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

[Smokin Joe]

No, you're a typical liberal. What you just typed is that you expect Christ/Christianity to comply with what you believe to be true. And when it does not, then it's Christ/Christianity that is the problem.

That is E X A C T L Y the way you view conservatism. You believe X is conservative and when the whole of conservative thought/principle conflicts with your view, then it is conservatism that is wrong/must change to your belief structure.

Religion or political philosophies do not change for you. You either change/align yourself to them or you arent part of them. Your beliefs are different. So it is the height of absurdity that you claim to be what your entire premise and actions show you are not.

Conservatives are not pro gay agenda, pro tranny, pro abortion legality, pro Obamacare or pro arrest and fine Christians for following their faith. Nor is the Constitution. But liberals are.

Recall, there was a period when being "conservative" was the 'in' thing, it became "cool". I think we acquired a bunch of folks who didn't agree with the principles, but liked the title who declared themselves to be 'conservative' so they could have lunch at the grown-ups table.
Then, too, there are hosts of trolls out on the web who think they should be the arbiters of what principle is or is not "conservative", not to mention those Liberals who are out to subvert Conservatism as a philosophy.

[Jazzhead]

I think for myself, Norm.  You parrot dogma.

[Norm Lenhart]

Recall, there was a period when being "conservative" was the 'in' thing, it became "cool". I think we acquired a bunch of folks who didn't agree with the principles, but liked the title who declared themselves to be 'conservative' so they could have lunch at the grown-ups table.
Then, too, there are hosts of trolls out on the web who think they should be the arbiters of what principle is or is not "conservative", not to mention those Liberals who are out to subvert Conservatism as a philosophy.

I find it completely disgusting that someone can stand here day after day spouting verbatim leftist dogma against the Constitution, Conservatives and Christianity and not be loudly refuted by the entire forum. Yes, several/a growing number of us are vigilant and don't let him get away with his nose under tent BS, but it is indicative as to how many more are willing to sit quietly and allow liberalism/liberal ideas within their ranks. That actually disgusts me more than he or his comments do.

[Norm Lenhart]

I think for myself, Norm.  You parrot dogma.

You parrot Left wing talking points. Nothing more.

[Smokin Joe]

I think for myself, Norm.  You parrot dogma.

Over 1.3 million people suffering the wages of abomination and sin (HIV/AIDS).
Fifty million dead babies since Roe.
You think people can't see where what you call 'dogma' isn't actually a guide to living a better, happier, and more wholesome life?

What you see (and I find this funny) as the immeasurable strictures of "dogma", the confining rules that would have you abandon the advocacy of, if not the practice of sin, are actually also fine guidelines for living a long, fulfilling, and healthy life.

Instead, you would somehow overturn that "dogma" with 'legal' rules which result in pain, misery, death, and destruction, and advocate that daily on this forum, championing the very lifestyles and actions which lead to untold misery.

It doesn't take a logical genius to stop sticking their hand in the flame if it hurts, but you would deny the sizzle of your own flesh to advocate against such 'dogma' as would tell you not to do so. Maybe you should think a little more.

[Norm Lenhart]

Over 1.3 million people suffering the wages of abomination and sin (HIV/AIDS).
Fifty million dead babies since Roe.
You think people can't see where what you call 'dogma' isn't actually a guide to living a better, happier, and more wholesome life?

What you see (and I find this funny) as the immeasurable strictures of "dogma", the confining rules that would have you abandon the advocacy of, if not the practice of sin, are actually also fine guidelines for living a long, fulfilling, and healthy life.

Instead, you would somehow overturn that "dogma" with 'legal' rules which result in pain, misery, death, and destruction, and advocate that daily on this forum, championing the very lifestyles and actions which lead to untold misery.

It doesn't take a logical genius to stop sticking their hand in the flame if it hurts, but you would deny the sizzle of your own flesh to advocate against such 'dogma' as would tell you not to do so. Maybe you should think a little more.

Liberals use people to achieve ends. He said himself he's a policy wonk right?   He wants Obamacare so using gays and AIDS treatment to get it isn't a stretch. He wants more Islam in America, so  advocating for unhampered admission of refugees gets him that. He wants Chistianity become liberal/leftist in it's dogma so he proclaims all people hat believe in Christianity  as written, bigots. He wants legal abortion so he uses women's 'freedom' as a strawman. He wants all this liberalism to be called 'conservative'.

Notice a pattern here?

[Chosen Daughter]

I look at it a bit differently.   From a legal perspective, the question is the power of the state to compel an individual to give birth.   That's quite different from the moral perspective, where the question is the power and the will of the woman to do the right thing. 

I think it is fundamental to require consent to the provision of personal service to another.  That's why slavery is unlawful.   A woman must consent to bringing a zygote/embryo/fetus to term.  She must voluntarily agree to assume a duty of care toward the nascent child.  As a LEGAL matter, I mean.  As a condition of the state compelling her to give birth.   So I don't think the government should be able to ban abortion before the woman has had the chance to give, or be deemed to give by the passage of time,  that consent.   How long should that period of time be?  That's hard to say.  Certainly before the fetus becomes viable,  I'd think.     

You apparently see life as a political argument.  I don't.  I see life as a responsibility and naturally a woman should respect life.  It isn't a political act....  Abortion.  It is killing human life.  Murder of an innocent human being.  We have separated ourselves from common decency and the ability to appreciate life.  Viewing carrying a baby as a inconvenience that a woman should be able to terminate life.  No rights to the life inside her living and deserving of a chance to live.

We don't treat animals with that kind of disrespect.  It an absence of good.

There are people who have survived abortion.

[EC]

Still dancing on the head of this pin? 

[Chosen Daughter]

Well, that's for the courts to decide.   What, do you think I have it in for bakers?   It's in the nature of the service they provide.  Bakers make cakes, for celebrating occasions.   The tee shirt vendor is in the business of printing custom messages on shirts.  Of course he can refuse to print a message he finds objectionable.   He just posts a sign.   Just like "no shirts, no service," it's easy as pie.   

I liked the way National Review did it years ago.   In their personals section (yep, they used to run personal ads),  they'd say they extend maximum freedom,  but NR's idea of freedom may not be the same as the advertiser.   That's gentle, and conveys the message.

If the baker wants to discriminate,  he's got to be smart about it.   As I've suggested before,  say he'll only cater religious weddings.   Say he reserves the right to refuse to write an offensive message.   But he can't arbitrarily refuse to sell the service he advertises to sell because he wants to play good Christian soldier in the culture wars.  Not in the conduct of public commerce.       

I'm a policy wonk;  what floats my boat is the mechanics of public policy, that's why I post a lot about ACA.   I like to get under the hood.    I'm a Goldwater Republican who voted for Perot in '92 and didn't vote for Trump in '16.  Neither did you - we have something in common.

 I'm a deeply disaffected Christian.    Getting more disaffected all the time, too; like I said, your viciousness is just astonishing.  Is that how you think Christ acted?  I have gay relatives and friends,  who've married in recent years, and they live quiet, productive, honest, joyous and virtuous lives.   Of course I defend them; that's what friends do.  Because they are virtuous, and I believe that is what God wants us to be.

Oh they made a mistake of not posting a sign?  I have gay relatives too.  I love them but I don't have to agree with their life choices.  I still believe Gods Word is true and I don't believe I have to defend them against what the Bible says about sin.  Homosexuality isn't the only sin in the Bible.  If I had relatives that were hooked on pornography I wouldn't defend that either. 

It is very simple.  With God you either believe or you don't.  If my friends or relatives find my belief offensive its too bad.  Whenever I go to church and find the Pastor is preaching about something I am doing that is wrong I am glad.  I am not offended.  I am convicted knowing that I have to lean on Christ to overcome things that hold me back or make my life opposed to Gods teaching.  We all sin.

[INVAR]

So the Supreme Court legalizes same-sex marriage and it's Trump's fault. Got it.

That is not what I said or implied.

"Conservatism" is now whatever Trump stands for or agrees with, including his own views that homosexual marriage is just fine and good.

[INVAR]

Well, that's for the courts to decide.   

You asked where your hypocrisy was.  It was pointed out and you deflect with this nonsense to deflect further?  You got caught red-handed in your own hypocrisy - freedom for homosexuals to demand service with punishment for those who refuse to celebrate them - and exoneration for homo businesses refusing to print T-shirts with scriptures on them.   

The courts have no authority to decide matters of obedience to The Law of God as stated in scripture.  Efforts to do so is tyranny, plain and simple and demands disobedience.

What, do you think I have it in for bakers?

You have it in for anyone who will not acknowledge, celebrate, serve, and applaud homosexual behavior and perversion of marriage.  You said so yourself, referencing Christians who call homosexuality a sin to be 'bigots' whom you said you will fight with every breath.

It's in the nature of the service they provide.  Bakers make cakes, for celebrating occasions.

Muslim bakers refused to make homo wedding cakes.  The courts are not interested in taking the lawsuit and neither is the media to report it.  Only Christian bakers, florists, photographers and caterers are being targeted for lawsuits that the courts are eager to punish at the behest of people like you.

If the baker wants to discriminate,  he's got to be smart about it.   As I've suggested before,  say he'll only cater religious weddings.

NO, that is STUPID in the current reality of things. That's simply painting a target on themselves as you well know.  Handing the Gay Mafia an easy target to sue, which their own leaders have stated is their current strategy.   So as usual you're wrong.

But he can't arbitrarily refuse to sell the service he advertises to sell because he wants to play good Christian soldier in the culture wars.  Not in the conduct of public commerce.

You're just a propagandist in establishing a Mark of the Beast like the good pawn you are.     

I'm a policy wonk;

You're a Leftist and Democrat Apologist Wonk pretending to be a Conservative because you think you can persuade the weak minded reading this board with your tripe.

I like to get under the hood.

No.  You like to poke us in the eye and scream that you are a victim.

I'm a Goldwater Republican

You are nothing of the sort.

I'm a deeply disaffected Christian.

And worse.   

like I said, your viciousness is just astonishing.

That's what every promoter of wickedness says when confronted with a Christian who is not afraid to wield the Sword.  You're used to the lukewarm ones. 

I'm not one of those.

Is that how you think Christ acted? 

You have absolutely no understanding of the bible or how Yeshua reacted to evil being pushed and imparted upon a people who disguised it as a moral, lawful and legitimate good.  Whips and chains on two occasions and when He comes again - He'll be wielding a sword and lay waste to over 200 million in the Valley of Hinnom.

I have gay relatives and friends,  who've married in recent years, and they live quiet, productive, honest, joyous and virtuous lives.

There is nothing 'virtuous' about homosexuality according to God in scripture.  Nothing.

Of course I defend them; that's what friends do.  Because they are virtuous, and I believe that is what God wants us to be.

You're not virtuous - you are blasphemous, debaucherous and pushing evil as a good.

Isaiah 5:20 prophesies to your kind.

Woe to you.

[Norm Lenhart]

Oh they made a mistake of not posting a sign?  I have gay relatives too.  I love them but I don't have to agree with their life choices. 

As do I. And I'd bet good money that much, if not most of the BS / drama in your family centers around those gay relatives and their supporters. In fact I would like to see proof from any of the Pro gay types here showing actual evidence that there exists a Family with homosexuals in it is NOT turned upside down or tied into knots by the special snowflakes on an ongoing basis just to keep a semblance of peace. Their attention seeking and narcissism invariably lead to issues. Usually it's over someone's refusal to approve of them, someone's refusal  to rewrite the Bible for them, or the parade of ever changing 'partners' they bring home/parade through family gatherings.

And God forbid someone speak against every conversation being turned into a gay issue.

Which is no way for a family, or anyone else to be forced to live.

[EC]

Sorry Norm.

My sister's sexuality didn't cause the slightest bit of drama in the family. It was a shrug and "OK" by all concerned. About the only problem I can recall is the hassle of remembering to be scrupulously fair to her partner's kids at Christmas when they were young, and not overly favor my blood niece.
Then again, we're Yorkshire folk. Don't do drama at all, it's a waste of time.

[Norm Lenhart]

Sorry Norm.

My sister's sexuality didn't cause the slightest bit of drama in the family. It was a shrug and "OK" by all concerned. About the only problem I can recall is the hassle of remembering to be scrupulously fair to her partner's kids at Christmas when they were young, and not overly favor my blood niece.
Then again, we're Yorkshire folk. Don't do drama at all, it's a waste of time.

I envy you that miracle of good fortune. You are the first I've encountered since I married into madness whose family wasn't either wrecked or nearly wrecked by homosexuality. And I have known, lived around and worked with many. My sister in law was a grade A psycopath and a violent one besides.

[EC]

Yeah. We were lucky. Helps that my little sis is even more laid back and laconic than me - she's one who wants to be left to her own devices, and doesn't go in for causes (other than fox hunting - we've had massive fights over me riding out with the hunt).

[Norm Lenhart]

Yeah. We were lucky. Helps that my little sis is even more laid back and laconic than me - she's one who wants to be left to her own devices, and doesn't go in for causes (other than fox hunting - we've had massive fights over me riding out with the hunt).

Basset or Beagle?

The child unit just lucked into a rescue Basset. 6 years, female and fixed. Ears and sag for days. Shockingly it is the classic/stereotype hush puppy. Mellow as hell and howls like a banshee. .. Er I mean 'sings with a lovely musical voice.' Her other Basset is from show stock. Lucked into that one as well as a puppy. Cheap but it's suicidal. She's spent a fortune at the vet saving it from it's poor life choices. 5 years and is more the AKC textbook type. No sag, 'normal (for a Basset) ears and an attention whore. She can't go to the bathroom without him going into panic attacks.

[Jazzhead]

I'm somewhat confused by your statement. How do you figure that someone who is a LGTB be virtuous?  The Bible (God's word) specifically condemns homosexuality.  I don't see how you consider a  gay, lesbian, transgender or bisexual as having high moral standards when their sexual preferences are immoral. 

LB, please don't be like so many social conservatives, obsessed with genitalia.   I said my friends, who happen to be gay, lead quite, honest, productive and virtuous lives.   And in fact they do -  they have good jobs,  care about their community, treat family with honor and respect,  help others, and approach the glass of life as half-full. 

Why is the only thing that matters how they knock boots?   

This is why I'm a disaffected Christian.  I'm ashamed of the bigotry, cruelty and judgementalism; the refusal to look behind the label to the person inside.   Good people are good people, LB.   Whether they're gay or straight, it makes no difference.   Yes, LB, my friends have the highest of moral standards.   I see it.  I'll bet my bottom dollar that God sees it too. 

I doubt I will ever return to the church, LB, because of attitudes like yours, Norm's, and INVAR's.   My respect for Jesus Christ precludes it.     

[txradioguy]

I doubt I will ever return to the church, LB, because of attitudes like yours, Norm's, and INVAR's.

Honestly I'm surprised your Liberal "values" allow you near a church...especially since it's as horrible as you've made it out to be in your head. 

My respect for Jesus Christ precludes it.   

If you truly had ANY respect for Christ and his teachings...or for that matter ANY teaching in the Bible...you wouldn't be defending or advocating for half of what you do on here.

You're one of those Liberal/DU types that goes around believing that "Jesus as a Liberal" to help assuage your guilt over believing in things that fly directly in the face of what Christ taught.  You blame individual people to avoid manning up and spewing your hatred at the Church you supposedly respect.

[libertybele]

You apparently see life as a political argument.  I don't.  I see life as a responsibility and naturally a woman should respect life.  It isn't a political act....  Abortion.  It is killing human life.  Murder of an innocent human being.  We have separated ourselves from common decency and the ability to appreciate life.  Viewing carrying a baby as a inconvenience that a woman should be able to terminate life.  No rights to the life inside her living and deserving of a chance to live.

We don't treat animals with that kind of disrespect.  It an absence of good.

There are people who have survived abortion.

Exactly.  Life is NOT a political argument and never should have been allowed to be.  The responsibility of consensual sexual intercourse falls upon the woman; knowing that a pregnancy may result with or without protected sex should ALWAYS be understood and given consideration

[Smokin Joe]

LB, please don't be like so many social conservatives, obsessed with genitalia.   

Marching in 'pus sy' hats, vagina costumes, entire groups of Liberals who DEFINE themselves by either confusion about or the things they do with their genitalia and you think Conservatives are the ones obsessed?

Because they proclaim they use their genitalia in a certain way, people can put a baker out of business for not baking them a cake, or get a florist fined for not selling them flowers and they claim "protected status" because of the way they use their genitalia?

Wow, just wow. How much DO they pay you?

This is why I'm a disaffected Christian.

Permit me to suggest you might be a "disaffected Christian" because you have not only abandoned moral principle but simply aren't walking the walk. You aren't even talking the talk.
Yep. That'd be 'disaffecting' all right.

Yes, Jesus taught forgiveness, it is his raison d'etre, but he also teaches repentance. Without the latter, the former is used by some as some sort of hall pass, allowing them license to do whatever, and that is 180 degrees out from the intent. "Go forth, and sin no more" was the admonition, not "If it feels good, do it".

[IsailedawayfromFR]

Wow, just wow. How much DO they pay you?

Must be by post, as his numbers of posting lib talking points is really impressive.

[Norm Lenhart]

LB, please don't be like so many social conservatives, obsessed with genitalia.   I said my friends, who happen to be gay, lead quite, honest, productive and virtuous lives.   And in fact they do -  they have good jobs,  care about their community, treat family with honor and respect,  help others, and approach the glass of life as half-full. 

Why is the only thing that matters how they knock boots?   

This is why I'm a disaffected Christian.  I'm ashamed of the bigotry, cruelty and judgementalism; the refusal to look behind the label to the person inside.   Good people are good people, LB.   Whether they're gay or straight, it makes no difference.   Yes, LB, my friends have the highest of moral standards.   I see it.  I'll bet my bottom dollar that God sees it too. 

I doubt I will ever return to the church, LB, because of attitudes like yours, Norm's, and INVAR's.   My respect for Jesus Christ precludes it.   

Yea best of luck with that. The good thing that has come from this particular tender moment is that lots of people got a good look at what you're really about and won't be making the mistake of buying into your liberal empowerment campaign.

BTW, there have been a lot of threads on the World News section enumerating the crimes against humanity by Islam this week you seem strangely absent from. Which is just as well since good conversation happened without your usual Muslim apologetic.

[Smokin Joe]

Must be by post, as his numbers of posting lib talking points is really impressive.

Does our side pay for this sort of stuff, only Conservative? I enjoy it here, but I could use the income.

[Norm Lenhart]

Does our side pay for this sort of stuff, only Conservative? I enjoy it here, but I could use the income.

If we did, I hope we'd have the good sense to hire someone competent at delivering the message. The DNC,the mosque or whoever paid Capt. Conservative got hosed on the deal. I'd dare say they were the only people he managed to scam.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

Does our side pay for this sort of stuff, only Conservative? I enjoy it here, but I could use the income.

It is like our side's showing up for demonstrations like in ND to protest the protest of the p/l.

They all have real jobs, not as paid protesters.