Navigating the Controversial Science on Transgender Identity: https://www.realclearscience.com/bl...the_controversial_science_on_transgender.html
Trump sez: Transgenders B gone!
- Thread starter ok doser
- Start date
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
right?
i just don't get the rebuttal "yeah, well, the wife/husband may well have committed adultery, but it was the fault of their husband/wife"
you'd think so, right?
that should go without saying
it's a red herring i've seen thrown out there by some, in specific circumstances - it often goes something like this: "since Jesus died for us while we were sinners, we shouldn't criminalize (homesoxuality/adultery/etc)"
it's never presented as a coherent argument, only a situational one
never, for instance can you get a proponent of this argument to admit that the logical progression of this argument is a refutation of all law
often you see this coupled with the phrase "consenting adults" or "what they do in their bedroom..." or "victimless crime"
well said! :first:
you would need dna evidence from both to prove inappropriate contact between the two specific individuals - you're not looking for semen or sperm on the woman, you're looking for DNA that matches the man
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
worth a listen as well:
as you can imagine, there's been a huge backlash over these views from mentally ill people who don't like having the truth pointed out
Good point. :thumb:
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
"gets left in the lurch" would appear to mean that the wife decided to leave him and get a divorce
we're not discussing divorce
we're discussing a wife deliberately and consciously deciding to engage in adultery, a sinful, immoral and societally damaging behavior that effects the spouse, the children, the extended families involved, the whole society
i find it difficult to understand why you would want to claim that the responsibility for her choice to engage in adultery can be laid at the feet of anyone but her
Here's the study that was mentioned in the above link:
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0202330
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0202330
But what are the facts of the matter? So far, this is what we know. Quote:
2. Is being transgender a mental illness?
No. While some outspoken commentators espouse this notion, there's no good evidence to back it up. According to the American Psychological Association, "A psychological state is considered a mental disorder only if it causes significant distress or disability. Many transgender people do not experience their gender as distressing or disabling, which implies that identifying as transgender does not constitute a mental disorder." Moreover, the World Health Organization no longer classifies being transgender as a mental illness.
While transgender identity is not a mental illness, transgender people and those experiencing gender dysphoria are more susceptible to depression, anxiety, and ADHD. However, a systematic review found that psychiatric symptoms vastly improve following gender-confirming medical interventions. It seems that when transgender people are permitted to assume their gender identities, they become happier and healthier individuals.
No. While some outspoken commentators espouse this notion, there's no good evidence to back it up. According to the American Psychological Association, "A psychological state is considered a mental disorder only if it causes significant distress or disability. Many transgender people do not experience their gender as distressing or disabling, which implies that identifying as transgender does not constitute a mental disorder." Moreover, the World Health Organization no longer classifies being transgender as a mental illness.
While transgender identity is not a mental illness, transgender people and those experiencing gender dysphoria are more susceptible to depression, anxiety, and ADHD. However, a systematic review found that psychiatric symptoms vastly improve following gender-confirming medical interventions. It seems that when transgender people are permitted to assume their gender identities, they become happier and healthier individuals.
Source: https://www.realclearscience.com/bl...the_controversial_science_on_transgender.html
George Affleck
TOL Subscriber
You're whistling in the wind Doser.
Deterrence is not the goal of the Mosaic law. It is a standard that points us to Christ for mercy.
Neither is it possible to legislate righteousness.
There are not now, and never will be, divinely sanctioned theocracies as exhibited by the special, one time, relationship between God and Israel in the Old Testament.
It's over. It was necessary, for a time, to teach the impossibility of works based salvation and prepare for the coming of the Lord where all things were made new.
Now is the kingdom of God at hand where the law is written on the tablets of our hearts.
If you believe so strongly in works based justice, there are plenty of false religions to satisfy your need.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
right - i was going to excerpt that but had to go out and shoot some squirrels
this is the part I want to highlight: "A psychological state is considered a mental disorder only if it causes significant distress or disability. Many transgender people do not experience their gender as distressing or disabling, which implies that identifying as transgender does not constitute a mental disorder."
first of all, people suffering from gender dysphoria delusions have suicide rates phenomenally higher than the general population, which to me would indicate the presence of "significant distress or disability"
secondly, they are encouraged to mutilate their bodies, both chemically (with hormone treatments) and physically (as with surgery)
any rational person twenty years ago would not argue that cutting off your penis and surgically creating a faux vagina in your pelvic region would not meet the definition of "significant distress or disability"
but the APA is not comprised of rational people, not since they bowed to political pressure and declared homosexuality a "variant of normal" sexual behavior
no, they've become a wing of the far left ideologues, who wish to destroy our society and create a marxist/socialist utopia
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
easy question george, deserving of a simple answer:
| [MENTION=14087]George Affleck[/MENTION] - do you believe that laws against rape deter incidences of rape? iow, if we removed all laws against rape, would you expect to see incidences of rape increase, decrease or remain the same? |
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
strawman, george
nobody's arguing that one can legislate righteousness
what laws seek to do is legislate righteous behavior
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
George Affleck
TOL Subscriber
Interesting video
[video]https://duckduckgo.com/?q=3+ex+transgenders&atb=v133-6__&iax=videos&ia=videos&iai=-pxxBQm114k[/video]
George Affleck
TOL Subscriber
Incorrect, in my opinion.
George Affleck
TOL Subscriber
I don't know the answers to these questions and neither do you.
Here is what I would expect.
We have strict laws against rape. If the death penalty was involved, there might be a slight downtick in instances. If it became legal, I would expect a slight uptick in instances.
The problem with looking into this crystal ball is that you are assuming what would happen without taking into consideration the culture upon which you are imposing these penalties.
I guess he never bathes.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
i'm asking you what you believe, not what you know
i'm not asking about applying the death penalty to rape
now that's an answer to the question i asked! :thumb:
i would expect a huge increase in instances of rape, especially among youth involved in the club/concert/bar scene - in fact those places where one is most at risk of being raped, i would expect incidents of rape to skyrocket
and i would expect it to be drug-related - if there's no laws against slipping a roofie in a girl's drink and raping her, i would expect it to happen much more frequently than it does now
imagine telling a young man that not only does "no means no" no longer apply, "no" now means nothing, legally
to think otherwise is saying, in effect, that all of our societal effort toward preventing rape (such as the "no means no" campaigns) is unfounded
and that our current laws have little deterrent effect
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
same consideration given to getting dna samples from a rape victim :idunno:
tam - do you believe that when two Christians marry, they become one flesh?