people to pander to your small percentage of people doing weird things with their lifestyles and bodies and expect them to act like it is the norm. "Get with the times"
Personally I blame all the crap in our processed foods and the stuff the government puts in the water.
If you're offended by my views. Good. Cry about it.
(07-27-2017, 02:42 PM)HURRICANE!!! Wrote: [ -> ]So you're insinuating science should be used as rationale for everything then
Of course people are going to use science as their rationale to prove out things related to the universe since Science is actually defined as the following:
*** Science (from Latin scientia, meaning "knowledge")[1][2]:58 is a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe ***
As such, it's only logical that someone would use science to prove out climate change and evolution (e.g. bing bang theory) and use use science to prove out ones desire to turn transgender.
If this is still too difficult to comprehend, I'll simplify for you .... One may use science to debate the distance of staturn from earth but they will most likely not use science to explain why people cry when they watch sad movies.
Simple question.
If Bruce "Kaitlyn" Jenner's DNA was tested today, what would the results be? Are the results not determined by science?
I'm not insinuating that science should be used as a rationale for everything at all. I'm just pointing out how those on the far left use "science" as their argument regarding some things, yet ignore "science" regarding other things.
The argument from the left:
Creationism should not be taught because science dictates otherwise.
Transgender people are what they "say" of "feel" what they are regardless of what the science says regarding their DNA.
(07-27-2017, 03:10 PM)jagibelieve Wrote: [ -> ] (07-27-2017, 02:42 PM)HURRICANE!!! Wrote: [ -> ]So you're insinuating science should be used as rationale for everything then
Of course people are going to use science as their rationale to prove out things related to the universe since Science is actually defined as the following:
*** Science (from Latin scientia, meaning "knowledge")[1][2]:58 is a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe ***
As such, it's only logical that someone would use science to prove out climate change and evolution (e.g. bing bang theory) and use use science to prove out ones desire to turn transgender.
If this is still too difficult to comprehend, I'll simplify for you .... One may use science to debate the distance of staturn from earth but they will most likely not use science to explain why people cry when they watch sad movies.
Simple question.
If Bruce "Kaitlyn" Jenner's DNA was tested today, what would the results be? Are the results not determined by science?
I'm not insinuating that science should be used as a rationale for everything at all. I'm just pointing out how those on the far left use "science" as their argument regarding some things, yet ignore "science" regarding other things.
The argument from the left:
Creationism should not be taught because science dictates otherwise.
Transgender people are what they "say" of "feel" what they are regardless of what the science says regarding their DNA.
The left is quick to be all inclusive, until it means including someone with different views than themselves.
They are all about free speech, until they hear something they don't like.
They are all about equality but want special treatment (not equality for right leaning folks)
Who raised these idiots... it wasn't always this bad. This is a new millennial thing I think... I don't like it.
Well my father, who has voted Republican up until trump, raised me. He is a hard [BLEEP] like you but I guess he did something right because I do not believe myself to be an idiot...but thanks for the name calling. Everyone that I know that considers themselves to "think like a liberal" all agree with the first part of your three statements but not the second part. I honestly see the conservative leaning individuals on here and in Jacksonville to be way more hateful in the way they think. Just my 2 cents which doesn't mean anything to you.
(07-27-2017, 03:23 PM)The Holy Teal Wrote: [ -> ]Well my father, who has voted Republican up until trump, raised me. He is a hard [BLEEP] like you but I guess he did something right because I do not believe myself to be an idiot...but thanks for the name calling. Everyone that I know that considers themselves to "think like a liberal" all agree with the first part of your three statements but not the second part. I honestly see the conservative leaning individuals on here and in Jacksonville to be way more hateful in the way they think. Just my 2 cents which doesn't mean anything to you.
How are conservative leaning individuals on here (I assume you mean me as well) being hateful?
(07-27-2017, 03:31 PM)jagibelieve Wrote: [ -> ] (07-27-2017, 03:23 PM)The Holy Teal Wrote: [ -> ]Well my father, who has voted Republican up until trump, raised me. He is a hard [BLEEP] like you but I guess he did something right because I do not believe myself to be an idiot...but thanks for the name calling. Everyone that I know that considers themselves to "think like a liberal" all agree with the first part of your three statements but not the second part. I honestly see the conservative leaning individuals on here and in Jacksonville to be way more hateful in the way they think. Just my 2 cents which doesn't mean anything to you.
How are conservative leaning individuals on here (I assume you mean me as well) being hateful?
There's a line between "I think that being transgender is a mental illeness," and "I think trannies belong in concentration camps." Some are incapable of seeing it.
(07-27-2017, 04:19 PM)TJBender Wrote: [ -> ] (07-27-2017, 03:31 PM)jagibelieve Wrote: [ -> ]How are conservative leaning individuals on here (I assume you mean me as well) being hateful?
There's a line between "I think that being transgender is a mental illeness," and "I think trannies belong in concentration camps." Some are incapable of seeing it.
How in the world do you get that from this thread? Seriously?
The topic of this thread is how some on the left use "science" as justification for some of their arguments, yet ignore science for other arguments.
Somehow the discussion has been taken it to "conservative individuals hating" and "concentration camps". Really?
So opening up a discussion for a clear dialog regarding science somehow becomes a "conservatives hate people" discussion? Attempting to have a clear dialog regarding the topic of this thread equates to "concentration camps" in some way?
Discuss the topic.
(07-27-2017, 06:08 PM)TJBender Wrote: [ -> ] (07-27-2017, 04:51 PM)jagibelieve Wrote: [ -> ]How in the world do you get that from this thread? Seriously?
The topic of this thread is how some on the left use "science" as justification for some of their arguments, yet ignore science for other arguments.
Somehow the discussion has been taken it to "conservative individuals hating" and "concentration camps". Really?
So opening up a discussion for a clear dialog regarding science somehow becomes a "conservatives hate people" discussion? Attempting to have a clear dialog regarding the topic of this thread equates to "concentration camps" in some way?
Discuss the topic.
Dude, I'm defending you.
I think he's just frustrated. It is a frustrating subject and on this board, for reasons I can't understand, name calling seems to be the response of otherwise really intelligent folks on both sides of the argument. It doesn't help matters at all.
(07-27-2017, 08:17 PM)americus 2.0 Wrote: [ -> ] (07-27-2017, 06:08 PM)TJBender Wrote: [ -> ]Dude, I'm defending you.
I think he's just frustrated. It is a frustrating subject and on this board, for reasons I can't understand, name calling seems to be the response of otherwise really intelligent folks on both sides of the argument. It doesn't help matters at all.
You can't be frustrated if you know what's going to happen.
You bring up this subject and it's not going to go well. Just like every single political topic on this board.
May I add to this discussion that scientist have determined that the sun is getting hotter. I recently watched a program that stated according to NASA it is only a matter of time before the planet earth becomes a molten mess like Mercury as the sun continues to warm. With that in mind what is the debate on global warming using science? Is it we can't stop it or is it we are causing it as Al Gore contends?
This leads into the question JIB is asking. You were born with X but feel you should have been born with Y. So which is it? Genetics and pure science gave you one but your brain tells you otherwise.
If you can't understand the paradox of this you may be too emotionally attached to the politics of the question to comprehend what was asked.
Great topic JIB!
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
(07-27-2017, 10:41 AM)HURRICANE!!! Wrote: [ -> ] (07-26-2017, 05:12 PM)jagibelieve Wrote: [ -> ]I started to have a discussion with my very liberal and gay brother about the ban on transgenders in the military and something came to mind.
When it comes to discussing global warming climate change, liberals are always quick to point out and cite "science" regarding this.
If a debate and/or discussion comes up regarding creationism vs. evolution, the main argument from the left is "science".
When it comes to transgender issues, they are quick to cite "feelings" or "identity" and basically ignore science. After all, when a person is born, science determines their gender not how they "feel".
I would love for some of our liberal friends on here to explain what the difference is.
I don't understand why you are attempting to tie the 3 subject matters together?
... unless I'm missing something like Adam (Eve's boyfriend) got a boob job and the silicon is now adversely impacting the ozone layer, I don't see how you can group climate change, evolution, and transgenders into a single grouping.
.
Hell's gonna freeze over some day.
