Sunday, 14 January 2018

RC IGNORANCE ABOUT DEEP GENDER ISSUES




Transgender issues next battle in culture wars
Letter from US religious leaders comes out calling transgender identity a 'false idea' that is 'deeply troubling'
Jan 13, 2018
by Heidi Schlumpf NATIONAL CATHOLIC REPORTER

In December, while the rest of the country was debating tax reform and net neutrality, four Catholic bishops and 16 other conservative religious leaders issued an "open letter" about transgender issues, firing a shot in what has become the next major culture war issue after same-sex marriage.
Not surprisingly, progressive Catholic groups — including New Ways Ministry, Call to Action and Dignity USA — denounced the document, while traditionalist Catholic websites and media supported it. Lost in the battle were transgender people themselves.
"It's like we're collateral damage in the culture war," said Hilary Howes, a Washington D.C.-area Catholic and founder of TransCatholic, a ministry to transgendered people. "It's painful to have people think of us in this way.
The open letter, titled "Created Male and Female," affirms the "inherent dignity" of all people, but warns that transgenderism is a "false idea" and "deeply troubling," and calls upon the government to support "policies that uphold the scientific fact of human biology."
Transgenderism "compels people to either go against reason — that is, to agree with something that is not true — or face ridicule, marginalization, and other forms of retaliation," said the Dec. 15 document.
The bishops and other signers warn that children are harmed when told they can change their sex, "sowing confusion and self-doubt."
"Parents deserve better guidance on these important decisions, and we urge our medical institutions to honor the basic medical principle of 'first, do no harm,' " the letter said.
It was signed by Archbishop Charles Chaput of Philadelphia, chair of the U.S. bishops' Committee on Laity, Marriage, Family Life and Youth; Bishop James Conley of Lincoln, Nebraska, chair of the Subcommittee for the Promotion and Defense of Marriage; Archbishop Joseph Kurtz of Louisville, Kentucky, chair of the Committee for Religious Liberty; and Bishop Joseph Bambera of Scranton, Pennsylvania, chair of the Committee on Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs. Pittsburgh Bishop David Zubik told the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette he also supported the letter, though he was not a signatory.
It was unclear if any transgender people were consulted in the drafting of the document. Repeated requests by NCR for comment from the United States Catholic Conference of Catholic Bishops, which released the statement, were declined. 
However, a U.S. bishops' conference press release states that the letter is the result of a meeting, held after the U.S. bishops' fall general assembly in November in Baltimore, during which ecumenical and interfaith partners discussed gender ideology with members of the conference's Subcommittee for the Promotion and Defense of Marriage.
The press release also mentions previous letters on "religious freedom" and "defense of marriage," with similar groups of ecumenical partners. 
The transgender letter was signed by the Anglican Church in North America, which broke away from the Episcopal Church in 2009 over LGBT issues, and by the more conservative Presbyterian Church in America, North American Lutheran Church, and the Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod.
It was not signed by those denominations' more liberal counterparts: the Episcopal Church, the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), and the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, which have taken stances in favor of LGBT rights.
The open letter also follows a February 2017 statement from Chaput and Bishop George Murry of Youngstown, Ohio, praising the Trump administration's repeal of a previous instruction from the U.S Departments of Justice and Education that prohibited discrimination of students based on gender identity, including transgender status. 
"I think this is the new front in the gender culture wars," said Mark Silk, professor of religion in public life at Trinity College in Hartford, Connecticut, noting that both liberal and conservative advocacy organizations may have been surprised at how quickly Americans — including American Catholics — came to largely accept same-sex marriage.
"I don't mean to be overly cynical, but I think both sides thought they were in for a much longer struggle … and then they needed a new issue to keep them raising money," Silk said. "Same-sex marriage is no longer where you can get anybody's attention."
Yet the public policy issues — focused on bathroom accommodations or military service, so far — seem relatively minor, and the number of people affected relatively small, Silk said. "I don't see how it really affects people in terms of institutional behavior," he said. "What's the threat?"
But it is precisely the social and legal advances made by transgender people that have conservative Catholic and other religious leaders concerned, said Francis DeBernardo, executive director of New Ways Ministry, which advocates for LGBT people.
"I think it's going to become a big issue," DeBernardo said. "In the religious world, and in the Catholic world in particular, gender is so embedded in so many doctrinal statements that any new understanding of gender is very threatening."
He noted critiques of transgender issues at a conference for bishops last year, sponsored by the Knights of Columbus and the National Catholic Bioethics Center, two organizations with a long track record of anti-LGBT efforts. 
New Ways Ministry now receives more requests for its programs about pastoral care for transgendered people than for ones about gay and lesbian issues, DeBernardo said.
"So many Catholic initiatives around the world are trying to understand transgender issues and people in sensitive and responsive ways," he said, "But [the open letter] just seems so insensitive and irresponsible."
response from Call to Action said the letter "represents an outdated and harmful understanding of gender that is rejected by the majority of faithful U.S. Catholics."
One study has found that a majority of Catholics (56 percent) opposes laws that require transgender people to use bathrooms that align with their sex assigned at birth, while another shows Catholics divided about whether it is possible for someone to be a gender different from their sex at birth.
Dignity USA called the letter "heinous and immensely damaging" in its response and urged the U.S. bishops' conference to remove it from its website.
New Ways Ministry also signed a reaction from the National Religious Leadership Council's LGBTQ Task Force, which urged the religious leaders who signed the document to reach out and connect with transgender people.
"If Catholic leaders wanted to, they could avail themselves of the immense amount of scientific, theological, and spiritual research which supports transgender people in their quest to live as their authentic selves by various forms of gender transition," DeBernardo said. "Even more simply, Catholic leaders should listen to the personal experiences of transgender Catholics."

Howes, who converted to Catholicism after she transitioned, agrees. "They have a very poor understanding of what life is really like for transgender people," she said. "If they would listen to transgender people, it would be a step forward."



PAT SAYS:
Right-wing and conservative Christians and believers have a great knack for showing the rest of us stupid they are when they try and talk about deeply complex scientific issues by glibly quoting - out of context - phrases from 5,000-year-old sources.
Medicine and science are only BEGINNING to come to grips with the very complexities of gender and gender-related issues. 
And then a few RELIGIOUS NUTS come out of the woodwork quoting simplistic throwaway phrases like "Male and female he created them".
Of course, as a Christian, I believe in the fact that God is the Creator of all that is.
But just like I would never be so stupid to try and claim I know the "mind" of the Creator - neither would I be so stupid as to think that I can even begin to grasp the diversity of all that Creation involves - and of how Creation and the Laws of Creation so often faces us with mind-blowing Contradictions and exceptions.
For a start, God is not just exclusively male and female - but a whole lot more besides - AND things that we can never imagine.
So why is it any surprise that Creation defies the male/female model when the Creator itself defies it!
I have worked with a number of people caught in the transgender "dilemma".
I have never sought to judge them - or to make them feel freaks - as this conservative church crowd thinks they are.
When faced with such a human dilemma I find myself struck silent by the vastness of the issue and the only desires I feel are to listen, to care, to love, to offer support etc.
Those of us who are not personally affected by this dilemma are most fortunate.
I can only begin to imagine the pain, the sense of loneliness, the isolation etc that such men and women face.
I totally reject what these US bigots are saying - and if there are sides to be taken I am on the side of the Transgendered.
The Jesus I have come to know is on their side too!

66 comments:

  1. As ever, your response is compassionate and humble, Bishop Pat. 'Humble', becsuse you accept that the gender binary, while comforting to those inflexibly like Archbishop Charles Chaput, is not the tidy model of humanity suggested by Scripture, especially by parts of the Old Testament.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nothing whatsoever “humble” about Pat Buckley’s response! That’s not surprising coming from you, Magna Carta, because you wouldn’t know humble if it bit you on the behind. Compassion too for that matter.

      This whole business has gone absolutely ridiculous and crazy. You can’t call boys “boys” anymore or girls “girls”.

      This entire craziness is the fad of a small number of aggressive and agenda led lobbyists who are looking to “offended”. There are indeed people who are suffering with identity issues but you attempt to rewrite Nature to suit every whim.

      The whole carryon is mad and it will end in tears and further multiple confusions.

      Delete
    2. Are you only able to approach Bishop Pat on your knees again today, Magna?

      Delete
    3. 12:16, let's say, then, that Bishop Pat's response is honest and realistic, because we truly don't know enough (you certainly don't) about human psycho-sexual development to pronounce dogmatically on gender binary. Linking it exclusively to biological sex (as poor, hapless and confused Pope Francis has done) clearly isn't sufficient...unless you happen to be a dyed-in-the-wool arch-idiot like Archbishop Charles Chaput of Philidelphia.

      Delete
    4. Ha ha! I think we know a few more "dyed-in-the-wool arch - idiots". What about yourself, dear apoplectic MC?

      Delete
  2. Well, that's life for you.... Some people are are never content unless they are pushing at the barriers of something. As soon as they achieve one thing, they look around to see what else they can turn upside down. It used to be "get same sex marriage" but that's a bit passe as a cause these days. (It's so "last year" don't ye know! So what's next?..Ah.. transgender, of course!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Doesn't Jesus refer to Sodom in the gospels. Do you think he was on the side of the sodomites? If we don't recognise the issues at the front line of the battle to destroy Jesus and his Church, we can easily find ourselves fighting against faith and reason. Did not Martin Luther fall into this trap in his day? Maybe I'm wrong.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I’m sure you are wrong in the way you draw up the battle lines.

      Your formula: Sodom = gay = anti Jesus.

      Here’s where it breaks down -

      To be anti Jesus is to choose to be so.
      Gay people do not choose to be gay.

      Delete
    2. Historians would see the idea of a pro-gay Jesus as insane. We must be willing to abandon Jesus if it means supporting human rights. It is odd how the Church is continually accused of homophobia and he gets a free pass.

      Delete
    3. It’s an anachronism to claim that Jesus held any position on the gay/anti-gay spectrum. They are modern concepts. The ancients didn’t have the notion of sexual orientation. They knew about actions and desiring.

      Your second claim is a non sequitur. It is false, ill-informed, off the mark and completely contrary to historical-Jesus research which shows him as a vindicator of the poor, oppressed, marginalised and those who were discriminated against.

      Delete
    4. 00:49, yes, you are wrong. But at least you had the humility to admit this possibility...unlike the many intellectual neanderthals who post here.

      The story of Sodom and Gomorrah, if it is historical narrative at all, (and we can't be certain that it is) had nothing whatever to do with homosexuality, but with communal insularity, selfishness and cruelty.

      The men of Sodom, according to the story, wanted to anal rape the two angels. Were ALL the men of Sodom 'bum bandits', then? Because this is what your misunderstanding inescapably suggests. Among these men were the two engaged to Lot's daughters.

      If you read the story more carefully, you'll learn that God intended to punish the city of Sodom BEFORE sending the angels there; his motive had nothing whatever to do with homosexual 'acts'. In fact, the prophet Ezekiel makes it clear that the motive, instead, was inhospitality.

      I can't decide whether the reason for ignoring all of this vital biblical information (of which Jesus would probably have been aware) among modern Christians is ignorance, or just homophobic prejudice.

      Delete
    5. 13:08, which historians would regard as insane the idea of a pro gay Jesus? I doubt whether historian Tom Holland would, since he has written critically of the Pauline take on homosexuality.

      Delete
    6. Was that Magna accusing other posters of being "intellectual neanderthals"!! His kindred spirits then.... Unbelievable...

      Delete
  4. Pat, using phrases like religious nuts, freaks, bigots etc...about conservative Catholic groups is counter productive. We all need clarity of thought, scientifically, morally, theologically, psychologically, medically, physiologically and psychiatrically to discuss the issue of transgenderism. We all have a right to express our view and that view should be treated with tolerance and respect. Your "Pat says" reactions are becoming like an "agony aunt" question/answer session, reminiscent of the "Dear Frankie" of old. At least she was honest and didn't give glib, dismissive answers or engage in ridiculing people. I do feel Pat you should not always go with the flow. A glance through some professional medical studies and other seriously researched work on transgender issues is a requisite on your part before advising others or partake in insulting name calling. There are eminent scholars of all faiths and none who have insights on these moral issues. Let's HEAR all of them, the radical and the conservative. You are as intolerant as the people and groups you condemn. They have legitimate concerns. Let's not fall for everything. Surely we stand for something if we are TRUE CATHOLICS, not pretend ones! So I hooe the debate on this issue will be marked by intelligent comments, respect and tolerance for one another. The dignity of people gets lost when nastiness takes over the blog. So, Pat, less of your intolerance, nastiness and "know all" mindset. More openness, respect and tolerance instead.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I accept your criticism.

      But it makes me very angry when people who call themselves Christians use God to attack vulnerable people who are already suffering greatly.

      I do not believe that Jesus agrees with this or wants it.

      "God wants spiritual fruits,
      Not religious nuts".

      Delete
    2. Has it ever dawned on you, Pat, that you might be a bit of a “religious nut” yourself?

      Delete
    3. If your are looking for respect, tolerance and alltherest then I guess your in the wrong blog site cause that would rarely happen here.

      +Pat didn’t offer you words of comfort yesterday as I was dealing with the same scenerio with my brother at the time. I say to you as I did him Love of Scrapper goes a long way, may they rest quitely.

      Delete
    4. 12:08 The Pharisees etc thought that Jesus was a bit of a religious nut too - mainly for associating with sinners!

      Delete
    5. I'm with you one hundred per cent poster @ 1.04
      Thank you for that measured, reasonable response and evidence of clear mental vision.
      I also think poster @ 00.07
      is accurate. I'm afraid he tells it very much as it really is.

      Delete
    6. Ha ha! I knew we'd be back to those very convenient 'Pharisees "again before long. So here we go..Happy new year. Nothing has changed..

      Delete
    7. Pat Buckley at 12:56 - you are not anything - even remotely - like Jesus.

      Delete
  5. Transgenderism, depersonalised as an 'issue' disembodies incarnate, personal, identity, contained within the crucible of a mystery of a person's search for who they are in THEMSELVES, not their place in the world or other people's idea of who they should be. Identity, considered as other people's idea of ME, is the objectification of MY existential pursuit for and the realisation of an understanding of MY own personhood. If you don't like it baby, find a bridge a get over it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 02.32: What mad confusion. Awful confusion. Why not be a tree, a crab, a stone? Human beings are distinct - male and female, not the manufactured notion of "ME" as I want "ME" to be. Less experimentation. God help all who are led down roads of utter confusion about their gender. Yes, God loves us as we are - as he created us, male and female, not what we can manufacture by science.

      Delete
    2. Correct comment @ 13.19..thank you
      (And God preserve us from the pretend "cognoscenti" who try to blind their betters in a confused fog of half-baked theories! You meet them, believe me...)

      Delete
    3. 13:19,, and what of intersex people? Where is the neat 'male and female' dichotomy here?

      Delete
    4. The gene test will tell if the person is male or not... The body might give reason for the need to do the test. Thankfully, this is very unusual and yes, it is problematic and distressing in some cases where there is mental trauma and denial. I am sympathetic certainly.

      Delete
  6. Saw an ITV programme on gender reassignment recently. It was on catch-up I think. Operation Transformation? Showed from the point of view of those involved family and a London clinic. Worth a watch. We have allot to learn. I suppose the Christian thing to do is be non judgemental accompany those on the journey and ask God's guidance as we go. The temptation is to project our judgement as if it was God's word.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Does anyone know if there is any magisterial teaching actually on this specific topic, and if so where it can be found?

    ReplyDelete
  8. The doctrine of naturalism is that there is nothing but blind force and blind force made us. Therefore if nature is against us we should go against it for it is nothing special. As a naturalist I believe there is nothing really unnatural. Nature makes mobile phones through us. The doctrine of original sin says that the universe broke with God and is now treated as if God was absent unless God is invited in. Whether there is a God or not it is clear that if having surgical intervention makes your life better or can do then go for it. Anybody who is in any way reluctant to accept transgenders is a bigot. The Church is a disgrace and it is better for all of us to become spiritual and unaffiliated and no longer Catholic than for one transgender to be driven to suicide over the faith.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I find that comment (@13.07) very one dimensional and disrespectful and dictatorial. I am not so easily impressed I'm afraid.

      Delete
    2. 14:03, the poster at 13:07 might find your comment 'very one dimensional' if it comes from a Faith perspective.

      Delete
    3. Of course! Every perspective that's not his own....

      Delete
  9. The Vatican's doctrinal congregation (January 2013), sent Church leaders a document concluding that "sex-change" procedures do not change a person's gender in the eyes of the Church. The document instructs bishops never to alter the sex listed in parish baptismal records and says Catholics who have undergone "sex-change" procedures are not eligible to marry, be ordained to the priesthood or enter religious life.

    The Vatican’s point is that the (transsexual) surgical operation is so
    superficial and external that it does not change the personality. If
    the person was male, he remains male. If she was female, she remains
    female," said the source.

    The Vatican text defines transsexualism as a psychic disorder of
    those whose genetic makeup and physical characteristics are
    unambiguously of one sex but who feel that they belong to the
    opposite sex. In some cases, the urge is so strong that the person
    undergoes a "sex-change" operation to acquire the opposite sex's
    external sexual organs. The new organs have no reproductive
    function.

    The document's conclusions close one area of controversial
    speculation that arose in Italy in the late 1980s when a priest
    publicly announced he had undergone a "sex-change" operation.

    Given church teaching that only males can be validly ordained
    priests, the question posed in newspapers at the time was whether a
    priest who undergoes a "sex-change" operation remains a priest --
    the answer is "yes" -- and whether a woman who undergoes the
    procedure can be ordained -- "no."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear God in Heaven! The ignorance by the Vatican on transgenderism is so profound it is almost sublime.

      'If the person was male, he remains male. If the person was female, she remains female'. And this APPARENT psycho-sexual dogmatism regardless of corrective, sex-reassignment surgery on any individual. Yes, 'IF' the person was male or female. But who (or what) decides this? The institutional Church? Given its history of Galileo syndrome, not a good idea. Relying on ancient texts, collectively the Bible, to make astronomical, or other sceintific, pronouncements is never a good idea. And one almost guaranteed to end with egg all over a proponent's face...like that of the institutional Church in the 17th century.

      This institution is nothing if not a slow learner, and it is trying yet again to find its way through an aspect of modernity (psycho-sexualism) using unreliable and uninformed texts as a guide. (Have a wet wipe handy, because more egg is coming this way.)

      Biological sex is not a totally reliable determinant of gender either. Some individuals have an extra chromosone; others are born without genitalia, or with genetalia that are indistinct.

      One thing the institutional Church has not done is meet with trans people to learn from them. But then, the Church already knows all that needs to be known on the subject, doesn't it? Just as it did with Galileo, and so many others.

      Delete
    2. No.. The medical profession can easily test the genes today establish the gender for sure, irregardless of how the person decides to present him/herself to the world at large.
      They can check the genes.
      (The rest of us can check the jeans too.... Might be a little quicker.)

      Delete
    3. '...irregardless of how the person DECIDES to present himself...'. Your perception of transgenderism as a personal choice ('a decision') smacks of the social prejudice that regards homosexuality as a chosen, rather than natural, orientation. Both are demonstrably wrong.

      Medical science today, especially the area of genetics and epigenetics, lacks a complete picture, and full understanding, of human psycho-sexualism. So your dogmatic post is immature.

      There is evidence that transgenderism among twins may have a genetic component and/or be influenced by exposure to hormones pre-natally. (See 'Gender Identity Disorder in Twins: A Review of the Case Report Literature' [2012], in "The Journal of Sexual Medicine")

      As for your remark about jeans, it suggests your mental age as around seventeen years.

      Delete
    4. Then you had just better be a little more careful and circumspect, Mr Magna, hadn't you?
      - - - and less free and easy with your abusive insults!
      To be knowingly abusive to a seventeen yr old(a minor under 18 yrs) online is a criminal offence. Don't tell me you didn't know that. ( have been advised to retain any responses and copy them onto this other device which I have had to learn to use.)
      Today is Monday 15/01/18.

      Delete
    5. Then you had just better be a little more careful and circumspect, Mr Magna, hadn't you?
      - - - and less free and easy with your abusive insults!
      To be knowingly abusive to a seventeen yr old(a minor under 18 yrs) online is a criminal offence. Don't tell me you didn't know that. ( have been advised to retain any responses and copy them onto this other device which I have had to learn to use.)
      Today is Monday 15/01/18.

      Delete
    6. I said 'mental age', you pathetic old fool. Not chronological age. Ha ha😅

      Delete
    7. There really is no limit to your genius and expertise, Magna Carta, is there? We stand in awe.

      No field of human knowledge exists that you cannot pronounce upon with utter precision.

      Incontrovertible are your declarations and analyses on science, genetics, medicine, psychology, theology, biblical studies, the list is endless.

      A veritable polymath art thou and wasted art thou on this blog.

      Surely, only the very highest echelons of the seats of academia befit thee?

      Blessed are we that thou shouldst vouchsafe unto to us such priceless pearls of thy wisdom and learning.

      Long, good sir, mayest thou prosper to deal favourably with thine humble servants. This be our humble prayer. May God bless us all. Amen.

      Delete
    8. Sorry Magna.. Your excuse won't wash.. If the poster has in your edtimation, a mental age of seventeen, then he is a "vulnerable adult"and therefore entitled to the same respect as a minor. But you don't KNOW his/her age. If I were you I would keep a civil tongue in my head and desist from addressing any other poster as a "pathetic old fool" which you did at 22.49
      (This is 15/01 /18)
      Cc

      Delete
    9. Magna, you cannot be abusive and address a vulnerable adult as a "pathetic old fool"
      Shame on you. That is disgraceful and for all you know, he/she might be under 18 yrs.

      Delete
  10. Nowafays we call people bigots, pharisees, racists etc.. when they don't accept the fullness of a liberal agenda. Not everything "liberal" is necessarily good or appropriate for humanity, morally, ethically, socially or spiritually.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nor is everything conservative 'necessarily good...'

      Delete
    2. Like Maggie Thatcher for example?

      Delete
    3. True Magna at 18.09 but now the new liberal is the new dogma and we must all bow before it. The new liberal is the new stranglehold on thought and free speech and we must all conform or be labelled a bigot, a dinosaur, a racist, backwards etc....

      Delete
    4. 20.13. Mrs. Thatcher was a great Prime Minister. Great.

      Delete
    5. Try telling that to the impoverished youngster in the poorest parts of West Belfast. I still remember our reaction of disbelief as teachers when Thatcher cancelled for good their pitiful little allowance of a small bottle of school milk. Millions wasted on arms and she did that.....

      Delete
    6. For what you call 'liberal' read 'truth'. At least sometimes.

      Delete
  11. 16:08 January 2013! The month before Benedict XVI resigned.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Just heard fr gregory cormican from d&c has passed away . Former pp st malachy's coleraine . He is and will be sadly missed by many in coleraine . The parish went to the dogs without him

    ReplyDelete
  13. It would be very difficult to decide what category of species Magna belongs to after his outpourings today. The confusion about our natural identity given to us grows more deeply. So now we can put aside all we know about human nature and decide to be what we want to be. How the hell did we arrive at this conclusion? Just wondering now what I may have been in a former life! A monkey.... I'm confused. Maggie, come to my rescue..... Can't imagine who or what to be......help.... male/female/man/woman/trans/
    gay/lesbian/feminine/masculine/....What am I! Who am I.....Maggie, help me...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sorry, but I can't put right a clear case of incorrigible idiocy.😆

      Delete
    2. Incorrigible idiocy sums up many of your contributions Magna. You describe yourself without realising it! But you're so blind to notice your own flawed nature. You display little pisitivity or encouragement to others. Respect for others is alien to you.

      Delete
    3. What a wonderful comment at 19.09. So true, bit tongue in cheek but haven't laughed as much for a long time and then comes Magna at 20.37!!! Tears in my eyes...he's offended.

      Delete
    4. MC - so you are a medical practitioner and a theologian and a psychiatrist apparently. I stand in profound admiration of your Googling and copy and pasting skills. (How much do you charge for wallpapering a lounge.?) How you fit it all in when you seem to be on here all the time is beyond me unless, unless err.. you have angelic powers - ah that's it.

      Delete
  14. Somebody is saying to me here that the answer is in your jeans. Apparently that's what they have to check if you're not sure....

    ReplyDelete
  15. The Jewish rabbinical commentary on Genesis known as the 'Midrash' states that God sent the deluge because of the legalization of same sex marriages and bestiality. The so called progressive West likes to think it is so avant garde. My foot! God will not be mocked much longer. Mankind shall undergo a massive chastisement unless people repent of this present madness.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You need a drink, 21:43. A stiff one.

      May I join you? I promise I'll listen to you as you witter on maniacally.

      Delete
  16. There are MILLIONS of starving children in the world, who cares if a guy who wants to be a girl can't use the girls' toilet. Let's get some priorities sorted out for goodness' sake. I recently interviewed a young woman who had been to Africa with a Charity. I enquired about the specifics and she said that they had been distributing sanitary towels in rural areas where they could not be afforded/obtained so that menstruating girls could attend school rather than stay at home. Apparently, they use LEAVES which don't do the job. I asked how many girls were affected and she said that the charity estimated that there were millions of girls whose education was affected. Forget the sexually confused, the press and the professional campaigners and politicians have got their backs and will shed their crocodile tears (as though they care). Concern yourself with life and death matter first.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That is just what transgenderism is for many people, a life or death matter.

      Have you any idea of the suicide rate for transgender teens? Do you even care?

      Today, on this blog, we are debating transgenderism. It does not mean that we are indifferent to the plight of those girls in Africa, or of girls elsewhere.

      Why must concern for one group of human beings spell indifference to others in such petulant minds as yours?

      Delete
    2. According to Pat in an earlier blog the incidence of suicide amongst 'transgender' teenagers accounted for the whole of the teenage suicides in Ireland as I pointe out to him and to which he did not reply. It's a whole other 'new thing' and they will never end. I have never, to my knowledge, met a transgender person in my life and have never known anyone so afflicted. You are about the most unkind person in the world to strangers about whose motives and problems you know nothing, on this blog, but I am sure that you make exceptions but only for those confused about their sex. You are an idiot and most of us know it.

      Delete
  17. I suppose today blog has just been another day off for Gaynooth.

    ReplyDelete