Posted on 07/31/2014 1:41:29 AM PDT by markomalley
Msgr Pope ping
Oh, I think I can beat it:
PIV is always rape, ok?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-backroom/3108209/posts
Good gravy.
Analysis: A few people have minds are out of sync with their genitals for whatever reason. So to make sure those people are not uncomfortable, we have to mess up all children’s heads the same way.
I must say, I have never read anything stranger in my lifebump
It is called reality - boy or girl, as the design is intended.
Occasionally we have developmental deformities, but that’s just another reality - face it or go insane. Seems some people have such a hard time with reality, they insist others share in their shortcoming.
Bingo. Have you been reading the news, Msgr. Pope? People have lost their jobs for holding the belief that a coworker who was a man yesterday is still a man today, even though he's wearing a dress and heels ... and most people who are aware of it cheer, because they've been taught that there is no reality, per se, only individual perceptions.
See where this leads? "There never was such a person as Leon Trotsky, comrade."
Is it wrong I found that article hilarious?
This doesn’t even address the brutal practice of species assignment.
LOL!
I guess she must think that the womb is a sort of Schrodinger’s box, where the baby is neither male nor female until someone looks at it, at which point the probability cloud collapses into a reality?
If that is the case, then how would she avoid gaining any knowledge of the child’s genitalia? She has to change diapers, after all. And how will she keep the child from discovering which set of genitalia he or she has and thereby collapsing the probability cloud him/herself?
I’m all for keeping the gender of the baby a mystery all through pregnancy. It’s nice to have a little surprise waiting after all that labor. But not knowing the gender doesn’t mean there isn’t one!
Each time “gender” appears in your post, it should be replaced with “sex.”
I read the article at “Slate”; the author’s a barking moonbat.
I think of “sex” as the physical act, so it is not something I would associate with babies (except as an explanation for their existence).
Now I will have to go see the article at Slate. I’m wondering how readers over at Slate receive the article.
I think of “sex” as the physical act, so it is not something I would associate with babies (except as an explanation for their existence).
Now I will have to go see the article at Slate. I’m wondering how readers over at Slate receive the article.
Oops, it looks like no comments are allowed at Slate. Hmm, they publish such nutcase articles, they probably don’t want the shredding that would no doubt occur if they allowed comments.
You are forgetting that that is standard practice for the Left - Make outrageous statements, and then try to prohibit countering opinions.
"Sex" is our biological dimorphism, male and female.
Not surprising that "Slate" doesn't allow comments. Surely even some of their regular readers would think this is crazy.
It did make me laugh. It’s just more evidence that the Democrats are not exactly the party of science.
We think science is a procedure for investigating reality.
Leftists think science is a body of dogmatic beliefs, which are “true” only as long as they serve the Revolution.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.