Vatican issues document rejecting idea that people can choose or change gender

MontgomeryClift

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

WHO THE **** ASKED HIM FOR HIS OPINIONS?

I'm happy to hear the church take a stand on this gender mania. Thanks God we have one institution left that doesn't get dragged along by the machinations of GloboHomo capital.

How many wars has the church started?

How many wars have Jews started?

ohnonotgmail

MontgomeryClift wrote: »

I'm happy to hear the church take a stand on this gender mania. Thanks God we have one institution left that doesn't get dragged along by the machinations of GloboHomo capital.

How many wars have Jews started?

no idea, why dont you tell us?

FunLover18

_blaaz wrote: »

How has transgender sh1te become so mainstream the pope is commenting on it


Afaik its less than 1% of population it affects??

You'd swear it was a lot more than that given the amount of threads started on the issue here recently.

Glass fused light

Deleted User wrote: »

being (or feigning to be) outraged at this entirely unsurprising statement is a staggeringly poor use of one's emotional energy

ppl are allowed to feel they are the wrong gender/sex and they are allowed to take steps about it if they wish. its a personal thing, just like all the other political issues the church has been wrong about lately

Its not a personal thing, its depending on other people accepting a personal mental concept as being factualy correct when the other persons looking at a biological reality which is different to the mental concept.

Glass fused light

FunLover18 wrote: »

_blaaz wrote: »

How has transgender sh1te become so mainstream the pope is commenting on it


Afaik its less than 1% of population it affects??

You'd swear it was a lot more than that given the amount of threads started on the issue here recently.

Well about 50% of the population in the UK.
According to the NHS there are
a) men
or
b) women and people with a cervix
They have also published a helpful guide about how "lesbians" should wear a condom on their penis.

One eyed Jack

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

WHO THE **** ASKED HIM FOR HIS OPINIONS?

HE has nothing but hate in his heart for people and the only way the church can get in the headlines and be relevant is by picking fights and spewing their evil bitter hatred.

No one WANTS them stirring up hatred in the world.

How many wars has the church started?

And now they want everyone to hate trans people?


These people are dark.

Nobody wants anyone to hate people who are transgender -


The objective of the document — entitled "Male and Female He Created Them: Towards a path of dialogue on the question of gender in education” — is to support those engaged in the education of the younger generations to address “methodically”, in light of the broader horizon of education in love, the issues most debated today on human sexuality.

...

Nonetheless, the document goes on to point out “some positions that could provide points of agreement” within the framework of gender research, which have “the potential to yield growth in mutual understanding”. One area of possible agreement, it suggests, “is the need to educate children and young people to respect every person in their particularity and difference, so that no one should suffer bullying, violence, insults or unjust discrimination based on their specific characteristics (such as special needs, race, religion, sexual tendencies, etc.)”.


Vatican document on gender: Yes to dialogue, no to ideology

FunLover18

Did they actually use the words "no to ideology" in a Vatican document???

One eyed Jack

FunLover18 wrote: »

Did they actually use the words "no to ideology" in a Vatican document???

Nah, that was the Vatican News, a better source than the Irish Times at least, who appear to have left out the context of the document and it’s full title. It’s as though they did so on purpose, knowing it would wind people up... but that’s me being cynical

Anyways, full document is here -

“MALE AND FEMALE HE CREATED THEM”, TOWARDS A PATH OF DIALOGUE ON THE QUESTION OF GENDER THEORY IN EDUCATION

FFred

Glass fused light wrote: »

Ermmmm no.
Women do not have a second anus.

They too have sexual reproduction organs, these bits are for growing the babies in.

I’d say you’re a right craic at parties.

Glass fused light

Glass fused light wrote: »

Its not a personal thing, its depending on other people accepting a personal mental concept as being factualy correct when the other persons looking at a biological reality which is different to the mental concept.

i do not think i said what you want to think i said

the conversation around whether or not anyone outside of the individual should have to agree that they are gender x is totally separate to whether a person defines themselves as gender x

and that latter is what I addressed, i was careful to do so

SexBobomb

klaaaz wrote: »

You previously claimed that science was heavily influenced by politics without a shred of proof. 2,617 scientists disagreed with you, that hurt you alot.

Science doesn't operate on a consensus basis, just because a large number of scientists (which type of scientists?) agree on something doesn't make it so, Facts not opinions are what science is about. Galileo is a good example.

paleoperson

It's not the RCC that's losing here (I say this as an atheist btw), it's the gender-SJW types. Transgenderism is progressively being exposed as both nonsensical and dangerous.

I remember calling Brady Manning and Bruce Jenner he back when it was "like so uncool" to call them by their real gender and getting put on suspended status on some sites even for it. And calling out all the msm for their farcical labelling of them as their chosen gender, with people even being fired from jobs for "misgendering". They tried to push "misgendering" into being some extraordinary offensive insult, such a joke.

Now there's a lot of pushback. There are older transgender people coming out saying it was all a mistake and transgenderism is all nonsense. There are kids who now want to be their own gender, despite having been irreversibly damaged due to hormones and the like because they said they thought they were a girl and liked to play with dolls when they were like 7.

Sonics2k

hmm, how much should I value the opinion of an organisation that hordes massive amounts of cash, gold and other resources, while simultaneously directly acts in the cover ups of child abuse and rape, as well as the numerous rapes of their nuns.

This is the same lot that literally believe they eat the body of Christ, so I'm not going to trust their view of biology.

**** the Vatican.

Still waters

Sonics2k wrote: »

hmm, how much should I value the opinion of an organisation that hordes massive amounts of cash, gold and other resources, while simultaneously directly acts in the cover ups of child abuse and rape, as well as the numerous rapes of their nuns.

This is the same lot that literally believe they eat the body of Christ, so I'm not going to trust their view of biology.

**** the Vatican.

You're allowed to agree with something if it's TRUE even thought you might not agree with the person/institution saying it

Zorya

Still waters wrote: »

You're allowed to agree with something if it's TRUE even thought you might not agree with the person/institution saying it

No, no, we are not allowed to even disagree about things as friends/lovers/spouses/colleagues. Everyone must be on the same page about absolutely everything or else they must be thrown away instantly or at the very least divorced. You can only agree with someone if you have thoroughly checked their posting history to make sure it's one hundred percent kosher on every relevant issue (look at that now, a Yiddish word, cultural appropriation and Islamophobia in one fell swoop, oh dear). If you find they have uttered one word against goodthink then your task is to immediately set about having them fired or at the very least turned into public pariah.
PS What's this thread about?

Sonics2k

Zorya wrote: »

No, no, we are not allowed to even disagree about things as friends/lovers/spouses/colleagues. Everyone must be on the same page about absolutely everything or else they must be thrown away instantly or at the very least divorced. You can only agree with someone if you have thoroughly checked their posting history to make sure it's one hundred percent kosher on every relevant issue (look at that now, a Yiddish word, cultural appropriation and Islamophobia in one fell swoop, oh dear). If you find they have uttered one word against goodthink then your task is to immediately set about having them fired or at the very least turned into public pariah.
PS What's this thread about?

At this point this thread is about the victim complex of those who simply can't accept the trans people are very real.

You don't have to accept everything they say, but you can't refute their existence and presence as living, human beings.

hatrickpatrick

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

I'm confused. If they're saying that it's impossible to change ones biological sex then that's obviously true.

But isn't gender different?

A lot of people don't agree with this.

Zorya

Sonics2k wrote: »

At this point this thread is about the victim complex of those who simply can't accept the trans people are very real.

You don't have to accept everything they say, but you can't refute their existence and presence as living, human beings.

Trans people are real, living human beings. Hundred percent. There are some fab trans people whose stories I have listened to on youtube or read about, very endearing people.
Trans activists who deny the reality of biology and attempt to coercively impose their ideology and faulty science on society should be refuted. Hundred percent. The sterilisation and chemical or surgical inteference with minors should be refuted as an acceptable medical practice. Hundred percent.

Sonics2k

Sonics2k wrote: »

At this point this thread is about the victim complex of those who simply can't accept the trans people are very real.

You don't have to accept everything they say, but you can't refute their existence and presence as living, human beings.

i mean this means nothing, really.

nobody has done that in this thread.

ive never seen anybody do that....anywhere i dont think.

_blaaz

Zorya wrote: »

The sterilisation and chemical or surgical inteference with minors should be refuted as an acceptable medical practice. Hundred percent.

I dont know enough about trans people,but dont really see the harm.in people identifying as what they want??(it affects noone only person doing it ffs)

....but the above has to stop

A minor.cant concent to sex,its lunacy to think they can consent to a sex change

FFred

Zorya wrote: »

On this matter, I found this chap's musings to be interesting. The science of biology is at this time being completely ideologically corrupted. And people involved in the area are too afraid to speak out about it for fear of losing their jobs.

From 1.30 mins...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tmFZ0deR_vA

What the fcuk would Dev from Coronation Street know about this topic?

BoJack Horseman

This should clear things up

https://twitter.com/TitaniaMcGrath/status/1138166057351430151

Ok. (Prepares to be annihilated!)

This old Fogey can't keep up with all the definitions of sexuality that keep appearing.

So, would someone kindly explain what on earth all the fuss is about?

Because gender used to mean a state of being Male or female - so, what's changed?

And surely minors haven't been allowed to have sex changes? Because that would be more than slightly irresponsible.

suicide_circus

the idea that you can be any gender you want to be is about as realistic as transubstnaciation.

indeed as western society slays the old mythologies so we see new suspiciously similar ones take their place; priesthood, heresy, the veneration of the victim, inquisition.

BoJack Horseman

Deleted User wrote: »

Because gender used to mean a state of being Male or female - so, what's changed?

Everything has changed.

We've progressed on from that constraint.

Gender, like age & race are just social constructs.
Literally just labels.
Means of putting people into little boxes.

Thankfully we've moved on & people are free to be whatever gender or skin colour or age they feel like they are that day.

And surely minors haven't been allowed to have sex changes? Because that would be more than slightly irresponsible.

That's just bigotry.
A child trapped in the wrong gender frankly needs this assistance more than anyone to help them cope better.

You'll be glad to know we are making progress there too.

In California people as young as 12 can now seek medical intervention to prevent puberty and hormone treatment to ready them for their transition to another gender or skin colour.

This is literally a life saver for many young people trapped in the wrong body.

Zorya

^^^^ 8 years old. Dr. Johanna Olson Kennedy. Los Angeles. Full cross sex hormones. Government funded.

paleoperson

Deleted User wrote: »

Ok. (Prepares to be annihilated!)

This old Fogey can't keep up with all the definitions of sexuality that keep appearing.

So, would someone kindly explain what on earth all the fuss is about?

They unironically think that if say you're a woman, then you're a woman. And anyone who says otherwise is a "bigot".

Deleted User wrote: »

Because gender used to mean a state of being Male or female - so, what's changed?

They realized that for reasons of being pregnant or having testosterone, being susceptible to certain disease, whatever, it would be ridiculous and confusing to have to call women men or whatever in that case. Besides, medicine and science would never accept it because the difference is important.

So the solution they came up with is to incorrectly suggest gender is different to biological sex and to use this term "gender" as the basis of their calling the person a he/she/whatever. Now I am cognizant of the fact that when a load of authoritative sources start using a word a certain way that it's difficult to argue otherwise. But the truth is that they hijacked the word gender and the authorities were afraid and too much self-identified as lefties themselves to object.

Deleted User wrote: »

And surely minors haven't been allowed to have sex changes? Because that would be more than slightly irresponsible.

Children as young as 4 have been given hormones that can irreversibly stunt/delay their development. Not the full operation yet which would be insane. However you can't just suppress gender hormones that are part of normal development and then it all comes back to normal later.

Their parents are generally looney SJWs themselves, often in their early 20s, who are just as dogmatic as the most fundamentalist christians in that they believe that anything that is lefty must be right. What's unfortunate is that authoritative and supposedly-responsible professionals are enabling them on this.

Either way it's clear that transgender nonsense has reached its peak. Many commentators now predict the end of physical transgender interventions in children in the next 5-10 years, whether it be by regulations or massive lawsuits by people believed to have been harmed by them. I don't know why OP is acting like this hasn't happened, if he/she is pretending it isn't happening or is genuinely not aware of this.

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Everything has changed.

We've progressed on from that constraint.

Gender, like age & race are just social constructs.
Literally just labels.
Means of putting people into little boxes.

Thankfully we've moved on & people are free to be whatever gender or skin colour or age they feel like they are that day.





That's just bigotry.
A child trapped in the wrong gender frankly needs this assistance more than anyone to help them cope better.

You'll be glad to know we are making progress there too.

In California people as young as 12 can now seek medical intervention to prevent puberty and hormone treatment to ready them for their transition to another gender or skin colour.

This is literally a life saver for many young people trapped in the wrong body.

This has to be a joke post. There is no way surely anyone could be this dumb.

Literally a life saver? Come on, I smell troll.

DEFTLEFTHAND

Zorya wrote: »

^^^^ 8 years old. Dr. Johanna Olson Kennedy. Los Angeles. Full cross sex hormones. Government funded.

The fall out from this 20,30 years down the line is going to be horrific.

Danzy

The Satanist wrote: »

Anyone that pays any attention to this bunch are fools.

The greatest trick the devil pulled was writing on boards.ie ironically.

BoJack Horseman

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

This should clear things up

https://twitter.com/TitaniaMcGrath/status/1138166057351430151

Eh? Sorry, but I can't see anything "heteronormatively conformative" about a hetero male sucking a transgender woman's d*ck.

It's not for me to tell anyone what to do, or think - but this business of redefining what words mean to suit a particular viewpoint is crazy.
Live your life however you like - but if you want to live a more liberal lifestyle, then don't try telling the majority of the population what they consider to be "heteronormatively conformative" - because it's not likely to be "sucking a transgender woman's dick" - irrespective of whether it makes a member of the LGBT community "lol" or not!

Live how you like, I don't care, but just as the LGBT community are entitled to have sexual preferences, so do the heterosexual community. Trying to define what a hetero man or woman regard as "conformative", as being the same as what a transgender man or woman regard as "conformative" makes absolutely no sense.

You can make people who are different equal - but you cannot make them identical.