Quote:
Originally Posted by Rathji
No, in my previous post, I dealt with each example individually, not lumping them up into some broad category that has no relevance.
|
And then come back with ridiculous hyperbole that has no relevance.
Quote:
|
Despite what you may claim, if this was to come up at any level or sport, the governing body of that sport would make a choice based on many criteria, including the physical demands of the sport, there own prejudices and the social climate at the time.
|
And then get their asses sued for discrimination.
Quote:
|
To claim that the Icelandic Hockey Federation could somehow be bound to allow transgender players in sex segregated leagues, due to the choice made by the Miss Universe Pageant is unbelievably ridiculous.
|
As is your leap from one to the other.
Quote:
|
However if you were to claim that over time, people in general will become more open minded about things that were previously misunderstood or feared by the general population, then that things will be allowed that previously would not have been. That would be a result of increased knowledge though and not because of the choice some antiquated pageant made about the disqualification of one of it's contestants.
|
Although there is no fear, it could be argued that I misunderstand - mainly because I do not agree with the proponents of the argument. The pageants
are antiquated and if they ceased to be I would not even notice. Furthermore, I don't watch or follow women's sports in any way shape or form so it does not affect me in the least.
The bottom line is that it is an issue that is political in nature and the only reason it is 'news' is due to the lobbying clout of those behind it. You made a pretty bold statement in:
Quote:
|
However, that doesn't change the reality that this is the best option for these people at this time.
|
On what basis are you making this claim? The one issue question that I am still waiting for anybody to address was brought up a few times from afc wimbledon (emphasis mine):
Quote:
|
If some drug company came up with a pill that would 'cure' every person that felt like they needed a sex change there would be an outcry, it would be decried as a facist plot to get rid of a viable community, there would be protests outside the offices by pink triangled wearing activists because transgender has become a community and not a medical condition, because of this there is only one direction we are persuing, which is to cut parts of peoples bodies in order to make them feel good, if it was any thing other than transgender, leg amputations, cutting, anorexia we would rightfully call it a psychological condition and try and cure it, but in this one case we have decided it is fine.
|
Why is it fine in this case to bring the body to the mind when in almost all other cases it is to bring the mind to the body?