A Last Minute Post Before Temporary Shutdown

 I haven't time to peruse the link within this link, from which it's info comes, but the summary is bad enough.  The willingness by the "progressive" left to lie in order to promote perversion and disorder is not new at all.  References to the earliest studies who how true that fact is, as those earliest studies did not rely on solid methodologies, but were focused on the outcome they needed.  It still goes on:

https://thefederalist.com/2022/04/19/doctors-biden-administrations-dangerous-push-for-trans-treatments-for-kids-falsifies-science/

Side note: as I said in the previous post, I'll be shut down for several days, but anyone can still submit a comment which will sit in moderation until I have the ability to check them out.  Were it not for a certain troll who abused the welcome to participate in discussion here, comments would show up immediately.  But as we know, lefties are why we can't have nice things. 

PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT

 Within the next day or so, I will not have access to this blog except as a visitor.  This situation will last sometime around April 25th or so.  Thus, I will not be able to review and allow comments, though I can't say exactly when that black out will begin.  Just wanted to let y'all know.  

Thank you for your patience.

What's So Good About Good Friday?

 In speaking about his film The Passion of the Christ, Mel Gibson said the hands you see nailing Christ's hands to the cross are his.  It stands as Gibson's only appearance in the film and his hands are all you see.  (I'd need to watch the film again to see if I can spot him among the Roman soldiers at all or if he just stepped in enough so only his hands hammering away could be seen...which is what I recall him saying was the case.)  His explanation was that he recognized his own sinfulness and thus, as is true of all sinners, he was responsible for Christ's crucifixion and thus it made sense to him to symbolically be the one to crucify Christ.  That's quite the profound statement.  It's certainly true of all of us.  It could have been any of us whose hands were used for that scene and the point Gibson made would still be a righteous position.  

Christ's death on the cross was a long time coming, going all the way back to the eating of forbidden fruit.  At that point sin came into the world and all animal sacrifice for the atonement of sins were a foreshadowing of His sacrifice.  He came as the perfect Lamb of God to be offered up as a propitiation for us and by doing so provided us with the means by which we can one day come into God's presence.  And He was the perfect Lamb because He's God Incarnate and God is perfect.  There could be no other sacrifice offered because none were perfect.  Animals chosen for the purpose were as perfect as possible, yet not perfect in reality because only God is perfect.  

So God became Man, offered Himself to be put to death by mankind, in order to appease Himself for the benefit of mankind.

When I hear from those who criticize Scripture...specifically God...for creating man and giving him free will to reject Him, His ultimate purpose should be enough for these people to stifle.  Which of us would allow others to be themselves and then in being himself a man does us harm, would then offer ourselves to be imprisoned or fined for what that man did to us?  Anyone?  Bueller?

This was the Good News Jesus brought...that we'd be allowed to be regarded as perfect and worthy of being in God's presence as if we not born in sin and thus possessed of a sin nature.  And it happened because Christ shed His Blood which paid our debt, which washed away our sin nature and we are thus provided in our acceptance of Christ as our Savior. 

Jesus didn't die because he pissed off the Jews or the Romans.  He died because we were in need of God and His death provided the means by which we can be with Him.  He died because we're sinners.  Those are our hands driving those nails.

Listen To These Black Voices

 https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2022/04/unapologetic_tony_dungy_smokes_out_obamas_betrayal_of_black_america.html

The above link could have been added to the previous post.  It presents a truth the progressive won't address in earnest about a legit cause of problems in the black community.  Thus, it also stands as evidence of the disorder of progressive thinking.  

But it also, and more importantly, contrasts the extremes of "black voices", and in doing so clearly indicates which voices are worthy of our attention, as well as which voices are noble, honorable and honest.

Any time I see Tony Dungy on TV, I have trouble reconciling his quiet, gentle comportment with an NFL defensive player.  Even as the coach of a Super Bowl winning team, he just doesn't seem the type.  He clearly is a man of strength...strength of character.  He's "a Christian father of eleven".  Yeah.  A man of strength!! 

And yet this man who has proven his fine character is criticized by a vile moron like the contemptible Keith Olberman and others who default to race-hustling when no legitimate argument against his words are possible to present.  Here's a man who naturally lives a proper life to the extent that I've never heard any negative reports about him or his offspring.  And the leftists can't stand that.

In the meantime, we have the voices to two other blacks described in the article.  One is the unjustly worshiped Barrack Obama (who incidentally was interviewed for his opinions about the Russia/Ukraine situation without any mention I could see of his part in making Ukraine vulnerable to Russian aggression).  Barry spoke properly at one time regarding the importance of fathers to their sons.  That is, he did so ONCE!  It's not as if anything changed after that.  In my humble opinion, he can more justly be put forth as a contributing factor to continued negative issues in the black community and increasing crime rates.  To hold up a punk like Trayvon Martin as one who looks like a son he could've had doesn't do much to recommend him as any son's father! 

Whether or not Jesse Jackson was the reason Obama never continued with this narrative during his presidency I'm not about to suggest...though the author does imply that.  But the voice of this black man is of particular consideration for two reasons:

1.  Is this common among leftist black leaders...castrating someone with whom one disagrees?

2.  I can't imagine a conservative of any color not being crucified for daring to suggest such a thing.  Castrating someone with whom one disagrees? 

So here we have three "black voices":

1.  A honorable Christian man I have no doubt would not back down from what he said about a most important problem in the black community and would say it again without flinching.

2.  A less than honorable former president who, while saying the same thing as Tony Dungy, didn't think it important enough to keep saying it out loud to the general public, favoring kind words for the products of that problem instead.

3.  A dick who has exploited the problems in the black community for profit since the days he first hitched his self-serving wagon to MLK JR.

Listen to the voices of those like Tony Dungy.  They speak truth and as such their words have value by which anyone can benefit. 

The Sick Progressive

 It has been said that liberalism is a mental disorder.  It's hard to dispute that assertion.  The things they say and believe are so often...so routinely...counter to rational, logical thought; so distant from morality.  Indeed, those things are anathema to the common progressive.  They promote and defend evils and then accuse those who oppose them as the evil people.  What follows are a few examples from today's assortment of AmericanThinker articles:

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2022/04/abortion_is_lifesaving_lifeaffirming_healthcare.html

This article presents an attitude which is not uncommon among the common progressive...that one's aspirations are more important than the life of the person the progressive invited into existence.  It's no secret the typical leftist has shown their contempt and disregard for the newly conceived by referring to such people as mere "clumps of cells".   And they do this while daring to speak of racism and "white privilege".  The reality is these people clearly believe there's no need to deny one's self sexual self-gratification simply because the chance very much exists of becoming impregnated by engaging in the act meant to bring about new human life.  They are so warped as to believe their deceptive position on when life begins holds any water, even for themselves.  Remember, they're disordered...not stupid.  They know damned well they're killing people when they have or encourage abortions.  These liars who demand we follow the science simply ignore science when it's convenient for them to do so.  They're contemptible.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2022/04/the_disturbing_trends_in_progressive_support_for_abortion.html

This article takes that from above and worsens it beyond description, by presenting the worst of them.  Imagine celebrating the murder of black people the way the black woman in this article celebrates the murder of innocent human beings in the womb!!  But the disorder of the leftist pretends there's some difference of significance in order to preserve the "right" to sexual self-gratification.  Indeed, to suggest to such people they deny themselves results in the wildest look.  "What???  Not get laid???  What's wrong with you???"

 https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2022/04/sacrificing_childhood_innocence_for_the_sake_of_delusional_adults.html

Notice the trend here.  Progressive adults, disordered as all get out, having an extremely damaging impact on the most vulnerable people...small children!   If they can't kill them in the womb, they'll indoctrinate and influence them as soon as they can get their evil hands on them.  In this case, they do so behind the backs of the children's parents, purposely, intentionally, as if they know best what's good for the children.  And to them, what's best is trying to recruit...through their grooming efforts...as many to the deviant LGBT cause as possible.   Progressives support this disordered thinking, because progressives are disordered people themselves.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2022/04/a_retired_new_york_times_columnist_offers_an_incredibly_classist_take_on_alcoholism.html

This article highlights the progressive attitude toward "others", as in, mostly the common man...the very people the progressives like to pretend are their greatest concern.  I especially enjoyed the author's use of the term "'White' progressive elites"...the truly privileged as it happens.  But they're truly privileged in their attitudes regarding themselves, while supposing themselves compassionate. 

Now here's where I throw a bone.  I regard all left-leaning people as varying degrees of the same evil.   I've known and continue to know many people of the left.  Some are even family members.  The people I know I would regard as mostly decent people who simply buy into the crap which defines the  progressive.  They vote for this shit.  Thus, despite their "best intentions" and their otherwise compassionate natures, they are no less guilty of promoting and enabling the disorder of progressive-ism.  It saddens me to no end.

The above is just a taste of the disordered positions and attitudes of the progressive.  There are other topics in which the disorder manifests.  These articles were simply those which all happened to appear in a single day's posting at AmericanThinker.com. 

More Truths With Which The Left Struggles

 My post on Friday, March 25, 2022 was intended to discuss how the left has no fealty to truth and honesty.  At least it was before Dan T took it on a tangent to Pervland.  He was challenged to provide the definitive studies or proofs which debunk the truth "transgendered" people are disordered.  His last failed attempt was on April 7, 2022 at 10:09 PM and I don't know if he'll make any additional attempts.  One would think if such evidence existed, it would always be at the ready for those like Dan and other enablers to shove in the faces of better people.  But alas...

During that little debate, while I presented all manner of rebuttal which shredded his links, or demonstrated why they weren't the evidence Dan thought they were...as if he actually read them seriously...there was one video in particular which I was keen on finding and posting, but could not find it.  Then, as I was seeking other info for use to further make Dan look stupid, I came across it.  I also came across something else which is just as good for what it says.  I will post them both here in just a bit.  First, I want to re-post a couple of links from that debate which were among the first I presented there.  The reason is because like the new links I'll be posting here, these two have similarities in the sense they all ask questions of logic which are provoked by the "evidence" the LGBT activists/enablers in the psych and medical communities present to support the lies of the Agenda That Doesn't Exist.  As you study them, you'll see what I mean, but I'll cite quotes from each as examples along the way.

The first is from Robert L. Kinney III, who holds a doctorate in pharmacy from Purdue University and an M.A. in philosophy with a concentration in bioethics from Franciscan University of Steubenville, which for Dan isn't good enough to comment on the subject.  But Dan's a buffoon and any honest person can see the guy makes solid points of contention regarding that which the "experts" Dan likes insist is evidence LGBT people aren't disordered.  Here it is:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4771012/

It's rather lengthy, but well worth the time to study, as this excerpt clearly proves:

<i>an abbreviated version of Kinsey's argument looks like this:

• 1.  In human beings, homosexuality has been demonstrated to be more common than previously assumed;
• 2.  Therefore, there is a normal variation (or a normal “continuum”) of sexual attractions.

By replacing homosexuality with the examples of body integrity identity disorder and self-harm/self-mutilation in Alfred Kinsey's and the APA's argument (that is, if we follow the logic of Kinsey and the APA) the argument would be as follows:

• 1.  In human beings, it has been observed that some people are attracted to and desire to cut themselves and remove their healthy body parts;
• 2.  The attractions to cut oneself and remove one's healthy body parts have been demonstrated to be more common than previously assumed;
• 3.  Therefore, there is a normal variation of attractions to self-harm; there is a continuum of normal variations of orientation to harm oneself.

Hence, we can see how illogical and deficient Kinsey's and the APA's argument is; the observation that a behavior is more common than previously assumed does not automatically lead to the conclusion that there is a normal continuum of behaviors. One would have to conclude that every human behavior observed is simply one normal behavior on the “continuum” of human behaviors; if the desire to harm oneself or the desire to remove a healthy limb is shown to be more common than previously assumed, then (according to their logic) such behaviors would be part of a normal continuum of self-harm behaviors and orientations.</i>

The paper if full of these kinds of flaws of logic in the "evidence" for arguing LGBT folk are "normal".  But Dan insists his arguments are invalid because Kinney isn't specifically in the field of pro-LGBT science, as if he needs to be in order to see the half-assed work put forth as "solid data/evidence".  This is why Dan's a buffoon.  Logic eludes him.  The arguments of Kinney, as well as the rest of those I'll present are chock full of logic, reason and indeed, OBVIOUS counters to the fraudulence of the LGBT activists.

The next is from John Conlin who I falsely identified as JD Rucker, who simply posted this article in the Clarion News. 

https://amgreatness.com/2022/03/26/my-dads-left-hand-and-the-insanity-of-transgenderism/

<i>But if there were more and more babies being born with hands like this, we would aggressively investigate and try to fix whatever was causing these birth defects and we would be right to do it. In doing so, however, we would not be negating my father’s identity in any way. 

There would be even greater urgency if these defects were concentrated in specific communities. Is it something in the water? In the air? If we discovered it, something would quickly be done because this isn’t the way a hand is supposed to be.

Yet in what can only be described as societal insanity—driven primarily by activist groups, a willing media, and using people’s innate goodness against them—we do just the opposite with gender dysphoria, or what is more commonly called transgenderism.

In all other areas of medicine—every single one—the overall goals are diagnosis, treatment, and prevention.</i>

Conlin doesn't appear to have any psych background, but he easily exposes the incongruous nature of the pro-LGBT narrative.  Indeed, no such background is required and no "expert" of the type Dan worships has yet brought forth a single rational argument for suggesting there's something unique about the LGBT conditions which justifies treating them differently than all other abnormalities.  Certainly appeals to an alleged history of "oppression" doesn't do it, no matter how often Dan tries to make that appeal matter.

Now we come to the two pieces I just recently found.  I'll lead with the newer of the two...the one I'd not seen before.  Unfortunately, I can't seem to find it, but it made a great point among many of the great point presented in rebuttal to the narrative, which is how we're told we should not push children toward gender specific directions.  By that I'm referring to blue blankets, trucks and baseball for boy babies, toddlers and pre-adolescents, versus pink blankets, dolls and dresses for girl babies, toddlers and pre-adolescents.  But what are we seeing with those with allegedly "transgendered" minors?  A boy who insists he's a girl is enabled with all manner of female accoutrements.  Indeed, they are encouraged to do so by the "experts" who are no better than LGBT activists pretending to help.  I'm really sad that I can't find the article from which this problematic falsehood is exposed, as it lists a number of similar counter-intuitive claims of the pro-trans activists.  Should I come across it, I will add it to this post.

Finally, is the video I've been trying to hunt down since I first saw it and wrongly believed I had saved it.  It is from a talk given by Gina Rippon, who is a British neurobiologist and feminist. She is a professor emeritus of cognitive neuroimaging at the Aston Brain Centre, Aston University, Birmingham. Rippon has also sat on the editorial board of the International Journal of Psychophysiology.  I pray that's "expert" enough for the likes of a Dan Trabue, but certainly she's expert enough for rational, honest people.  I don't have time to sit through another viewing of the video (actually it's split into two vids, with Q & A in the second).  As they are vids, I'm not going to quote anything specific because again, I've not the time to view them again for that which is akin to all of the above.  You're looking at about an hour and a half total time, and within that you'll find those points which are of the type the above links provide, as well as actual science which shreds the claims of the more activist types in the various connected fields of science.  She uses the term "neurotrash", coined by another person, to describe the types of studies which give Dan such a tingle in his lady bits.  

 Enjoy...she's actually entertaining in:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1swI97JbuUA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uqR4cw9Amlg

Enemy Action VII: The Enemy Being Really Dangerous

 Though I don't have the time I wish I did right now, and in past periods where my time was also limited, I still maintained a desire to post something here.  I'm amazed at those like Stan and Wintery Knight who seem to post so regularly, as to Neil and Glenn, and do so in extremely competent and informative ways.  (Too much time on their hands?)  I wish I was as capable of doing as fine a job as they do with the same frequency.  In the meantime, I have files of stuff which I can reference for topics on which I might someday do a post.  Other times, more recent stuff makes it a somewhat useless practice, as there's always something going on.  

With that in mind, one of my files has to do with the media and particularly how true it is they're the enemies of the people President Trump said they are.  Another is simply stuff about Biden, including how he's far more the dangerous liar Trump is said to be for reasons of deranged and irrational hatred.  Last Thursday night, Tucker Carlson opened his show with a monologue about both.  It began with Biden lies but was mostly about the leftist media.  He touched on other truths, regarding both parties getting nuts about this Russia/Ukraine thing, but it was mostly a expose on morons in the Washington press corps.  Here's a vid, with about the first twenty minutes being the monologue:

https://nation.foxnews.com/watch/d92850ac0e6f7ba48d5ed39a24a445ea/

I ALMOST FORGOT!!!:

As we know from countless comments to that effect, Dan is incensed over Donald Trump's "attacks" on the press.  It is among the various lame arguments he offers to justify his abject and grace-embracing hatred of our former president.  The reality, of course and as any honest person can easily explain, is Trump's problems with the press are justified and justifiably aimed at that leftist portion of the press which serves as the mouthpiece for the Democratic Party.  They've been all too willing to "report" every slight against the man, while eagerly refusing to actually investigate those slights for their veracity or lack thereof.  The damage to Trump's re-election chances by the withholding and stifling of information regarding the Hunter Biden laptop situation is well known...and naturally ignored, dismissed and rejected by the left, and Danny T. in particular.

But if Dan is really concerned about how a president mistreats the press, one need look no further than Dan's cherished Barack Obama.  While most presidents had issues with the press to one degree or another, Obama is considered the worst of the worst by a wide margin, including by a number of leftist press figures as well. What follows are links to articles describing just that:

https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/opinion/editorials/sd-obama-trump-media-leakers-20180910-story.html

 https://www.cbc.ca/radio/sunday/the-sunday-edition-for-may-5-2019-1.5121509/barack-obama-was-a-greater-enemy-of-the-free-press-than-trump-michael-s-essay-1.5121514

 https://www.cjr.org/criticism/barack_obamas_press_freedom_legacy.php

 https://www.cato.org/commentary/barack-obamas-war-free-press

It isn't "corruption" to point out the failures of the press when they're clearly not doing their job as the job is meant to be done.  And if those failures tend to flow in one direction consistently, it is one's duty to warn others of those failures and those who've perpetrated them.  Trump's description of the press as enemies of the people is considered hyperbolic, but it is not untrue.  Anyone who is abusing their 1st Amendment protections as the leftist media does is indeed an enemy of the people, given what the people rightly expect from the press.  

But when it comes to one who was truly abusive of the press, Trump doesn't come close to holding a candle to Barack Obama, whose actions against the press border on criminal.  Any further whining by Dan about Trump's treatment of the press is thus another example of how Dan, like leftists in general, find truth inconvenient.