[PLUG-TALK] The homosexuality discussion is pointless now...

Michael Robinson plug_1 at robinson-west.com
Thu Jan 8 13:22:10 PST 2009

> What is a man?
> What is a woman?
 <?מיהו יהודי‎
> What makes our identity?
> What is interesting about the case you bring up is that a "man" was  
> raised as a "woman".... but who/what determined whether they were a  
> man or a woman to start with? Was "he" a "failed woman" trying to be  
> a man? Was "he" a "gay woman" who didn't like advances from men? Was  
> he both?
> As far as not being able to have two genders in one person, I don't  
> know what to say. There's quite the historical record to reference.

In this particular story, the person in question was born male with
a deformity that was "severe enough," for doctors to recommend that
he be raised as a girl.  This story is quoted as an ethics example
for human development classes.  Identity comes from social environment
and is partially influenced, but not determined, by genes.  Most of
the time, genetic men identify as men and genetic women identify as
women.  Men can be feminized if they are raised by women with no
men around and girls can be masculinized if they see their mothers
abused by men.  Abuse is very powerful and needs to be rooted out.
The alternative when people become homosexuals is to ignore the
abuse that often is the cause and say that that is just the way
they are.

> Welcome to Oregon!
> We're Pioneers here.

That is highly debatable.  The death with dignity revolution fizzled
thank God.

> We kind of like to think we're part of a "new world", not an "old  
> world".

A wise man does not abandon what is good in the old world to create
a new one.  The founding fathers did not abandon what works in England
when they created the federal system.

> > I'm still for a ban on IVF because it isn't fair for a child to not  
> > be connected with his/her biological parents if at all possible.
> If you were a child of a rapist, you might think differently. Who knows.

You are assuming that the rapist will not change for the better 
later in his life.  Indeed, many children want to know who their 
real fathers are regardless of the circumstances behind their
conception.  Sometimes, knowing is a medical necessity.  Children 
should be paired with their biological parents whenever possible 
barring an extremely good reason not to.  Even if the biological
parent is dangerous for some reason, a child has the right to
know who that parent is.

For the good of society, I want to see all states require at
a minimum the collection of identifying information by certain
web sites so random people can't see lude and otherwise sexual
activities over the web.  If I can be arrested for having
porn on my computer, the person who put it on the web should
be arrested as well.  Concerning children, society has a 
responsibility as a whole to protect children where saying
that the parents simply need to keep their children behind
filters is not good enough.  There isn't a perfect filter
because sites that show lude activity and photos are not
required to have a universally recognizable feature that
filters can easily pick up.  There's also the problem of
a site potentially being legit even if it has certain 
words in it that the filter will tag.  Solving a problem
by ignoring the supply side is no solution at all in the
long run.  We will never stop drug abuse in this country
by simply keeping an eye on potential drug abusers and
forcing them to get treatment, the supply of drugs has to
be cut off.  We will never solve the problem of sexual
slavery by expecting everyone in the world to ignore the
lude images that are available on the web.  It is in
society's best interest to make porn less accessible
because doing so lowers crime rates.

More information about the PLUG-talk mailing list