Remember, when you ask the transgender movement adherents for the science behind their idea that, when the body and mind disagree, the body needs to change, they usually offer only anecdotal evidence (stories of people who thought they were unhappy at one point in their journey and, at their current stage, now think they are happy). Anecdotal evidence, remember, is only one point in time and does not sum up a person’s entire existence, including any future regrets.
This post reminds us that we can all say wrong things, unless we go through life as a total introvert, never initiating conversation and rarely responding.
It makes me remember the folks who have said that the new unforgivable sin is being awkward.
Kind of resonates, doesn’t it? I mean, we will tolerate the office gossip, or even bring her close within our social circle, so long as she has good timing in her sarcastic observations.
We will do the same with someone who has a total “potty mouth.” As long as he says things with self-assurance, instead of awkwardness, we are good to go.
We will even forgive moral lapses before we will “forgive” a person who is socially awkward.
I recall a number of years ago when I was at an “awkward” graduation at a small Christian school.
The valedictorian was a very studious girl. When she walked the platform, she got enthusiastic applause from her parents, accompanied by polite applause from everyone else.
Next came the salutatorian, who was somewhat of a party girl (she ended up a single mother within a year of graduation–not knocking single mothers, but just saying that this was a Christian school, after all). This young lady got loud celebratory screams from all directions when she walked the platform.
The contrast could not have been greater. And it broke my heart. Not that a party girl would get applause but that a good student would not get them as well.
But studious people are sometimes socially awkward. Or they don’t care as much about their image so it can seem tarnished with awkwardness.
My prayer is to keep getting better in encouraging people, rather than saying the wrong thing. And my motive is to do that to honor Christ in my relationships to other people.
Hopefully I will never be perceived as awkward, but if I ever am, I hope the people around me will forbear making me wear a scarlet “A.” LOL!
I love the post, above, as I have been pondering similar things for weeks now.
I have gotten fond of Dear Prudence, the commonsensical advice columnist in the Washington Post. Since she is an atheist, I do, however, often find myself silently arguing with her. Here is why.
Prudence claims the same principles that the Bible says govern the universe. Only
. . . as an atheist, she can’t do that. Not without acknowledging that she is actually a post-Christian-era personage who is actively rejecting Christianity while trying to retain its logical underpinnings.
Did anyone ever actually promise non-believers that everything would just work out right? Actually, no. God, in creating the world, created common grace so that the rain falls on the crops of everyone, not just those who acknowledge the God who creates the rain. But, beyond that common grace, things can badly misfire in the lives of unbelievers because, um, the events of their lives are supposed to act as an impetus to draw them to Jesus. That is specialized, saving grace, applied to the individual.
The Bible does say that all things work together for good to those who love God. But that is different than what is normally quoted.
Another point I often ponder is that, if there is no God, then there is no reason to tell people to not be superstitious. I mean, wouldn’t a superstitious person have just as much of a chance of being right in his estimate of how a world works without God in it? What would make a logical person better than a superstitious person, under those circumstances? Either the world would operate randomly or it would be held together by some inexplicable system that was never devised by a God. Either way, superstitious beliefs should seem more valuable to an atheist than to a person who believes God exists and is in sovereign control. Right?
And, as Prudence often says that life is not a zero sum game, I especially have to challenge her on where she got that belief, if not indirectly through the Scriptures. I mean, she constantly tells women who are not rejoicing with their newly engaged friends that life is not zero sum and that they too could meet the man of their dreams any day now. I mean, each happy bride does *not decrease the possibility that a single girl will get married. There are roughly the same number of heterosexual people of both genders and the same percentage of them would make good mates. So there!
But the most humorous superstition/zero sum belief that Prudence has to oppose on a weekly basis is the idea that, when one couple conceives, they have just decreased the chances that their friends will conceive at the same time. She regularly has infertile couples (or others who are slow to conceive) practically cursing their friends who have had the audacity to conceive a child in their vicinity. They act as though the couple who have conceived a child have sucked all the oxygen out of their world in order to do so. And they justify unbelievable rudeness and displays of ill manners toward the expectant couple as a result.
Back to the idea that, without God, we don’t have a predictable world system and . . . well, how can Prudence prove that life is *not zero sum? What if the universe really does have a random pregnancy lottery and . . . once the hundredth couple conceives each day, no one else gets to conceive? Just sayin’
What actually happens, I believe, is that Western atheists enshrine the mores of the Golden Age of Greece and enthrone logic and philosophy. How very Western-centric of them, eh? Only . . . there are so many other times and places from which we could draw ideas, if there were really no God.
Do our American atheists really mean to suggest that logic and philosophy are, in and of themselves, Gods? If so, at least acknowledge that that is the starting point, for other atheists in the world may disagree.
As for me, I am glad to believe in a sovereign God, for I don’t have to worry about waking up one day and finding that I, myself, am the most advanced life form there is! LOL!
As a born again Christian, I found the above link to be immensely helpful in seeing the viewpoints of both the traditional feminist community and the LGBTQ community regarding bathroom usage. I would like to hesitantly side with the traditional feminist community on this issue–the externals are usually clearly male or female and bathroom usage should follow that–but I also see that I am increasingly in the American minority on my views and will have to accede to a plan B. So I will present it here. Skip to the bottom if the background gets too technical for you!
Just to be clear, I view transgenderism as an anomaly. A sad anomaly. I don’t hate transgender people but I regard them as delusional. The fact that other delusional folks are following closely in their footsteps, declaring themselves to be a different race than the one to which they were born or a different age than the one they have attained or disabled when they are not (until they mutilate themselves) shows me that the world is full of sad delusions. We don’t get ahead as a human race by embracing delusions though . . .
I am comforted by the Pope’s encyclical on transgenderism and family life this week. Although Baptists and Catholics don’t always agree, we do here. We have to help transgender people *without joining them in their delusion.
You see, the fact is that intersex people have always existed (one birth in 2000 right now, but perhaps that statistic is not constant, as DNA can be harmed by many environmental factors). So the idea that the existence of intersex people (a birth defect which usually results in being a mixture of both genders anatomically) proves that gender is not binary is nonsense. It is using the exception to disprove the rule. I believe that the LGBTQ community is being disingenuous to advance this argument (“intersex people prove that there are not just two genders”).
Even Jesus said that eunuchs, like the poor, would always be among us. There will always be a subset of people born in a way that makes parenthood impossible and marriage difficult. They have a slightly different life, is all. They are not less valuable than the rest of us. Jesus did not exclude eunuchs from the life of the church, like the Old Testament law excluded them from serving as priests . . .
Disclaimer: I am *not saying that intersex people and transgender people are the same group. They usually are not. I am saying that the argument for transgenderism being a real condition and not a delusion is being (falsely) predicated on the existence of intersex people.
So . . . what do we see by the huge backlash against North Carolina’s new bathroom law? Well, in North Carolina, you have to go into the bathroom that matches your genitals after a certain childhood age. But, by default, the other 49 states and the District of Columbia do *not have this legislation and, therefore, our bathrooms are non-gendered.
Let that work *for you, folks. You can’t legally be asked to prove your gender when you use a bathroom. If you have male genitals but are dressed like a female, you can use the ladies’ room. If you have male genitals and are happily dressed like a man, you can use the ladies’ room, too. Really!
So if you are out with your daughter or granddaughter and don’t wish to take her past a bunch of guys at urinals when taking her to the bathroom, take her into the ladies’ room.
I know many red-blooded American males will feel very strange about that but if your child’s safety is the issue, do it. Practice answering the questions that the uninformed might ask. “Are you a man?” “Do you belong in here?” The answer is, and always remains, “You cannot legally question my gender or whether I belong in this bathroom.”
See, the bathrooms are not just open to transgender people, they are now open to *everybody. And probably always have been, if my previous experience of seeing kids making out in stalls is accurate. LOL!
This will work great at stadiums, too, when the ladies’ bathroom line is too long. We used to wait for the men’s room to clear out, then we posted a guard while we used it. We don’t need to now. Just walk on in. If you are modest and don’t wish to see men at a urinal, don’t look as you walk past to the stalls. If you *are a man and don’t wish to be seen at a urinal, you can use the stalls, too.
Brave new world, folks. We might as well get used to it without fighting an ultimately losing cause.
I do believe this will eventually result in *lots of private (one toilet) bathrooms, but that will take a while as that is expensive. Meanwhile . . . do what you gotta do.