Zone1 Stop Listening to Thomas Sowell

[Hector12]

So you’re just another typical Democrat…..anyone who doesn’t agree with you is just stupid.

End of discussion.

I never said that. I do not think that.

 

[IM2]

And he would still align more with current Republican values than current Democrat values.

Kennedy woud not align with todays republican party in any way. Today's republicans are the dixiecrats of the 60's.

 

[JoeMoma]

Kennedy woud not align with todays republican party in any way. Today's republicans are the dixiecrats of the 60's.

So you think the John F. Kennedy of 1963 would think that men can give birth.... I don't think so..
I am confident that the JFK of the 60s would totally reject trans-ideology which is embraced by the Democrat party of today.


That's just one example.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Or what?

Or they will send Reverend Al to get you.

 

[fncceo]

Or they will send Reverend Al to get you.

Pretty sure I can take Al on rounds.

 

[Lisa558]

So you think the John F. Kennedy of 1963 would think that men can give birth.... I don't think so..
I am confident that the JFK of the 60s would totally reject trans-ideology which is embraced by the Democrat party of today.


That's just one example.

No question. JFK would run as a Republican and be appalled at what the Democrat Party has become - destroying families, disincentivizing work, opening the border to foreigners who make false asylum claims, spending a fortune in government bills during high inflation, tucking tail and running and leaving the enemy with billions of U.S. military equipment, calling nearly half of all voters “threats to democracy,” and weaponizing the government against political opponents.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Pretty sure I can take Al on rounds.

No rounds. He will knock you out in the 1st.

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

So you think the John F. Kennedy of 1963 would think that men can give birth.... I don't think so.

WTF? I don’t think so either!

But as far as I can make out, only crazy “culture warriors” would say this, or would say that Democrats really believe this. My neighborhood is filled with Democrats — never ever heard anyone argue this point.

In short this is just hyperbolic nonsense.

Maybe you’re upset about “secret pronoun changes” to suit children’s preferences in school? I can certainly understand this (if it’s really happening anywhere). There is way too much faddishness over “pronouns,” at least in the media.

But somehow I doubt your own child is transitioning without your even knowing it. Do you know somebody this has happened to?

Well, granted — gay kids often in the past felt they had to stay in the closet because of parent & societal disapproval. But they hid it from pretty much everyone, and certainly didn’t change their pronouns!

I wonder if I’m not a bit guilty myself, though, since I don’t always practice “masculine tough love” with my granddaughter — and she’s almost 4 already! I even bought her, my daughter and my wife three cute little “Hermione” T-shirts.

Am I helping to bring down Western civilization? Will my grand-daughter grow up imagining she is not really a little girl, but is in fact a young witch? Will she one day fall in love with a scruffy, gay “Albus Dumbledore” - type character?

Maybe I should have bought them all Marilyn Monroe T-shirts instead? Would JFK approve? Would Jackie?

/s

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

No, JoeMoma dems don't say that, only you do.

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

No, JoeMoma dems don't say that, only you do.

Love it. Short and simple and very much to the point.

 

[JoeMoma]

WTF? I don’t think so either!

But as far as I can make out, only crazy “cultural warriors” would say this, or would say that Democrats really believe this. My neighborhood is filled with Democrats — never ever heard anyone argue this.

Your democrat neighbors vote for politicians that espouse trans-ideology. Many Democrat politicians that are in office have stated that men can get pregnant and give birth and/or they support academics that do. They are the people fighting for allowing children to take puberty blocking drugs and so called "gender affirming" surgeries that involve removing perfectly healthy body parts or construction fake parts of the opposite sex. Joe Biden and his Democrat comrades are trying to change Title IX so that public schools will have to allow biological males that claim to be girls/women to compete against biological females in female sports. This would also allow biological males that have male genitals to be able to expose themselves to biological females in female locker rooms for minor children.

You may have never heard any of your democrat friends "argue this" because you never had that conversation with them. And if your Democrat neighbors don't believe this trans-ideology, then they need to be electing different politicians that don't espouse trans-ideology.

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

Your democrat neighbors vote for politicians that espouse trans-ideology. Many Democrat politicians that are in office have stated that men can get pregnant and give birth and/or they support academics that do. They are the people fighting for allowing children to take puberty blocking drugs and so called "gender affirming" surgeries that involve removing perfectly healthy body parts or construction fake parts of the opposite sex. Joe Biden and his Democrat comrades are trying to change Title IX so that public schools will have to allow biological males that claim to be girls/women to compete against biological females in female sports. This would also allow biological males that have male genitals to be able to expose themselves to biological females in female locker rooms for minor children.

You may have never heard any of your democrat friends "argue this" because you never had that conversation with them. And if your Democrat neighbors don't believe this trans-ideology, then they need to be electing different politicians that don't espouse trans-ideology.

Well, I myself am not a registered Democrat. To answer your point though, I don’t think politician’s views on how to define a “real man” or a “real woman” — however you may define those terms — ought to be a key issue in voting for or against them.

Of course I don’t like bullies, demagogues, or witch-hunting types. I think politicians like that should not get anybody’s vote.

X and Y chromosomes certainly determine the broad physical characteristics of most human sexuality and individual sexual development, but not all by any means.

I’ve already expressed my rejection of faddish pro-“gender identity” obsessions with “changing pronouns” — which is the root of most of the confusion over who, or at least which sex, can get pregnant. To me all these debates are silly.

I’ve known many more liberal Democrats than you it seems, and have had this kind of discussion at many social events, dinners, etc.. My experience is that Liberals & Democratic voters have various views but really have no confusion whatever about physical reality and sexual identity. They are simply much more tolerant than most Republicans, especially “MAGA” Republicans.

Democrats overwhelmingly strongly defend women’s right to choose a legal, quick & easy abortion if they “get in trouble” from an unwanted pregnancy. They vigorously defend gay rights. As for “trans” rights … my experience is there is much controversy (and mostly opposition) to teenagers starting “early transitioning,” or older trans athletes participating in competitive sports, but almost all agree trans types and those who “identify” as bisexuals should not suffer special persecution.

My main concern is that all the nonsense — on both sides — of the “trans” and “gender identity” issues … distracts from larger issues concerning education, medical and dental health for youth, and other economic and social issues.

I certainly criticize Democratic voters for electing many assholes to Congress — but overall I think Trump-cultists and MAGA “election deniers” who follow conspiracy theories pushed by “Big Liars” & witch-hunters are a far more direct threat to the unity and survival of our nation and Republic.

 

[JoeMoma]

Well, I myself am not a registered Democrat. To answer your point though, I don’t think politician’s views on how to define a “real man” or a “real woman” — however you may define those terms — ought to be a key issue in voting for or against them.

I believe it out to be one key issue in voting for or against them. If you have no problem with "Lia Thomas", a biological male exposing his genitals to real female athletes/swimmers who didn't consent to that, then don't use it as a key issue... which kind of proves my point.

That said, I was originally saying that JFK of the 60s would align more with Republicans of today than of Democrats of today. Support for trans-ideology is coming overwhelmingly from the Democrat side of the Isle, not the Republican side. In the 60s, it was well understood that a man is an adult human male and a woman is an adult human female....something that many democrat politicians are afraid to say today.

 

[IM2]

So you think the John F. Kennedy of 1963 would think that men can give birth.... I don't think so..
I am confident that the JFK of the 60s would totally reject trans-ideology which is embraced by the Democrat party of today.


That's just one example.

JFK would not be a republican today. Period.

 

[Grumblenuts]

My main concern is that all the nonsense — on both sides — of the “trans” and “gender identity” issues … distracts from larger issues concerning education, medical and dental health for youth, and other economic and social issues.

Bingo. Its obvious purpose. Instantly made a thousand times more difficult since Rupert Murdoch ditched his favorite spoiled brat, Tucker Swanson Carlson, without so much as a "Bubbye!" by email.

 

[IM2]

I believe it out to be one key issue in voting for or against them. If you have no problem with "Lia Thomas", a biological male exposing his genitals to real female athletes/swimmers who didn't consent to that, then don't use it as a key issue... which kind of proves my point.

That said, I was originally saying that JFK of the 60s would align more with Republicans of today than of Democrats of today. Support for trans-ideology is coming overwhelmingly from the Democrat side of the Isle, not the Republican side. In the 60s, it was well understood that a man is an adult human male and a woman is an adult human female....something that many democrat politicians are afraid to say today.

Lia Thomas could not compete in womens sports without undergoing estrogen treatments for at least 1 year. That's the NCAA rule pertaining to trans athletes.

 

[Lisa558]

I believe it out to be one key issue in voting for or against them. If you have no problem with "Lia Thomas", a biological male exposing his genitals to real female athletes/swimmers who didn't consent to that, then don't use it as a key issue... which kind of proves my point.

That said, I was originally saying that JFK of the 60s would align more with Republicans of today than of Democrats of today. Support for trans-ideology is coming overwhelmingly from the Democrat side of the Isle, not the Republican side. In the 60s, it was well understood that a man is an adult human male and a woman is an adult human female....something that many democrat politicians are afraid to say today.

Transgenders are the Democrats’ new “protected minority,” so nothing will come of it, but exposing one’s male genitalia to an unwilling person is a form of sexual assault.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Exposing one's genitalia period to any unwilling person is an assault, yes.

 

[Lisa558]

Exposing one's genitalia period to any unwilling person is an assault, yes.

So Lea Thomas could be charged with sexual assault. I’m thinking Riley should bring charges.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

So Lea Thomas could be charged with sexual assault. I’m thinking Riley should bring charges.

One can try and see what the courts have to say.