Seriously dude. Just stop. The fact that you got lost means that you only favour what you think is right.
I got lost because you respond to everything as a giant block of text and you don't include what you're arguing against in the argument when you do so. Format your posts like I'm doing.
My argument is that anything based on beliefs is ok as long as it isn't enforced on others. The fact that you will bring the government in order to accept your beliefs is just as tyrannical as those who forces others into converting into religion. Yeah, I'm talking about ISIS and Saudi Arabia.
You do realize that beliefs shape laws all the time right? The first amendment is based on the belief that the government shouldn't impede on certain freedoms. The fact that women can abort is based on beliefs. Women's suffrage, the abolition of slavery, democracy are all based on beliefs.
You're operating on the notion that the government enforcing beliefs is universally, 100% always a bad thing, and it is not. If the government enforces this belief system, it doesn't harm, impede on, or force any changes of beliefs on those that don't have it, so it wouldn't be a negative enforcement.
That "extra stuff" that I was talking about refers to giving them special treatment. Seriously dude please understand that it is only BELIEFS that are in question here. To say that you are something you're not is fine but if you shove that into others makes it NOT AT ALL FINE.
WHAT. SPECIAL. TREATMENT?
Like another member said above, what do you think happens in a public bathroom? It's not a ****ing meet and greet, you don't even have to talk to or acknowledge anyone in the bathroom. No one is shoving any beliefs into your face by allowing a transgender to piss in a bathroom. Is the government shoving the beliefs of feminists in a sexist's face by allowing them to vote or work in the same office as them? Because that's how your logic sounds.
They should not need to receive any recognition. Sorry dude. I nor the laws of nature do not care whatever it is you identify yourself. Do not force it onto others. I am not denying them of their rights. No far from it. I am denying them of their desires.
Why?
1. Nothing is given to the world from doing so
2. Nothing is taken from the world or from another person by doing so
3. You gain nothing from doing so
It's fine to pursue your own happiness but should you try to enforce it on others, you are not allowed. That is not just a SIMPLE complication. FACT is not based on one's perception/beliefs. You know how screwed up that is?
And what gives you the right to suppress someone else's happiness when the pursuit of it doesn't harm you and doesn't harm themselves? What's the point?
Human beings don't operate solely on FACTS. We aren't machines that just operate on stone cold date. It is a blend of objectivity and subjectivity that makes us human.
Yes, objectively, transsexual men and women are not, and may never be, biologically men and women. Objectively, you accomplish nothing by acting on that premise and denying them their desires, so what's the point in doing so? The only thing that is accomplished is making the life more difficult so you can maintain your beliefs.
Try to use that argument against a case. Good luck on winning cases in court with that argument.
*Sigh* This is why formatting is important.
Sorry but if you want acceptance, seek religious people. Logical and scientific people simply dismiss anything in regards of one's feelings. Those do not change facts.
No one says you have to accept it. Because quite frankly, it doesn't matter if you do or don't. Unless the thing you're against impacts your well-being, the quality of your life, or your life, then you have to simply deal with it.
But you treat my disagreement as some kind of a bigoted attitude when I am simply not playing along with delusional people.
Already explained why I said a particular part of your argument displays bigotry. Note that I didn't say you were a bigot, I said your argument displays bigotry because you CHOOSE to only apply it to one concept, and refuse to apply it to another concept that it applies to just as much. You are CHOOSING to enforce "biology" and "beliefs" arguments with transsexuals, but not with a concept like adoptive parents, which means a bias towards transsexuals simply because they are transsexuals.
They will argue as much as they want that "it is natural because so and so have the capability to change genders."
Well not human beings.
Humans are capable of changing genders, as genders are social roles that are assigned to the biological ***.
The reason why we are not seeing eye to eye is that you see my stance as something that bigots do.
You think that I do not recognize them as people. I do. I am not denying them of their rights nor will I treat them as nonhuman.
That's exactly what you're doing by dismissing their *** identity on unjustified grounds.
How is it that I am the one that is a bigot when I am fine with transgender going into the same bathroom as me (if they were born male).
Explained.
I think it is far more discriminating to disallow them to use the bathroom they had used simply because they LOOK different. They are STILL the same ***/gender (whatever you want to label it as, IDC).
What?
IDK why you brought up adopted kids. Because it is irrelevant as accepting them as human beings was never the discussion.
The discussion was that what they believe should not be enforced on others. Not whether to mistreat them.
Because it is an instance of you giving someone the "rights" of something they biologically are not. This refutes the notion that because someone isn't biologically something, we can never treat them as that thing.
Appearances you can change, but it will never change what you are. Not for human beings anyways.
You know hormone therapy causes actual, internal, biological changes, right? No of course you don't.
