• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Anyone notice how stable the Biden cabinet has been?

I fail to see what your argument is.
No argument. I stated that you have no legal leg to stand upon.

Your argument is as clear as mud.
The law only cares about biology. Is that clear enough?

Are you suggesting that the existence of trans people is not supported by medical science0?
The law doesn't care.

Is there a problem that the law makes an exception for trans people or should the law also make an exception for non-trans people?
I am not suggesting anything. I am saying that you have nothing unless the law spells it out.

Your position is quite clear. You think that the rule of law only applies when you wish it to apply.
 
I'm expressing neither like or dislike. I'm simply telling you what it is and what it is not. Though you're right, it's not about me. And it's not about you. It's not even about them. It's about reality.

This is the same mindset of “if God wanted us to fly he would have given us wings”.

Technology is about using the power of science to play with reality. It’s not just about learning and accepting reality. Turning a man into a woman is no different than turning a fat person into a skinny one through liposuction. Maybe the technology is not convincing enough for you yet. But technology has a tendency to improve over time.

But this line of argument is an old one about all previous attempts to play with nature and reality. You are saying we shouldn’t do it. But that’s what technology is all about.
 
Love the stability




Stability? I have a question, I know you will not answer honestly. Will democrats loss control of Congress in November?

Haha- rumors of Harris tensions with Biden, from the NY Post, is the same thing as the rotating door of the Trump era? You’re really trying- but no.

Maybe Dems will lose congress this fall. Maybe not. What does that have to do with the stability and soundness of Biden’s cabinet?
 
In re the topic line, not only has there been but minimal churn in the appointees of the present administration, but the number of leaks from the West wing of the White House, a torrent but a while back, has dwindled down to a precious few drops.

Regards, stay safe 'n well 'n remember the Big 5.
 
This is the same mindset of “if God wanted us to fly he would have given us wings”.

Technology is about using the power of science to play with reality. It’s not just about learning and accepting reality. Turning a man into a woman is no different than turning a fat person into a skinny one through liposuction. Maybe the technology is not convincing enough for you yet. But technology has a tendency to improve over time.

But this line of argument is an old one about all previous attempts to play with nature and reality. You are saying we shouldn’t do it. But that’s what technology is all about.
No, that is not what technology is for. And again, my statements are not advocacy in either direction. They are statements about what is real and what is not. A biological man does not become a biological woman simply because he wishes the transformation to occur. Delusion is not reality.
 
No, that is not what technology is for. And again, my statements are not advocacy in either direction. They are statements about what is real and what is not. A biological man does not become a biological woman simply because he wishes the transformation to occur. Delusion is not reality.

Science is about understanding what is. Technology is about using science to mess with what is- to make it more like what we want it to be. That does not make technology anti-science. Technology uses science.
 
Show me those tough questions being put to Biden. Don't tell me - throwing softballs is part of your definition of politeness. :rolleyes:
You said the people asking questions are "They are handpicked and vetted, for the most part, feeding scripted questions. "

So you can't back up your point. Got it.
 
Ahahaha! You mean the people who ask questions are more polite. They are handpicked and vetted, for the most part, feeding scripted questions. Steve Doocy is certainly more polite than Jim Acosta, or whatever posturing woke journalist chose to bubble up at Trump or Sara Huckabee-Sanders.

What were the toughest questions given to Biden on the campaign trail and once he got into office?
"What's that flavor of ice cream you're eating, Mr Biden?"

And you're now happy that these questions make for less acrimony and more harmony.
Good grief. :rolleyes:

My sincere advise, lay off the Fox. It is know to make mush of the mind.
 
Show me those tough questions being put to Biden. Don't tell me - throwing softballs is part of your definition of politeness. :rolleyes:
You're obviously happy to remember the truth-hiding con man administration under Trump and his sworn liar/loyalty oath supplicants. That is gone, so there is no longer a need for the twisted and ridiculous exchanges of those days.
 
No, that is not what technology is for. And again, my statements are not advocacy in either direction. They are statements about what is real and what is not. A biological man does not become a biological woman simply because he wishes the transformation to occur. Delusion is not reality.

They want surgery to look more like the opposite sex- just like a fat person wants surgery to look skinnier. It makes them happy and matches their self-image more. That's cosmetic surgery is for. Not sure why that's anti-science.
 
Show me those tough questions being put to Biden. Don't tell me - throwing softballs is part of your definition of politeness. :rolleyes:

When you lie more, you are going to have tougher questions. When Trump said something as obviously outlandish as that Covid is no big deal and will be gone by April 2020, when all the medical organizations and authorities were saying otherwise and it turns out he knew how deadly serious it was, you are going to get some follow up questions. That's just calling out bull--it.
 
Let's clear up one thing. You are using the term gender inappropriately. People do not have gender; words do. It's a grammatical thing.

If you mean someone is taking on a different presentation, or to use the old British word, a style, say so. The term gender is simply wrong.

Sex is determined by biology. Laws, regulations, and rules dealing with sexual distinctions are predicated on biological sex. Notice the period indicating the end of a setence.

This is relevant of what? Laws, regulations, and rules apply to a scientifically determinable feature and not to a personal choice.

I know more than one father of young girls who is glad males presenting as females are not allowed in the women's restroom in our state. Just sayin'.
No, you are choosing one restrictive definition of the word 'gender' that suits your argument and using it to reject other accepted definitions of the word. This fallacious reasoning is required in order to artificially reject the accepted social and cultural notion that sex and gender are separate concepts. That words have a grammatical gender doesn't mean that gender expression traditionally associated with, but not inextricable from, biological sex therefore doesn't exist in humans. Other definitions of the word 'gender' exist besides that of grammatical gender, and other definitions of the word 'woman' exist besides adult human female, whether you approve of them or not.
 
That comment was made not in regard to cabinet stability. I was replying to a post that implied it was only the right that tried to push unscientific concepts.

Thanks for the clarification.
 
Well- there’s also pedophilia and communism. Everything is pedophilia and communist. Don’t like the new traffic light at your intersection? Communism! Don’t like broccoli? Communism! Don’t like your new boss? Must be a pedophile!

People who are falsely accused of pedophilia need to sue for the defamation that it is.
 
Haha- rumors of Harris tensions with Biden, from the NY Post, is the same thing as the rotating door of the Trump era? You’re really trying- but no.

Maybe Dems will lose congress this fall. Maybe not. What does that have to do with the stability and soundness of Biden’s cabinet?
Sorry, I linked to another right wing magazine.


Who cares if the incompetent fools in Biden's cabinet haven't been fired. The people see the clown show and will vote the moron liberals out of office.
 
Sorry, I linked to another right wing magazine.


Who cares if the incompetent fools in Biden's cabinet haven't been fired. The people see the clown show and will vote the moron liberals out of office.

What clown show?

There is some inflation due to supply chain issues after the pandemic and Putin invaded Ukraine. I'm not seeing how that means we need to bring back the party whose party platform is to investigate Hillary's pedophilia chain operating out of a DC pizza joint.
 
No, you are choosing one restrictive definition of the word 'gender' that suits your argument and using it to reject other accepted definitions of the word. This fallacious reasoning is required in order to artificially reject the accepted social and cultural notion that sex and gender are separate concepts. That words have a grammatical gender doesn't mean that gender expression traditionally associated with, but not inextricable from, biological sex therefore doesn't exist in humans. Other definitions of the word 'gender' exist besides that of grammatical gender, and other definitions of the word 'woman' exist besides adult human female, whether you approve of them or not.
It's called a definition because it defines. Regardless, what you choose to call gender is not an appropriate use of the term.

More to the point, the law doesn't care.
 
I'm not seeing how that means we need to bring back the party whose party platform is to investigate Hillary's pedophilia chain operating out of a DC pizza joint.
WTF?
 

The GOP’s platform is now officially “whatever Trump says”. Really. Look it up.

Trump has no ideas except science denial, calling any reporters he doesn’t like “enemies of the people”, wild conspiracy theories, personal grievances, and fantasies of revenge against his perceived enemies ((which is just about everybody at this point) when he is back in power. It’s all about him, of course. It has nothing to do with the good of the nation or even his own supporters. Those are just tools to be exploited and used.

Most Americans are starting to realize this. Of course there will always remain a core following of true believers and worshippers who will keep seeing him as the persecuted Messiah and salvation. But America is moving on.

 
The GOP’s platform is now officially “whatever Trump says”. Really. Look it up.

Trump has no ideas except science denial, calling any reporters he doesn’t like “enemies of the people”, wild conspiracy theories, personal grievances, and fantasies of revenge against his perceived enemies ((which is just about everybody at this point) when he is back in power. It’s all about him, of course. It has nothing to do with the good of the nation or even his own supporters. Those are just tools to be exploited and used.

Most Americans are starting to realize this. Of course there will always remain a core following of true believers and worshippers who will keep seeing him as the persecuted Messiah and salvation. But America is moving on.

You might want to seek help.
 
Notice how Trumpers derailed a thread about Biden's cabinet stability into another stupid argument about trans rights.

That's all they have.
 
It's called a definition because it defines. Regardless, what you choose to call gender is not an appropriate use of the term.

More to the point, the law doesn't care.
I see. So is a 'handicap' an advantage or a disadvantage?
 
Back
Top Bottom