Originally Posted By Dabob2 <A homosexual man does not insist I go along with his game.> It's not a game, it's simply the way x-percentage of the population is. <I said *intentionally conceiving* the child with the intention of depriving that child of a father.> I know a couple of Lesbian couples who have children. Newsflash: they didn't say to each other "hey, let's get inseminated so we can deprive the resulting child of a father! How cool would that be?" Believe it or not, that was not their motivation. Shocking as it may be to believe, they had kids because they wanted to raise and love kids. And they're doing a very fine job (5 kids between the two couples, all great kids). <Yet someone who is “transgender†insists I call him a woman? Not going to happen,> Well, no one can force you to. But I think it's just common courtesy to call people what they prefer to be called. I know a guy who refuses to call anyone "African American" unless they actually come from Africa. His attitude is "they've never set foot in Africa. Why should I call them that? I just won't." Okay, fine. No one can force him. I actually don't have any black friends who have much of a preference one way or the other, but if they did, I'd honor it. And if someone went through the difficulty of sex reassignment, as Shiva said so well, "If someone has had enough pain in their lives that they feel radical surgery is their only option, I don't feel the need to add to it." So no one can force you to do so, but refusing to do so, if not indicating blatant hatred as Mr. X says (I don't know you, so wouldn't say that), at the least, IMO, shows a lack of manners.
Originally Posted By mele It's interesting that someone so vocal about their Christianity would be so rude about "playing make believe". You want people to respect your beliefs, yet you don't want to reciprocate and frankly, if refusing to be polite to someone out of stubbornness and cruelty is what your religion does for you, why should I respect it? A little bit of kindness goes a long way...why refuse to be kind to a stranger? How does their choice negatively affect your life? (It doesn't, of course.)
Originally Posted By mele And as to your comment that these people shouldn't be bringing up any children...well, you've said some very misogynistic things in this thread...perhaps you shouldn't be allowed to raise daughters or be married. Maybe that's not the best environment for a child to be raised in. I guess it's always easier to judge other people than to hold yourself up to the same standards, isn't it?
Originally Posted By woody >>"hey, let's get inseminated so we can deprive the resulting child of a father! How cool would that be?" Believe it or not, that was not their motivation.<< By definition, it would not have entered into their mind.
Originally Posted By woody >>You want people to respect your beliefs, yet you don't want to reciprocate and frankly, if refusing to be polite to someone out of stubbornness and cruelty is what your religion does for you, why should I respect it?<< By your tone, you don't respect it. Why pretend. Very funny. Okay, we get your game. >>I guess it's always easier to judge other people than to hold yourself up to the same standards, isn't it?<< With no standards, there's only the judgement that you're against.
Originally Posted By Mr X ***By definition, it would not have entered into their mind.*** Of course it would. What a foolish thing to say. The poster didn't say it "didn't enter into their minds", actually by definition such an important decision to have a child would naturally involve lots of thought and consideration. The poster simply said it was not their motivation. And I agree. You, on the other hand, have an even more amazingly negative opinion towards these people (even to their ability to consider or reason on any level) than I would've thought possible. How could you possibly believe that such a thing "wouldn't enter into their minds"? And what does "by definition" mean in this case?
Originally Posted By woody >>How could you possibly believe that such a thing "wouldn't enter into their minds"?<< Two lesbians, who believe the love between 2 women is sufficient, would not see the benefit of love from a father to his children. Some women wouldn't have children without the benefit of a husband who will be the father. Now, it is apparent, this is less of a factor in today's society. How would a lesbian couple be predisposed to think like a straight women who might have a bare appreciation for a male parent? Lesbians don't.
Originally Posted By woody >>The poster simply said it was not their motivation. And I agree.<< This comment is self-explanatory.
Originally Posted By Mr X ***Two lesbians, who believe the love between 2 women is sufficient, would not see the benefit of love from a father to his children.*** How idiotic. Not to mention unrelated. The love any parent feels for their child is entirely different from romantic love, for you to assume otherwise (that they somehow couldn't "see the benefit") is just plain dumb.
Originally Posted By Liberty Belle >>The love any parent feels for their child is entirely different from romantic love<< Agreed. Lesbian or not, most people grew up with a father. It's not like gay couples haven't had the experience of a father-daughter (or mother-son) relationship, regardless of whether they've ever had a romantic relationship with someone of the opposite sex.
Originally Posted By Liberty Belle Disclaimer: I'm feeling incredibly inarticulate today, so I hope that post got my point across okay. Reading it back I'm honestly not sure if it makes that much sense!
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <>>"hey, let's get inseminated so we can deprive the resulting child of a father! How cool would that be?" Believe it or not, that was not their motivation.<< <By definition, it would not have entered into their mind.> On one level, that's right. That was my point, actually. To ascribe "depriving the child of a father" as some sort of intention is ludicrous. Lesbian couples have children for the same reasons straight couples do. Imagine that.
Originally Posted By RC Collins imadisneygal: >>Psychologists and psychiatrists disagree<< I appreciate where you are from on this. However, “psychiatrists†(meaning the controlling majority, not all) used to classify homosexuality as an illness or disorder. Now they don’t. So, they were either wrong before, or are wrong now. Which means it is possible for them to be wrong. >>Gender Identity Disorder and Gender Dysphoria<< Why can’t these be treated between the ears instead of between the legs? >>Some transgendered people never have any surgery related to changing their sex.<< So it isn’t necessary, is it? >>But if you knew some people who are transgendered and talked to them about their experiences before and after their transitions you might see things differently.<< I have, actually. I had a relative who went through the full “transitionâ€. He’s a funny guy and pleasant enough. >>I met several affirmed males (born female) and unless you saw these people naked before their surgeries you'd never, EVER know it.<< That’s fine. People I deal with every day do things all of the time that I think are wrong that I never find out about, and really, I don’t care other than I care about people in general. Sometimes I do things that I think are wrong or stupid. Doesn’t mean I’ll turn around and say “must be okayâ€. It’s not like I stay awake and night worrying about this. I simply think people ought to stick with their XX or XY instead of dressing differently, injecting themselves with hormones, and having perfectly healthy body parts removed. If someone is XX, they are female.
Originally Posted By RC Collins Mr X: >>See, I don't see a big difference in the levels of prejudice and hatred was my point.<< I do not hate someone for doing this to themselves. And I'm not prejudging. I'm judging something that has been done. It has already happened. According to what I believe about our bodies and our gender, such actions are wrong. Why do you feel so compelled to tell me that I’m wrong? You’re judging me. >>Of course the experience of such people is different. I don't see either one as particularly better or worse, just different.< They ARE different (homosexuality and transexuality), so I distinguished them, is all. >>Okay, so if you ever lose your, I'll just say "important parts" in an accident, I'll feel free to call you a girl.<< You are ignoring what I've been saying all along. It is about DNA, and changing (or losing) your parts does not change who you are. >>As far as your anger or hate or whatever it is in insisting that you protest this whole sordid thing by "refusing" to call them by their chosen gender, I wonder why it's such an issue for you.<< Gender is not chosen. I don’t point to a newborn kitten and say “It’s a dog!â€
Originally Posted By RC Collins Dabob2: >><A homosexual man does not insist I go along with his game.> It's not a game, it's simply the way x-percentage of the population is.<< I'm sorry... by “gameâ€, I didn't mean to imply that a gay man is playing at being gay. >><I said *intentionally conceiving* the child with the intention of depriving that child of a father.> I know a couple of Lesbian couples who have children. Newsflash: they didn't say to each other "hey, let's get inseminated so we can deprive the resulting child of a father! How cool would that be?" Believe it or not, that was not their motivation.<< It is a necessary result of their action. Are you saying they were unaware that there would be no father in the home? While not their motivation, they did it intentionally. There was no way this was an “accidentâ€. >>But I think it's just common courtesy to call people what they prefer to be called<< Okay, from now on, please refer to me as His Royal Highness. ;-)
Originally Posted By RC Collins mele >>A little bit of kindness goes a long way...why refuse to be kind to a stranger?<< I believe it is unkind to encourage people to remove perfectly healthy body parts. >>How does their choice negatively affect your life?<< It makes a mockery of masculinity and femininity. I am a man. So, it matters to me. >>And as to your comment that these people shouldn't be bringing up any children...well, you've said some very misogynistic things in this thread<< Like what? >>...perhaps you shouldn't be allowed to raise daughters or be married.<< Well, state-sanctioned marriage is not a right, so if you can get enough people to agree with you, you can revoke my marriage license. I’ll still be married as far as God is concerned. Funny thing is, my wife and I can make children naturally (see, when there is a male and a female, that can happen without third parties), so you really have no say in it. >>I guess it's always easier to judge other people than to hold yourself up to the same standards, isn't it?<< No, I don't expect anyone to call me a woman, no matter what I do to myself. So I do expect to be judged by the same standards.
