For me, the most important point there is 'do not harm Others', as trans-folk are frequently assaulted simply for being trans. Doesn't everyone want to be accepted, recognised and celebrated? Christians are a special interest group, get all sorts of those things and have done for centuries. They ought to have plenty of love to spread around. I'd be interested to read the Christian teachings on 'special interest individuals choice' - could you point me in their direction?
Service Goat???
- Thread starter DrHenley
- Start date
Help Support Homesteading & Country Living Forum:
For me, the most important point there is 'do not harm Others', as trans-folk are frequently assaulted simply for being trans. Doesn't everyone want to be accepted, recognised and celebrated? Christians are a special interest group, get all sorts of those things and have done for centuries. They ought to have plenty of love to spread around. I'd be interested to read the Christian teachings on 'special interest individuals choice' - could you point me in their direction?
I completely agree - I've heard very little about it but it baffles me, too. Certainly, petting cats and dogs can help people with high blood pressure and so on, but these aren't animals trained for a specific purpose to assist with a specific condition, they're just their warm, fluffy selves and feel soothing to have around. Having a pet and having a highly trained service animal as a pet are surely two different things. A friend of mine trains guide dog pups, and the amount of effort, time and money involved is tremendous.
It seems most of the assaults on the trans groups are made up by themselves in order to get recognition. All the latest high profile cases have been . But yet you see many of these individuals in the ranks of rioters and antifa trying to force their lifestyle on Others . Unlike any Christians I know of that will share the word and let Others choose for Themselves. Anyone that rejects the word then leave Them to their own decision.
The liberals seem to have convinced Themselves that They are these great social justice warriors fighting a new Civil War when actually They are showing what a self destructive fringe they really are .
I don't care what a person wants to be, but I shouldn't be forced to except it, we shouldn't have special laws putting these people in a special protective class and we don't need to see them in parades flying the rainbow flag as if they are saying to world 'hey look at me I'm a special kind of queer'. You don't see heterosexual holding parades because of there sexual affiliation.
You don't see parades for heterosexuality because there's no need for them: heterosexuality is celebrated everywhere in society, music, film, politics, media, sports. That celebration is absolutely fine, but it also makes it easy to abuse, and ignore abuse of, other sexualities. The parades aren't so much about celebrating sexual affiliation as they are about celebrating making it through another year alive, celebrating being alive despite having been abused and assaulted simply for existing, celebrating the lives of the people who didn't make it through alive because some heterosexual people insisted on forcing their views on others with fists, feet, penises, bottles, tree branches, gasoline, knives, lead pipes, electrical cables, baseball bats, hatchets, barbed wire. On the whole, cis-het people don't get to the end of the year and heave a sigh of relief because no-one's abused, assaulted or killed them simply for being cis-het.
Folk don't really want special laws, they'd like the same laws: marry the person of their choice, have the same rights to foster and adopt, etc., use the toilet where they feel comfortable and aren't liable to get beaten up, etc.
Again, can you point me to your sources? Individual US cases don't often get reported on in the UK so I'm not sure what you're referring to.
Re the shot of Romans 1: I'm not sure how that relates to 'special interest individuals choice', as Paul seems to state clearly that his god made them do it. On the other hand, it's always nice to see where different gods stand on various topics, so thank you.
Last edited:
I get news from UK and Europe whenever I choose to . Im sure You can find any report You want .
Where did You say all these trans people were being attacked at ?
I didn't say specifically that the attacks were on trans people, or mention where the victims were attacked. My response was about queer folk in general as I was replying to Maverick's raising of pride parades. Two fairly simple places to start for information about attacks on non-cis-het people:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Significant_acts_of_violence_against_LGBT_people
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unlawfully_killed_transgender_people
That's hogwash, it's totally about sexual affiliations, you don't see signs saying I made it alive for another year, they hold signs that say 'gay and proud' 'queer nation' 'resist unite' 'pride' 'I'm a fag' "out and proud' 'queer and proud' etc.. it's a 'PRIDE' parade not a survival parade.
You don't see 'heterosexual parades' with signs say 'look at me I'm heterosexual' 'I love women' I love men" etc..
Like I said, I don't give a damn if one is straight or gay but it should NOT be flaunted in our faces, I'm proud of who I am but I don't go around flaunting it holding signs etc..
Anyway... we sure gone off on a rabbit trail... 
It's a celebration of life, of saying to bigots 'You attack us and what we are - We love us and what we are.' Like I said, heterosexual parades aren't a thing because, on the whole, no-one is attacking heterosexuals simply for existing while being heterosexual. Heterosexuals don't need to remind themselves that they're valid human beings in the face of hatred and persecution. Heterosexuality gets flaunted in faces all the time and it doesn't need to get knicker-twisted because someone else has a flaunt
Anyway... we sure gone off on a rabbit trail...
Around here, if it's not a service rabbit then it's liable to get popped in the pot
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2013
- Messages
- 18,372
It has been said that conservatives hate the group but love the individual, but liberals love the group but hate the individual.
For example even the most die hard racist redneck actually likes most of the black people he knows and gets along with them just fine. It's just "blacks" in general he hates.
Every individual is different. If you try to come up with a "One size fits all" policy that must be applied universally without considering the individuals, you get...well you get what we've got now...
I posted a picture of one person. Some people here immediately started talking about abstract groups of people and coming up with elaborate excuses for the entire groups...apparently lumping that one guy in with those groups without knowing ANYTHING about him.
I discretely followed that guy around in Lowes for a few minutes just observing (the picture was taken from behind a display and he never even saw me.) My first reaction was that he must be a disabled veteran with PTSD or something like that. But I saw enough to know that That guy...THAT ONE GUY was doing this just because he could get away with it. He had no business bringing that goat into that store.
For example even the most die hard racist redneck actually likes most of the black people he knows and gets along with them just fine. It's just "blacks" in general he hates.
Every individual is different. If you try to come up with a "One size fits all" policy that must be applied universally without considering the individuals, you get...well you get what we've got now...
I posted a picture of one person. Some people here immediately started talking about abstract groups of people and coming up with elaborate excuses for the entire groups...apparently lumping that one guy in with those groups without knowing ANYTHING about him.
I discretely followed that guy around in Lowes for a few minutes just observing (the picture was taken from behind a display and he never even saw me.) My first reaction was that he must be a disabled veteran with PTSD or something like that. But I saw enough to know that That guy...THAT ONE GUY was doing this just because he could get away with it. He had no business bringing that goat into that store.
I undestand (as I said earlier) that there will always be people who abuse a good thing.
My liberal tendencies come from things that I've experienced in real life when it comes to inclusiveness, and so on.
I assume that you're an M.D. or a D.O., so I can run some real-life ethical conumdrums by you and feel confident that you'll see my point even if you disagree.
I was a paramedic in South Florida from the 1980s until 2000, when I got hurt.
I discovered--from experience, and because I'm a high-functioning autistic man with a head for numbers--that if a wife accompanied her husband if the back of the truck on the way to the hospital and was comforting him...that I could use smaller doses of cardiac meds to accomplish whatever it was that I wanted to accomplish.
We carried IV Lidocaine, dopamine, norepinephrine, bretylium tosylate, procainamide, nitroglycerine paste, morphine sulfate, and so on.
These meds are life-saving, but also dangerous...and should be used in a reserved, conservative manner.
I expanded these ideas to include the other half of the gay couple under the theory that I have to be nonjudgemental, and this is what landed me in hot water.
Religious hospitals (life Trinity Healthcare and the 7th Day Adventist Hospitals) got me suspended because "Only a spouse" can vist the patient.
You see my ethical conflict, I'm sure.
And for the record, a man comforting his male partner let me use smaller doses just like a man and wife.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2013
- Messages
- 18,372
I probably would have done the same thing Kevin. I despise restrictive arbitrary policies cooked up by corporate lawyers.
BTW my advanced degrees are of the "More Sh*t" and the "Piled Higher and Deeper" varieties...
BTW my advanced degrees are of the "More Sh*t" and the "Piled Higher and Deeper" varieties...
Ok, but you can still see my point.
My ambulance service got a lot of money from the religious hospitals, and the idea that I treated gay couples with the same courtesy that I extended to straight couples was offensive to the clergy that ran these institutions.
There was a belief that homosexuality was, somehow, contagious...and if children observed a gay couple talking with each other or holding hands...then the child could, by some unknown mechanism, turn gay.
There was the fear that parents would remove their children from the ER before life-saving treatment if there were gay patients being emotionally supportive of each other, so I'm a baby-killer because I treated gay couples like straight couples when I was rendering care.
This situation even ended up in the Supreme Court when a Florida hospital refused to allow a lesbian to visit her dying partner (a cerebral bleed) despite Power of Attorney paperwork that existed between them.
They were a couple for 15 years, and had kids together.
Look up Lisa Pond in a Google search if you think I'm misrepresenting the circumstances.
A husband could have visited, but a lesbian? No! It's morally wrong!
And so forth.
This is part of why I hate Biblical literalism.
Back on topic. The issue is allowing folks with the wrong anatomy to invade the private facilities of the the opposite anatomy. I don't give a rat azz if the percentage of molestation is low or even absent. The issue is one group is being exposed to the sexual organs of a opposite sexed group, without the offended groups permission. If I join a nudest colony, then I expect to see naked bodies of the opposite sex. If my granddaughter is allowed into the nudist colony, then it was with her parents permission and knowledge. On the other hand, if my granddaughter showers after class in school, she can be exposed to the opposite anatomy, without her parents permission. As for the safety from trans-gender, right there in England they placed a male claiming to be trans gender in a female prison and he promptly raped and molested several of the female prisoners. Many Old fashion ideas are time proven. You do not place opposite sexes in a revealing situation. Just as myself and others have stated, a person with a male anatomy better not go into the bathroom or other private areas with my granddaughter, it would not end well for the penis swinging person.
I worked in EMS during an era when there were demonstrations (and official policies) set up against gay people, because of the belief that gay people must recruit children...since no one is ever born gay because God doesn't make mistakes.
This leads us to the conclusion that it's very harmful for children to see men, say, holding hands. This is modeling a gay behavior to vulnerable, impressionable children who may be badly influenced.
Fine, but I have a small problem with this.
In many congregations in the deep south (including parts of Florida), snake handling is a part of Christian worship with some Pentacostalist churches.
They handle eastern diamondbacks, timber rattlers, and--God help us (pun intended)--water moccasins.
People bring their children to church where they see a pastor (a role model for the community) handle venomous snakes, and have no concern that their impressionable children may do the same.
I've run on snake-bit kids who were tormenting water moccasins because of what they saw in church.
How come the Christian Right isn't demonstrating against congregations that do snake handling out of fear for the childrens' safety?
This seems like a double-standard or, if you prefer, religious hypocrisy...which is, in my mind, the worst kind.
I don't want to persecute any group or individuals but I will not allow there beliefs to be imposed on me or my family. If a person believes they are a different sex than what they were born with, then that is their issue to deal with. Their belief does not grant them privilege to expose themselves to me or any of my family. A male sexed trans-gender entering a womans shower is no different the the person waving his wienie on the street corner next to a school. Exposing is the same not matter what the claim.
I'm not sure how to respond to your idea.
I would have a problem (and be tempted to settle said problem with a gun) if a pervert came up to my child (I'm not a parent, by the way...but suppose I was) and exposed himself at the school bus stop.
I see your concern about opposite genders in public restrooms and a need to protect children from paedophiles. Paedophiles go to great lengths to secure access to children, and I can see a paedophile disguising himself as a trans-woman to get into a restroom to molest a little girl.
I don't have an easy answer, except to say that there are male paedophiles who like to molest little boys in public restrooms as well, and being trans has nothing to do with it.
I also recognize that parents have the right to authorize and control what their children see and don't see when it comes to sexual and reproductive issues, and religion and culture for everyone must be respected in this regard. I, for example, might not have a problem if my young son got ahold of a Playboy magazine...but I'd have a major sh---t fit if he got ahold of an issue of Hustler.
Part of why I feel this way is that my definition of porn is a product of my culture and is subjective, and I see a difference between Hustler and Playboy...a difference that other people may find hypocritical.
I don't have an easy answer...but maybe I will after I think on it longer.
@Kevin. I agree with the different versions of child predators, the big issue is I can go in with my grandson but it would be completely inappropriate to to in with my granddaughter. Stating that situation is why I cannot respect the desires of Trans-gender folks. I have no ill will towards these folks with different sexual positions, as long as it does not affect me or mine. That is the line. They can parade or prance or get married, I really don't care, that is their business. I respect the religious right to refuse to marry same sex folks, that is their belief. I do go along with Civil Marriage. I say let them get married and experience the wonderful joy of divorce, just like the rest of the folks. I also don't believe in any special status for any group. Equality means equal, not special designation.
I agree somewhat, but equal and fair are two different things.
I would allow a muslim employee to pray five times a day, but I would make sure that also made equivalent (but perhaps different) concessions toward a Christian...like allowing time off around the holidays, or being forgiving with a work schedule.
I try to meet each persons' individual needs as I can...a Christian may not need to pray 5 times a day, but may get first pick of overtime because her kid needs braces, for example.
Being fair doesn't mean everything has to be the same.
If I had a trans worker, I could see myself having individual unisex bathrooms installed to eliminate the issue.
I was incensed at a recent news story where a middle school did a mass shooting drill, and the plan was to hide the kids in the locker room.
The problem was that the trans student was forced to wait in the hallway while all the other kids were secured, as the teachers couldn't decide which locker room to use.
So...the trans student was left to die during the drill, and sacrificed to the mass shooter.
That's a true story. It happened in Texas.
Major lawsuit over something stupid, as during a mass shooting any gender should run into any locker room...if that's the designated safe place.
Well said. I usually don't spend the time to express deeper thoughts. I think a lot of people get fed up with the self deemed entitled.
I remember reading a story of a vet who came back mentally damaged, he had a german shepard and he was finally able to get a job at some lumber place, like Lowes' or Menards or somewhere, they let him bring his dog. I had no issue with that and see it as an unusual case. On the other hand, I really feel that most of these people are abusing the system when it comes to emotional support, Heck, who doesn't need emotional support. People have to learn how to comfort themselves, we learn that when we are babies.
That's
Isn't that what drills are for?? It is to find out what works and what doesn't and to address any problems that might be encountered. The drill was successful.
Supposedly had a letter from a nurse practioner that she needed the critter on board. for one thing a nurse practioner is only a 6 year degree. Not a doctor and this type of endorsement should only be given by physicians.
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2013
- Messages
- 16,288
I don't care if a person has a note from JC. If a person is so messed up in the head that they can't go anywhere without some kind of animal, I don't want to be around that person. I take my dog most everywhere I go, but he stays in the car when I go into a business. This whole "service" animal BS has been taken advantage of just like the blue tag criple parking permit has.
Well, Kevin, that's you schooled in the fine art of the insightful and well-substantiated rebuttal! ☺
Guys... I'm going through discussions, and there are 5 pages on this nonsense? Really? I went through a page & stopped. All of you have nothing better to do than talk about goats & baloney gender stuff?
Service animals can be useful and it's a much-abused system. There are 2 sexes, a very rare few birth defects, and a whole lot of really screwed up people. You can choose to spend time on this nonsense or do something useful.
Go ahead if this is important, you're not going to convince leftie Bluejay of a thing. I just thought this needed to be said.
Service animals can be useful and it's a much-abused system. There are 2 sexes, a very rare few birth defects, and a whole lot of really screwed up people. You can choose to spend time on this nonsense or do something useful.
Go ahead if this is important, you're not going to convince leftie Bluejay of a thing. I just thought this needed to be said.
