You guys need to watch this interview/documentary with an 11 yr old transgender

No, you merely need it to be irrelevant in order to support your views.

 

Right transgender people's bodies produce the opposite hormone than their gender requires thus they take hormones. Males, barring any hormonal deficiency, naturally produce testosterone, thus no supplemental testosterone is necessary.

 

LOLOLOL!!! No, they lack the hormones their body image requires.

 

Males don't lack those hormones.

 

Hahahaha... okay there, Mr. Prosecutor-man.

 

Did you have a point you wanted to make to me? Locate your nads if you can little boy and make it.

- - - Updated - - -

Correct. Females who wish they were male do lack those hormones.

 

I'll need to see some links proving that same-sex marriage laws, of any state, purposefully disallow heterosexuals from entering into same-sex marriages.

 

You are delusional. EVERY state would exclude the single mother and grandmother from marriage. I prefer to leave you to wallow in your ignorance of the topic.

 

Dixon is putting on his stupid act again. He knows perfectly well that (1) heterosexuals are perfectly free to marry those of the same sex if they should so desire, but (2) in practice, same-sex marriage is strictly about same-sex orientations. The new laws, in their majestic equality, permit heterosexuals as well as homosexuals to marry those of the same sex.

- - - Updated - - -

But not because they are heterosexuals. You have changed the subject again. Are you EVER honest, even by accident?

 

that is correct, thus this simile you made (post 258 ) was faulty and you have admitted to it.

Once again Dixon you are arguing with yourself.

 

No, it still stands just fine. The analogy wasnt of a transgendered boy being pumped full of testosterone.

 

Not if they are closely related. You can let go of the strawman now.

 

But of course this entire discussion is about gay marriage, not about close-relations marriage. You are changing the subject again. AND you omitted most of the context. Are you EVER honest?

 

well then the analogy fails. Because a non transgender boy is male and his body makes it's own testosterone.

 

No, you didn't.

If its so obvious then post it.

And once again you don't comment on numbers or age for marriage which do not fit your explanation. Try again Joker.

Just because you don't find the Constitution reasonable that doesn't change the reality of it. Religion is covered in the Constitution homosexuality is not. If you truly believed in the Constitution you would support an amendment to allow for gay marriage but you don't because you know your side doesn't have the votes for it.

I haven't dodged anything. I said your side doesn't support civil unions which is 100% correct. You pointing out only one state offers the same doesn't change the logic of pursuing civil unions over gay marriage and once again you dodge the fact that your side refuses to persue civil unions and only gay marriage.

You are answering your own question. Pursue a federal amendment. But you don't because you dont have the votes for it.

I'll say it again Joker. Just because you don't use the same argument for gay marriage as others on your side do does not mean you don't support the game goal as they do.

I'm not the one doing it here Joker. Own up to your own words.

 

So he's a mildly effiminate man, like Prince - what's your point? You think Prince needs a sex change? Looks more like Justin Bieber in a wig to me.

What about Michael Jackson. Was he just "born in the wrong race"?

Great "scientific diagnosis" right there, lmao. Imagine if this were any other type of surgery - what if doctor made a decision to amputate someone's leg or arm not based on biological evidence, but "just on his eyes" ROFL

That's physically impossible. "I was always Brad Pitt, I was just born as an average joe". lmao

 

And Michael Jackson's a Caucasian American, yeah. lol

Then girls who were blue jeans and play sports need a sex change, because "they're acting like men". What century are you from dude?

So was Michael Jackson - that doesn't mean this boy's "bravery" is anymore admirable than Michael Jackson's self-harming.

 

It's not a matter of "fear" or "difference", it's a matter of healthy or unhealthy.

People for example don't discuss anorexia, self-harming, or similar identity disorders just because "it's scary" or because they're "different", they discuss it because it's proven to be damaging and abnormal (and yes groups do exist that want to "normalize anorexia" and turn it into just a 'natural identity too').

Personally I can't understand how anyone who isn't ignorant or just a sadist, couldn't have a problem with parents encouraging a child to destroy his 'identity' and 'correct him' rather than get him proper treatment for his mental confusion (and "proper treatment" doesn't include removing genitals and injecting an underage boy full of chemicals).

Next to molestation I really can't imagine a worse and more long-lasting form of abuse, but hey some people are just too afraid of not "being nice" to be brutally honest. C'est La Vie

 

Well said - that's a refreshing change from the NAMBLA-esque "morality" espoused here by a lot of child mutilator apologists - and from a liberal makes it even better. Hopefully the Mengale wannabes will get the memo now.

 

I don't know if that's how he identified himself.

Girls can play sports. Girls have played sports for thousands of years.

He was himself. Don't really have anything more to say about him.

 

Men have worn "dresses" for 1000s of years.

 

I'm not aware of a paranoid schizophrenic who thinks he's Jesus being given plastic surgery to make him look like Jesus as a "treatment". But then again I've never practiced medicine at Auschwitz.

 

That is not comparable to "dresses" that women wore today. Togas don't look feminine.

 

Togas are not dresses. They're togas.

 

I'm just distorting his logic

- - - Updated - - -

Regardless if a man wore a toga today, it would be considered a dress. For the most of Western history women weren't allowed to play in professional sports - so by your logic any girl who plays sports "isn't confirming to a traditional role", and therefore might be "transgender".