• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

HB2 Strikes Again

TownieDeac said:
I believe the natural order of man and woman to be gods creation. Laugh roll your eyes. Once removed from the natural process of procreation and we are born with hormones to grow through puberty and sexual stimulation during stages of puberty that are not fully understood as a 12 year old for example. If a 12 year old male is molested he will be confused but stimulated. If he continues to be molested and has sexual relations till he's 21 and thinks he is loved by his abuser should we try to change his mind? Why should he feel ashamed if sex two men is totally fine. I don't believe there is any DNA that proves a person is born homosexual or bisexual. If we remove the man and woman, once removed what does it matter how we feel about our relationship with others? If we are truly bisexual do we choose either sex eventually or do we need to have both sexes? If we are questioning our sexuality at 20 years old what makes it so confusing? Are there underlying issues that happened during their younger years? If someone is into recreational deviant sex and decides they identify with beastiality then what makes them any different from deviating from man and woman? Once removed what does any other relationship which is love and sex mean? On the other hand abortion. We started after roe v Wade with 12 weeks. Why 12 weeks? The baby which was called a fetus wasn't viable outside of the womb. So the determination is made. Here we are years later using methods for partial birth abortion. Partial birth? So 12 weeks, 15, 20, it's not an issue anymore. The original aborting a life depending on the woman to feed and nourish this life naturally was destroyed. Once we said that life can be taken it really doesn't matter when. Am I making sense? Partial birth babies are born and taken to a room and left to die. I know I'm mixing apples and oranges but the natural order of god given life. Once removed I don't care if you love a goat. I think there is a chance there is confusion but it's too late now with transsexuals and body mutilation. I don't care if Caitlyn finally removed her manhood. Does she have ovaries? Uterus? Can she menstruate? Bear children? She's pumped up with hormones and surgery to the fullest extent. She thinks or believes she should have been a woman? Where in her body? In her mind? Call me what you want but doesn't anyone ever think it through rather than everyone hates all these people? Something's not right. Instead of shunning gays back in the 60s and 70s they should have been embraced and loved. But maybe loved with compassion and help. Just my thoughts that nobody here will ever to hear. I should delete this but I won't. Don't comment on no paragraphs and my grammar. I'm just flowing. It's a psychological term. The docs around here know what it means.
Click to expand...

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Sweet, I'm glad I re-upped my season tix for next year. We don't get tix to the All-Star game itself, but I think season ticket holders get seniority access to the dunk/3pt competition tickets, which is more entertaining anyway.
 
Texas is close to passing a similar bill.

I guess they don't care about the fallout NC left for them.
 
HailToTheDeacons said:
Texas is close to passing a similar bill.

I guess they don't care about the fallout NC left for them.
Click to expand...

I don't expect the NCAA and pro leagues to have the balls to say no to hosting events in Jerry World and Houston.
 
PhDeac said:
I don't expect the NCAA and pro leagues to have the balls to say no to hosting events in Jerry World and Houston.
Click to expand...

Nor should they. Sports should stay out of legislating state politics. The NCAA can't even enforce their own rules.
 
Mebane, Reff, you've got it backwards. The hate-filled legislation by the state politicians created the actions of sports groups. Every American and group have the right to speak out on things politicians do. Didn't Lincoln say something like,"Not ot protest when there is just cause is a sin"?

Maybe black people should have kept their mouths shut about Jim Crow and segregation. Maybe Branch Rickey shouldn't have signed Jackie Robinson.
 
RJKarl said:
Mebane, Reff, you've got it backwards. The hate-filled legislation by the state politicians created the actions of sports groups. Every American and group have the right to speak out on things politicians do. Didn't Lincoln say something like,"Not ot protest when there is just cause is a sin"?

Maybe black people should have kept their mouths shut about Jim Crow and segregation. Maybe Branch Rickey shouldn't have signed Jackie Robinson.
Click to expand...

Denying people the right to act according to what they imagine themselves to be is substantially different from denying people the right to be what they are objectively. The equating of sexual desire and imagination with actual ethnic or racial fact is the height of insult and degradation. People may imagine whatever they wish; but demanding that everyone accept what they imagine to be fact is absurd especially when what is imagined contradicts objective fact. On the other hand, denying people the liberty of being what they actually are is in fact evil.

But I am not going to argue with you, especially since you demean everyone who disagrees with your certitude.
 
mebanedeac said:
Denying people the right to act according to what they imagine themselves to be is substantially different from denying people the right to be what they are objectively. The equating of sexual desire and imagination with actual ethnic or racial fact is the height of insult and degradation. People may imagine whatever they wish; but demanding that everyone accept what they imagine to be fact is absurd especially when what is imagined contradicts objective fact. On the other hand, denying people the liberty of being what they actually are is in fact evil.

But I am not going to argue with you, especially since you demean everyone who disagrees with your certitude.
Click to expand...

You nailed it. Ben Shapiro has also eloquently made that point:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkONHNXGfaM

ETA: Also, mebane & I could not be further apart as far as how religion has influenced our agreement on this issue. To the best of my knowledge, mebane is an evangelical. I, on the other hand, have not attended church services in more than 48 years.

So their must be something beyond simple religious beliefs that would lead both of us to reach the same conclusion on this issue. And, actually, it isn't that complicated. Ben Shapiro probably phrased it best when he said that sex and/or gender are not malleable. You can think or pretend that you are anything you wish...but that does not make it so. And just because you want to think or pretend that it is so, I am under no obligation to pretend that it is so simply to satisfy your imagination about the matter.

And that gets to the root of the problem with this bathroom access stuff. The 0.2% of the population who are men who think they are women or women who think they are men have every right to think whatever they wish. However, the other 99.8% of the population is under no obligation to share in that fantasy with them....nor should they be under any obligation to adjust their public bathroom options to accommodate the fantasies of that 0.2%. (Not to mention the Pandora's Box of negative events that would certainly be a by-product of doing so.)
 
Last edited:
mebanedeac said:
Denying people the right to act according to what they imagine themselves to be is substantially different from denying people the right to be what they are objectively. The equating of sexual desire and imagination with actual ethnic or racial fact is the height of insult and degradation. People may imagine whatever they wish; but demanding that everyone accept what they imagine to be fact is absurd especially when what is imagined contradicts objective fact. On the other hand, denying people the liberty of being what they actually are is in fact evil.

But I am not going to argue with you, especially since you demean everyone who disagrees with your certitude.
Click to expand...

Just wondering, do you believe people imagine that they are gay, or that they are objectively gay?
 
mebanedeac said:
Denying people the right to act according to what they imagine themselves to be is substantially different from denying people the right to be what they are objectively. The equating of sexual desire and imagination with actual ethnic or racial fact is the height of insult and degradation. People may imagine whatever they wish; but demanding that everyone accept what they imagine to be fact is absurd especially when what is imagined contradicts objective fact. On the other hand, denying people the liberty of being what they actually are is in fact evil.

But I am not going to argue with you, especially since you demean everyone who disagrees with your certitude.
Click to expand...

Sorry, for as long as there has been written history, there have been gay and transgender people. You can't find a time without them. It's not about "sexual desire" any more than having blue eyes is about a choice (other than contact lenses).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top