If you've ever wondered where you would have stood a hundred years ago when Eugenics was the horrifying crackpot scientific fad theory of the day, just look at where you stand today. Transgenderism is the Eugenics of the 21st Century. Based on warped ideologies and activism, with virtually no debate or discussion, it has zilch to do with science. Brought to the stage by an increasingly bloated mental health industry drunk on its place of privilege in our culture, it said if you think you're Napoleon it's fine. Who's to say Napoleon is an objective reality?
There is no scientific consensus at all behind it. It is only settled science if you accept the premise that all scientists agree, because those who don't are transphobic hater fascist types who don't count and deserve to lose their jobs anyway.
Of course this movement has already dug itself into the global mindset that would push to eradicate the Christian Western heritage by deconstructing anything that can be labeled Western or biblical. To that end, power player think tanks have converged to celebrate the mutilation of adolescents and teenage minors, while sexing up the youngest of these, all in the name of this crackpot shamanism.
Think on it. A month or two ago, news broke that a children's hospital in Boston was preforming gender surgeries on underage minors. Not so! the hospital responded. Local media outlets circled the wagons. National press outlets did their part by burying the story altogether. Fact checkers rushed forth to prove this was a lie - there were no 'transformative' surgeries being done on minors. It was a viscous, transphobic, right wing fascist lie. There were preliminary procedures being administered in order to prepare the teens to receive double mastectomies and hysterectomies once they turn eighteen. But no surgeries on underage kids!
Yet within a couple months we have the President of the United States calling immoral any attempts by states to keep minors from being so 'treated'. We have a CBS article praising the practice that only a month or so earlier was denied. That's quite a turn around. And that shows that the powers behind this are far more established than the powers in the early 1900s who would bring the logical fruits of Eugenics to their most horrific conclusions at Auschwitz and Dachau and Treblinka.
There's not much we can do of course. You can raise your kids otherwise, but imagine trying to tell Rolf that Herr Zeller is wrong. It isn't as easy as it looks. Not when every major national institution, and a fair number of global institutions, now sing the praises of Herr Zeller and his obviously infallible perspectives. Especially when the most we're getting from our brave religious leaders is silence, or assurances that we all just love everyone.
Again, if's fun to imagine that if we lived in the olden days, we would have been the brave heroes standing up to the evil of the age. Today, we spend all our time condemning the evils of the past and anyone in the past for failing to do as well as we clearly would have done in the same position. But how are we doing now? If we're standing by this affront to children and life itself, not to mention common sense and truth, chances are I know exactly where we would have stood when rumor came along about those strange camps in the German woods.
Well there were people who objected back in those days.
ReplyDeleteAnd they were often tarred and feathered with the same insults and epitaphs used against those objecting today.
Funny that.
Also you're not alone. Dr. Michael Egnor has expressed almost the exact same idea in this podcast.
I see Rod Dreher also posted an article going in that direction. I think it's the fact that in only a few months, we went from 'never a minor' to 'it's wonderful it's happening to minors.' And all with no consensus or agreement. Just one side with the power moving forward. The only difference is I'd wager most a hundred years ago weren't aware what was happening in the world of eugenics, while today a tremendous number not only know, but fully support.
Deletethis the article you talking about?
DeleteYep. Apparently he isn't the only one. But the deafening silence from most religious leaders, politicians and others in leadership positions is mostly the rule rather than the exception. Again, so much for wondering what we would have done in the past when faced with such things.
Delete(Tom New Poster)
ReplyDeleteWe can have some Catholic pride that the Church was the stoutest institutional opponent of eugenics, and the Knights of Columbus its great arm in this country. The attraction of the idea was curious. We fell for it and so did liberal nations like the Swedes (who were sterilizing the "unfit" into the 1970s), but stodgy old Great Britain did not, Parliament voting down such proposals. People had speculated about heredity and race since antiquity, but it was a French minister of education name Gobineau who first put the thing on a "scientific" basis in the mid-19th century. It (like transgenderism) was decidedly a progressive evil.
True. We've let secular scholars have their way for too long. Too hear most version of history, it's always the churches causing the trouble. In fact, it was often the churches - beyond just Catholicism - who were holding the line and standing on the right side of the issues.
DeleteIn writing, always use quotation marks with "transgender" (also “trans,” “trannie,” etc.) to signify that it is a faux term since nobody can change their genders. In conversation, be sure to make it clear that the term is not accepted and won't be acknowledged for the same reason. Don't ever give in on this, even for so-called politeness reasons. Apply the same approach to the despicable, anti-freedom-of-speech insistence that people must deny objective reality and refer to other people by their “chosen pronouns” that do not coincide with their biological/gender realities.
ReplyDeleteAlso, nobody has “transitioned” or is in the process of “transitioning” from one sex to another. Such is impossible, so this must also be resisted and made clear that it is merely a fantasy that also attacks objective reality.
The roots of the term gender come from the Latin genus, which means kind, or kind of thing. As such, one objective and legitimate application of the term ‘gender’ is the classification (kind of thing) of organisms based on their biological sex. This being so, everyone is a particular and non-changeable gender or kind of thing, which is either the biological male gender or the biological female gender.
Moreover, ever since the 12th century, the word 'gender' has been properly recognized and used as a synonym for the biological sexes, and this understanding/usage was made even stronger in the 15th century. As such, this rightful understanding of gender must not be surrendered to the “transgender” movement since they and their fellow travelers use their preferred yet still false definition of gender as a social construct and/or feelings a person has that may or may not coincide with their biological sex/gender to further promote their despicable agenda. It is also the case that the word 'gender' has been used as a grammatical term or category, BUT it is not limited to this usage, and so this false approach that wrongly separates biological sex from gender must also be avoided. We must always insist that gender and biological sex are synonymous to further demonstrate the folly of the "transgender" movement that proudly proclaims biological sex and gender are different.
Bottom Line: Male sex = Male gender. Female sex = Female Gender.
Many years ago the late, great Reverend William Smith frequently advised that "all social engineering is preceded by verbal engineering." The more we give in to the use of such malevolent and false terminology used by "transgender" advocates (no matter how many doctors, psychologists, church leaders, and so on believe otherwise), the more we help to normalize the abuse of properly recognizing God's creative order of male and female.
See https://www.etymonline.com/word/gender#etymonline_v_1349
By the Bye:
People who claim that they are "transgender," and that they "transitioned" tell the rest of us ad nauseum that gender is not really or ultimately about biological sex, and the fact that gender has been rightly used as basically a synonym or meaning virtually the same thing as biological sex should no longer be done.
But if they really believe that their claims are true, then why do the vast majority of these mentally ill people go out of their ways (includes physically mutilating themselves in one form or another) to appear more like the biological sex that they insist has nothing to do with their declarations to be the opposite gender than what their biological sex actually reveals?
Way ahead of you. I never accepted the word gay for homosexual. Lipstick on a ....
Delete