This is not about bigotry it is about rejecting perversion, especially as it is targeted to our most vulnerable: our children.
They were there, just closeted because back in the day the bigots would have just killed them as they wish they could do now.
Since the sexual revolution many haven’t so much as come to knee jerk identify people’s sexual escapades with pursuit of happiness as if that was all there was (though they’re are plenty who do) but identify any restraint of same, anything prudery, as a flat denial of some people’s pursuit of happiness and therefore as intolerable as if the greatest injustice.
This may be especially the case among a group I’m really suspecting has come to exist among the radical Left, what might be called socioempaths.
These are people for whom the ability to operate except by emotion has been all but lost, they are more than just merely empathic, it’s all they know. It’s a nebulous idea but it seems to me that a socioempath would at least be easily offended by proxy, which is something that is an entirely separate issue than we are talking about here when dealing with sexual perversion or confusion (real sociopaths have no difficulty being rakes and bounders, or a ho, as the next sexually libertine person, so being sexually libertine or insane doesn’t mean you’re either at the sociopath extreme or what I might small a socioempath extreme).
Interesting term, but it does no justice to true empaths.
An empath can feel the pain caused to anyone. Not just a certain subset of people while ignoring the pain of others.
If you remember back in the day, gays at first said they just wanted to be accepted. Now they want special legislation and special rules written to accommodate their every social desire. And who is willing to give them whatever they want? Democrats. The Trump administration has to roll this back. This kind of social engineering has no place in our nation’s armed forces.
2 Likes
This of course is a double edged sword constitutionally… the right created two constitutional problems in its quest to not just guide but dictate morality. First was the writing of sodomy laws…clearly an attempt to monitor the behavior of consenting adult citizens in their bedrooms. Not seeing that clear conflict with the right to pursue happiness, the right drove this argument to the Supreme Court… the result was a no brainer.
The next thing that the right did was impose the word marriage, which for the last several centuries was a religious ceremony, into a legal contract recognized in law… at the end of the day, if two citizens can get married in the eyes of a state that provides equal protection under the law , then any two people can seek the same contract. The use of that contract wound its way into employment contracts, insurance, taxes etc, etc. Government, via the rule of law, should be the arbitrator of privately created contract…when it creates a special kind of contract, it must be available to everyone…
Of course marriage (One man and one woman) was given government recognition with all good intentions… Problem is, government was never supposed to set the social direction of the people…people were suppose to figure that out for themselves.
Its actually quite sad in regards to the athletic field.
Men who can’t compete on an even playing field with fellow men, can merely claim they “identify as female” and then proceed to curbstomp women in competition.
This basically shits on any females who bust their arse in training to be as good as they can be - to be beaten by an actual man in a female competition.
What’s the point of having a “female” category in sport if its going to be infested with men who think they are women?
2 Likes
Transgenderism is a mental disorder. It was treated as such until people cucked to the pressure of mainstream media and virtue signaling sjws. This is the slippery slope Obama asked for with gay marriage. Normalizing abnormal behavior has consequences, and we’re seeing them play out right now.
1 Like
No such human creature exist. They may presume to, but their feeling for is not feeling. And of course they exclude some, they’re human.
What does this have to do with the OP? No one here is arguing about civil rights, or about gays in the bedroom but the the unfair advantage that transgenders has in women sports. This is a legitimate issue based on science not some argument based on marriage laws and a social contract that is worded in the constitution. Completely separate topic!
That is both the cultural Marxist and progressive construct. Take an inch take a mile. When conservatives stop being push overs on almost every issue because they are afraid of being called racists then boundaries can be maintained and established.
As far as the military, I believe Trump already has and the issue is still an outstanding one in which the SCOTUS has to define.
That is right. Men can take a bunch of Hormone blockers, claim to be a woman then obliterate any sport of their choosing and be perfectly fine to not be sanctioned, then when its all said and done, they can return to being a man. How is this not cheating? This is how it is set up currently within the rules of the Olympic committee and no one is even blinking an eye on this. BTW this is not only in Semi professional events such as the Olympics but seeping into High School and College sports as well and there currently are no rules for a man is chopping off his junk to qualify as a women. This is totally BS and it needs to change.
But if this all started because of gays demanding extra rights, can’t we say that would be the root cause of this whole mess?
Are transgenders considered gays or just confused? Remember they have their designation in the alphabet soup.
No I would not say its the root cause, because one argument is based on the science and the other is a civil rights matter, such as the right to marriage.
Hmmm…but they are demanding rights and special treatment because of their “condition” which is not heterosexual or normal.
What specific rights are “they” demanding? And how do these rights translate to women’s sports and the issue of the science argument? Please elaborate.
They are demanding access to sports of their opposite biological gender. Same for all of the infrastructure like bathrooms, locker rooms, and showers. They are claiming discrimination based on gender for not being allowed to participate.
Well that doesn’t mean it is discrimination that they are demanding as such that they base their logic to which arguments have been constructed. The problem with this entire issue is that it hasn’t been challenged yet in the high courts. Why? Because legally they will lose based on the merits of their arguments.
Here, lets put forth a Hypothetical OK?
I am a lawyer so in my mind this is a pretty straight forward case to build.
So lets say me and my firm were retained to represent biological Women athletes in a class action suit. Who would be the defendants in this case? Could be anyone where Transgender athletes have been allowed to participate. So for the sake of this argument we will say the Olympic Committee.
The Class Action suit would state their case based on the science that builds its case on when transgender women have an unfair advantage. As I said previously the science is overwhelming and the legal team of the defense would have to refute science in order to convince a jury and IMO would be pretty hard to do. All the Olympic committee legal defense team would have as a defensive argument is their current rules, (which BTW conflicts and contradicts their own anti doping rules). They also can’t use the discrimination law as an argument either, because my lawsuit is not based on denying access and equality to Transgender athletes, its based on the argument of science and the unfair advantage they have over biological women.
How many transgender men are competing in men’s sports? Ask that question first! Probably zero because they would get their ass kicked to oblivion, and they know it. Which I could also suggest due to the recent weight lifter and cyclist stories that because they still have their male genitalia that they can’t exactly call themselves male by both scientific and legal terms, and thus their entrance into women’s sports is a premeditated calculation on their part to have an unfair advantage. So IMO this would be an easy case to win!
Lastly, this is not a civil rights issue, it never has been. The only reason why it hasn’t been challenged in the similar scenario I just laid out is because no one is brave enough to do so. Why? Because the repercussions would be felt in almost every aspect of society and would have a negative impact on the individual who decided to stand up to challenge this issue, for the blowback of the militant LBGTQ would no doubt rear its ugly head. A case like this no doubt would be a landmark ruling that would set precedent for following cases to come, such as the locker and bathroom issue etc., etc,.
Well… serves the feminazis right. Now, they can lose $$$ in prizes to trannies. In any case, aren’t the Williams brothers the trailblazers here?
Venus and Serena are all Woman along with exceptional athletic skills superior to most women tennis players. No one complained when Martina Navratilova was at the top of her game because everyone was focused on Chrissie Everts body.