User Tag List

Page 5 of 18 FirstFirst ... 234567815 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 261

Thread: Trump sez: Transgenders B gone!

  1. #61
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    20,780
    Thanks
    2,052
    Thanked 5,794 Times in 4,234 Posts

    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    2147730
    Quote Originally Posted by The Horn View Post
    It's not OK to be a homophobic bigot . Saying it's "not OK to be gay " is like saying "It's not OK to be left-handed ". And I'm s southpaw and proud of it !
    ok, how about this?


    it's not ok to engage in homosexual sex (which is one of the defining characteristics of being gay)

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to ok doser For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (October 25th, 2018)

  3. #62
    Body part Right Divider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    13,762
    Thanks
    11,321
    Thanked 19,231 Times in 10,829 Posts

    Blog Entries
    5
    Mentioned
    34 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147683

    Lightbulb

    Quote Originally Posted by JudgeRightly View Post
    That's a non-sequitur if I've ever seen one...
    Logical reasoning has never been a strong suit of the fanatical radicals that reject God's way.
    Quote Originally Posted by Squeaky View Post
    That explains why your an idiot.
    Quote Originally Posted by God's Truth View Post
    Father figure, Son figure, and Holy Spirit figure.
    Quote Originally Posted by God's Truth View Post
    You preach against me for preaching obedience to Christ for salvation.
    Col 2:9 (AKJV/PCE)
    (2:9) For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

    1Tim 4:10 (AKJV/PCE)
    (4:10) For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.

    Something that was SPOKEN OF since the world began CANNOT be the SAME thing as something KEPT SECRET since the world began.

  4. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Right Divider For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (October 24th, 2018),Tambora (October 24th, 2018)

  5. #63
    Over 5000 post club fool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    5,383
    Thanks
    223
    Thanked 869 Times in 592 Posts

    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    277753
    Quote Originally Posted by glassjester View Post
    Are you saying that only XXY's, XYY's, etc should be considered "transgender" ?
    We haven't got to that part yet.
    Everyman is a voice in the dark.
    I II III IV

  6. #64
    Over 4000 post club glassjester's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    4,747
    Thanks
    586
    Thanked 1,298 Times in 1,020 Posts

    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    279131
    Quote Originally Posted by fool View Post
    We haven't got to that part yet.
    Why not?
    Your "catholic" is showing. - Sozo

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to glassjester For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (October 24th, 2018)

  8. #65
    Over 5000 post club fool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    5,383
    Thanks
    223
    Thanked 869 Times in 592 Posts

    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    277753
    Quote Originally Posted by glassjester View Post
    Why not?
    Because we have to figure out the first part first.
    Everyman is a voice in the dark.
    I II III IV

  9. #66
    Over 4000 post club glassjester's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    4,747
    Thanks
    586
    Thanked 1,298 Times in 1,020 Posts

    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    279131
    Quote Originally Posted by fool View Post
    Because we have to figure out the first part first.
    What's the first part? It isn't obvious what you mean.
    Your "catholic" is showing. - Sozo

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to glassjester For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (October 24th, 2018)

  11. #67
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    20,780
    Thanks
    2,052
    Thanked 5,794 Times in 4,234 Posts

    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    2147730
    Quote Originally Posted by JudgeRightly View Post
    That's a non-sequitur if I've ever seen one...
    therefore, we must end poverty

    because think of the children

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to ok doser For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (October 24th, 2018)

  13. #68
    Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle Stripe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Taipei, Taiwan
    Posts
    17,374
    Thanks
    323
    Thanked 10,618 Times in 7,750 Posts

    Blog Entries
    2
    Mentioned
    33 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147826
    Quote Originally Posted by The Horn View Post
    It's not OK to be a homophobic bigot . Saying it's "not OK to be gay " is like saying "It's not OK to be left-handed ". And I'm s southpaw and proud of it !
    Nope. It's fine to be left-handed. It's not fine for a man to have sex with another man.

    Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk
    Where is the evidence for a global flood?
    E≈mc2
    When the world is a monster
    Bad to swallow you whole
    Kick the clay that holds the teeth in
    Throw your trolls out the door

    "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
    -Bob B.

  14. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Stripe For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (October 25th, 2018),ok doser (October 25th, 2018),Right Divider (October 25th, 2018)

  15. #69
    Over 5000 post club fool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    5,383
    Thanks
    223
    Thanked 869 Times in 592 Posts

    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    277753
    Quote Originally Posted by glassjester View Post
    What's the first part? It isn't obvious what you mean.
    The first part is to get JudgeRightly to acknowledge that his chart is not accurate.
    Everyman is a voice in the dark.
    I II III IV

  16. #70
    Gold level Subscriber JudgeRightly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    On the road
    Posts
    7,423
    Thanks
    24,039
    Thanked 6,816 Times in 4,285 Posts

    Mentioned
    48 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147603
    Quote Originally Posted by fool View Post
    The first part is to get JudgeRightly to acknowledge that his chart is not accurate.
    No, the first part is to establish that errors in genetic code do not make a new gender.

    A normal mother will always have two X Chromosomes.

    A normal father will always have an X and a Y Chromosome.

    If you want to do a punnett square with one or more people with abnormal numbers of chromosomes, by all means, do. Just realize that they're ABNORMAL.

    NORMAL Punnett squares have two chromosomes from each parent and four possible NORMAL outcomes.

    Extra chromosomes are usually the result of an error in cell division.

    https://www.urmc.rochester.edu/encyc...ntentID=P02126

  17. #71
    Over 4000 post club glassjester's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    4,747
    Thanks
    586
    Thanked 1,298 Times in 1,020 Posts

    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    279131
    Quote Originally Posted by fool View Post
    The first part is to get JudgeRightly to acknowledge that his chart is not accurate.
    I don't see why that should have any bearing on your response to my question. Should only individuals with genetic anomalies (ie, XXY) be considered "transgender"?
    Your "catholic" is showing. - Sozo

  18. The Following User Says Thank You to glassjester For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (October 25th, 2018)

  19. #72
    Over 5000 post club fool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    5,383
    Thanks
    223
    Thanked 869 Times in 592 Posts

    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    277753
    Quote Originally Posted by JudgeRightly View Post
    No, the first part is to establish that errors in genetic code do not make a new gender.
    But people do have them.

    A normal mother will always have two X Chromosomes.

    A normal father will always have an X and a Y Chromosome.
    But everyone is not normal.

    If you want to do a punnett square with one or more people with abnormal numbers of chromosomes, by all means, do. Just realize that they're ABNORMAL.
    But they're still people.
    NORMAL Punnett squares have two chromosomes from each parent and four possible NORMAL outcomes.
    But everyone is not normal.
    Extra chromosomes are usually the result of an error in cell division.

    https://www.urmc.rochester.edu/encyc...ntentID=P02126
    But people who have them are still people yes?
    Everyman is a voice in the dark.
    I II III IV

  20. The Following User Says Thank You to fool For Your Post:

    quip (October 28th, 2018)

  21. #73
    Over 5000 post club fool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    5,383
    Thanks
    223
    Thanked 869 Times in 592 Posts

    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    277753
    Quote Originally Posted by glassjester View Post
    I don't see why that should have any bearing on your response to my question. Should only individuals with genetic anomalies (ie, XXY) be considered "transgender"?
    Haven't got to that yet.
    Everyman is a voice in the dark.
    I II III IV

  22. #74
    Over 4000 post club glassjester's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    4,747
    Thanks
    586
    Thanked 1,298 Times in 1,020 Posts

    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    279131
    Quote Originally Posted by fool View Post
    Haven't got to that yet.
    Let's get to it now. Your conversation with JR can continue, unaffected. Should only the individuals with genetic anomalies (ie, XXY) be considered "transgender"?
    Your "catholic" is showing. - Sozo

  23. The Following User Says Thank You to glassjester For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (October 26th, 2018)

  24. #75
    Gold level Subscriber JudgeRightly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    On the road
    Posts
    7,423
    Thanks
    24,039
    Thanked 6,816 Times in 4,285 Posts

    Mentioned
    48 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147603
    Quote Originally Posted by fool View Post
    But people do have them.
    Doesn't make them not errors...

    So what's your point?

    But everyone is not normal.
    And? The number of people who have

    The percentage of those who are NOT normal (ie "XX" and "XY") is statistically insignificant. My point remains.

    [QUOTE]But they're still people.[/QUOTE

    Duh. Never said they weren't, so what's your point?

    But everyone is not normal.
    Supra.

    But people who have them are still people yes?
    Supra.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 4 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 4 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About us
Since 1997 TheologyOnline (TOL) has been one of the most popular theology forums on the internet. On TOL we encourage spirited conversation about religion, politics, and just about everything else.

follow us