Hey, fella - why don't you go for gold and pop Jennifer on your ignore list, just like you threatened the owner of this website.OK, I've got to admit that my opinion of you has changed a great deal but then so have the opinions you've expressed in the threads, I'm not going to go search as a result of the political differences that have arisen on this topic I've pretty much seen your philosophy and even spiritually change direction. For my part I've tried to maintain my view as I always have without responding to militancy by adopting militancy of my own but who knows.
I have tried to be respectful to you without suggesting that your views are mere prejudice dressed up as polemic or employed thinly veiled accuastions of bigotry or suggestions about intellectual integrity. That goes a bit far and I hope you'll think about it. As a representative of your choosen politics you are coming of pretty poorly and I have to say that it has given me cause to question some of the things about American liberalism which I've read without giving any credience to before now.
I would say in your performance as mod you continue to be civil and fair, a lot of your posts on topics other than politics, particularly, almost uniquely those relating to the minority sexual and gender identity issues are commendable.
Pardon me if I think this comes of a little defensive.
Alright, I'm not trying to suggest any meaning that's not there or catch you out or anything like that.
I'm not understanding this, I do consider my opinions to be rational, in so far as I think that reason commands authority because its not the only source of authority and not always the most enduring.
By rational analysis I think you mean that I dont reach agreement with your own positions on minority sexual identity, or do you think this holds true for my opinions on philosophy, economy, political identity such as the tea party or sovereign citizens threads?
Why is it important that you portray my perspective as irrational gut reaction? I think its clearly because you're trying to denigrate or ridicule my opinion and you engage in some name calling like this, its no substitute for a sound argument and its not very persuasive. Infact its a bit of an emotionally charged reaction to say the least, not saying thats wrong, just saying think about it.
I can appreciate how they approach things differently from me, can you appreciate how I reached my conclusions? I mean besides attacking it as so much evil or prejudice?
So what you're suggesting, right, is that transexuals following their sex change be given something akin to witness protection programme status? To me personally I seriously question A LOT of the trans movement, which is similar to the homosexual rights movement and even feminism in so far as it has attracted a lot of intellectual attention and effort which can at times be pretty unrepresentative of the populations they theorise about in the first place.
How did people conduct themselves before there was even the prospect of a sex change procedure? How did they conduct themselves before the kind of special treatment in terms of identity protection existed to serve them?
Oh, oh, wait, I'm sorry, I didnt realise that you thought it was only a matter of inconvenience, well, if that's the case then I'd suggest to you that your entire argument is that the people who've never experienced gender confuse and identity issues should be prepared to make special allowances for the population of people who are, if anything you have a blind spot for one pretty significant populations inconvenience.
And now I'd question your motives, why, whe presumably you've not had any direct experience or purchase on this issue do you have to profess and belief, argue it and agitate in favour of it? Is it about being righteous? Doing the right on kind of thing? What if you discover that the right on thing wasnt what you thought it was? That you've managed to enable some pretty distressed people to mess their lives up even further?
I'm not sure what gay baggage you're talking about, if anything you've got the baggage because my failure to adopt an unambiguously supportive line of homosexuality has seriously poisoned the once cordial exchanges there where between you and me, to the point where you've complained at any new thread I start.
You're right, the thread has meandered about a bit, so thanks for bringing it back to the topic of the legal system. I originally said that I felt the policy was stupid, I intervened because I also felt it was not inexplicable as you suggested. My motive clear enough for yah? Or would you prefer that I say nothing? Bit close minded to suggest people who dont agree automatically butt out, wouldnt you say?
You know what IS amusing?
That first paragraph followed by the final one, hows them apples?
Physician heal thyself.
You're a clever guy, in your own head. Congratulations - you are first on my ignore list. What you have to say is utterly worthless.