Monday, 22 September 2008

Today's Battles

At the Salt Lake Tribune :
Our definition of marriage is the union between a man and a woman and we don't have to alter it to include the deformed or defective.
No comment necessary.

At RightPundits.com :
Forty years ago the federal government began to take on the role of Orwell’s Big Brother, inserting Washington DC into the hiring and management practices of almost every business in the United States. State governments soon followed, which leaves us today with an ever-increasing tangle of titanic-sized regulations that dictate what we can and cannot do as small-business owners in the interest of achieving state-desired social engineering.

The case of Diane Schroer is different. This is the public sphere and so the public deserves the most value for the buck. As long as her gender change does not affect productivity on the job, the decision of the court was morally right.
Yes, that should be the view of all on the right, not just the more sane. But it means we're making progress.

At The Other McCain
Just because I'm at a very early stage of transition -- being a married father of six and all that -- doesn't mean that I don't have rights as a transgendered lesbian.
Well, at least there's an attempt at (sarcastic) humour.

And Pursuing Holiness :
Zoe, you mistakenly equate brain abnormalities with genetic problems. In reality, pathological thought patterns shape the brain, and one of the best ways to cure many psychological ills (for example, anxiety disorders) is to correct the patient’s thoughts. That is the essence of cognitive-behavioral therapy.
...
Finally, no reasonable person has a problem with taking an intersexed, genetically diseased child and trying to mould him into whichever gender seems the most appropriate...
...
We assault masculinity in almost every area of our society, and now we have idiot judges blatantly encouraging men literally to castrate themselves. It is no wonder men are so weak these days.
If a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, this guy is a category V disaster. Ignorance and Arrogance are a toxic combination.

3 comments:

ephant said...

Finally, no reasonable person has a problem with taking an intersexed, genetically diseased child and trying to mould him into whichever gender seems the most appropriate...

o.O I don't think that's true.

Zoe Brain said...

I think it is true - provided *only* that you define "appropriate" to mean "whatever the patient requires".

Otherwise, yes, I disagree and very strongly indeed. It is arrogance in its most malignant form.

Battybattybats said...

"I think it is true - provided *only* that you define "appropriate" to mean "whatever the patient requires".

I don't concur. The word moulding is a serious issue too.