Mermaids to be shut down?
This is beautiful. Over 370 religious leaders from 35 countries have signed a declaration demanding a worldwide end to the dangerous practice of conversion therapy for LGBT+ people.
So no one is to be encouraged, enabled, guided through, conversion?
Oh well, if the religious folks tell us that then why not?
We call for all attempts to change, suppress or erase a person’s sexual orientation, gender identity or gender expression – commonly known as “conversion therapy” – to end, and for these harmful practices to be banned.
They really do say no to changing someone’s gender expression. Thus “trans” becomes something that cannot be done, right?
Wrong. Logical consistency is not required in sexual matters.
350 leaders?
Wow.
Hang on a sec.
*Toddles off to Wikipedia*
Right.
In the Catholic church on its own, there are approximately 400,000 priests.
That’s 0.0875%, and only if we only look at the Catholic church.
How many Imams are there?
How many protestant preachers?
How many Sikh gurus?
How many Hindu, erm, hinduists?
I bet if we went round the world, like this declaration aspires to, we could easily find more than that that would want to make conversion therapy mandatory (and maybe go further, with involuntary gravity therapy).
Nothing to see here. Move along.
Well, I guess we’ll see if they really are ‘leaders.’
Call me old fashioned, but I believe Jesus Christ wasn’t joking when he warned us:
But whoso shall cause one of these little ones who believe in Me to fall, it were better for him that a millstone were hung about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.
Anyway, queer theology:
We affirm that we are all equal under God, whom many call the Divine, and so we are all equal to one another.
But we are not all equal under God, or to one another. Peter was not equal to Judas. Heaven isn’t a democracy, it’s an absolute monarchy. The Bible certainly doesn’t endorse equality:
He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still
We believe that love and compassion should be the basis of faith and that hatred can have no place in religion
Of all the strange directions modern thinking has taken, the hateful hatred of “hate” is one of the queerest. There’s nothing intrinsically wrong with hate, it’s a natural emotion just like any other.
Like all emotions, we should strive to master it with the cool command of Mr Spock, but the reason emotions like hate, disgust and fear exist is to protect us. Some things should be hated, some things should disgust us, some things should be feared. We would be extinct as a species if we didn’t have these emotions, because we don’t live in a garden of Eden, we live in a tough universe with all sorts of people and things trying to kill you, do you, rip you off – everything.
What sort of creatures would wish to suppress our God-given self-defence mechanisms, I wonder?
“involuntary gravity therapy”
New keyboard required. You win the internet today!
Mermaids to be shut down
The choice of name has always been puzzling. If below the waist you are redolent of fish, you have a personal hygiene problem.
Logical consistency is not required in
sexual[leftist] matters.This has nothing to do with sex and everything to do with bastard wankery.
. . . but I believe Jesus Christ wasn’t joking when he warned us:
They’ll be happy for you to sit and wait for the undove from above. They know He ain’t coming. They’ve figured out it’s possible to make make-believe belief in anything.
PJF – we can’t expect God to do all the work
Oh, more from Tim’s favourite perv. Still beats me why it gets listed under ‘femininism’, though. What’s feminist about a fat geezer in a frock?
Why not just say that 97% of church leaders agree and therefore the theology is settled?
No airtime will be given by the bbc to opposing beliefs other than you know who.
“What’s feminist about a fat geezer in a frock?”
Apparently the judicially approved description is a ‘pig in a wig’.
North Pole postcard postmarked Glasgow
Please Santa, I’ve been a good girl all year so can you fix it for me to have my own fanny for Christmas and please, please, PLEASE can you make me pretty?
Presumably you are not allowed to convert between religions either?
@ Steve
Quite
We all have equal rights, but that does not make us all equal – more importantly it does not make us identical.
I call as witnesses the poor guys bowling at Virat Kohli, Steve Smith, Ben Stokes …
ABC and ABY not on it.
Hmmm. Round Robin and not on the mailing lost?
No. Not right. The famous case of David Reimer shows that if someone is a boy you can’t turn them into a girl. Many trans people don’t want to change sex, they want to be recognised as the sex they believe themselves to be – which is only controversial because their body appears to contradict their mind. However, as we can see in a huge variety of areas, biology is not infallible and pretty much anything that can go wrong will go wrong. There are people with all kinds of bodily defects and variations. Some are quite harmless – such as being born with an extra toe. In the area of sex, it’s quite clear that there are many definitions (chromosomes, expression of chromosomes, mental self-perception etc) and there is no reason why they all align, though they do in enough people to make it seem that way. We are perfectly used to some people being left handed and others being right handed, and even though there may be some biological basis for this (because it is pretty much impossible to turn an extremely left handed person into a right handed person as has been tried extensively in schools), we now just accept that there are aspects of people where the only way to know is to ask them.
So for many trans people, it’s exacly like being gay. Just as the gay man wants society to accept that they are gay and not try ineffective and distressing treatments to turn them straight, a trans man wants society to accept that they are a man and not try to convince them that they are really a woman.
Of course, this also means that since we cannot tell whether someone is really a woman or a man without asking them, someone could lie or be deceived into telling us something which is not true. But that doesn;’t change the fact that there’s no better way to know, so all we can do is ask. Just as the best way to find out if someone is left handed is to ask them.
I believe it’s the lesbians who are complaining, never a statistically big group so the rise in transgender claims (female to male) has hit them hard and they are leading the claims that confusing gay kids with stuff about gender and trans as they are just discovering their sexuality is the problem.
On a personal note daughter came out at a young age, couple of months later they had the gender team come and talk to them and suddenly it’s all ‘I’m trans’. I agree that there’s a lot of people out there messing with kids heads and it isn’t good and it isn’t pretty
this also means that since we cannot tell whether someone is really a woman or a man without asking
Apart from the most convincing Bangkok chickboys, we can definitely tell whether someone is a woman or a man. It is a shame that some poor tortured buggers can’t tell themselves.
I can accept that trans men largely want society to accept that they are a man and not try to convince them they’re a woman although my understanding may be hampered by the transient nature of the nomenclature du jour.
But when that same “acceptance” requires allowing former dudes to make a mockery of various women’s sports it is clear to all but the most wilfully blind that something is going very wrong very fast (a bit like certain athletes) and that merely accepting someone’s word simply will not suffice.
Wrong, Tim. That’s not what “trans” means. For once, you have failed at the first hurdle.
“Conversion” is the imposition of some desired outcome. You wouldn’t accept that in politics, so why might it even be a consideration in sexuality?
Normally, if there is any “guidance” from religious leaders, if it depends on their religious beliefs, it is founded on myth, ignorance and stupidity, so should be not ignored, but resisted with utmost force. However, it seems that, at last, so called “religious leaders” have abandoned centuries of prejudice; a step in the right direction, and accepted that sexuality is something we are born with. Of all people, Tim, I’d have thought you would be OK with people being what they are, so long as it is consistent with other people not being affected. And no, effrontery, religious sensibilities and other such nonsense and other such nonsense don’t count.
I may be old-fashioned but I still don’t find anything wrong with what Desmond Tutu said – it’s the spin that will be applied (if it isn’t already) by the likes of “Carrie” that will be objectionable.
BniC has nailed it.
@Tim the Coder
Thanks! 😀
@NauticalNick
Normally, if there is any “guidance” from religious leaders, if it depends on their religious beliefs, it is founded on myth, ignorance and stupidity, so should be not ignored, but resisted with utmost force
That’s a heck of a claim.
Why should it be resisted?
Religions have been around for a long time, Christianity is around 2000 years old and created societal conditions which have led to the modern world. Therefore it’s teachings must contain some useful information about how to build a functioning society.
Sometimes this means not allowing everyone to do whatever the fuck they want. Which might include men pretending to be women?
There’s stories in the Bible about God smiting people for undesirable behaviour. Sodom and Gomorrah for example.
Could it be that these stories are warnings about behaviours that shouldn’t run rampant if we want a stable society?
Nautical Nick December 17, 2020 at 9:55 pm – ““Conversion” is the imposition of some desired outcome. You wouldn’t accept that in politics, so why might it even be a consideration in sexuality?”
Why wouldn’t we consider it in politics? Surely the only success so far of that prat Boris of politics is to break the Red Wall and convert the Labour voters of the North into Tory voters. That is a very impressive success actually.
It is certainly known in religion. You know, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.” Road to Damascus – heard of it? Might even call conversion the whole point.
As for considering it in sexuality, well, paedophiles? Shouldn’t we try to help? Suppose that I find I cannot achieve an erection except through thoughts of hurting my wife. Thoughts that tend to lead to very mild deeds. And I find that distressing. Are you saying that therapy should be banned? That I should embrace my inner Sadist and beat her until she leaves me? Do tell, I would really like to know.
“Normally, if there is any “guidance” from religious leaders, if it depends on their religious beliefs, it is founded on myth, ignorance and stupidity, so should be not ignored, but resisted with utmost force.”
Roman Catholicism is the work of 2000 years of the greatest minds in Western civilisation. You cannot write it off as stupidity. Myth? Yes. Ignorance? Not about human nature. But stupidity no.
“However, it seems that, at last, so called “religious leaders” have abandoned centuries of prejudice; a step in the right direction”
Bollocks.
“and accepted that sexuality is something we are born with.”
There being no evidence of this at all. And considerable evidence to the contrary. We can see it in the growth of trannydom Gays among the younger generation now they have been exposed to a generation of deviant propaganda.
“Of all people, Tim, I’d have thought you would be OK with people being what they are, so long as it is consistent with other people not being affected.”
Trans people h8urt me by existing.
“And no, effrontery, religious sensibilities and other such nonsense and other such nonsense don’t count.”
It does when it comes to race. If a woman can be offended – and British law called on to defend her – by a mug with a naughty sea side picture on it, why can’t I by a man in a frock? Transexual harassment. Should be a law.
Charles December 17, 2020 at 7:24 pm – “The famous case of David Reimer shows that if someone is a boy you can’t turn them into a girl.”
Is this the famous No True Scotsman fallacy being applied to trans babies? Fascinating.
“Many trans people don’t want to change sex, they want to be recognised as the sex they believe themselves to be – which is only controversial because their body appears to contradict their mind.”
And I would like to be recognised as Bridget Bardot’s towel boy. Reality sucks that way don’t it? It is controversial because it is contrary to reality. I do not become Napoleon just because I want to be.
“However, as we can see in a huge variety of areas, biology is not infallible and pretty much anything that can go wrong will go wrong.”
I disagree. Biology is a reality. It is not an act of will.
“There are people with all kinds of bodily defects and variations. Some are quite harmless – such as being born with an extra toe.”
Which all have genetic causes. As does gender. You have two Xs and you’re a girl. You don’t and you are not. Infallible.
“In the area of sex, it’s quite clear that there are many definitions (chromosomes, expression of chromosomes, mental self-perception etc)”
A perfect logical fallacy there. A circular argument. Trans are trans because of the definition of gender. The definition of gender depends on whatever you want it to be. Great. But wrong.
“and there is no reason why they all align, though they do in enough people to make it seem that way.”
There is a reason they will align – science.
“we now just accept that there are aspects of people where the only way to know is to ask them.”
Who is this we of which you speak Kemosabe? We do not accept any such thing. A handful of deranged lunatics have bullied a lot of people into saying it but that still don’t make it true.
“So for many trans people, it’s exacly like being gay.”
Finally something I agree with.
“a trans man wants society to accept that they are a man and not try to convince them that they are really a woman.”
And I want to be Ms Bardot’s towel boy. Ain’t going to happen.
“Of course, this also means that since we cannot tell whether someone is really a woman or a man without asking them”
Circular argument again. We can actually. We can test their chromosomes. Infallible is this science thing.
Charles–your comment is sly cod-reasonable Marxist garbage. The best thing troubled people could do is denounce sly marxistic garbage like you and thus escape the brutal violence and destruction set eventually to fall on the scum of the left. Being best buddies of the vermin of socialism clouds the issue and leads to far greater hatred than such individual troubles should engender. No pun intended.
I don’t care if some weirdos want to shove themselves in the wrong hole and/or play dress up and pretend to be women or whatever. So long as its all volunteers. But the involvement of real evil in the form of socialism must be punished severely. All who take on socialism as their ally MUST be destroyed along with the socialist scum involved. Creepy males trying to invade the role of female is a piece of Marxist garbage too far. They can posture as women to whatever extent they can–of the ones I’ve seen a laughably small extent–but when they assist Marxist scum to claim that objective reality can be refuted by verbal declaration then bad things must happen to all making that evil claim.
Also there are numbers of people who seek out therapy because they are troubled by homo urges that they want rid of. Are these people to be denied help because of a load of sanctimonious religious cant? The religion being socialism of course.
As for Nautical Nicks Nonsense–the main problem with Christianity is the frame.
I could except that God could send his son and return him to life–it is the reason for these events that baffles me. Why would a God of love and reason create such a stupid farrago as we find ourselves in? “I love you, I made you in my image–but you’re all scum” does not seem a logical or even sane set of propositions. More a set of rationalisations designed to show why everything is fucked up and that it is somehow our fault.
@Chernyy_Drakon
Not half as big a claim to know all about a supreme being, without any evidence for it at all.
Religions have indeed been around for millennia. They can’t all be right can they? The only logical position is that none of them is right.
As for their teachings, for centuries they allowed slavery, burnt heretics at the stake, and their holy book advocates killing homosexuals. Not much information there for building a society. And in any case, unless you have any evidence to the contrary, the whole thing is made up by society, so the influence goes in the other direction. It is as we abandon religion that progress is made.
As Tim is keen to point out, the default position should be that everything is permitted, unless there is reason to ban it. I really don’t care what sexuality anyone claims for themselves; where it matters is how it impinges on other people, an altogether different matter.
@SMFS Though it seem like at times (!), no voter is genetically Labour, so their “conversions” bears no resemblance to trying to convert something innate. Just imagine someone wanted to convert your sexual position. Just because they didn’t share it. I don’t think so…. Of course, if you become gay or straight as a result of divine intervention while ravelling up the M1, then that’s fine by me, but I don’t think it will happen, do you?
Paedophiles: any treatment is to stop them acting on it, not for them to try to change their genetic makeup. If it is the result of their experiences, then yes, it can be addressed in a therapeutic way. But are you really saying being gay is just the result of upbringing? Seriously? I’d suggest that the increase in the number claiming an alternative sexuality has more to do with such things being permitted, rather than an increase in incidence. How much propaganda would it take for you to change your sexuality…?
Etc, etc…. can’t be bothered to write any more….
Nautical Nick December 18, 2020 at 8:45 pm – “Religions have indeed been around for millennia. They can’t all be right can they? The only logical position is that none of them is right.”
Well that is not true. There are several flavours of String theory but it does not follow that they must all be wrong. I mean they are probably all wrong but there is no logical necessity.
“As for their teachings, for centuries they allowed slavery, burnt heretics at the stake, and their holy book advocates killing homosexuals. Not much information there for building a society.”
I disagree. For thousands of years this was highly successful at building societies. Hence we are where we are today. A lot of the problems of today are because we stopped doing those things.
“As Tim is keen to point out, the default position should be that everything is permitted, unless there is reason to ban it.”
It offends me. Therefore it is a hate crime. Therefore it should be illegal. So ban it. The default position should not be that people are hounded out of their jobs because they think people with a cervix are women. We have a problem with what to do with the intolerant in a tolerant society. I think the solution is to become a little less tolerant of the intolerant.
“I really don’t care what sexuality anyone claims for themselves; where it matters is how it impinges on other people, an altogether different matter.”
At the moment it is impinging on other people quite a lot.
“Though it seem like at times (!), no voter is genetically Labour, so their “conversions” bears no resemblance to trying to convert something innate. Just imagine someone wanted to convert your sexual position.”
I am open to offers. There is no evidence at all that sexuality is genetically shaped in that way. So it is like politics, not like skin colour.
“Paedophiles: any treatment is to stop them acting on it, not for them to try to change their genetic makeup.”
There is no evidence of a genetic influence on pedophilia. Science is wonderful isn’t it? No more than there is on homosexuality. If someone is really really unhappy because they keep getting these bad thoughts are you saying the only solution we should offer is to prevent them doing something bad and not to help them stop thinking such thoughts?
“If it is the result of their experiences, then yes, it can be addressed in a therapeutic way. But are you really saying being gay is just the result of upbringing? Seriously?”
Yes. Homosexuality shows no signs of being genetic and every sign of a bad relationship with the mother. It is upbringing. Probably.
“How much propaganda would it take for you to change your sexuality…?”
I am not eight years old.
@So Much For Subtlety: “You have two Xs and you’re a girl. You don’t and you are not. Infallible.”
No. It’s not infallible. The “master switch” that makes you a man is the SRY gene found on the Y chromosome, but (as I said, anything that can go wrong does go wrong) in a small proportion of people they have XX chromosomes, but the SRY gene appears on one of the X chromosomes. The effects of this vary, but it can result in them being male because the SRY gene triggers a cascade of other genes into making the body male. Even in cases where the SRY gene does not fully work, and results in ambiguous genitalia, the people still think of themselves as male abd it is only medical analysis which reveals what has happened.
Somewhere in the cascade of effects triggered by SRY there is the underlying cause of people having a male mind or a female mind. I expect that some day it will be possible to test for this from a blood sample, and it would then be probably possible to tell if someone is trans by seeing what genes were expressed and what defects, mutations, or other non-standard effects were present. Until then, all we can do is ask someone.