Head of LGBTQ Dems of Maryland busted going after a 14-year-old.

[otto105]

Anyone who messes with children.... like Biden...

The convict admitted walking thru Ms. Teen America dressing rooms while they were changing, would that count for going to hell too?

 

[otto105]

He wouldn't be allowed on the grounds at my church, shame on anyone who still let's him preach@! Got a link for that, so I can start the process of shaming that church?

Megachurch pastor and ex-Trump adviser admits child sexual abuse | Texas | The Guardian

 

[SeaMajor7]

Again, try to explain how you’re using Marxism in your post.

You don't get it, do you? These hive-minded zombies want to destroy society so they can reform into their dystopian nightmare. They play the long game as this is nothing new.
This goes for feminism as well.Have you noticed the state of dating for young people these days????

"The situation is now normalized."
-- Marxist subversives

Wake the FUCK up, stupid.

 

[otto105]

You don't get it, do you? These hive-minded zombies want to destroy society so they can reform into their dystopian nightmare. They play the long game as this is nothing new.
This goes for feminism as well.Have you noticed the state of dating for young people these days????

"Tbe situation is now normalized."
-- Marxist subversives

Wake the FUCK up, stupid.

WTF are whining about.

Karl Marx wrote extensively in regard to ownership of production. His economic theories aren’t even practiced in Russia where you think they are.

But you’re projecting quite nicely what convict maga supporters are currently engaged in.

 

[SeaMajor7]

WTF are whining about.

Karl Marx wrote extensively in regard to ownership of production. His economic theories aren’t even practiced in Russia where you think they are.

But you’re projecting quite nicely what convict maga supporters are currently engaged in.

You don't know what you're talking about, and you are blind.

 

[marvin martian]

Why are you making their victims birth that child?

There's no child resulting from a gay male pedo raping a little boy, which is what your fellow DemoKKKrat was attempting to do (and you're defending).

 

[WEATHER53]

Now that they have gone to bat for child molestation I imagine they will call for jailing of anyone who denounces them.
All internet sites are monitored so here may be a trap to see who is an advocate and who denounces.
I denounce. Bring on your rebuttals perverts

 

[WEATHER53]

And another leftist child predator protector chimes in. Tribalism at its finest.

I thought endorsing child molestation got you bounced from here??

 

[Dogmaphobe]

I thought endorsing child molestation got you bounced from here??

No, they get protected.

There was a known pedo who called himself Delta4Embassy 10 years ago, and they punished people left and right for being outraged by him.

It was only when their support for him became so obvious that they started to worry that they may get in trouble for it and took any action.

Pedos are more than welcome here, until they become such a liability that they can be protected no longer.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

And another leftist child predator protector chimes in. Tribalism at its finest.

Too bad Bob Blaylock is no longer here to contribute to the discussion. His wife was sexually abused by her father and the pedo supporters used that against him.

I know of 4 posters who have either been molested or are very close to a victim of it, and all you people do is to try to make them a pariah here.

I am glad you are speaking out against it. You are the first from what I can tell. As long as the status quo here remains what it has always been, however, then you are just speaking hypotheticals.

 

[otto105]

No, they get protected.

There was a known pedo who called himself Delta4Embassy 10 years ago, and they punished people left and right for being outraged by him.

It was only when their support for him became so obvious that they started to worry that they may get in trouble for it and took any action.

Pedos are more than welcome here, until they become such a liability that they can be protected no longer.

Pedos aren’t on this site trolling your old white asses fuckups.

Your just gaslighting with anger.

 

[WEATHER53]

I got suspended with the reason stipulated that I indicated in a response to a poster that he was a pedo
So, what’s up and what has changed?????

 

[Stryder50]

Your chosen god. Didn’t he make them that way?

If it’s basic biology, why are you fighting it?

Question was regard YOUR "chosen god".
Clearly you are clueless on my "chosen god".

Illness and disease are also "basic biology". That doesn't prevent most of us from treating and/or cure the illness~disorder.

Transgenderism as a choice for expression or sexual active may be a "right", but it doesn't mandate special laws, treatment, or taxpayer funding.

Transgenderism as biological misfire~disorder could warrant treatment and cure if the patient so desires.

As for toilet usage, sports,etc.; exterior plumbing applies, regardless of the mental disorder~derangement.

 

[Stryder50]

Pedos aren’t on this site trolling your old white asses fuckups.

Your just gaslighting with anger.

Check your mirror 'Pete'.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Pedos aren’t on this site trolling your old white asses fuckups.

Your just gaslighting with anger.

You think pedophilia is a laughing matter.

 

[otto105]

You think pedophilia is a laughing matter.

Hilarious

Just like that.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Stop generalizing

 

[Curried Goats]

As I've pointed out, surgical and chemical intervention in a child's normal development is not necessarily a good thing.

Not necessarily a bad thing either. Puberty blockers and breast surgery have been performed for decades without controversy on minors when those puberty blockers are given to children going through puberty at too early an age or when young girl develops overly large breats. I knew a girl in high-school who had breast surgery to reduce the size of breasts. No one freaked the fuck out.

You're making my point. I believe in 100 years we will understand far more how the brain functions than we do now, and very likely will view what we're currently doing as abhorrent.

I don't give a shit about your pretend psychic powers. I don't care if you threw chicken bones into a bowl and now can tell me the future. I care about what you can prove, today, with logic and reason.

It's in the terminology. We're told that men can become women, full stop. Do you agree with that statement? I do NOT believe men can become women. I believe they can FEEL like they are not comfortable being male and may BELIEVE that they want to be what is considered female, but I don't believe they really know what it's like to actually be a human female.

The terminology separates sex from gender. When we're talking about gender all we're talking about is feelings. Your biological characteristics determine sex. A person can not change their chromosomes. They can change their gender.

Therefore, I do not believe a homosexual man can become a heterosexual woman, but that conclusion is inevitable for someone who insists a man can actually become a real woman with no qualifications. IOW, put "trans" before "woman" and you have a valid description. Drop it, and you have to deal with the issue I've raised.

What issue did you just raise other than your ignorance about the difference between sex and gender?

What Do We Mean By Sex and Gender?

No, you tell me flat out, can a man really become an actual woman, no qualifications needed?

Me and Yale school of medicine tried exclaiming that to you above. It could just be that you're too stupid to understand the difference.

I believe a real woman is one who has the biological cellular makeup that determines she is a female of the human species. There are a few who carry mutations of that DNA makeup, but we're not talking about those.

The DNA that makes up you and your sexuality is also a mutation. We all evolved from single cell organisms who reproduced asexually through cell division. The only difference between the mutation for opposite sexual attraction and homosexual attraction is the frequency which it is found.

We're talking about a person with the XX chromosomes. That is a real woman. They come in all shapes and sizes, some appear more feminine than others, but they all have those chromosomes.

And do you know why men occasionally pick up trans women? It's because no one knows what chromosomes anyone else has. Sometimes people don't know what chromosomes they have. You aren't attracted to chromosomes. You are attracted to people who present a certain way. There are cases of people not learning until much later in life that they have different chromosomes than they initially thought.

I rely on biological science to tell me what is male and what is female. On what do you rely, and is your belief a better reflection of reality? Why?

What science? I linked to Yale School of Medicine. Why don't you give me the link to the place where you get your understanding from?

 

[Frankenstein]

Megachurch pastor and ex-Trump adviser admits child sexual abuse | Texas | The Guardian

Ok, he confessed, and repented,

The convict admitted walking thru Ms. Teen America dressing rooms while they were changing, would that count for going to hell too?

and should not be allowed around Children!

 

[LibertyKid]

What Do We Mean By Sex and Gender?

Let's talk about this "Journal/Article":

At Women’s Health Research at Yale, we are committed to advancing the health of a diverse society. We do this in large measure by studying the health of women and the similarities and differences in health outcomes between and among women and men. As we pursue our work, it is particularly important to use language that captures the different concepts of sex and gender so that our science and our findings can be more precise and better serve everyone.

From the onset, one can clearly read that this article is to server a "narrative" and conform to social pressures.

What do we mean by sex and gender? Aren’t these terms interchangeable? Perhaps at some point in time they were used as synonyms, but this is no longer true in science.

What do they mean by "Perhaps"? Yes, sex and gender, for 1000s of years has been scientifically synonymous. If you were a born male, you were "Male". If you were born Female you were "Female". Read the language being used. Data forms facts. Now this article is going to try to explain why those facts have changed.

In 2001, a committee convened by the Institute of Medicine (IOM), a nonprofit think tank that took on issues of importance to the national health, addressed the question of whether it mattered to study the biology of women as well as men.

The IOM, now embedded within the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM), concluded there was more than sufficient evidence that, beyond reproductive biology, there were major differences in the biology of women and men that greatly affected their health and influenced treatment and prevention strategies.

Well, no shit. The last two sentences prove nothing and only reinforce historically known medicine. That's why we have doctors that specialize in female medicine and health.

Importantly, the committee emphasized that neither the health of women nor men is simply a product of biology but is also influenced by sociocultural and psychological experience. To differentiate between these broad areas of investigation, the members created working definitions of “sex” — when referring to biology — and “gender” — when referring to self-representation influenced by social, cultural, and personal experience.

It's important to note "Referring to self-representation influenced by social, cultural and personal experience". Yale is absolutely suggesting that a person can change how they want to represent their "gender" based on social influences. That being "trans" can be nothing more than someone want to "fit in" or find a social group they want to belong to. That some "trans" are trans not because of a actual physiological or mental wiring, but rather, peer pressure or the idea of belonging to something.

The committee advised that scientists use these definitions in the following ways:

• In the study of human subjects, the term sex should be used as a classification, generally as male or female, according to the reproductive organs and functions that derive from the chromosomal complement [generally XX for female and XY for male].
• In the study of human subjects, the term gender should be used to refer to a person's self-representation as male or female, or how that person is responded to by social institutions on the basis of the individual's gender presentation.
• In most studies of nonhuman animals, the term sex should be used.

More social pressure to conform to an extremely small percent of the entire population. The differentiation should be based on the type of care. If I'm seeing a doctor for physical ailments, my sex matters. If I'm seeing a doctor about a mental issue concerning gender or gender dysphoria, than I can see "gender" discussion and terminology matter. The type of medicine is factor here.

These working definitions were a good start in recognizing the value of studying sex and gender and their interactions, yet they were always meant to evolve. Now, we are learning more about ourselves and so must adapt our terminology to be inclusive, respectful, and more accurate.

Again, the language is conformance. I think there is a good discussion that can be had on the phrase "always meant to evolve". And, what exactly are we learning about ourselves. That some people want to represent their "gender" how they please. Okay, but that doesn't change the medical and biological facts about that human being. The article already stated that societal influences can affect someones ideology about how they want to represent. What does that have to do with actual biology and medicine?

For example, while most people are born biologically female or male, rare biological syndromes can result in genital ambiguity. Or a resistance to a sex hormone can result in traits typical of the opposite biological sex.

Intersex is a very rare and is NOT supportive or evidence of the trans ideology narrative. I'm not even sure why this is present in this article.

Moreover, while an individual’s internal sense of gender can be female or male, some people identify as nonbinary — neither female nor male. Other individuals can identify as a gender that is the same as (cisgender) or different from (transgender) the one assigned at birth. These terms are separate from an individual’s sexual orientation, which describes a person’s emotional, romantic and/or physical attachments (such as straight, lesbian, gay, asexual, bisexual, and more).

In science, as our understanding grows, so must the precision of our language in communicating what we know.

This article/journal really is nothing more than a liberal university conforming to social pressures. Nothing, and I mean nothing stated in this article is new. Everything stated in this article has been stated by the trans community ad nauseam.

In summary, this article proves nothing. But it does support that the trans community, can be made up of people who are doing nothing more than making a decision based on social and cultural influences. Some are making a choice, despite their actual biological make up or wiring.