Does Religious Freedom Supercede Gender Identity?

You question is based upon several misconceptions.

Someone who has only pedophilia, will lose interest in children as they reach puberty. If they happen to also have hebophilia and/or ephebephilia, then there is a chance the attraction will continue on through adulthood.

With that said, on the assumption our hypothetical attacker has all three, they might have say male victims for the pedophilia stage, but as they interact with older minors, the preference may shift to females. This assumes an adult orientation of only heterosexuality or homosexuality. A bisexual would of course be attracted to both in at least adult partners, but maybe only one or the other for the pedophilia stage. There is also indication that pedophiles don't have an actual preference in gender, but choose their victims based upon availability and ease. It's when a person has hebophilia or ephebephilia that gender preference becomes more important. Probably because until puberty boys and girls are more or less the same, as opposed to the vast changes that occur in puberty.

 

Confirming a delusion does not benefit anyone. That is why it is a delusion in the first place.

The operative word in the above is "if" suggesting whatever perceived benefit is not actually guaranteed. Those that are not helped by the surgery, it amounts to nothing more than needless mutilation of a functioning body in the desperate hope it will do some measure of good for a condition that is not even physical to begin with. If it helps, but it does not help. Not everyone, and not in anything resembling a universal fashion. Then the afflicted have more problems than when they started.

Supposedly. There is no evidence that the supposed success of such surgeries are widespread or universal. It is, at best, hit or miss. Some individuals will believe themselves to be helped, others will not.

Just as individuals who suffer from anorexia and bulimia believe they are morbidly obese when they are not, and that is why they choose to starve their bodies in an effort to rid themselves of weight they do not have. The surgery is no different in that regard. It feeds a psychological delusion, all because society is moving in the direction of believing psychological illnesses should be embraced, accepted, normalized and even celebrated, rather than being treated.

Minors do not amount to a third gender. Homosexual molestation is the result of a homosexual individual being attracted to a victim of the same gender.

 

And convicted criminals loudly proclaim that they did not do anything wrong, even when they are arrested in the middle of committing a crime.

 

Again, I do not believe anyone should qualify for special benefits, you cannot ask my opinion but then say I cannot have a whole opinion.

Trans people likewise should not have special status — that includes not being allowed to participate in athletics against females if they transitioned after puberty.

 

No it’s a cop out and I’ll prove it. If a homosexual male becomes primarily attracted to young boys and only molests them, is he a homosexual pedophile?

 

Nothing has been proven to move them beyond such, until some breakthrough occurs and it becomes treatable the best option is to alleviate their distress.

Again, therapy and pharmaceuticals do not work on many people suffering varying degrees of GID or dysphoria.
So in your opinion we should just let them suffer until they commit suicide even though there is a medical treatment that can greatly diminish their condition?

And all because you don’t want to call a boy a girl...

Except it does for many so your statement is false.
Is it 100% effective, no — neither is Advil, should we ban it also?
Should we tell people that have joint pain it is all in their head because pain medication isn’t 100% effective?

 

Yes they are more likely to be pedophiles.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/1556756/

“The present study investigated whether the etiology of preferred partner sex among pedophiles is related to the etiology of preferred partner sex among males preferring adult partners. Using phallometric test sensitivities to calculate the proportion of true pedophiles among various groups of sex offenders against children, and taking into consideration previously reported mean numbers of victims per offender group, the ratio of heterosexual to homosexual pedophiles was calculated to be approximately 11:1. This suggests that the resulting proportion of true pedophiles among persons with a homosexual erotic development is greater than that in persons who develop heterosexually.”

You were saying?

 

Happy to prove myself right but that’s not even my point. I was speaking about child molestation and not pedophilia as a diagnosis of pedophilia is subjective and determined upon whether or not the individual himself feels as though it’s a problem.

 

When the alternative is death or absolute misery I disagree. If all it takes is using a word to alleviate someone’s pain then so be it.

That is not the norm however, so because something does not work for everyone it should not be allowed for anyone?

And?

Again, what other treatment is there for this? You keep trying to compare it to disorders that if embraced will lead to the death of the patient — reaffirming the gender of a trans person does not cause death — instead it may prevent it.

That is false and goes against every medical and psychological definition on the subject. I see you have just jumped to making things up on the fly now...

Pedophilia is a sexual orientation just as zoophilia is; if a human male has sex with a male animal does that make him a homosexual zoophile?
Of course it doesn’t.

 

Read the last line of your study, [This, of course, would not indicate that androphilic males have a greater propensity to offend against children.] Furthermore your study is from when homosexuals were believed to represent less than 1% of the population [taking into consideration previously reported mean numbers of victims per offender group] — it is up to 8% currently bringing your 11:1 figure down to 1.375:1. Your study is also from 1992 — homosexuality was outright illegal in several states at the time.

If you have to use these types of studies to justify your narrative then you likely have an agenda.

 

A male that is primarily attracted to children is a pedophile.
If a male becomes primarily attracted to male animals is he a homosexual zoophile?

 

Evidence for the existence of God is irrelevant to the first ammendment.


The biggest threats to our republic are attacks on the first and second ammendments.

The first done out of hatred of religion in the name of equality .
The second by illegally gun laws that have proven to accomplish nothing.

 

What do you mean “hatred of religion in the name of equality“, are you saying that equally and religion cannot coexist?

Second, it is absurd to say gun laws do nothing — numerous nations have banned or severely reduced gun violence by implementing varying levels of gun control.

 

This. is. bullshit.
There are objective ways of determining gender. NO ONE GETS TO DECIDE, sorry Sally (or Jim).

 

I'm just now seeing this thread (and only read page 1 and page 14), so I'm going to change the subject back to the thread topic for a moment.

I don't think that a court would hear a case that you are justified to do or not to do anything based on "lying" as a religious belief. If they did hear it, then the prosecutor's first question to you would be along the lines of, "Have you ever lied to your wife when she asked, 'Does this dress make me look fat?'" Everyone lies some times about some things, usually with good intentions.

That said, I do think there is a 1st Amendment free speech defense against laws making speech compulsory. The real questions are, "Can the government force you to lie or to say things that you don't want to say?", and "Does the 1st Amendment protect us from not speaking?"

This subject gained attention when Dr. Jordan Peterson's employer sent a memo that employees and staff would be compelled to call transgendered people by their preferred pronoun, including words that aren't pronouns or words even in the dictionary.

This topic will probably go to the Supreme Court before it's over. I do not believe the government can force compelled speech any more than they can tell you what not to say under the 1st Amendment rights to free speech.

Like Peterson, I'm comfortable to call someone whatever they want to be called if they ask me politely. Even if I know a "woman" is really a man, I'll most likely humor her/him - whatever. By contrast, these "political" transgenders who get in peoples' faces and are screaming demanding to be called "Ma'am" or "she/her" or whatever, I would refuse. I would refuse politely, but I don't entertain rude people who scream in my face demanding me to speak....for any reason.

As for the first reply to this thread about the law being exclusively about nursing homes, I disagree with a blanket law (which is probably unconstitutional). I support a nursing home, or any business, to write rules for employees to follow. If the nursing home wishes to compel speech, I'm even okay with that. They can fire you or you can quit the company if you don't like the employers' rules.

 

I feel like an end table today. If I go out socially and demand people call me "ET" because "I AM AN END TABLE", here is what I would expect:

Some people would humor me and say, "Okay, ET, whatever you want."
Some people would say, "I don't think you're an end table, and I'm not calling you that. I'll just defer from calling you anything."
Some people would say, "You're freaking crazy and I'm calling you Idiot."

I have a right to request to be called, "ET". I don't have any right to demand that people comply with my request. They have a right to call me anything they want, even if they insult me. Period.

 

First off, we have to look at the difference in the use of the words "sex" and "gender" in history. Originally they were not the same thing. Eventually, due to uncomfortableness with the word sex also meaning the act, the word gender began a slang use that eventually became common colloquial language, although for medical/scientific purposes they still remained separate. The word gender is once again undergoing a lingual shift. Whether it remains or not is to be seen.

As to objective means to determine sex there are three: genitals, chromosomes, and genes. The presence of either a penis or a vagina is the most common outward indicator of sex. The presence or absence of the Y chromosome is the next level of indication. However, the presence of a Y chromosome is not a guarantee that the person will be born with a penis (see AIS). And finally it is the SRY gene, commonly found on the Y chromosome, which is the specific gene that determines the development of the male physical features. However, it can be missing on the Y chromosome, and it can also end up on the X chromosome. As a result, an XX person can be born with a penis, and an XY person can be born with a vagina.

Now the biggest thing is that NONE of these three things are visible when you meet a person. So what objective criteria are you using to determine sex?

 

I could say the same about religion.

 

It is still needless mutilation of a functioning body. Worse than that, it is corrupt profiteering off the suffering of others who are desperately seeking answers.

Nor does encouraging a delusion. If nothing else, therapy and medication do not result in the same degree of profiteering off the misery of victims as does invasive and permanent surgeries.

If the mental health of an individual is truly so poor and fragile, they are willing to end their own existence over not being able to accept that their delusion is truly that, nothing more than a delusion, then they are well beyond the point of being able to be helped. Anyone who is that far gone is a lost cause, no different from a patient suffering from multiple organ failure brought on by septic shock.

The number of individuals that such surgeries do not help is increasing, not decreasing. These individuals are being exploited by physicians who are willing to perform unnecessary surgeries for the sake of making a profit, at the expense of victims who are desperately searching for help from anyone that may be willing to listen to them. They are being tricked into surgeries that they do not need, and do not realize such until after the damage is done.

Over-the-counter medicine is not comparable to permanent, life-altering surgeries that cause irreversible damage to the functioning body.

 

Technically, acknowledging the wishes of a trans-sexual or other confused person does not equate to bearing false witness. As much as I dislike homosexuality, and will even publicly argue against it, my religion in no way requires that I be mean to homosexuals, that I judge them personally based on their sexual preference, or do anything else except mind my own business. My accountability isn't going to come from those times that I play along with a transsexual woman (not even sure what that means - born as a woman became a man or the opposite?) but, instead, will come from all the times I have judged people for what I believe are their sins - regardless of what that sin is.

 

I find the underlying concept here interesting even though the original post is a thinly veiled attempt to legitimize taunting people. In a lot of ways though the struggles for religious freedom is the same as the struggle for gender fluidity. They're both the struggle to have the human ego overwhelm the realities of physical existence.

Maybe that's why they don't get along so well. Maybe that's also why religions don't typically play well with each other. Maybe that's one of the things that makes America unique thus far. All these different perceptions of what is even the most basic truths in some cases completely opposite existing in one nation under one law. For as long as it lasts it's a truly remarkable time and place to be alive. I hope we can all hold true to our delusions, and extend others the same right. The other hand contains nothing but blood, and only leads to a reminder of two of my basic truths. One that history is written by the victors as I'm sure the person with the confederate flag avatar knows, and two that while truth is not subjective self identity, the soul if you will most certainly is.

 

If an individual is truly of such poor mental health, that the use of the perceived wrong gender pronoun can cause them such a degree of suffering and misery, they have far worse problems in need of address than whether or not they feel accepted.

Anyone who would willingly end their own existence, over a matter as insignificant as how they are addressed, is in need of drastic psychological care from trained experts in the field.

It is a growing trend. So-called "gender reassignment surgeries" are being recognized by the afflicted as not working, long after the damage has been done. Because it does not address the underlying issues that brought on the delusion in the first place.

It is nothing beyond medical exploitation in the name of profit.

How does this disorder differ from any other disorder relating to the perception that the body of the individual is not right? What is the meaningful difference that makes it legitimate while all others are not? Explain such.

In truth it does. If the gender of both partners it the same, the aggressor is of a homosexual nature. It does not matter if the victim is a minor or an animal, it makes no difference. Heterosexual individuals to not willingly molest individuals of the same gender.

 

If I ever go to prison, I'm going as a woman. If I end up in a long-term care facility after my wife passes, I'm going as a woman. If I were in high-school today, I'd be a self-assigned female. Just try to keep me out of the communal showers in any of those places...

 

That is your opinion. That it is successful for many people that arrive at surgical procedure after sometimes years of other failed treatments disagrees with your opinion however.
I believe the people actually involved would have more knowledge on the issue than you or I.

Except they are not, they can transition which causes relief for many suffering from the condition. That you believe the better alternative is for them to end their own existence over you being asked to call them by a specific gender is just disgustingly arrogant.

Strange, all of the sources I can seem to find on the subject outside of obviously biased (ie hate groups and religious organizations — odd that their narratives line up) seem to state otherwise. Have an unbiased or peer reviewed source?
https://medicine.yale.edu/news-article/21447/
https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc...ng-term-mental-health-benefits-study-n1079911

But that is the argument you are making, since it doesn’t work for everyone it is “corrupt profiteering off the suffering of others who are desperately seeking answers”. Do you feel the same way about people that have facial reconstructive surgery for birth defects (not 100% effective), or pharmaceuticals (not 100% effective and most have permanent long term risks). Or does it only apply to something you don't like or understand?

Do you believe society should stop encouraging the delusions of religious persons? Many believe it is only “corrupt profiteering off the suffering of others who are desperately seeking answers”. Seems to cause more harm than it fixes. Can’t be explained...[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]

 

All of the disorders are legitimate. The least invasive way to lessen suffering should be taken in all cases. Unfortunately with some people with gender dysphoria that requires gender affirming surgery. There is also a surgery for extremely obese people — are you against that as well? Might as well let them die, right?

Jesus Christ man.
I can no longer tell if you are serious or not. That’s sheer insanity.