In a recent post, our favorite Louisville leftist moron attacks the character of North Carolina Lt. Governor Mark Robinson for comments he made at a church on the subject of perversion forced upon the school kids of his state (and by extension, the nation). He called it filth. He did so because what he was referencing is filth. Robinson provides a few snippets of the filth in this video response:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_7rMmQgBZIQ
Throughout the subsequent comments, Dan tries hard to defend the filth by joining in the unjust attacks on Robinson and the lies that he was attacking members of the LGBT community...those Dan loves referring to as "historically oppressed". This stands as one of the first problems...lies, really...Dan piles up in his comments, not to mention the post itself.
The LGBT community and their enablers...of which Dan is one of the latter and possibly the former given his out and proud support...love to demonize anyone who dares object to absolutely anything even remotely related to their agenda. If you question a homosexual's necktie, then by golly, you're a hater and an oppressor with no regard for the "historically oppressed". Of course, the reality is that this is untrue. Just as one can enjoy the music of Elton John or the comedy of Ellen DeGeneres without advocating for their immoral and disordered desires and choices, it is also true that one can criticize those desires and choices without hating those people or wishing them harm. Few conservatives do, though they seem to demand our hatred by their response to legitimate criticisms and objections. Robinson was clearly attacking the practice of forcing their sexual habits upon kids in schools under the false guise of "sex education", which is a clinical instruction regarding the human reproductive system, not descriptions of homosexual...or even heterosexual...erotic sexual practices. Again, check out the video for examples of what, for the activists and Dan Trabue, passes for "sex ed". To insist they're deviants is being kind, to say nothing of accurate.
But that's not all we learn in the discussion. At some point, Dan attacks conservatives as being somehow irrational fearful. He cites a couple of lefty-leaning studies which ignore the nuances related to legitimate concerns regarding things like crime, terrorism, China and the like, while in the meantime, the left screams in terror at the thought of "climate change", "Covid-19" and "white supremacy". Incredible.
Finally, as Dan hates that I refer to him as an intentional liar, he goes off in all sorts of panty wetting in protest of that which most anyone can see as a legit accusation.
Now, I know that some have suggested that calling him a liar is uncalled for if he truly believes the lies he tells. But lies are lies, and when shown to be so, one is a liar for continually telling them. This has been the legend of Dan Trabue, Liar Extraordinaire.
So I asked a simple question to force him into choosing between truth and lie. I reference "Caitlyn" Jenner and "Rachel" Levine and asked Dan if these two were men or women. He said they were women, which is factually a lie and he knows this to be so. He then whined about having answered directly, but he followed his "direct" answer with all manner of equivocation. Then he chose to continue focusing on whether or not his answer was direct or not, while the most salient aspect of his answer is that it was an intentional lie.
Of course, throughout this "discourse" he deleted my responses to his demands...as usual doing so despite my responses meeting his narrow and petulant criteria...and he again has proven himself childish and really not worth the time anymore. More on that later.
One of his newest and most moronic practices is the constant references to "historically marginalized" people, and of course any criticism of them makes you an "oppressor". This means if you criticize a low character woman like, say, Stormy Daniels for not only being true whore (one who trades sex for money) but also a slut (in this case, according to her, having sex with a man she knows is married), you are guilty of misogyny. If you criticize LGBT activists who get schools to use pornographic comic books to teach kids to accept perversion, you're "homophobic". Whores and homosexuals, you see, are "historically oppressed/marginalized" people.
But if we look at more obviously oppressed people, say Jews, for example, and speak against them for their irrational support of the anti-Semitic Democratic Party, are you then a Jew-hater? By Dan's way of thinking, that would be a "yes".
It's, of course, a lie. Another of which Dan tells intentionally. To criticize is not to hate, even if hate actually exists behind the critique...which we see when criticism comes from the left. From most conservatives, hate of the practice, lie or policy is the point, not hate of the person...despite how it seems they really, really want us to hate them..."them" being the left, whose practices, lies and policies rational people do hate.
A final point is this notion that somehow my descendants will look upon me as some kind of bigot for my Christian beliefs about LGBT people, black people, or whatever else Dan stupidly needs to believe I have wrong in order for him to be right. If that would happen, then my descendants are just as stupid as Dan, fully given over to idiocy, lies and evil. I would hate it if that is how my descendants turn out. So far, it doesn't seem like it'll happen, but one never knows. When so many are unwilling to step up and do the right thing as citizens of this country, allowing a moron to ascend to the presidency because the incumbent isn't perfect, doing next to nothing in between elections to compel proper behavior by our representatives...well...there's no telling how one's descendants will turn out. There will come a time when I have no more ability to influence them and they'll be on their own. I can only pray that God will be important to them in a real way which Dan only pretends is true of himself. It will only be more difficult for them to do the right thing given the direction of the world right now, thanks to asshats like Dan.
He's never been worth my time. So many have written him off and denied him a forum at their blogs. I won't say I won't continue posting comments at his. My job is still one where I am left alone with little to do and no ability to do what I'd like (middle of the night when all are asleep and such), so commenting on line is something available to me, should there be a new post somewhere which interests me. Dan provides because he's a moron always posting stupid crap. But real "good faith" discourse...something of which he speaks but of which he isn't remotely capable...will only happen here and elsewhere. Never at Dan's. It's not how he rolls. But he's a reflection of the worst of our kind, and seems proud to be so. As such, he's a source for ideas and little else.
74 comments:
"historically oppressed"
Since Genesis 19.
Seriously, it is pure filth to push pervert propaganda onto anyone, let alone kids. The pervs used to feign insult when told they'd ultimately do that. "We'd never do that, we just want fake marriage blah blah blah." 15 minutes later, they pushed it on kids. "We have to because of bullying blah blah blah."
Also, anal sex is filthy. Don't be afraid to say it.
Robinson is so great. The media has to try and hide that he's black. Hope he has a long career in politics. We need more bold, brave, accurate people like him.
Put a polygraph on the pro-"trans" people. Some indeed have been brainwashed into believing a false reality, but most would admit that "Rachel" and "Caitlin" have always been and will always be males.
We all say something is wrong with "trans" people. Normal people say the mind is wrong, so fix that. God-haters say it is the body, so hurry up and mutilate children without parents' consent or awareness. Pure Satan-worship.
If Caitlin is male, then Karen Carpenter was fat, and not affirming that would have been hateful.
I offered an analogy of someone believing himself to be a wombat. Dan rejected it because it's a different species as if that makes a difference to the point about what one believes about one's self. Is the self-perception a valid representation of reality? The answer is no, and it's no when the self-perception is the belief one is of the opposite sex one actually is.
Dan then cites pro-LGBT "psychologists" who pretend they've discovered something that rationalizes the lie that there are more than two genders...a word they've bastardized as the leftists have bastardized so many words, expressions and concepts since prior to Lawrence v Texas. These bastards manipulate data which by itself gives no justification for the conclusions they impose upon the data rather than draw from the data.
In the meantime, they don't bother to compare the "transgendered" (or homosexuals, for that matter) to the guy who believes he's a wombat in the sense of determining why any of them believe what normal, rational and honest people can clearly see is a problem of the mind. So, since Dan doesn't like the wombat example, how about Karen Carpenter? Her perception of herself was clearly delusional as well. She wasn't fat. There are those who see themselves as amputees and won't rest until they actually have the normally functioning legs or arms surgically removed. These are all the same problems manifesting in different ways, with differing perceptions of the self. One doesn't need to hold a Ph.D. to see the obvious.
Dan then cites a definition of "disorder" "only if it causes significant distress or disability". They're so distressed they have their dicks cut off. I don't know what more obvious evidence of disorder there can be. What's more, they are also still far more likely to kill themselves than normal people...by quite a bit, in fact. I just watched Dave Chappelle's latest Netflix show. He speaks of a "transgendered woman" with whom he became close friends. The dude committed suicide and Dave wasn't sure why. Because the dude stood up for Chappelle, he became a target for the "trans" community, who attacked the dude on Twitter relentlessly. It could have been the reason he killed himself. It could have been something else. But the dude was clearly distressed, and clearly so are all those "trans" assholes who attacked him for not falling in line with the "community's" narrative about Chappelle. "Disorder" is appropriate, but not accurate. They're lunatics who prefer lunacy to treatment.
Yeah, the psychiatric community got infiltrated and politicized in the 70s and can't be trusted on issues like this (or much of anything else, if they don't hold a Christian worldview). What they say about pervert lobby issues is not only meaningless but almost certainly the opposite of the truth.
It's shameful they even presume to say they're serious about helping people.
"The psychiatric community got infiltrated and politicized..."
Conspiracy idiocies live on. It's always easiest to deny the experts' conclusions if you literally demonize them and pretend that you know best.
What a bunch of maroons.
Seriously, do you all not understand how irrational and emotionally fragile and disconnected from reality you come across to the rest of the world? Modern conservatism has come to be known as anti-science, anti-reason and anti-reality. Does that not concern you?
And it's not like we're seeing you all as anti-science, anti-reason and anti-reality because we just naturally hate conservatives and want to see you fail because we're "mean..." We oftentimes come from conservative backgrounds and have conservative loved ones. We WANT to believe in the best for you all, as a group. But you all, as a group, are becoming known as shrill and irrational because of this arrogance that you all know better than mental health experts, that you all know better than climatologists, that you all know better than medical experts, history experts, social science experts... on point after point, people with NO expertise keep insisting that you all know better than the experts and you do so, oftentimes (most of the time) based on false information and disinformation and because you're listening to your little echo chambers instead of expert opinion.
Does it not concern you that a large part of the world views you to be so emotionally fragile, out of control and irrational?
Dan,
Maybe you're channeling Bugs Bunny. Maybe Bugs was simply mispronouncing what you are. But I've been chastised for daring to do the same. I'm amazed such a champion of "black voices" isn't aware.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maroons
It's no "conspiracy theory" that the psychological community is rife with leftists seeking to normalize the abnormal. But then, that's a term you people throw about when you wish to keep your conspiracies secret.
And as you continue to pretend conservatives are "anti-science", I'll again remind you that it is you who believes men can be women, and that one isn't a person at the moment of conception. Those are just two examples of how you lying lefty bastards pervert science, if not outright ignore it when you need reality to be altered to your perverted tastes.
The reality is that those you cite as "experts" are simply lefty assholes like you are. Actual experts disagree and you disparage them for doing so. You have no credibility here because truth is anathema to you.
And please...by all means...cite the poll which supports your final contention, "that a large part of the world views you to be so emotionally fragile, out of control and irrational". I know you think you have science behind it, but it's just more hateful, lefty crap with no true basis in truth and fact. Come back when you have some real facts and data to present.
Marshal... "It's no "conspiracy theory" that the psychological community is rife with leftists seeking to normalize the abnormal."
Fine. Then either support this damned lie with some data from from reputable sources or admit that you've made a stupidly damnably false claim.
That's how adults operate. At least rational ones. So you've made a serious claim. Mental health experts want to "Normalize the abnormal." Support the claim.
When you can't, at least have the decency to admit that you can't.
* caveat: While you almost certainly don't mean it this way, there is a sense in which mental health advocates want to destigmatize mental health concerns. In that sense, yes they want to normalize mental health care. But that's almost certainly not what you are talking about. No this is just another ignorant attack on people you fear because they don't fit in with your small worldview.
"Fine. Then either support this damned lie with some data from from reputable sources or admit that you've made a stupidly damnably false claim."
Yeah...that's funny...as if that hasn't been covered multiple times over the years. Get a grip. It's a freakin' given.
So, that's a no. You can provide no data for your stupidly false claim? Of course that's the answer. It would just be helpful if you would acknowledge it... You know, establish that you're not totally divorced from reality.
There's a vast and blatantly obvious difference between "can't" and "won't" or maybe "some other time when I have the time to indulge what you've already been given repeatedly and comprehensively over the years". Pretending that hasn't been done is just another case of you straight up lying, which has become an art form with you. I've provided quite a bit regarding how the psychological community came to normalize homosexuality. Don't act like you haven't seen it, unless you're now admitting you never read what you've demanded your opponents provide...which wouldn't surprise me in the least.
Uh-huh. We see what is clear: You were called on another stupidly false claim and instead of supporting it, you say you don't need to and "won't."
Stupid lies are the hallmark of today's lazy Trump conservatives.
You "won't" because you "can't."
Trabue,
First, there is no such thing as "mental health." That is a lie foisted upon society by the psychobabble industry. The mind is intangible and there for cannot be "healthy" nor "unhealthy. IF there is an organic problem in the brain affecting the thinking process then that can be dealt with medically. Otherwise psych industry is just "rent a friend" to be counseled by.
Yes the psych industry leftist have long sought to normalize the abnormal. They normalized homosexual behavior, they've normalized the lie of "transgender" -- both of which require denying the science of biology. And those are just two sexual perversions the psych industry has normalized.
And what precisely is your expertise in the area of mental health, Glenn? How many years have you been studying the topic? Where is your degree from? What research are you citing to support your crazy-sounding hunches?
Do you all know how much you embarrass yourselves and your families and communities when you continue - in spite of coming from a place of abject ignorance - that you know better than the climatologists, the epidemiologists, the psychiatrists, the historians, the psychologists, the researchers, the scientists... the experts in general... that you all know better than expert opinion based on nothing but sheer arrogance and the confidence that comes from being so totally ignorant on a range of topics?
Re: The mind cannot be unhealthy... Then HOW do you explain your troubled mind?
Anxiety is not fictional. Depression is not fictional. Grandiose thinking is not fictional. Narcissism is not fictional. These are all observable realities, studied by experts for years. That you do not understand them doesn't mean that they don't exist.
Good Lord, have mercy.
Marshal, you seem one tick less insane than Glenn... do his words not trouble even you?
"Uh-huh. We see what is clear"
Who is "we"? You and your head lice? You continue to appeal to some unknown population of unknown numbers to presume anyone should be more inclined to your position for doing so?
"You were called on another stupidly false claim and instead of supporting it, you say you don't need to and "won't.""
"Then either support this damned lie with some data from from reputable sources or admit that you've made a stupidly damnably false claim."
The claim is valid as has been proven to you in discussions past. I'm under no obligation to present the argument every time you pretend it's not been done...like the intentional liar you are. Go back and seek them out.
"Stupid lies are the hallmark of today's lazy Trump conservatives."
There are no conservatives of any stripe who refer to Jenner and Levine as women as liars like you do. None of them lie about the beginning of human life or when one becomes a person whose life must be respected as having value. None of them lie about the wealthy and say they haven't paid their "fair share" of taxes. None of them lie about those who do not migrate according to our laws not being illegal. None of them lie about the reasons too many in the black community are poor or imprisoned. None of them lie about there being some Scriptural basis for defending and enabling "gay" marriage. YOU are among the true liars of our nation and have brought about great harm to our culture as a result. NO ONE lies like a progressive. NO progressive lies like you.
"You "won't" because you "can't.""
I won't because I already have, quite comprehensively, over the years. You lie in presuming that hasn't ever happened. It's what you do. It's who you are.
"Marshal, you seem one tick less insane than Glenn."
And what precisely is your expertise in the area of mental health, Dan? How many years have you been studying the topic? Where is your degree from? What research are you citing to support your crazy-sounding hunches?
"... do his words not trouble even you?"
Of course not. I know where he's coming from. I don't pretend he's speaking without some legitimate basis because of the manner in which he says his piece. I know he's well read on the subject. I know he's not referring to any particular disorder as much as simply the overall state of psychology. It's not a "hard science" as is, for example, biology. It's rife with ambiguity, which serves the "progressive" well. I also know there's no "hard science" which supports the crap you favor about the immorality you cherish so strongly by your defense and enabling of it. I have nothing against those who truly seek to help people with various mental disorders. I have quite a bit against those who lie about what is or isn't disorder simply because of activism and to further an agenda. You default to those very liars as infallible experts to whom we must all subordinate reason and logic.
"Anxiety is not fictional. Depression is not fictional..."
Progressivism is not fictional. It's a serious disorder which has led to all manner of cultural decay in our society. It continues to fester and is responsible for corrupting millions of Americans...particularly our young people. It lies about those who adhere to time-tested standards of character, decency and virtue which has served mankind well.
"Do you all know how much you embarrass yourselves and your families and communities...?"
We embarrass no one who isn't as morally bankrupt as are you.
Marshal... "And what precisely is your expertise in the area of mental health, Dan? How many years have you been studying the topic? Where is your degree from? What research are you citing to support your crazy-sounding hunches?"
1. My degree is in special education from the University of Louisville where I studied for a total of five and a half years.
2. I taught in Special Ed classes for a year, then worked at a mental health agency for another year and a half. My career path changed for 17 years before returning to Disability and Mental Health field for the last five years where I have received additional training and certifications in the area. I have sufficient study and work in the field first hand to be at least informed on the topic.
3. Additionally, my wife studied Special Ed and then got her Masters in Social Work (from the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary way back in 1988) and has spent the last 33 years supporting homeless and mentally ill and other groups and I've been regularly involved with her work and research.
4. Additionally, I attend churches for the last 30 years that work extensively with the mentally ill and which are full of experts and doctors in mental health fields. Mental Health issues and working with the mentally ill and other marginalized groups are areas my churches have been steeped in and informed about and researched first hand for most of my adult life and I've been an active participant in as have many of my church friends.
The point being, while I would not call myself an expert, I am not uninformed on mental health studies.
It is, of course, real science.
But look... I'm not at all an expert in climatology or epidemiology or many other fields of science. Nonetheless, I value the opinions and research of those who ARE experts in those fields.
And that's the point. It takes an awful lot of arrogance and hubris to just assume that you know better than experts for no solid reason other than your gut feelings and your ignorance of and inability to understand the science involved.
How is this not rational and understandable to you?
I don't assume that I know better than geologists or astronomers the age of the Earth or universe because, why would I?
Marshal... "It's not a "hard science" as is, for example, biology."
Biology and other "hard science" is not on your side/does not affirm your ignorance-based biases any more than the science of psychology...
"Contrary to popular belief, scientific research helps us better understand the unique and real transgender experience. Specifically, through three subjects: (1) genetics, (2) neurobiology and (3) endocrinology...
The popular belief that your sex arises only from your chromosomal makeup is wrong. The truth is, your biological sex isn’t carved in stone, but a living system with the potential for change.
Why? Because biological sex is far more complicated than XX or XY (or XXY, or just X). XX individuals could present with male gonads. XY individuals can have ovaries. How? Through a set of complex genetic signals that, in the course of a human’s development, begins with a small group of cells called the bipotential primordium and a gene called SRY."
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/voices/stop-using-phony-science-to-justify-transphobia/
Now that I've demonstrated at least some degree of expertise, training and knowledge on mental health issues on my part...
Now that I've pointed out that the so-called "hard sciences" don't agree with your ignorance-based biases in the area of transgender issues...
The question remains: WHY would you think that you are in a better place for understanding gender and sexual orientation concerns than experts in the field?
And the same can be asked for the age of the earth, climatology, epidemiology, history or any other area where you Trump types tend to presume that the experts are wrong... WHY would anyone listen or value the uninformed opinions of those not an expert in the field over and against the consensus of experts in the field?
Do you not see how that's presumptuous? Arrogant?
And just as a clarifying note: When I note that you are ignorant of a particular field, that's not intended as an insult. It's a descriptor. You all are not experts in the fields of study of Psychology or Mental Health. You're operating from a place of ignorance, in that you haven't studied them in any serious, rigorous sense.
Am I mistaken?
And if I'm not mistaken, the questions remain:
YES, some people ignorant of psychology or mental health (climatology, epidemiology, biology, etc) may disagree with the experts in those fields and the research they've done, but why would any rational people care what the uninformed think about fields they're uninformed in?
And isn't it a bit presumptuous for the ignorant/uninformed/underinformed to think they know more than the experts in those fields?
Trabue,
I don't have any degrees which you worship, but I have studied the psych industry for decades and have read some of their text books and it's all psychobabble.
Again, tell me how something intangible can be ill. I'll wait.
You didn't seem to notice what I said about organic problems with the brain causing issues with thought processes which ARE problematic. People with emotional problems don't need "rent a friend" to talk to.
I just laugh at how you always have to make an ad hominem attack on those who disagree with your foolishness - I don't have a "troubled mind," but you have a foolish one.
And I've never embarrassed anyone.
You listed a whole line of "experts" which have nothing to do with the "mind." And we could have a lively discussion about how some of those such as climatoligists are just lackies for the LEFT with all their lies about mankind being able to affect the climate - just another way to control our lives. You love living under a dictatator and his tyrannical government who have done more to destroy this nation in 8 months than any previouls administration.
By the way, convoluted or wrong-thinking, if not caused by an organic problem, is just people having sinful thoughts.
Dan,
You conflate physical problems with the brain with mental disorders like those of the LGBT community and how they should be handled. Thus, your background doesn't make you more equipped to expound on that which is not proven in the least as being "normal". I will once again speak to those who identify as animals, overweight when they are not, other people (like Jesus Christ or Napoleon) and dare you to again try to pretend they are different than those who think they're members of the opposite sex. All others I have little doubt you'd expect to be treated and counseled to deal with their disordered self-images. But this one...because you so clearly promote and enable sexual immorality...you pretend is benign with no harm to the deluded. You would not rationalize someone purposely having functioning legs because of how they identify, but you'll support those who'll have their functioning genitalia removed because of how they identify. The fact is they all suffer from a manifestation of the same disorder, but you defend those with one specific form of it because of your love for sexual immorality.
And while there are those who do not abide the pro-LGBT agenda in the psych field, you ignore those people as somehow being out of step with facts...facts not proven, but only asserted by the activists within the field. But you'll conflate your favored deviancies with normal when they more align with the sick...the sick for whom you'll provide assistance. It's like saying all diseases of the body are to be treated, except for cancer because you are pro-cancer and only listen to those who say cancer is good for us.
As to your link, it once again is no more than looking at data and asserting it means what they're pushing in the first place. They are not among those who let the science lead them, but begin with a premise into which they force findings. For example:
"XX individuals could present with male gonads."
The liars you favor use this to pretend it supports the notion that "gender identity" is a thing, when in fact it merely represents a developmental defect...not a normal process of development. What's more, it has little to do with someone like Jenner pretending he's a woman. It represents such a tiny segment of the population about which one can sympathize for the struggles it likely presents them. But to exploit that condition in order to normalize homosexuality and transgenderism is the very "normalizing" of which I speak, as well as unethical and a lie. And you're more than willing to buy into it because of your own twisted and corrupt support for sexual immorality and disorder.
http://www.sdaafe.org/2019/05/28/gender-spectrum-just-belief-lacking-scientific-basis/
And who in the hell is sdaafe? What are their scientific sources?
Citing obscure non-science sources only further undermines your non-existent credibility.
Glenn... "I don't have any degrees..."
You should have stopped right there and added, "and I have absolutely zero expertise to speak of..." but instead, you continued...
"which you worship, but I have studied the psych industry for decades"
1. I don't "worship" degrees. I didn't go to college until late in life precisely because I didn't value degrees. I did woodworking for the first 10-15 years of my adult life. I value common sense and reason, however. And common sense tells me that if I have my plumbing checked out by an expert and they recommend replacing my toilet, I'm going to give a lot of weight to that plumbing expert. AND, if I have a second plumber come in validating what the first plumber told me, I'm going to give a lot of weight to all that expertise.
Why? Because common sense dictates that I do so. It's rational to listen to experts on areas I'm not an expert in.
2. When you say you have "studied" the "psych industry" for years... define that. What research-based, accredited experts are you listening to in order to "study" it? What research have you conducted and was it peer-reviewed by serious, accredited experts?
Look, little buddy, if you have read 1000 hatchet jobs from a bunch of conservative extremists complaining because the big bad mean "psych industry" has hurt their little feelings, I am sorry for you and all your little friends. But that isn't research.
You recognize that reality, don't you?
Come on. Just because you aren't an expert doesn't mean you have to be a simpleton.
And I'm serious: I can't tell you how much I'd love you to cite the "experts" you have "studied" to reach your "conclusions." Both of you.
As always, a request for support that will go unheeded because you two don't deal in actual research or study. You just whine and fret and look for other injured little white boys with no serious expertise who will confirm your hurt feelings.
Grow up, men.
"You should have stopped right there and added, "and I have absolutely zero expertise to speak of..." but instead, you continued..."
Which is bullshit because degrees don't mean jack, other than tests were passed and papers were praised. But then you have people with degrees, such as Anthony Fauci, any number of pro-LGBT psychologists, Robert Reich...even Sleepy Joe Biden. In the meantime, anyone could study all the same materials an accomplished surgeon has studied and be every bit as informed and wise on the topic of surgical procedures.
But YOU want to use the point as a bludgeon without actually addressing the issue itself. The true point is whether or not Glenn's position...or the position of anyone...is right or wrong. His lack of sheepskin doesn't at all determine the answer to that question. You only need it to.
The same is true with my link. Can you find true fault in any point it makes, or are you going to desperately point to whether or not it has the necessary fame and notoriety you demand? That's some weak sauce there, Danny-boy.
"I don't "worship" degrees. I didn't go to college until late in life precisely because I didn't value degrees."
So you say. Big deal.
"I did woodworking for the first 10-15 years of my adult life."
Probably sucked at that, too. Probably should go back to it, however.
"And common sense tells me that if I have my plumbing checked out by an expert and they recommend replacing my toilet, I'm going to give a lot of weight to that plumbing expert. AND, if I have a second plumber come in validating what the first plumber told me, I'm going to give a lot of weight to all that expertise."
I've done my own plumbing work in my house, as well as carpentry, painting, and a host of other chores without having formal education in any of it. I've fixed my own cars over the years. Common sense dictates you have no common sense.
"When you say you have "studied" the "psych industry" for years... define that."
Wrong question. Defend your position without merely saying "experts say", or "where's your PhD?" So far, you've provided bullshit assertion, but no hard evidence that a man is ever really a woman.
"Look, little buddy, if you have read 1000 hatchet jobs from a bunch of conservative extremists..."
Look, little bitch, if you've read 1000 fantasy jobs from a bunch of pro-LGBT lefty extremists... frankly, you'd have read all that exists to support your position. No real science, but only fantasy and wishful thinking. I know this is true because those like yourself never produce the definitive studies which support the fantastical claims defending any LGBT position.
"Just because you aren't an expert doesn't mean you have to be a simpleton."
What's your excuse?
"And I'm serious: I can't tell you how much I'd love you to cite the "experts" you have "studied" to reach your "conclusions.""
Where are yours? That link you from which you produced your quote is lame shit. I've already pointed out the problem with it.
But more importantly, as I said earlier, I've provided a shitload of data, evidence and studies over the years to support my position and show yours to be without merit. I'm not up for doing it all over again only to see you a few months from now again pretend it never happened.
And when are you going to stop with the racist crap? You've never even provided any legitimate reason to persist with it. What's more, the only whiner here is you. We don't whine, nor fret over your crap. We just acknowledge that it's crap. You just won't recognize that reality, will you? But that's how you liars roll.
Marshal... "Where are yours? That link you from which you produced your quote is lame shit. I've already pointed out the problem with it."
I've already pointed to the respected people of the APA and at least one biology source. And I GET that, over and against what those experts in the field have to say, that YOU, with no expertise in gender studies and NO sources supporting you that I can see... that YOU in your ignorance think the experts' words are "lame shit..." But YOU THINKING THAT doesn't mean a damned thing.
What about that are you failing to understand? YOU have ZERO authority and credibility to make these sorts of decisions. These experts DO. You may as well disagree with the procedure a respected group of heart surgeons choose to use for a patient. You can say, "I think that using the XYZ procedure that you collectively have researched for years, but I, Marshal, think it's lame shit..."
That YOU think that is less than meaningless. It's entirely inconsequential to the equation. Your non-expert opinions are worthless, ant piss, entirely with no meaning or value to the topic.
Now, if you have some RESEARCH-backed experts you want to cite, by all means, cite them. Until then, no one cares what you have to say.
And no one may care what I personally have to say, but what I say doesn't matter. It's what the experts says.
Look at it this way, Marshal: EVEN IF it were proven beyond a shadow of doubt that the science shows that some people born with a penis are actually female in gender, EVEN THEN, you wouldn't accept it. Would you?
So, if that's the case, stop pretending you even care about expert opinion. You clearly don't. You are suffering from a case of narcissism or some other egocentric mental disorientation, thinking overly grandiose of your uninformed opinions. Get help.
One has to wonder if God's own self came down in physical form, slapped you across the face and said, "Stop being a piss-ant ninny! Listen to the experts. I NEVER TOLD YOU that transgender women aren't women. The experts aren't saying it. Stop pretending to be Me and just shut the hell up. Good Me in heaven, you're an embarrassment to my church and humanity!..." If that happened, would you THEN quit whining about your ignorant opinions and recognize that you have no expertise or reason to disagree with the experts beyond your uninformed and biased opinions?
I'm glad you've fixed your plumbing and your cars over the years. Good for you. That means you studied and figured out things on your own sufficiently to take care of those matters. You've given yourself, to some degree, a bit of expertise in those fields.
BUT YOU HAVEN'T in gender studies. YOU HAVEN'T in sexual orientation studies.
Is that correct? You have NO research or experience in studies in these fields, isn't that right?
And keep in mind, in science, when they say Research and Data, they don't mean you listened to some preacher on youtube complain about homosexuality. They don't mean you read some article from some right wing conservative. That's casual reading, it's not research.
Do you understand the difference?
Marshal... ""When you say you have "studied" the "psych industry" for years... define that."
Wrong question. Defend your position without merely saying "experts say""
? If we're going to appeal to reason, data and what the experts say, asking someone about THEIR sources for THEIR "research" is a very basic starting point. As you may or may not know, part of the scientific process is transparency about data and sources. If an oil company owner says, "I hear that the smartest people are saying that not only is burning oil safe, it also helps you lose weight and makes you smarter..." then it is only reasonable to ask for his source for that information. ESPECIALLY if it contradicts widely held understandings of the science on the topic. ESPECIALLY because he's starting from a place of bias, with financial incentives in seeing people burn more oil.
So, it's literally NOT the "wrong question." It is precisely one of the fundamental scientific/rational questions reasonable people should ask.
You know this, right?
And citing what the experts say on a topic, likewise, is rational.
Glenn... "You listed a whole line of "experts" which have nothing to do with the "mind.""
And...
"tell me how something intangible can be ill. I'll wait."
I'm wondering if you two acknowledge the reality of left handedness?? I mean, like homosexuality, it exists in a minority of humanity and exists pretty consistently and naturally and regularly in a small percentage of humanity.
So far as I know, thus far, no biological or definitively genetic genetic reason has been found To biologically explain why some people are left handed. Glenn's comments suggest that if one can't identify something biologically or in the brain, then it doesn't exist. Mental illness doesn't exist (says Glenn) because it's not something we can currently measure in the brain. That seems to suggest that Glenn does not believe in left handedness, but you tell me.
Are you like some of those dark ages types who think that being left handed is associated with the devil?
Handedness is intangible. Sexual orientation - gay, straight or otherwise - is intangible. Mental illness is intangible. And yet, they are all real.
Do you recognize that reality?
Trabue,
If I gave the titles of all the books I've studied about the psych fields you would still say I'm unqualified to comment. Did you know one can get just as much education from personal studies as a Ph.D gets after spending hundreds of thousands of dollars. Titles don't make anyone smarted than those without titles. You do indeed worship degrees because you denigrate anyone without one.
I have had a lot of experience with dealing with young people with retarded development due to organic brain issues (just one example are my step-brother and step-sister who I lived with for years), I have counseled many, many people with emotional or personal problems (I have attended several Biblical Counselors' conferences).
I'm not your "Little buddy," fool. And I'm still waiting for proof from you that the intangible mind can be ill.
You, on the other hand, seem to think that you are the only person who has dealt with those who don't have proper thinking.
Glenn... "You do indeed worship degrees because you denigrate anyone without one."
Bullshit. This is a stupidly false, bald-faced lie. You can not point to ONE SINGLE thing I've said that has ever denigrated anyone ever for not having a degree.
Can you be an adult and admit your mistake and apologize for such a stupidly false claim?
Of course, I don't do this and never have. As noted, I myself didn't get a degree until I was in my 30s. Further, I work with adults with disabilities for my living, helping them get meaningful jobs. I have to fight back regularly against foolish assumptions that say people without high school (let alone, college) degrees don't have a great deal to offer.
What I DO object to is people who are not educated IN A SPECIFIC DISCIPLINE - be it plumbing, mechanics, mental health, heart surgery or knowing their own gender and orientation - to presume to tell experts in those fields that the ignorant and unscheduled (and here I'm not talking specifically about academic learning, although it may well include that) know better than the experts.
Glenn... you are NO expert in mental health. If you were, you could proudly cite your sources. You are a coward and an arrogant liar. In areas where I haven't had college-learning but where I have educated myself (in the study of naturalists, for instance), I would gladly cite the people I've studied and books I've read.
Saying, "I won't do it..." is the coward's way out... showing you don't even believe in your junk "sources" yourself!
Glenn... "Did you know one can get just as much education from personal studies as a Ph.D gets after spending hundreds of thousands"
Of course, I know people can educate themselves. I'm not saying that it can't happen. I'm saying YOU give no indication of YOU having educated yourself on the topic. Hell, you don't even believe mental health is real...
What if you told a heart doctor you didn't believe that the heart was real. Do you think you would be taken seriously as an expert?
Not much time at present, but a few points of response:
"Hell, you don't even believe mental health is real..."
Hell, he never even said that. He spoke of the mind.
"What I DO object to is people who are not educated IN A SPECIFIC DISCIPLINE - be it plumbing, mechanics, mental health, heart surgery or knowing their own gender and orientation - to presume to tell experts in those fields that the ignorant and unscheduled (and here I'm not talking specifically about academic learning, although it may well include that) know better than the experts."
You can't hide behind that ambiguous defense. If you can't focus on the exact point to which one objects, you can't simply say the person is wrong and unqualified for not having the same degree level as the "expert" you defend. That's denigrating the person objecting, not addressing his objection. And you do it often, as if it's a hobby.
"Look at it this way, Marshal: EVEN IF it were proven beyond a shadow of doubt that the science shows that some people born with a penis are actually female in gender, EVEN THEN, you wouldn't accept it."
Uh...I believe science calls them "hermaphrodites". But that doesn't mean they are actually both sexes, but someone of one sex with physical characteristics of the other or both. Each such person is generally, if not always, clearly more of one sex than the other or both. It's another manifestation of developmental defect, not an excuse to pretend a man can be a woman just because he sees himself as one.
More later...
Glenn... "I'm still waiting for proof from you that the intangible mind can be ill."
Mental illness is the term, I would hope you would know, for real life impairments. Depression is a mental illness and and it's real.
Glenn... "I'm still waiting for proof from you that the intangible mind can be ill."
Mental illness is the term, I would hope you would know, for real life impairments. Depression is a mental illness and and it's real. Anxiety is a mental illness and it's real. Bipolar And schizophrenia are mental illnesses and the real. People really do have hallucinations that impair their life. They're alive. Just because we can't view those hallucinations does not make them any less real to the person seeing them or hearing them.
Do you acknowledge the existence of all these real impairments?
Glenn... "I'm still waiting for proof from you that the intangible mind can be ill..."
This argument from materialism is a bit odd coming from you. This might be the same question that an atheist might ask you. "If you can't provide me some material proof of God, then it doesn't exist."
Glenn... "You, on the other hand, seem to think that you are the only person who has dealt with those who don't have proper thinking."
I, of course, do not think this. and I, of course, never said this. This is poppycock.
I don't think YOU two are experts and this is because you do not give any indication that you have any expertise in the area of mental health. Again, you said you don't even believe in it!!
How can you simultaneously be an expert in something that you don't believe in?
But indeed, thinking one knows better than the experts is, itself, a sign of disordered thinking. Especially if one has no serious study into the field. Do you recognize that reality?
Trabue
Glenn... "You do indeed worship degrees because you denigrate anyone without one."
Bullshit. This is a stupidly false, bald-faced lie. You can not point to ONE SINGLE thing I've said that has ever denigrated anyone ever for not having a degree.
You've been calling me ignornant because I don't have a degree in any bogus psych field.
I never claimed to be an expert in ANY field, so there went another red herring.
I didn't keep a list of all the books I've read -- No reason to. Two of my favorite experts in the psych industry are E. Fuller Torrey and Paul Vitz, both of whose books I've read many.
No one is an expert in mental health. The mind cannot be ill!!! It is intangible!!!
Anyone with any knowledge of biology knows that there are only two sexes -- male and female. No one can change from one to another. Sex is not separate from gender (gender used to be only about language parts).
Just because you think "mental health" is a bonafide thing, that doesn't make it so. I'm still waiting for evidence that the mind can be ill; you know, something you can't see or touch or even disect, etc? "Mental illness" was invented by the psych industry. Again, if you want to look at issues which cause problems with the thinking process -- organic causes -- that's medical and physiological, not "mental." To compare a heart with the mind just demonstrates your abject foolishness. TO compare left-handedness with the mind is also foolish; left-handedness is visible and obsevable. DUH!
And, Art, the mind is what the term "mental" applies to.
Dan... Hell, you don't even believe mental health is real..."
"Marshal... "Hell, he never even said that. He spoke of the mind."
Glenn...
"First,
there is no such thing as "mental health."
That is a lie foisted upon society by the psychobabble industry."
Marshal... "You can't hide behind that ambiguous defense."
Stop. Right there. Just stop. WHAT SPECIFICALLY was ambiguous about my response?
I said that I object to people who are not educated IN A SPECIFIC DISCIPLINE (see the specificity there?) to presume that experts IN THOSE SPECIFIC FIELDS (again, quite specific) do not know as much as they do IN THOSE SPECIFIC FIELDS.
What SPECIFICALLY is ambiguous about that?
I'm willing to bet that this is yet another stupidly false claim that you won't even try to support, like a true Trumpian intellectual coward.
Marshal... " If you can't focus on the exact point to which one objects, you can't simply say the person is wrong and unqualified for not having the same degree level as the "expert" you defend. "
Glenn made a point blank accusation, ridiculously, idiotically saying that there is no such thing as mental health and that the field of experts in psychology are engaged, en masse, in "psychobabble..." AS IF Glenn had anything to support such a nonsensical charge. HE is the one who made the general complaint about that entire field.
But EVEN IF Glenn thinks this ridiculously stupidly insane claim because specifically of the APA/rational adults support for LGBTQ people being able to live their lives AS LGBTQ people without ridicule, attacks, beatings or oppression, he STILL is making it as someone who is not an expert in the field of sexual orientation. He's just not.
Where am I mistaken?
And I get that people like you and Glenn may say, "One doesn't NEED to be an expert or highly research this field to know what we think is obvious..." But just because you say that doesn't make it valid, any more than the flat earther who says they don't need any expertise to "know" that the earth is flat.
It's an empty claim coming from a place of ignorance.
Marshal... "I believe science calls them "hermaphrodites""
Uh. No. "Hermaphrodite" is not a scientific term.
But then, you're ignorant of this field, so it's not surprising you wouldn't know this.
Educate yourself. Or at least start to.
https://www.nature.com/articles/gim200711
"You have NO research or experience in studies in these fields, isn't that right?"
No, I don't. But then neither do you and I don't need to. What I do have is the ability to read, understand what I read and know when what I read makes sense and when LGBT apologists in the world of science are full of crap. You reference a lot of crap and expect I'm under some obligation to eat it just because it's served up by one you regard as an "expert". You can have your fill of that crap, but my tastes are more refined. You'll believe anything said by a pro-LGBT "expert" because he's pro-LGBT. I prefer something more substantive.
"So, it's literally NOT the "wrong question." It is precisely one of the fundamental scientific/rational questions reasonable people should ask."
Bullshit. It's a cheap ploy to discredit an opponent, not on the merits of his argument, but on that which has no relevance to it. Thus, you're dodging the salient aspects of the argument with the same fallacy in both directions. What your "experts" say is fact because of their degrees. What Glenn says isn't because he lacks them. Never do you discuss the definitive.
"And keep in mind, in science, when they say Research and Data, they don't mean you listened to some preacher on youtube complain about homosexuality."
I don't listen to preachers on matters of science, unless they're also well versed in science as well. Otherwise I already know about homosexuality being an abomination regardless of the context or scenario in which it might take place.
"They don't mean you read some article from some right wing conservative. That's casual reading, it's not research."
Articles I read or cite refer to actual research and data, often providing links to R&D as well as more logical analysis than what your typical leftist, pro-LGBT expect honest and intelligent readers to swallow. You'd know this if you actually read the articles to which I've provided links, instead of deleting them and disregarding them because of the leanings of the source.
I'm doing some reading on your sources, Glenn, starting with Torrey. In the meantime, some questions for the two of you...
Glenn, Marshal has oft-claimed that homosexuality and being transgender are mental illnesses (correct, Marshal?). Since you don't believe in "mental illness," then presumably you would disagree with Marshal and agree with the APA on that point?
And speaking of Torrey, I see where he was part of the new younger vanguard in psychiatry that removed homosexuality from the DSM - I suppose you agree with Torrey and his colleagues on that point?
Marshal, why do you disagree with the APA and think homosexuality is a mental illness?
Do you both agree that sexual orientation is an innate reality, like being left-handed?
If so, why do either of you have a problem with people honoring their natural, innate orientation?
And here, I fully get that you two are amongst the increasing minority who think, in your heads, that your "god" "disapproves" of homosexuality, even though God has never told you that. But what of the majority of the world that disagrees with your interpretations of the Bible and your human ideas about God... Should they heed your views just on your say so?
Speaking of the minority view on homosexuality, you two are in agreement with fundamentalist Muslims and Mormons on your ideas about what god/allah think about homosexuality... does that cause you any concern?
Are you two agreeing that there is no scientific basis to be opposed to homosexuality? And the only reason one would agree with you would be if they happened to agree with your particular religious opinions from your human standpoint?
"Speaking of the minority view on homosexuality, you two are in agreement with fundamentalist Muslims and Mormons on your ideas about what god/allah think about homosexuality... does that cause you any concern?"
If you believe water is wet, fire is hot, snow it cold, does it concern you to know muslims and mormons believe the same things? What an asshat attempt on your part!!
"Marshal, why do you disagree with the APA and think homosexuality is a mental illness?"
A question answer hundreds of times in hundreds of conversations. It's abnormal for one designed to unite with a member of the opposite sex to try to unite with one of the same sex. One has to have some defect to one degree or another for such to happen. It's clearly true in the animal world, but in the human world, it also involves conscious intent. To be so obsessed with an urge as to cast off long-standing, time-tested concepts of morality and virtue in order to indulge that urge is mental. It's like you lying all the time.
"Do you both agree that sexual orientation is an innate reality, like being left-handed?"
Answering for myself...NO. Yet, even if it was, it is no more required that we treat it differently than any other immoral desire which also can be termed an "orientation" if it serves one to do so. That is, we can assume some biological explanation for every desire, none of which accounts for the moral status of the desire or the indulgence of it.
"And here, I fully get that you two are amongst the increasing minority..."
Ah!...if the number of people who believe murder is wrong is reduced, murder is therefore no long wrong and the minority must tolerate it. Got it. If indeed it's an "increasing minority", that's merely evidence of cultural decay, not enlightenment. Being morally decayed yourself, you wouldn't understand.
"...God has never told you that."
Uh...Yes He did. Lev 18:22
"But what of the majority of the world that disagrees with your interpretations of the Bible and your human ideas about God..."
Then like you, they're liars ignoring that which is crystal clear, unambiguous and without question, pretending there's some legitimate way to interpret the clearly revealed word of God on the subject in some way which makes the behavior OK and worthy of our tolerance. There's not, and those like you who try to pretend otherwise are abject, unmistakable and intentional liars.
"Should they heed your views just on your say so?"
Heed God. He's crystal clear it's an abomination.
Trabue,
You have a difficult time understanding the FACT that the mind is INTANGIBLE. It cannot feel, be touched, be seen, etc. Ergo it cannot be ill. Think of it perhaps like the soul - another intangible (some say the mind and soul are the same). The term “mental health” was invented by psychobabblers to take responsibility for behaviors away from the so-called “mentally ill.” This is not a “ridiculously, idiotically” statement — It is a fact that the mind cannot be ill.
Again, there are organic, medical issues which can cause problems with thinking processes, be it depression, suicidal thoughts, narcissism, OCD, anxiety, or whatever, then these are brain issues, not “mental illnesses.” The public has been brainwashed to accept a term so as to release people from personal responsibility. (Sort of like the bogus term, “alcoholic,” which removed responsibility from the drunk for his drinking habits.)
Your comparison to what an atheist thinks about God is the old “apples and oranges” fallacy.
Neither I nor Art have claimed to be experts, only that we are knowledgeable about the issues.
LGBQTZLXYZ people not “mentally ill,” and it was just another wrong statement by the psychobabblers and their DSM to begin with. NO ONE has to have sexual relations. Having sexual desires may or may not be a choice (I can conceded that someone may have a brain anomaly which causes such unbiological thinking, but acting on it is a CHOICE, not an “illness.”). I will concede that it is possible that someone has a brain anomaly which causes them to believe they are of the opposite sex, but it is a biological impossibility to change to another sex.
There is no such thing as an expert in “sexual orientation.” It doesn’t take an expert to know that someone has a problem with their thinking to desire to practice a sexual behavior for which the body was not intended. Sexual orientation towards opposite sex is innate; towards same-sex is not innate but deviant, either by personal choice or by a brain malfunction. If those of homosexual inclination want to act on it, that’s their business, but they shouldn’t demand everyone approve of it.
When Art says something is a “mental illness” he is just repeating what culture has been brainwashed with. What he should say is that these people have deviant/perverted thinking.
The APA is a LEFTIST organization promoting psychobabble based teaching by many atheist “nutjobs” such as Freud, Jung, Adler, Fromm, Maslow, Carl Rogers, Albert Ellis, et al, and their non-scientific ideologies.
Anyone who reads the Bible understands it plainly teaches that God considers homosexual behavior to be an abomination. One has to twist into verbal pretzels what God says about such behavior in order to claim God approve of it. And only the MINORITY believes that homosexual behavior is NOT an abomination, anti-biology, and an affront humanity. So why should anyone be concerned that false belief system recognize how deprave homosexual behavior is?
There is EVERY scientific basis to be opposed to homosexual behavior — it is destructive of human culture, the individual practicing it, as well as being biologically aberrant. It does’t take a religious person to see that.
Marshal... " It's abnormal for one designed to unite with a member of the opposite sex to try to unite with one of the same sex. "
It is absolutely not NORMATIVE for two men to desire each other from a population point of view. But it IS absolutely natural for it to happen, as it always does/has.
On the other hand, being left handed is not normative (or "abnormal" to use that same nomenclature), but, SO WHAT? Something being normative does not make it bad.
Agreed?
Or are you a dark ages type who thinks being left-handed is diabolical/sinister?
Does one have to have a "defect" to be left-handed?
Do you recognize how irrational and oppressive this line of thinking is?
Marshal... ".if the number of people who believe murder is wrong is reduced, murder is therefore no long wrong "
Says the guy who JUST SAID that homosexuality is "abnormal" - not in the norm, the status of a minority of the population AS IF that made it wrong, somehow.
But the difference is murder causes harm whereas to gay folk marrying does not and it's not a single bit of business of Muslim or christian extremists who are not being harmed by two folks getting married.
Do you see where this argument from you fails on multiple levels?
Marshal... "Then like you, they're liars ignoring that which is crystal clear, unambiguous and without question"
And yet again, I GET that this is your irrational and unsupported hunch. But that isn't what I asked. I asked WHY in the world if people don't share your tradition-based biases, WHY would anyone give a damn what you don't approve of?
And I GET that IN YOUR OWN LITTLE HEAD, that YOU THINK God doesn't approve. We disagree and think you're dangerously mistaken.
Now, GIVEN THAT, why should we give a damn what you think?
The answer is, we shouldn't, and we shouldn't heed your views based on your say so. That is the rational, adult answer. I'm just asking if you recognize that reality?
Trabue sure likes comparing apples to oranges in his attempt to prove his case, i.e. his comparison of homosexual behavior to left-handedness.
Nowhere in the Bible does God say left-handedness is an abomination; He calls homosexual behavior an abomination worthy of death.
There is nothing abnormal or unnatural about left-handedness. Homosexual behavior is abnormal and unnatural to the human body.
People are born either left-handed or right-handed. No one is born homosexual (no proof has ever been found for evidence contrary). Homosexual behavior is ALWAYS a choice and is an abuse of the biological functions of the human body.
Homosexuals couples can't marry by definition, regardless of what LEFTIST judges have determined. And same-sex fake marriage does indeed harm society.
We KNOW that God doesn't approve of homosexual behavior because he has stated as much in more than one place in Scripture, and He made human beings as heterosexual, as well as making it biologically/physiologically impossible for same-sex copulation.
Glenn... "There is EVERY scientific basis to be opposed to homosexual behavior — it is destructive of human culture, the individual practicing it, as well as being biologically aberrant."
I GET that you personally might think all this... but as I said to Marshal, we don't really give a damn what Glenn who doesn't know anything about gender studies or sexual orientation thinks about it.
Do you have any DATA or RESEARCH or EXPERT opinion to support your irrational-sounding hunches and religious biases..
For instance, I can point to plenty of studies and research about how fellow citizens have been harmed over the decades by anti gay and anti transgender policies and perceptions. People have been abused, harassed, bullied, beaten up, assaulted, killed, And otherwise oppressed by the sort of attitudes attitudes that you present here. I can point to the data and show the harm. But what harm is there in two guys getting married? How does that hurt you? How does that hurt them??
Your claims are unsupported by reality. You don't even try to support them, you just make them as if they stand on their own. They don't. Again, I can't emphasize how very little we care about your opinion or how very irrelevant your irrational and emotionally fragile opinions and religious biases are. For people who do not share your religious and cultural biases and fears, why would any of us care about your hunches?
This is a fair question in a free Republic.
Glenn... "There is no such thing as an expert in “sexual orientation.” It doesn’t take an expert to know that someone has a problem with their thinking to desire to practice a sexual behavior for which the body was not intended."
For every single empty and unsupported claim ordered claim that you two make like this, I GET that this is what YOU think in your little heads with your little religious biases and petty ignorance.
I don't care what you all think. No one rational does.
What I'm asking is, do you have any data, research, expert opinion to support such irrational and oppressive claims? Setting side what little Glen thinks in his little brain, which is entirely irrelevant, do you have any data to support this empty claim and the others like it?
You could really save a lot of time by saying, I have lots of opinions that I can't support with any data or expert opinion, but you probably don't care about those. And then just shutting the hell up. But if you want to try to have a rational adult conversation based in reason and data and not in fear and biases, comma then step up and talk like a rational adult. Make a case based on something other than just your empty declarations Which, yet again, are entirely meaningless and worthless.
Trabue,
Real science, i.e., biology and physiology prove that homosexual behavior is dangerous to the practitioners. Diseases are rampant with such behavior, damage to the anus and rectum result with male to male. FACT, not opinion. And suicide is at an extremely high rate among such perverts when compared to the rest of society. This is not a hunch, rather anyone doing even a minute of research discovers these FACTS. Whether you like it or not, facts win over your pontificating.
“Gender studies” are crap designed by the LEFT to try to excuse away sexual perversion. There is no real study on “sexual orientation” - just LEFTIST crap trying to justify sexual perversion. Isn’t bestiality just another orientation?
“Fellow citizens” have historically caused damaged to others for zillions of reasons. But that doesn’t then justify sexually perverted behaviors and ideologies.
Two guys cant marry by the definition of that word/institution — historical definition for thousands of years and not just since queers won a right from corrupt judges to call their unions marriage. These people are attacked physically (wrongly) because they are seen for what they are — a danger to society as a whole, a corruption of human sexuality and morality in general, as well as being a rebellion against God. Who’s harmed? Ask the baker who didn’t want to violate God’s laws and his own conscience by specially making a “wedding cake” for perverts, or the florist who has the same problem; both are going hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt because your perverts demand they accept what they are of be drummed out of business. This hurts me because the same thing could happen to me and the perverts are getting LEFTIST judges behind them. 2% of society (stats research over decades coming up the same) are being allowed to tell the other 98% what to do with their lives.
Yours are the only claims not supported by reality, nor by God.
Not a bit of this is my opinion, rather real science shows human sexuality is only designed by God for opposite-sex relations. And real science shows that no one can change from one sex to another. You live in a perverted and delusional world. No rational person would give you and your opinions and beliefs about sexuality the time of day because rational people agree with biology and God.
Glenn... "Trabue sure likes comparing apples to oranges in his attempt to prove his case, i.e. his comparison of homosexual behavior to left-handedness.
Nowhere in the Bible does God say left-handedness is an abomination; He calls homosexual behavior an abomination worthy of death."
No. God literally doesn't. YOU INTERPRET some passages that way, but God literally NEVER calls "homosexual behavior an abomination worthy of death."
At the same time, God IS quoted in the Bible calling disrespectful children an crime worthy of death, and yet, we don't believe that. At least, rational people don't.
And God is quoted as calling injustice towards the poor an abomination.
And God is quoted as calling shrimp an abomination, and yet you probably disagree with God (you tell me).
The point being, God literally hasn't said what you think God said and just because things are listed as an abomination in the Bible doesn't mean we treat them as such. And there are other things called an abomination that we don't take serious enough (oppression of the poor, for instance).
The point remains: Just because YOU happen to think in YOUR head that God doesn't approve of any and all homosexual behavior doesn't mean anything to the rest of the world that doesn't agree with your religious traditions and biases. So why should we give a damn what you think?
Answer: We shouldn't. We have literally no reason to take you as anything but an oppressor and bigot.
Glenn... "There is nothing abnormal or unnatural about left-handedness. "
Being left handed is LITERALLY not in the norm. It is, then, "abnormal," or not normative. Like homosexuality. But BOTH homosexuality and left-handedness ARE natural, happening in the natural world. Regardless of your human traditions and bigoted hunches.
Just speaking factually.
Do you agree with that reality?
One last thing: You don't own God, no matter how hard you try to put your god in a tiny little Glenn-shaped box. The True God is not a tame God to give a damn about your human opinions and bigotry. Likewise, you don't own marriage. Just because YOU make claims doesn't mean a single thing to the rest of the world who doesn't share in your religious bigotry and human traditions.
Do you understand that?
Glenn... "We KNOW that God doesn't approve of homosexual behavior because he has stated as much in more than one place in Scripture,"
And yet, you can't point to a single place that supports your tiny-minded, petty little human bigotry. You read words then READ INTO THEM meanings that make you happy so you can continue to oppress, harm and kill.
But the True God is not your slave or pet.
First off, a reminder that my job reduces and limits my opportunities to respond as I would prefer, and thus most of my responses are rushed as well as limited in detail. Such is life.
"Are you two agreeing that there is no scientific basis to be opposed to homosexuality? And the only reason one would agree with you would be if they happened to agree with your particular religious opinions from your human standpoint?"
I don't think either of us are even hinting there's no scientific basis to oppose homosexuality. For my part, I've also provided a host of links over the years to confirm just that.
I can't account for all the reasons one might agree with me, be it religious, scientific, philosophical...whatever. But you seem mighty keen on conflating religious with scientific reasons, so as to mitigate the science behind our positions and make all opposition as if held by pagan tree worshipers. Again, you're intentionally lying when you do this. My reasons, as are Glenn's I'm sure...as well as so many, many others...include evidence from both...evidence you reject out of hand due to your passion for serving the world over God. You need to promote the lie there are no "experts" on our side of the divide, religious or scientific, so as to convince yourself your lies are truths. You promote the lie that consensus...assuming there actually is any...means the conversation is over, which is crappy science. "There's 'consensus'", you'll assert and thus we're wrong. Again. That's crappy science and only how lefties work...not honest people seeking truth.
"It is absolutely not NORMATIVE for two men to desire each other from a population point of view. But it IS absolutely natural for it to happen, as it always does/has."
Nor is it normal, but use any word you like and pervert it to suit your perverted agenda, and the truth remains. It's abnormal any way a normal, honest person can look at it. And if you want to pivot to "natural", the fact is it's true of every human urge, desire and compulsion because people are compelled to all manner of behaviors. But here, it's unnatural in the sense that it perverts the biology and the purpose of there being two sexes...procreation and the survival of the species. As such, it is plainly unnatural to act in a manner in direct conflict with the survival of the species. And no...it doesn't matter if the 3% of the population don't result in the entirety of mankind becoming extinct, so don't try to go there, too.
"On the other hand, being left handed is not normative (or "abnormal" to use that same nomenclature), but, SO WHAT? Something being normative does not make it bad."
As Glenn indicated, this is a sad and pathetic deception to pretend it equates to a choice. I've known left-handed people who were taught skills using their right hand. A few of them got good at it despite not using their dominant side. When they decided to use their dominant side, they were eventually better. Left-handedness is not a compulsion. Homosexual attraction is, just as is pedophilia, which by your "logic" is only not "normative" but "natural" for the pedophile. So if you're going to try to compare fruits (no pun intended), stick to the realm of sexuality, where better and more accurate comparisons can be made and discussed. But you won't because that only shows the corruption inherent in your position.
"Says the guy who JUST SAID that homosexuality is "abnormal" - not in the norm, the status of a minority of the population AS IF that made it wrong, somehow."
No, says the guy who responded to your fallacious appeal to numbers to support your perverted position. Indeed, my position is that homosexual behavior is wrong regardless of how many people engage in it. Numbers of practitioners is irrelevant to that truth.
"But the difference is murder causes harm whereas to gay folk marrying does not..."
This is absolutely not true, as science has clearly proven. Homosexual behavior is not a benign choice, morally or physically. Harm is inherent in the practice in ways it is not within the normal sexual practices of man/woman unions.
It's also not true that it harms no one else given the ramifications to the culture...quite apparent these days...from normalizing the practice and protecting it with unjust laws no one truly supported who were not connected to that perverse community. It is YOUR argument which is the failure regardless of how laws change to enable those who engage in the practice.
"And yet again, I GET that this is your irrational and unsupported hunch."
No. You need to believe it's an irrational and unsupported "hunch" despite my having provided all manner of support for my rational position over the years. I can't help you refuse to truly acknowledge what I've provided, but then it would be harder for you to lie about the issue and those who oppose your perversion.
"WHY would anyone give a damn what you don't approve of?"
Only those who truly seek truth and wish to be morally correct would. Why those like you don't give a damn is the result of your devotion to perversion and worldliness rather than the will of God and scientific truths and facts.
"And I GET that IN YOUR OWN LITTLE HEAD, that YOU THINK God doesn't approve. We disagree and think you're dangerously mistaken."
That's because you're morally bankrupt and don't care about the clearly revealed will of God on the subject (or many other subject, either, for that matter). You disagree and think me mistaken, but continually fail to provide any verse or passage which supports that intentional lie or your position.
"...we shouldn't heed your views based on your say so."
Good thing I've never suggested anyone believe me on my say so alone...if at all. No. But honest people heed God and scientific truth. If you were honest, you would, too. But you're not honest at all, and that's the reality all honest people recognize.
re: "Homosexuality is unhealthy..."
Don't tell me what you think. Again, WE DON'T GIVE A DAMN ABOUT YOUR UNINFORMED, IGNORANT OPINION. Cite some experts, some science, some data.
Glenn... "Real science, i.e., biology and physiology prove that homosexual behavior is dangerous to the practitioners. Diseases are rampant with such behavior, damage to the anus and rectum result with male to male. FACT, not opinion."
Don't tell me what you think. Again, WE DON'T GIVE A DAMN ABOUT YOUR UNINFORMED, IGNORANT OPINION. Cite some experts, some science, some data.
To head you off before you make stupid claims:
1. Unprotected sex with multiple partners CAN be unhealthy for gay or straight people.
THIS IS AN ARGUMENT IN FAVOR of committed marriage relationships, gay and straight.
2. Anal sex can cause damage if it happens too frequently in gay or straight people.
The reality is that anal sex doesn't happen much in gay or straight relationships. And nearly never in lesbian relationships because, of course it doesn't.
These are not a rational, science-based argument against homosexuality. They just aren't.
If that's all you have, you don't have anything more than your bigoted opinion, which leads us back to the question you two STILL dodge: WHERE IS THE DATA?
If you're just telling me, again, that you two are really, really, really, REAAALLLLLYYYY against homosexuals, we don't care about your hunches. Your opinions are just another ant-piss puddle in an ocean that doesn't care about them.
"Don't answer a fool according to his folly."
Trabue is demon-possesed - that's the only thing which can explain his abject denial of what God says about homosexual behavior in many places in scripture, and what biology, physiology, and even the medical professions say about the harm such behavior causes to the practitioners, let alone the social destruction caused by these perverts.
By the way, just because there are fewer left-handed people than right-handed people, that doesn't make them abnormal. There is not a specified "normal" for handedness in either the Bible or science.
And Trabue is unteachable about fake marriages and homosexual behavior in general because he refuses to acknowledge facts, snuffing them all off as "opinion."
Trabue is a demented, perverted, demon-possessed, deviant human being.
Glenn... "Trabue is a demented, perverted, demon-possessed, deviant human being."
The irony is that Glenn does not see how demented this makes him sound.
Marshal, Do you see how megalomaniacal and irrational and unstable Glenn sounds when he says that those who disagree with them on this issue are "demon possessed..."? Are these the sort of people you want to align and associate with?
Lord have mercy.
And we see that Glenn STILL can't answer any questions with data. Only insane claims of "demon-possession" and slander and name-calling.
Glenn... "just because there are fewer left-handed people than right-handed people, that doesn't make them abnormal. There is not a specified "normal" for handedness in either the Bible or science."
They are not normative, not in the norm. Literally. Same as LGBTQ folk. But NOT being in the norm - as even Glenn attests about Left handed people - is not the same as not being "normal" or natural. Of course, homosexuality and being transgender are normal and natural, they happen in the real world naturally.
And it's not a choice any more than Glenn chooses to be straight or a male (or is he only pretending?) It's just a real world, natural, observable reality, like being left-handed or right-handed.
Not being in the norm does not mean one is not normal.
And that I treat your literal opinions AS opinions is only rational and sane. It's the one who insists that their opinions can't be mistaken and that they speak for God on the point that one becomes irrational and unstable.
"Perverse," even, if one wants to point out the obvious.
SIDEBAR...because Dan will probably delete this comment posted to his most recent post:
"Do you recognize the rational (and indeed, biblical, for what it's worth) point being made there?"
I recognize you're dodging again.
"We don't know the serious consequences of sin as a general reality."
And yet again you're dodging the question. Scripture, indeed Jesus Christ, references consequences for sin. You pretend we don't or can't know what they are so that you don't have to contend with exactly what Scripture, indeed Jesus Christ Himself, teaches on the subject.
And it's not a question of the earthly reaction to an equal and opposite action. We're talking about the penalty of sin in the spiritual, life everlasting sense, so stop with the crap. If you want to dismiss Scripture or what you wish to pretend are no better than "human tradition", borrow a pair of testicles and provide an alternative to what Scripture is saying. Pretend, at least, that you actually have a better "interpretation" of what is plainly stated in Scripture and spell out what it is and how Scripture supports your contention.
"Also, it's permissible, you know, to have reasons other than Scripture to make a case."
No. It's not. Not when the discussion is purely around what is presented in Scripture. Your quote above is more evidence that Scripture has no true value to you...that you think it is irrelevant to one's faith in some dude named Jesus or God. You're a fraud and a coward who hasn't the strength of your laughable convictions.
"No. God literally doesn't. YOU INTERPRET some passages that way, but God literally NEVER calls "homosexual behavior an abomination worthy of death.""
Here we see Dan straight up lying...as in, "intentionally". We know this to be true because he's referenced the verse (Lev 20:13) purposely because of the consequence God attaches to the behavior when having confronted the truth about God's prohibition of homosexual behavior. With this verse, God reiterates the behavior as an abomination ("detestable" in my NIV)as He did in Lev 18:22 but adds the punishment of which it is worthy. There's no other way to interpret either verse without adding what the context itself doesn't provide anywhere with regard to that specific behavior.
"At the same time, God IS quoted in the Bible calling disrespectful children an crime worthy of death, and yet, we don't believe that. At least, rational people don't."
Why wouldn't you? "Rational" people understand a behavior may indeed still be worthy of death, without ever being inconsistent by never promoting death as a penalty for it. We're not obliged to prescribe that penalty for it, but that doesn't mean it isn't worthy of it in the eyes of God. If He said it, one who finds the rule objectionable needs to find another verse that counters it in order to say it is no longer worthy. Can you find such a verse? Of course you can't. No such verse exists. Fortunately, Christ died for those unruly kids. They won't lose their salvation if they accept Christ and nothing in the NT obligates us to follow the OT laws handed down to a specific people. Yet, the behavior is still wrong, it is still worthy of death it's so wrong, and homosexual behavior is still a forbidden abomination regardless of the context or scenario in which it takes place. No amount of LGBT activism, whining about being "marginalized", no amount of "progressive" "Christians" or corrupt judges or legislators can change that. All you can do is lead others to sin by preaching heresy and pretending Scripture doesn't mean what it says on the issue.
"And God is quoted as calling shrimp an abomination, and yet you probably disagree with God (you tell me)."
First, of all the instances where God attaches "abomination" to a behavior, there are two stark differences which lefties ignore in order to pretend God's prohibition against engaging in homosexual behavior is no longer a valid rule we're to follow. In some cases (and I'm not going to dig them all out), a behavior IS an abomination according to God. That is, HE asserts it's an abomination. In others, God wants us to regard the practice as an abomination. That is to say, there is nothing inherently wrong morally with eating shrimp or other shellfish, whereas there is with some behaviors such as homosexuality. This has to do with separating the tribes of Israel from all other people in their role as God's chosen.
In my very first ever blog post (or very shortly thereafter) I provided a rather exhaustive explanation for which Levitical rules still apply to Christians and why. To this day, you've never offered a counter argument to it, and your troll never even tried, either, preferring to attack the authors of the piece for not being scholarly enough or some shit.
"The point remains: Just because YOU happen to think in YOUR head that God doesn't approve of any and all homosexual behavior doesn't mean anything to the rest of the world that doesn't agree with your religious traditions and biases. So why should we give a damn what you think?"
The point remains: We don't think it's true God prohibits homosexual behavior in all it's forms and contexts. We know it's true because God says so by saying "thou shalt not" and because jokers like you have no legitimate way to get around that. Your lame crap about what Canaanites did in their religious practices are not anywhere specifically discussed in Scripture with regard to this behavior. But more to the point, it's certainly not about anyone's "religious traditions and 'biases'". It's about your corrupt nature and disregard for the will of God. To put it another way, we don't give a damn that you don't give a damn about what we think. But you should care just a little about what the God you laughingly claim to revere thinks and has said without ambiguity in Scripture.
"We have literally no reason to take you as anything but an oppressor and bigot."
Sure you do, but you and your kind are too dishonest for that. It takes a lefty to regard denying what's harmful to be oppressive and bigoted. Saves you the time and effort of having to defend your indefensible positions.
"One last thing: You don't own God, no matter how hard you try to put your god in a tiny little Glenn-shaped box."
That's funny. Try it this way: You don't own God, no matter how hard you try to redesign Him to fit your perversions and deviancy.
We don't put God in a box. We simply abide His clearly revealed will, whereas you pretend it's hard to understand and open to individual interpretation...which gives you license to pervert His Word. "We see you."
"Don't tell me what you think. Again, WE DON'T GIVE A DAMN ABOUT YOUR UNINFORMED, IGNORANT OPINION. Cite some experts, some science, some data."
In my case, I've provided. You now pretend it's never happened as if you expect us to believe you sincere in your pretense. Were I to do it yet again, you would surely posture in the same way in the future. So go look it up. It's likely right in the comments section of one of your posts humorously attempting to defend the indefensible in the days before you took to deleting that which you couldn't overcome. Otherwise, look in my past blog posts. But it's been done absolutely and exhaustively.
"The reality is that anal sex doesn't happen much in gay or straight relationships."
https://www.gaystarnews.com/article/how-do-men-and-women-prepare-to-bottom-for-anal-sex/
From the above:
13% have anal sex daily
39% of gay men have it a couple times a week
24% of gay men have it a couple times a month
5 in 6 gay men have it at least a few times a year
One in six has it less than once a year
Look at that! 76% of "gay" men have it at least a couple times a month! Looks like it's you who needs to learn the data, stats and science! Or you're just lying again.
"If you're just telling me, again, that you two are really, really, really, REAAALLLLLYYYY against homosexuals, we don't care about your hunches."
Frankly, I think I can speak for Glenn in saying we're far more opposed to you than we are to homosexuals in general. You claim to have "seriously and prayerfully" studied Scripture and thus you still enable behavior God calls an abomination. You're the type of Pharisee Christ opposed...one who should know better because of your "serious and prayerful" study, but promotes immorality nonetheless. This is where the "to those who are given much, much is expected" truly is applicable. You fail in this regard mightily.
"The irony is that Glenn does not see how demented this makes him sound."
Perhaps...if the context in which it appeared is not referenced in full. If it is, it makes him sound reasonable given your positions on these many topics, which are in conflict with Scriptural teaching.
"Marshal, Do you see how megalomaniacal and irrational and unstable Glenn sounds when he says that those who disagree with them on this issue are "demon possessed..."?"
I see how badly you need him to be regarded as such. But there has to be some reason your beliefs are so opposed to the clearly revealed word of God...even after being corrected so many times. Demon possession is as good a reason as any.
"Of course, homosexuality and being transgender are normal and natural, they happen in the real world naturally."
Of course that's a lie. But it seems as if you're trying to use the "queer animal" argument. That's pretty desperate, given animals can't reason any better than you can. Hey! Maybe that's it! Homosexuals are incapable of reason! Animals who seek to mate with others of the same sex don't realize they're doing that. It's clearly some form of defect and you know what happens when livestock acts that way? They become dinner. That's because it's abnormal to want to mate with a member of the same sex. Little kids recognize it, until they're corrupted by "progressive" "Christians" and other LGBT activists.
"And it's not a choice any more than Glenn chooses to be straight or a male (or is he only pretending?)"
But Glenn isn't abnormal. He has a wife. Yet, like most people, I've no doubt he struggles with urges of some kind which are connected to sinful behaviors. Urges for which he never asked, but he chooses to transcend them as best as he is able, because his reverence for God and His clearly revealed word actually mean something to him. One thing for sure, he's not the kind to pretend that being left-handed is a good argument in defense of sexual immorality.
"Not being in the norm does not mean one is not normal."
Yeah, it kinda does.
"And that I treat your literal opinions AS opinions is only rational and sane. It's the one who insists that their opinions can't be mistaken and that they speak for God on the point that one becomes irrational and unstable.
"Perverse," even, if one wants to point out the obvious."
There's nothing "perverse" about speaking truthfully about God's will as so clearly revealed in Scripture...especially when it's preceded by a very specific and unambiguous "thou shalt not". No honest person can be mistaken about what such a command means. Find one and ask.
"Opinion" is only an argument you can make when something is not as clear as those passages and verses we continue to debate. I don't need to have an opinion about "thou shalt not". "What do you think it means?" "You mean that 'thou shalt not' bit?" "Yeah." "Oh. It's obvious. It means 'Don't do it'. It can't mean anything else. I don't have to ponder it and come up with an opinion, because it's direct and to the point." Dan's dishonesty writ large.
So, you two are full on insane. Got it.
Yep. Demons inside me, boys, and they're coming to get you. So get ready to wet your pants.
Jesus have mercy.
Aww, did I hurt your feelings? I'm already wetting myself...from laughing at your response! But let's assume we are insane. It doesn't change the fact that you're a heretic, liar and a fake Christian who enables sin, corrupts others with your heresies, etc. Whether or not Jesus has mercy on you remains to be seen, but on your current path, I'd wager it unlikely. There's still time for you, though. Good luck.
Hurt my feelings? Is that what you think?
Would YOUR feelings be hurt if some random stranger accused you of being a lizard alien disguised as a human?
The claim is irrational and embarrassing for YOU two. I am always indifferent to insane claims from irrational humans.
"Irrational" is thinking your example is an intelligent response to my comment. It's not the accusation, it's one's ability to support it. To wonder how someone like you can be so wrong so often as well as keen to promote wild falsehoods about the faith, the suggestion of demonic influence is not at all far-fetched. What...do you think you need to be puking pea-soup in order for that to be a true possibility? I know you reject the miraculous... particularly when you think it serves your positions to do so...but there is such a thing as a spiritual realm. That is, if you truly want anyone to believe you're a Christian, you'd have to acknowledge that as a reality.
Irrational is also thinking your demands for evidence in support of our positions has never been brought forth in the past, as if this topic has never been discussed in the past exhaustively. The reality is we're still waiting for you to provide something in support of YOUR position which is beyond questioning. You've not even come close in all these years, settling for anything which does little more than simply repeat the lies of the activists you enable.
YOUR "indifference" is toward truth and facts, as well as the clearly revealed Word of God. "Irrational"? A cheap accusation when a convincing argument eludes you.
Marshal... "To wonder how someone like you can be so wrong so often as well as keen to promote wild falsehoods about the faith, the suggestion of demonic influence is not at all far-fetched."
That might be a rational thought... if you lived 1,000 years ago. There's no such thing as "demonic possession," Marshal. Belief in demons "possessing" people is less biblical and more a sign of mental illness.
But by all means, PRESENT YOUR "PROOF" - hard data of actual demonic possession. Then, why don't you present your "proof" of the lizard people from Mars taking over for people, or maybe pod people taking over people.
Go all in on the crazy/irrational/superstitious beliefs of a less reasonable time.
In the meantime, when you can't present EVEN ONE DOCUMENTED and PROVEN case of "demon possession," you'll understand if rational people don't believe in your fairy tales.
Of course, "there's no such thing as 'demon possession'" is just what one would expect a demon possessed person to say. Of course, this is just another distracting dodge by you to deflect from the truth regarding the abominations you promote, defend and enable.
At the same time...
https://www.cnn.com/2017/08/04/health/exorcism-doctor/index.html
The above I wasn't going to bother posting but for the words of a skeptic near the end. If his words reflect honest psychology, it would have to apply to the deluded who see themselves a members of the opposite sex...as if they really know what that would be like.
But there are clinical psychs who do believe and insist they participated in genuine exorcisms. Maybe you can get one.
file:///C:/Users/snooz/AppData/Local/Temp/The_Growing_Evidence_for_Demonic_Possess.pdf
There's more I could present, but you'd only crap on it because it makes your assurance look stupid. For a "Christian" to pretend certainty possession is impossible or never happens is ludicrous. For you it's typical, since you reject so much of the faith to accommodate your world-worshiping leanings. Christ drove out demons, so it happens. I don't much care which cases can be disproved or proved. I just think it arrogant that you can know what Satan or demons have in store. How would you know that exactly?
Don't answer. I'm not continuing with this conversation, as it's off topic and wildly so. You simply seem to think you can score points with it. You can't. That's another game not being played here. Stick to the topic or come up with a more imaginative dodge.
Such stories as Gallagher's are interesting reading. I'd love to see some peer review of the alleged speaking in Latin and levitation and a 90 pound woman throwing a 200 pound man across the room.
Data. Show me data.
In the meantime, people who believe in such stories seem to give a lot of credence to "demons" and "the devil..." moreso than the evidence supports for me. Stories are perhaps interesting, but data is compelling.
As I say for those who believe in magic healings... show me the evidence - hard data - of the man who re-grew his leg after a "healer" prayed for him or missing eyes magically replaced and I'm more than glad to accept it as real. But not without data.
"Peer review". That's funny.
Post a Comment