Sarah Sanders says she was thrown out of Virginia restaurant because she works for Trump

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

14 minutes ago, bcking said:

Unfortunately for you it does...

 

What if I define the sex organs you were born with as female? What you say they're male? Well that isn't an error, it's just a difference of opinion. You're actually female now. I'm no more wrong than you are right.

so you are a doctor and you dont think identifying a ####### as a ####### is wrong.. Oh my ?

[bcking 3,157]

9 minutes ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

so you are a doctor and you dont think identifying a ####### as a ####### is wrong.. Oh my ?

Apparently all definitions are subject to opinion.

[yuna628 9,676]

22 minutes ago, bcking said:

Unfortunately for you it does...

 

What if I define the sex organs you were born with as female? What you say they're male? Well that isn't an error, it's just a difference of opinion. You're actually female now. I'm no more wrong than you are right.

You're going to go around in circles I'm afraid.

 

There's a question I always like to ask the more stubbornly insistent upon the 'opinion' that sexual orientation is a choice and that how our parts are defined, defines our sexual orientation.

 

There are many cases in this world of those who are born with ambiguous or both sets of parts. In the old days doctors would 'decide' for them what outward appearing gender they would be. In many cases, that doctor did not choose the outward parts 'correctly' as their sexual orientation was very obviously clear from young toddlerhood onwards. In these cases it is obvious that the child did not choose their physical gender, nor did they choose their sexual orientation (btw you can even find theological and ancient historical examples of such cases too for those even more stubbornly insistent).

 

Sexual orientation is not a choice.

Deciding to have sex with someone or not is a choice (I once had a debate with a theologian regarding this subject.. the best he could offer is that he agreed that sexual orientation is not a choice, but still believed the choice to have sex with the same gender is wrong, so as long as the person did not choose to engage in sexual relationships rather than 'friendships' it was okay with him and attempted to conflate biblical examples.. it didn't go so well. He still remains torn on the subject to this day).

[Randyandyuni 2,682]

discrimination because of disagreement is either acceptable or not

 

Choosing to make flavors of acceptable behavior that must be tolerated is ludicrous as it allows our internal prejudices to manifest itself

 

I am not LGBQorT I don't care if you are, I will not treat you differently unless you as an individual give me cause

 

I am not catholic or muslim or hindu, but I don't care if you are except for the previously stated caveat

 

I am not black or Asian but I have both in my family, again you will be treated as you act individually

 

I am neither wealthy or poor as long as you do not expect me to defer to you or lift you up we are fine

 

I am a conservative but did not vote for trump, but I don't care if you are liberal or did vote for trump don't call me privledged as I have not seen the benefit

 

Make me a cake, make me flowers, or serve me lunch,  or don't. I don't care  if you treat me differently than I desire, I will choose to go elsewhere. This MDR MDL is getting old, there is enough bull going on there really is no need to out lean the previous poster

Edited June 26, 2018 by TBoneTX
non-family-friendly term edited

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

30 minutes ago, bcking said:

Where is the law that states definitions require a certain number of years to be held true?

 

It is an option. It's just a difference of opinion. Sorry buddy (or should I say miss?)

For the same reason that the moon is still the moon, and the earth is not flat, the definition of female and male sex organs have not changed.  If you wish to view them differently, I support your right to do so.  

 

Just as as you should support my right to choose my sexual orientation.  Even if it changes from day to day.

 

Today, buddy is fine.

Edited June 25, 2018 by IDWAF

[bcking 3,157]

4 minutes ago, IDWAF said:

For the same reason that the moon is still the moon, and the earth is not flat, the definition of female and male sex organs have not changed.  If you wish to view them differently, I support your right to do so.  

 

Just as as you should support my right to choose my sexual orientation.  Even if it changes from day to day.

 

Today, buddy is fine.

Sorry you are just wrong. Words and phrases have established definitions. Sexual orientation is a medical term, and it has been defined by the expert opinion of the people whose opinion on the subject actually matter (hint: not you or me).

 

If you want to make up a word or phrase to describe whatever it is you are talking about, that's fine. But sexual orientation is already taken. It has a definition, and your opinion on that doesn't matter. Sorry to be harsh.

 

10 minutes ago, yuna628 said:

You're going to go around in circles I'm afraid.

 

Ya I'm aware. At this point I'm familiar with the circular arguments that people like to get into on these forums when they know they are wrong, but don't want to admit that. It's entertaining for a little while.

 

Honestly though yes now it's boring me a bit so I'll move on.

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

7 minutes ago, yuna628 said:

You're going to go around in circles I'm afraid.

 

There's a question I always like to ask the more stubbornly insistent upon the 'opinion' that sexual orientation is a choice and that how our parts are defined, defines our sexual orientation.

 

There are many cases in this world of those who are born with ambiguous or both sets of parts. In the old days doctors would 'decide' for them what outward appearing gender they would be. In many cases, that doctor did not choose the outward parts 'correctly' as their sexual orientation was very obviously clear from young toddlerhood onwards. In these cases it is obvious that the child did not choose their physical gender, nor did they choose their sexual orientation (btw you can even find theological and ancient historical examples of such cases too for those even more stubbornly insistent).

 

Sexual orientation is not a choice.

Deciding to have sex with someone or not is a choice (I once had a debate with a theologian regarding this subject.. the best he could offer is that he agreed that sexual orientation is not a choice, but still believed the choice to have sex with the same gender is wrong, so as long as the person did not choose to engage in sexual relationships rather than 'friendships' it was okay with him and attempted to conflate biblical examples.. it didn't go so well. He still remains torn on the subject to this day).

I never said our sex organs define our sexual orientation.  They simply determine our sex, and therefore reproductive functions.

 

i said sexual orientation is a choice.  I can choose to whom I am attracted (to some degree) and with whom I wish to engage (in every aspect).  I can be whomever I choose, sexually.  I just cannot choose my sex organs (except to elect to have them removed).

 

I can paint my truck a different color.  I can soup it up.  I can add a camper shell to it.  I can drive it slow or fast. I can park it close to the store, or far away.  I can park between the lines, or across the lines.  It’s my truck, and the choices are mine.  But it will always be a truck.  That’s not a choice.

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

Just now, bcking said:

Sorry you are just wrong. Words and phrases have established definitions. Sexual orientation is a medical term, and it has been defined by the expert opinion of the people whose opinion on the subject actually matter (hint: not you or me).

 

If you want to make up a word or phrase to describe whatever it is you are talking about, that's fine. But sexual orientation is already taken. It has a definition, and your opinion on that doesn't matter. Sorry to be harsh.

 

Ya I'm aware. At this point I'm familiar with the circular arguments that people like to get into on these forums when they know they are wrong, but don't want to admit that. It's entertaining for a little while.

 

Honestly though yes now it's boring me a bit so I'll move on.

Just because I don’t agree with you, I’m wrong?

 

Says something about you that I never expected.  But noted.

[yuna628 9,676]

17 minutes ago, IDWAF said:

I never said our sex organs define our sexual orientation.  They simply determine our sex, and therefore reproductive functions.

 

i said sexual orientation is a choice.  I can choose to whom I am attracted (to some degree) and with whom I wish to engage (in every aspect).  I can be whomever I choose, sexually.  I just cannot choose my sex organs (except to elect to have them removed).

 

I can paint my truck a different color.  I can soup it up.  I can add a camper shell to it.  I can drive it slow or fast. I can park it close to the store, or far away.  I can park between the lines, or across the lines.  It’s my truck, and the choices are mine.  But it will always be a truck.  That’s not a choice.

If you *personally* believe that you can choose whom you are attracted to or your sexual orientation then you are conflating that what you experience is a choice and are likely bisexual or bicurious, which is totally fine with me.

 

I cannot choose my sexual orientation. I am attracted to men and always have been. I cannot order myself (physical body, brain, heart, or mind) to make a choice that simply does not exist.

 

 

Edited June 25, 2018 by yuna628

[bcking 3,157]

19 minutes ago, IDWAF said:

Just because I don’t agree with you, I’m wrong?

 

Says something about you that I never expected.  But noted.

No. This isn't about agreeing or disagreeing with each other. We aren't discussing our opinions here.

 

You're wrong because you don't agree with the definition of the term "Sexual Orientation" and you have consistently confused it with whom "you have sex with", which it is not equivalent to. That isn't up for "opinion". It's a medical term, and it has a meaning that you don't yet understand.

 

3 minutes ago, yuna628 said:

If you *personally* believe that you can choose whom you are attracted to and whom you wish to engage with sexually, then you are conflating that what you experience is a choice and are likely bisexual or bicurious, which is totally fine with me.

 

I cannot choose my sexual orientation. I am attracted to men and always have been. I cannot order myself (physical body, brain, heart, or mind) to make a choice that simply does not exist.

 

 

Honestly the issue of choice in sexual orientation is irrelevant here. In order to have that discussion, you need to actually understand what the phrase "sexual orientation" means and it is clear he isn't even there yet. So discussing whether it is a choose or not gets us nowhere. We have to start with the basics.

Edited June 25, 2018 by bcking

[bcking 3,157]

28 minutes ago, IDWAF said:

i said sexual orientation is a choice.  I can choose to whom I am attracted (to some degree) and with whom I wish to engage (in every aspect).  I can be whomever I choose, sexually.  I just cannot choose my sex organs (except to elect to have them removed).

 

Good luck "choosing" to have different cerebral asymmetry and functional connectivity of the brain, compared to heterosexual males.

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18559854

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29227002

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25479554

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21094885

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19955753

 

I could provide a few more but realistically this is all going to go nowhere so I'll stop there.

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

57 minutes ago, bcking said:

Apparently all definitions are subject to opinion.

a testicle is a testicle and an ovary is an ovary. No opinion about it

[bcking 3,157]

4 minutes ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

a testicle is a testicle and an ovary is an ovary. No opinion about it

And sexual orientation is sexual orientation, no matter who doesn't understand that.

25 minutes ago, yuna628 said:

If you *personally* believe that you can choose whom you are attracted to or your sexual orientation then you are conflating that what you experience is a choice and are likely bisexual or bicurious, which is totally fine with me.

 

Oh I think maybe we're having a breakthrough here?

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

25 minutes ago, bcking said:

And sexual orientation is sexual orientation, no matter who doesn't understand that.

Oh I think maybe we're having a breakthrough here?

of course sexual orientation is sexual orientation. What else would it be ?

 

Although not all gay or bisexual people are strictly genetically predisposed that way. I have know more than one environmentally persuaded lesbians in my day 

[bcking 3,157]

2 minutes ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

of course sexual orientation is sexual orientation. What else would it be ?

Whatever IDWAF seems to confuse it with...