If a conservative were to say bla blq bla that Jimmy Kimmel just bla bla bla yadda yadda:
In the place of ABC’s late-night Jimmy Kimmel: The “Man Show” Jimmy Kimmel. The only thing missing were the women on trampolines.
Kimmel took aim Thursday at the Christian proprietor of Masterpiece Cakeshop in Colorado. For the late-night funny man, the takeaway from Jack Phillips’ refusal to bake a cake celebrating a trans person’s transition is that the cakemaker might be gay, and that he sure looks gay.
“It’s funny because this is a guy who spends all day, every day, meticulously designing flowers out of icing. His whole life is gay, OK?” Kimmel said to laughs. “I don’t know if the wrong cake might bring that to life or what.”
The late-night host turned his attention to the shop owner’s physical appearance, adding for good measure that Phillips is “the totally straight cake baker.”
“You would think that someone who looks like the Reba McEntire’s version of Col. Sanders would be more sympathetic to gender identity issues,” the host laughed.
“Progs” jabber about “right wing hate”, and then marinade their own culture in the real thing.
The most depressingly evergreen story in all of media.
Privilege
[priv-uh-lij, priv-lij]
noun
Definition: We can do what you can’t.
nah being against trans isnt being closeted gay. The closeted gay people are the right wing “anti gay preachers” who scream “I like the D but cant accept it”. Seriously if you care about what people do behind closed doors in the privacy of their own homes, its you that has the problem. Not them. I personally have had enough surprisingly deep conversations with gay and lesbian indivduals that I do believe they are born that way.
The problem with saying that homosexuals are “born that way” is that there is no biological marker for homosexuality. The sources of human behavior are extremely complex, and homosexuality is a behavior, not a condition.
Think about it. Suppose that there was a biological marker for homosexuality (or heterosexuality). now suppose a person behaved in a manner contrary to how the marker says they should behave. What are they?
MP I believe it has been observed as a natural phenomenon in nature, google it. I aint touching that with my work computer.
Kimmel’s words suggest to me that the left is not only stereotyping artists, but is also rather threatened at the possibility that someone could have the inclinations, but would not live them out.
And quite frankly, having known at least one person who died of AIDS–quite a miserable death it is–if someone came to me and said he had that inclination, I would be inclined to tell him to do exactly what Kimmel accuses Jack Phillips of doing. Have some stress, but life a life!
And is it what Phillips is doing? Not by my estimation.
Regarding the notion of innate homosexuality, perhaps, but cases like the recent allegedly lesbian professor basically begging her theoretically homosexual postdoc to go to bed with her suggest to me that for at least a portion of homosexuals, it’s opportunistic sexuality, not a true preference for the same sex. For that group–I don’t know how extensive it is–it seems that the other person is in some ways a life support system for the parts they use to achieve orgasm.
the reason I do say that is because when coming of age in puberty they always said they felt different circa 13-15 when attraction for the opposite sex just wasnt there.
I feel that equating trans to gay and lesbians is an insult to gays and lesbians because I believe that there is no such thing as trans. It is a mental disorder that needs to be treated. How else do you explain the 50% suicide rate for supposed trans people? They dont need acceptance, they need help. Personally I am not angry at anyone who claims to be trans I just feel that society as a whole, especially the leftists, is failing them. And I say this as a person who has severly struggled with mental illness and has a nice long family history of it too. Also side note I posted basically this on a left-wing site on Facebook and I was flagged for hate speech, what a lovely tolerant world we live in…
The issue isn’t whether homosexual behavior is legitimate, the issue is whether religious beliefs are legitimate.
Kimmel’s remarks implicitly deny the baker’s sincerely held religious beliefs are legitimate – they can’t be, the baker is a closet homosexual himself.
Kimmel needs to deny the legitimacy of religious belief so that he can argue gay rights are more important than sham religious beliefs. Otherwise, he’s got no grounds to ridicule the baker.
Are gay rights more important than sincerely held religious beliefs, or is it the other way around? Kimmel side-steps the issue. If they’re not sincerely held religious beliefs, they’re a sham for bigotry and closet homosexuality.
there is no such thing as trans. It is a mental disorder that needs to be treated. How else do you explain the 50% suicide rate for supposed trans people? They dont need acceptance, they need help.
Somewhat agree, POD. And the supposed party of “science” is rather reluctant to address the elephant in the room that is the relatively-high suicide rate among trans people. I have a nephew-turned-niece. The family has been supportive and accepting. Nevertheless, I worry about getting that call someday. If it happens, will it be because the family wasn’t supportive or accepting enough? Or will it be the result of an untreated mental illness?
SP publuc library hosts a meet the trannies day for your kiddies.
Then, there is this:
https://www.msn.com/en-ca/video/viral/7-year-old-trans-child-wins-la-pride-parade-with-fierce-strut-in-heels/vi-AAywUmJ
And, just imagine…The Catholic church is in turmoil because Love has led some adolescent boys into the caring arms of their parish priests, and yet some BIGOTS need to h8 them for it.
Apparently, this baker won’t even bake a Halloween themed cake, because he equates it with Satan and evil.
if thats the case, this almost seems like a real life phising scheme by the left to slowly chip away at religious liberty, which they clearly hate, and the beginning of the end of the 1st amendment. But I could just be a paranoid religious freak…
This is what the APA says about sexual orientation:
There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay or lesbian orientation. Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors. Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles; most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation.
http://www.apa.org/topics/lgbt/orientation.aspx
Not a lot of definite statements in there. “Nobody knows anything.”
most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation.
That’s easy to believe. Most people who grow to be moral people that value their self-respect weren’t born with thise traits; their parwnts taught it to them.
Same is true of 5 year old boys parading down the street in women’s clothes.
” . . . most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation.”
So, the APA doesn’t say that all people have no choice about their sexual orientation, it uses a three-way qualification. Not “all”, but “most”, not “have”, but “experience”, not “choice”, but “sense of choice”, and even “sense” is qualified with “little or no”.
There is nothing in this clause, “. . . most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation”, precludes a person willingly choosing their sexual orientation.