It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: JoshuaCox
Regarding transgender people, it should be just as it is now. The individual who is affected makes the decision, along with a team of medical healthcare professionals. I could be wrong, but I would imagine the core identity (brain) would win out, in other words, most would still rather change their body than change their awareness of themselves.
I've seen a whole lot of gay/trans people say they would have been born "normal" if they had a choice, but they were born they way they were so...
originally posted by: JoshuaCox
I'm really not totally disagreeing with you here, but when using the child opinion as a measuring stick, it's a child with no real concept of consequences.
The "normal" timeline proposed by the trans community, is diagnosing the kid at 4ish, and swapping identity, then chemically blocking puberty as young as 9.
Wouldn't they be making that decision with a brain with flawed wiring??
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: JoshuaCox
If they had a cleft lip, why waste the money to fix it? who knows they might rather keep it..
A cleft palate is debilitating.
A club foot is debilitating.
originally posted by: JoshuaCox
originally posted by: DOCHOLIDAZE1
a reply to: JoshuaCox
why waste any more money and energy on transexual and homosexual, there are plenty of living starving and missing children that our money and energy can go towards. I say let the individual choose whatever they want to do when they are adults on their own dime, and put the money and energy towards something that actually needs to be fixed.
Why fix any birth defect?
If they had a cleft lip, why waste the money to fix it? who knows they might rather keep it..
So, let's "fix" everyone who is ostracized for being who they are. Then the world would be perfect.
I'm pretty sure the entire trans kid argument is based on the fact it is debilitating to those effected to attempt lot to live say the opposite.
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: JoshuaCox
Because that and transgendered( where the topic originated) are considered disorders.
Homosexuality is not considered a disorder.
originally posted by: Annee
originally posted by: JoshuaCox
originally posted by: DOCHOLIDAZE1
a reply to: JoshuaCox
why waste any more money and energy on transexual and homosexual, there are plenty of living starving and missing children that our money and energy can go towards. I say let the individual choose whatever they want to do when they are adults on their own dime, and put the money and energy towards something that actually needs to be fixed.
Why fix any birth defect?
If they had a cleft lip, why waste the money to fix it? who knows they might rather keep it..
Cleft lip affects the ability to eat and talk.
Not a realistic argument.
originally posted by: JoshuaCox
originally posted by: Annee
originally posted by: JoshuaCox
originally posted by: DOCHOLIDAZE1
a reply to: JoshuaCox
why waste any more money and energy on transexual and homosexual, there are plenty of living starving and missing children that our money and energy can go towards. I say let the individual choose whatever they want to do when they are adults on their own dime, and put the money and energy towards something that actually needs to be fixed.
Why fix any birth defect?
If they had a cleft lip, why waste the money to fix it? who knows they might rather keep it..
Cleft lip affects the ability to eat and talk.
Not a realistic argument.
Well then we shouldn't be making any changes in the first place by that logic..
Being trans doesn't effect your ability to eat or talk..yet we swap names and sexs at 5 and give hormone blockers at 8...
If (and I'm sure it is) being trans is debilitating enough to make the changes we do now, then how are those same symptoms not enough to make their brains match their body?
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: TinfoilTP
Did you read the OP?
We were talking transgenderism, don't muddy the waters with homosexuals.
Again, neither is a disability.
originally posted by: ScepticScot
originally posted by: JoshuaCox
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: JoshuaCox
No. Mandating a genetic modification procedure on the children of others is not a good step to take. It reeks of eugenics.
I mean should we begin "fixing" all the kids diagnosed with these disorders after the process is confirmed to work and be safe?
If a kid is born with a cleft lip or (Enter whatever other genetic defect you want), we fix it. We don't wonder if the kid might want the cleft lip later....
Hospitals fix genetic defects are birth daily.
Why clasify it as defect? Is hair colour a defect? Height? Just because something may be genetically determined doesn't make it a defect.
originally posted by: TinfoilTP
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: TinfoilTP
Did you read the OP?
We were talking transgenderism, don't muddy the waters with homosexuals.
Again, neither is a disability.
Well then that is the problem, transgenderism and homosexualism are not the same, and each is not dependent on the other.
The hidden agenda against intervention, is that there would be a whole lot less visual homosexuals if transgenderism was fixed at birth. In their minds they would be attracted to the same sex as before, but their bodies would match natures whole penis/vagina evolution for procreation.
What is a visual homosexual?
The hidden agenda against intervention, is that there would be a whole lot less visual homosexuals if transgenderism was fixed at birth.
transgenderism and homosexualism are not the same, and each is not dependent on the other.