The words which you are basing this debate on are themselves problematic. I live in the US, many people on the political right here do not accept the validity of the term "trans."
Given the complexity of the issue as you are highlighting it, surely you can see how just lumping a bunch of people together under a grossly oversimplified umbrella term like "trans" is problematic.
Maybe you should take that up with the people who write dictionaries, because in the meantime I'm going to continue to speak normal, dictionary-standard English like a normal person in society, and not just make shit up like a weirdo sociology professor who has to redefine words to suit his agenda.
ah, the unbelievable irony.
Nevertheless, people cannot communicate with you if you make up your own definitions to words, in direct contradiction to the words everybody else understands and is using.
I don't really think "speak English" is an unreasonable condition to set, but suit yourself, champ.
Well, I'm not a doctor or anything and I'm perfectly happy for those medical arguments to be settled by the experts and researchers and doctors who actually study them, but in the meantime, why should that get in the way of me loving and respecting people? Even if it turned out that they had questionable, or outright wrong medical opinions or were making choices that potentially lead to an increased spread of disease, is that really enough that you think I should write them off as human beings?
I respect you for leveling up your ability to play devils advocate by defending troons. Couldn't do it. I don't have the stomach for it.
Based Christian take in general and Jesus would approve, but as far as the pronoun thing specifically, I just see it as a matter of civility, and not a proclamation of my viewpoints, which makes things pretty easy for me. I really do respect your principled stance on it but I certainly don't envy you the task of explaining that to people you might come across in life who feel deliberately disrespected. Some of them will get it, some won't. It's just good to see people standing by their principles even when their principles aren't always convenient or easy.
Hell no, pedos want to molest children. I won't defend war criminals or serial rapists or cartel enforcers either. I'll happily defend transgendered folx though, because they just want to express a different gender identity than the one they were born into, and I think that's nobody else's business and not at all comparable to raping and shooting people.
Agreed, it's a judgement call in those situations. You have to draw a fine line between condoning someone's sinful behavior and meeting them where they are at on the road to conversion; too harsh and you alienate them completely, too soft and you end up encouraging their behavior. I think gender-neutral pronouns like they/them are a fair compromise if you don't accept their identity but also don't want to completely offend them.
You don't need to be a doctor to be able to deem someone with an obvious mental illness as mentally ill any more than you do to deem a guy with a bullet in his gut wounded.
It shouldn't, but neither should your love and respect blind you to the facts.
The unvaccinated don't have any effect on individuals nor society. Gender ideology is a harmful pseudoreligion which has an observable negative effect on both individuals and on society. They are incomparable in terms of both scope and consequence.
Same thing,
I find being forced to playing pretend to be undignified and feel disrespected at being forced to ignore my senses and alter my language in order to validate beliefs and feelings that exist only in another person's head.
