Colorado Governor Bill Ritter’s signing of a transgender anti-discrimination bill points up the lunacy that ensues in a world without design (see here).
Comments
So it’s a sacred story because it presents morals . . .Whoa, I’m dizzy.
Don't be. Read it slow and think it through.
Darwinism, which provides an unprovable explanation as to how the creatures in the world came to be in their present forms, is not a scared story because it present morals. It's a sacred story because it can't be questioned.tribune7
June 6, 2008
June
06
Jun
6
06
2008
02:27 PM
2
02
27
PM
PDT
Just like how the big band theory presents the moral law that we must blow things up as much as we can, of course.
Everyone knows the big band theory was toppled by Diz and Bird in the late 1940s.pubdef
June 6, 2008
June
06
Jun
6
06
2008
02:18 PM
2
02
18
PM
PDT
OK, tribune7, let me get this straight. You characterize Darwinism as "a sacred story" by linking to this language:
A myth is a sacred narrative in the sense that it contributes to systems of thought and values, and that people attach religious or spiritual significance to it.
And then, you say
Like all such stories of course it presents morals.
So it's a sacred story because it presents morals, and like all such stories, it presents morals.
Whoa, I'm dizzy.pubdef
June 6, 2008
June
06
Jun
6
06
2008
02:15 PM
2
02
15
PM
PDT
Just like how the big band theory presents the moral law that we must blow things up as much as we can, of course.
76 trombones, baby :-)tribune7
June 6, 2008
June
06
Jun
6
06
2008
02:10 PM
2
02
10
PM
PDT
"Darwinism — the claim that all biodiversity comes from a combination of random forces and natural laws — is a sacred story used to describe how the creatures in the world came to be in their present forms
Like all such stories of course it presents morals."
Just like how the big band theory presents the moral law that we must blow things up as much as we can, of course. ;)
--fdsa out.fdsa
June 6, 2008
June
06
Jun
6
06
2008
02:05 PM
2
02
05
PM
PDT
Duncan (10) said:
"Other people’s transgender issues don’t affect the rest of us one jot – it’s really none of our business.
I just told you that NY State tax dollars go toward funding sex changes.
Take a look at this story:
http://www.9news.com/news/article.aspx?storyid=85989
The article states:
"[Kim] Pearson says children as young as 5 years old are realizing their true gender identity and her group wants to help parents who may be resisting the acceptance of this. "
Again, transgendered activists don't mind their own business. Homosexuals used to say the same thing, that you should be able to do what you want as long as it doesn't affect others (keep it in the bedroom)...Well, if you apply that philosophy to the societal level, you are left realizing that its impossible (just imagine everyone doing their own thing not affecting anyone else).
The result has been that in some Massachusetts school districts, "Heather has Two Mommys" is required reading in kindergarten.
What's interesting is that the book itself is lying, Heather had a Mommy and a Daddy, but her Mommy probably didn't like her Daddy any more and decided to like another woman instead. The book never states that Heather has a biological father.
Take a look at this story:
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2007/jan/07012902.html "The doctors acknowledged that it is extremely difficult to distinguish a “genuine” transsexual personality from a gender identity crisis deemed temporary"
One doctor in the article, Dr. Paul McHugh, University Distinguished Service Professor of Psychiatry at Johns Hopkins University would agree with Tribune7 and say that its more psychological then physical.RRE
June 6, 2008
June
06
Jun
6
06
2008
02:02 PM
2
02
02
PM
PDT
“Darwinism” (MET, RM+NS, the modern synthesis, whatever you want to call it) is a theory about the facts of the physical world. Why should it have “morals?”
Darwinism -- the claim that all biodiversity comes from a combination of random forces and natural laws -- is a sacred story used to describe how the creatures in the world came to be in their present forms
Like all such stories of course it presents morals.
ID, OTOH, is just the mere application of tested standards to phenomena and describing the results.tribune7
June 6, 2008
June
06
Jun
6
06
2008
01:43 PM
1
01
43
PM
PDT
Still nobody in the comments explains what this has to do with ID. It couldn't be *gasp* the 'G' word, could it? Or *double gasp* the 'C' word?
I thought that ID doesn't make any claims about the designer. It makes little sense to say that thinking in terms of design would "fix" this "problem".fdsa
June 6, 2008
June
06
Jun
6
06
2008
01:17 PM
1
01
17
PM
PDT
tribune7:
Of course, that’s conceding that Darwinism is worldview without morals.
"Darwinism" (MET, RM+NS, the modern synthesis, whatever you want to call it) is a theory about the facts of the physical world. Why should it have "morals?" If it is a good explanation of reality (grant me this for the sake of argument), but its implications undermine your idea of "morality," would you deny reality in order to preserve morality?
Meanwhile, I doubt that the pretense that ID is scientific, and not theological, could survive any coherent explanation of what "the lunacy that ensues in a world without design" means.pubdef
June 6, 2008
June
06
Jun
6
06
2008
01:09 PM
1
01
09
PM
PDT
It’s identifying the fact that we’re not the passive recipients of someone else’s morals, delivered to us on a plate. . . .It’s the difference between the USSR and the USA.
IOW, We reject any morality based on extra-human and extra-class concepts. :-)
Are these things really the basis of your objection to gender reassignment?
You brought up hermaphrodites. I'm I objecting to the use of surgery to resolve issues relating to hermaphrodites? No. I'm objecting to the use of permanent procedures to resolve psychological -- not physical -- issues.tribune7
June 6, 2008
June
06
Jun
6
06
2008
11:19 AM
11
11
19
AM
PDT
tribune (16) “Of course, that’s conceding that Darwinism is a worldview without morals”. No, it’s not. It’s identifying the fact that we’re not the passive recipients of someone else’s morals, delivered to us on a plate. Rather, we decide for ourselves, collectively and individually, what they are. Much more intoxicating, responsible, onerous and rewarding. It’s the difference between the USSR and the USA.
Re: hermaphrodites – indeed we weren’t talking about hermaphrodites, but we could, couldn’t we?
Re: transgender – well, I must confess I am now going to be presumptuous, but I think you’re being disingenuous here. Yes, surgery is a significant procedure. Yes, life isn’t and shouldn’t be nothing but a breeze. Yes, sometimes we can benefit from facing, and perhaps overcoming, difficulties. Are these things really the basis of your objection to gender reassignment?duncan
June 6, 2008
June
06
Jun
6
06
2008
10:11 AM
10
10
11
AM
PDT
Patrick (17) Yes, of course – I wasn’t being critical, just curious. Also, I hadn’t noticed the ‘culture’ tag, but it does say “…. the lunacy that ensues in a world without design”.duncan
June 6, 2008
June
06
Jun
6
06
2008
09:48 AM
9
09
48
AM
PDT
Also - I still don’t get the ID issue??
It's Bill's blog and he can post whatever he wants. Also, notice it's posted under "culture".Patrick
June 6, 2008
June
06
Jun
6
06
2008
09:31 AM
9
09
31
AM
PDT
Perhaps I’ve misunderstood Darwinism. I thought there was no purpose. Species that evolve characteristics that give them an advantage flourish. Those that don’t, or that fail to adapt to changes in their environment, don’t.
I guess that's another way of looking at it. Let them die out so to speak. Of course, that's conceding that Darwinism is worldview without morals.
Do you disapprove of all invasive surgery?
Invasive surgery is best considered a last resort and should never be used to address psychological issues.
I would consider it presumptuous of me to know better than they what the source of their misery is.
You think someone experiencing pain is better able to understand the source of their pain than an outside observer? Or do you accept the myth that we can have a pain-free existence and that there is no point to suffering and struggle?
Do you not think the fact that their stories tend to be almost identical – that from their earliest consciousness they understood within themselves that the gender of their personality / psyche was at odds with their physical appearance – suggests that there is something entirely valid going on?
I do think there are valid psychological issues -- which by the way are different than moral ones. My objection is giving license to self-mutilation, remember.
What is your response to the fact that hermaphrodites exist?
That you are not talking about hermaphrodites.tribune7
June 6, 2008
June
06
Jun
6
06
2008
09:27 AM
9
09
27
AM
PDT
I also fail to see what this has to do with ID - indeed, while it could be argued that transgenderism is a mark against survival-of-the-fittest Darwinian evolution, it seems to me that this just shows that the designer made some of us transexual.
After all, as duncan describes, the feeling of being transgendered is more spiritual than physical. If our spirit is separate from our physical body, it seems to me very likely that a male spirit could be placed in a female body. Since there is no way for humans to move a spirit, surgery is the best option.Venus Mousetrap
June 6, 2008
June
06
Jun
6
06
2008
09:10 AM
9
09
10
AM
PDT
tribune7
Perhaps I’ve misunderstood Darwinism. I thought there was no purpose. Species that evolve characteristics that give them an advantage flourish. Those that don’t, or that fail to adapt to changes in their environment, don’t. Within a species, the performance of an individual to the success of the species as a whole is irrelevant (lots of species where less than 50% of offspring survive to adulthood operate perfectly successfully, for example). An individual can therefore deviate from Darwinian success, but not from Darwinian purpose.
Self-mutilation? I’m sure they would consider it self-improvement. Do you disapprove of all invasive surgery?
I would consider it presumptuous of me to know better than they what the source of their misery is. Do you not think the fact that their stories tend to be almost identical – that from their earliest consciousness they understood within themselves that the gender of their personality / psyche was at odds with their physical appearance – suggests that there is something entirely valid going on?
What is your response to the fact that hermaphrodites exist?duncan
June 6, 2008
June
06
Jun
6
06
2008
08:48 AM
8
08
48
AM
PDT
Sorry I missed a tag:
duncan — Why do you consider wanting to change sex unhealthy and deviant?
If you are a Darwinian the answer would be that purpose of our existence is to survive until procreation and any premeditated effort not to is a self-evident deviancy.
If you are, however, someone who subscribes to the idea that we should love one’s neighbor you would understand that one should not encourage self-mutilation.
Isn’t it deviant of the rest of us to seek to prohibit someone liberating themselves from a state of perpetual misery?
It is deviant to fail to see that having the sexual organ with which you are born is not the cause of misery. The problem is a psychological one, not a physical one and it does not require a physical solution.tribune7
June 6, 2008
June
06
Jun
6
06
2008
08:03 AM
8
08
03
AM
PDT
duncan -- Why do you consider wanting to change sex unhealthy and deviant?
If you are a Darwinian the answer would be that purpose of our existence is to survive until procreation and any premeditated effort not to is a self-evident deviancy.
If you are, however, someone who subscribes to the idea that we should love one's neighbor you would understand that one should not encourage self-mutilation.
Isn’t it deviant of the rest of us to seek to prohibit someone liberating themselves from a state of perpetual misery?
It is deviant to fail to see that having the sexual organ with which you are born is not the cause of misery. The problem is a psychological one, not a physical one and it does not require a physical solution.tribune7
June 6, 2008
June
06
Jun
6
06
2008
07:58 AM
7
07
58
AM
PDT
Also - I still don't get the ID issue??duncan
June 6, 2008
June
06
Jun
6
06
2008
04:43 AM
4
04
43
AM
PDT
Thanks for the responses
SteveB (7) – Yes, of course there are limits. Freedom is not the same as license. The basic principle I subscribe to (a very old concept) is that anyone can do whatever they want, unless there’s good reason why they shouldn’t. The disapproval of others is generally not good reason. Other people’s transgender issues don’t affect the rest of us one jot – it’s really none of our business.
With regard to psychological compulsion – the concept of being ‘criminally insane’ is long established.
tribune7 (8) – Your comparisons are interesting. Why do you consider wanting to change sex unhealthy and deviant? Isn’t it deviant of the rest of us to seek to prohibit someone liberating themselves from a state of perpetual misery?
I don’t doubt the case you mention may have happened. But some priests / police officers / tax inspectors, etc, etc abuse their position of trust. It doesn’t mean we have to bring the whole house down, though.
RRE (9) – No, not special rights. Just the rights you and I take for granted.
The classic liberal slogan is ‘different, but equal’. By being different, you shouldn’t be treated differently. It’s the opposite of ‘everyone is the same as everyone else’.duncan
June 6, 2008
June
06
Jun
6
06
2008
03:00 AM
3
03
00
AM
PDT
So we have to give special rights and recognition to a group of people whose body does not match the sex of their mind.
I thought liberalism says that men and women are equals.
If that's true, then why would someone born a man want to be a woman if they are equal?
I do know that in New York, if you are a male inmate in the state prison system, the tax payer pays for a sex change operation if the inmate wants one. Then once the operation is complete and the taxpayer pays for all the hormone medication (until the inmate leaves or dies), the inmate goes into the female prison system, where they are at an advantage because of their superior musculature.
So this is more than equal protection.
Also...
What if someone wanted to be both sexes?RRE
June 5, 2008
June
06
Jun
5
05
2008
02:50 PM
2
02
50
PM
PDT
Personally, I can’t believe that under any circumstances anyone would ever embark on transgender surgery unless they felt absolutely psychologically compelled to do so.
There was a local case a few years back where a fellow got convinced to have it by his therapist only to realize -- too late -- that she was a quack.
People feel "psychologically" compelled to do all sorts of stupid things -- inject meth, have sex with animals, even kill themselves.
A healthy culture discourages this sort of stuff. It doesn't give it license.tribune7
June 5, 2008
June
06
Jun
5
05
2008
01:50 PM
1
01
50
PM
PDT
duncan,
Are there any limits to how far we can go in applying your principle? Can we say that whenever someone feels "psychologically compelled" to do something, "the only plausible response [for the rest of us] is to TRUST THEM that it has to be real"?SteveB
June 5, 2008
June
06
Jun
5
05
2008
11:52 AM
11
11
52
AM
PDT
Personally, I can’t believe that under any circumstances anyone would ever embark on transgender surgery unless they felt absolutely psychologically compelled to do so. The stories of transgender people facing being disowned by their families, friends, communities, churches, employers – everyone! – but still going ahead with surgery, are all too depressingly common. The only plausible response is to TRUST THEM that it has to be real. Particularly as the incidence is replicated throughout the world. To my knowledge there are no known examples anywhere, ever, of anyone being forced to undergo any form of compulsory transgender process. What is the problem?
I am not commenting on the detail of this particular piece of legislation, or the impact of a ‘rights culture’. But attitudes of disapproval towards transgender people are deeply dismal, in my opinion. Even the Iranian mullahs have got their head round this one.
And what’s it got to do with ID?duncan
June 5, 2008
June
06
Jun
5
05
2008
11:00 AM
11
11
00
AM
PDT
The problem is—just how many traditionalists really recognize the seriousness of the so-called Culture War? When a majority side with the materialist agenda, or are fooled or flummoxed by it or just simply blasé, where will things end up?
I'll tell you, we'll have a world full of anti-discrimination laws for every niche constituency out there. What kind of world will that be?poachy
June 5, 2008
June
06
Jun
5
05
2008
10:37 AM
10
10
37
AM
PDT
Ekstasis,
What scares me as I read your post is that I can see it all happening now.
"Pet gender reassignment surgery"
It doesn't even seem that far-fetched to me. Isn't that sad?ellijacket
June 5, 2008
June
06
Jun
5
05
2008
10:21 AM
10
10
21
AM
PDT
Yes, indeed, it’s looking pretty scary out there. The more progress we make the fiercer our antagonists get. It’s relentless—they never rest. The problem is—just how many traditionalists really recognize the seriousness of the so-called Culture War? When a majority side with the materialist agenda, or are fooled or flummoxed by it or just simply blasé, where will things end up?
Ben Stein’s warning comes not a moment too soon—it may be later than we think. But then this morning’s commentary by Jonah Goldberg put me on a more positive note.Rude
June 5, 2008
June
06
Jun
5
05
2008
10:07 AM
10
10
07
AM
PDT
Ekstasis, "So now that the gene predisposing one for homosexuality is old news"
I seemed to have missed this news. Please expand.bFast
June 5, 2008
June
06
Jun
5
05
2008
10:04 AM
10
10
04
AM
PDT
So now that the gene predisposing one for homosexuality is old news, the time is just about right for someone to locate that potent gene predisposing one to the inclination to change gender.
Of course, we are all familiar with those brave organisms out there that change gender when the need arises. So we will be preached to that it is all so normal and natural. And this is right around the time that a few animal psychologists will be recruited to come out with a new discovery that a substantial number of mammals, such as dogs and cats, actually believe they are of the opposite gender than what graces their anatomy, and they actually desire to switch genders. And one day soon the big thing in Hollywood will be to switch their pets' genders. Rover will finally get the opportunity to express herself as Roverita, or whatever the feminine version might be.
Hold on, the propoganda machine is about to kick into high gear.Ekstasis