Conservatives Must Win the Transgender Battle, For the Sake of Transgenders

[Comonbaby]

"Adam Hobbes of Reaxxion wrote one of the more insightful columns I’ve read on the subject of transgenderism.  It was titled “Why We Need To Fight Against Transgender Acceptance”.  Hobbes asserts in his work that the greatest danger with the transgender movement is that it forces us to “give up our minds” to accept something fundamentally untrue.  This is obviously problematic, and affects issues far beyond public restrooms and who plays on which sport teams.  As Hobbes explains, when one accepts the lie of transgenderism the slippery slope turns into a cliff of despair.  Polygamy, pedophilia, zoophilia, and anything else you can imagine will become the next potential battle in the culture war."

http://truthchron.com/2017/03/01/conservatives-must-win-the-transgender-battle-for-the-sake-of-transgenders/

[INVAR]

Homosexual marriage was the Pandoras box, that we warned once opened - could never be shut, and every form of deviance would be forced upon the culture by the force of shame and law.

As pointed out in another thread from @Cripplecreek, Conservatives were told at the Convention that if we refused to support Homosexual Marriage, there was the door.

In the near future, the "Conservatives" who now run the GOP will tell us if we do not accept Transgenderism, Pedophelia, Polygamy and Beastiality as inherent rights - the door is over there.

Conservatism has already been rendered irrelevant in the age Trump, and the avalanche into lawfully protected and encouraged deviancy is already rolling down the mountainside.

[goatprairie]

I would think the next big push by libs will be for polygamy,  polyamory, child/adult sex,  incest,  and even bestiality.  Yeah, I know for the latter three you say they'll never do that....that would be too outrageous.  Never say never....nothing is ever too outrageous when we're talking about what libs will attempt.

[Jazzhead]

Conservatism has already been rendered irrelevant in the age Trump

You're conflating social conservatism with conservatism.  It is my fondest wish for the social conservatives to find a political home outside the GOP.   So I hope you're right about Trump.

[Jazzhead]

I would think the next big push by libs will be for polygamy,  polyamory, child/adult sex,  incest,  and even bestiality.  Yeah, I know for the latter three you say they'll never do that....that would be too outrageous.  Never say never....nothing is ever too outrageous when we're talking about what libs will attempt.

What ridiculous crap.  Slippery slope arguments - especially bogus ones - are best ignored.   

[INVAR]

The Apostle Paul told us in no uncertain terms that sin is like leavening, and a little leaven, leavens the entire loaf.  Changes the very nature of the dough itself.

Sexual deviancy and perversion is a leaven that the entire culture will be infected with in short order.  It has already been kneaded into the dough of society with adultery, premarital and extra-marital sex and then big one - homosexual marriage.  There's no stopping the rising of perversion now, it is into everything and everything demands it be put into.

It may be more tolerable in the Day of Judgment for Sodom and Gomorrah than it will be for us.

[INVAR]

You're conflating social conservatism with conservatism.  It is my fondest wish for the social conservatives to find a political home outside the GOP.   So I hope you're right about Trump.

Your problem is that you conflate Liberalism, Statism, infanticide, and deviancy with Conservatism. 

You already have your fondest wish as far as I am concerned  There is no measurable difference between the GOP and the Democrat party in terms of establishing Secular Statism as your national religion.

What ridiculous crap.  Slippery slope arguments - especially bogus ones - are best ignored.   

Right.  Because when scripture plainly points the slippery slope out - deviants will always shout out and insist that everyone just ignore the Truth.

[Chosen Daughter]

Its a fight for any and every perversion.  We said it when it was gay rights.  Now its transgender.  And we have people openly speaking about pedophilia.  You know that is the next one on the list where we will be labeled pedophobe for not wanting children raped.

[INVAR]

Its a fight for any and every perversion.  We said it when it was gay rights.  Now its transgender.  And we have people openly speaking about pedophilia.  You know that is the next one on the list where we will be labeled pedophobe for not wanting children raped.

Self-identifying "Conservatives" like Jazzy here will insist you are paranoid to be worried about ridiculous crap like that, and that your slippery slope argument should be ignored, because it's bogus.

And he will say that when all the evidence out there proves his lectures and admonitions to be nothing but propaganda from the deviant and immoral Left.

[Jazzhead]

Self-identifying "Conservatives" like Jazzy here will insist you are paranoid to be worried about ridiculous crap like that, and that your slippery slope argument should be ignored, because it's bogus.

The legal rationale behind civil marriage equality  - the Constitution's equal protection clause - is not compatible with rights for pedophiles.  No state offers legal protections and benefits to pedophiles.   The slippery slope argument is bogus.   

[INVAR]

The legal rationale behind civil marriage equality  - the Constitution's equal protection clause - is not compatible with rights for pedophiles.  No state offers legal protections and benefits to pedophiles.   The slippery slope argument is bogus.   

You are then either willfully clueless and ignorant of what the proponents of those deviants are saying in concert with the Homos, or you are deliberately deceptive.

I'm going with the latter.

If one deviant behavior can be determined to be an inalienable right that is deserving of normalcy and recognition, then all of them have the same merit to argue before the courts and win.  Your insipid argument is absolutely compatible via the same 'legal arguments' for pedophiles, Polygamists, Beastialitists and every other sexual appetite and behavior to demand and receive the same demands the Homosexual deviants have been awarded.

Here you are, as expected - justifying deviancy and wickedness under stupid legalese argumentation.

Like I said - it will be more tolerable in the Day of Judgment for Sodom than it will be for this country.

Because we were supposed to know better. 

[Chosen Daughter]

You are then either willfully clueless and ignorant of what the proponents of those deviants are saying in concert with the Homos, or you are deliberately deceptive.

I'm going with the latter.

If one deviant behavior can be determined to be an inalienable right that is deserving of normalcy and recognition, then all of them have the same merit to argue before the courts and win.  Your insipid argument is absolutely compatible via the same 'legal arguments' for pedophiles, Polygamists, Beastialitists and every other sexual appetite and behavior to demand and receive the same demands the Homosexual deviants have been awarded.

Here you are, as expected - justifying deviancy and wickedness under stupid legalese argumentation.

Like I said - it will be more tolerable in the Day of Judgment for Sodom than it will be for this country.

Because we were supposed to know better.

We just saw that guy that was promoting sex with underage teens.

[Norm Lenhart]

You're conflating social conservatism with conservatism.  It is my fondest wish for the social conservatives to find a political home outside the GOP.   So I hope you're right about Trump.

I love watching you show your liberalism so proudly. Reagan would be surprised to learn that stools balance just fine with two legs. But of course, you are so much wiser and more conservative than he. right? So tell us Jazzy. In detail. Why are you right about flushing social conservatism and Reagan wrong about it being essential to conservatism as a whole.

[INVAR]

We just saw that guy that was promoting sex with underage teens.

Yes, we know.  His penchant to support abortion, homosexuality, homo marriage, sexual deviancy, ObamaCare and Islam is matched only by his vociferous opposition of Christianity, biblical morality and Constitutional limits.

[Silver Pines]

You're conflating social conservatism with conservatism.  It is my fondest wish for the social conservatives to find a political home outside the GOP.   So I hope you're right about Trump.

@Jazzhead

Well, in my case your wish came true.  I haven't been a Republican for a couple of years.

But I'll tell you what, I'll be a social conservative even if I'm the last one standing.  That's because I understand some very basic, simple, timeless truths:

The taking of innocent life is morally wrong

The idea that individuals of the same sex can "marry " is absurd.

Changing one's sex is not possible, and if you think you can do it by dressing up and disfiguring yourself, you're ill and you need treatment.

God can't be put into a box and separated out of everyday life.

The GOP has become a big-government, free-spending juggernaut.  Believe me, you're welcome to it.

[Wingnut]

You are then either willfully clueless and ignorant of what the proponents of those deviants are saying in concert with the Homos, or you are deliberately deceptive.

I'm going with the latter.

As you should. 

[Emjay]

What ridiculous crap.  Slippery slope arguments - especially bogus ones - are best ignored.

Slippery slope arguments are what Trump haters love best.

When he used the word 'compassionate' a lot of people went nuts.  They immediately assumed that all illegal aliens would be invited to Mar a Lago and get to dance with Melania.

[Emjay]

@Jazzhead

Well, in my case your wish came true.  I haven't been a Republican for a couple of years.

But I'll tell you what, I'll be a social conservative even if I'm the last one standing.  That's because I understand some very basic, simple, timeless truths:

The taking of innocent life is morally wrong

The idea that individuals of the same sex can "marry " is absurd.

Changing one's sex is not possible, and if you think you can do it by dressing up and disfiguring yourself, you're ill and you need treatment.

God can't be put into a box and separated out of everyday life.

The GOP has become a big-government, free-spending juggernaut.  Believe me, you're welcome to it.

Except for your abortion stand which I totally agree with, the other issues with sexuality should best be ignored.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

You're conflating social conservatism with conservatism.  It is my fondest wish for the social conservatives to find a political home outside the GOP.   So I hope you're right about Trump.

And you are attempting to redefine what a conservative is.

He is one who is conservative, read - adhering to original intention - of the US Constitution.

A conservatism by definition includes social conservatism.

To say it another way: One is not conservative if one is not socially conservative.

[Ancient]

The legal rationale behind civil marriage equality  - the Constitution's equal protection clause - is not compatible with rights for pedophiles.  No state offers legal protections and benefits to pedophiles.   The slippery slope argument is bogus.   

Really?  Because the fact minors are not able to give consent and non-minors are couldn't at all be construed as an equality issue... (Sarcasm in case you missed it).  And if a minor can give consent, then laws against pedophilia can't stand.

Two court decisions away, and the first one IS based on the equal protection clause... in-spite of your inability to see it.

[Silver Pines]

Except for your abortion stand which I totally agree with, the other issues with sexuality should best be ignored.

@Emjay

Not happening.

[INVAR]

Really?  Because the fact minors are not able to give consent and non-minors are couldn't at all be construed as an equality issue... (Sarcasm in case you missed it).  And if a minor can give consent, then laws against pedophilia can't stand.

Two court decisions away, and the first one IS based on the equal protection clause... in-spite of your inability to see it.

I do not think it is inability to see it.

He has a Liberal agenda masquerading as Constitutionalism he pushes here and goes to great lengths to argue the Leftist POV couched in legalese to justify it.

[INVAR]

Except for your abortion stand which I totally agree with, the other issues with sexuality should best be ignored.

Ignoring wickedness leavens the entire loaf regardless whether you ignore it or not.

Sexual perversion will not permit itself to be ignored.  It will seek to impose itself on the entirety for recognition, acknowledgment, benefit and celebration. In short order it always seeks to eliminate that which opposes it or it seeks to replace.

That is the way sin works.  It is never content to be equal or co-exist.  It will ALWAYS seek to dominate - for that is it's nature.

[goatprairie]

The legal rationale behind civil marriage equality  - the Constitution's equal protection clause - is not compatible with rights for pedophiles.  No state offers legal protections and benefits to pedophiles.   The slippery slope argument is bogus.   

All you have to do to win me over to your argument is to convince me that the human rectum was designed for sexual intercourse.

[Cripplecreek]

All you have to do to win me over to your argument is to convince me that the human rectum was designed for sexual intercourse.