Well yeah, OP was nitpicking the word “accused” rather than “convicted” when he was not, in fact, a convicted sex trafficker. Words matter, accuracy matters, especially these days…

Soliciting a minor wouldn’t be considered as sex trafficking though, be would it? I agree though that this is a heinously cowardly description of the man…

Mountain biking. Ridiculously fun especially when you have good trails and a good bike.

Genuine question since I am not knowledgable about this: could you expand on how HRW is Zionist? Wikipedia notes that HRW has been criticised for being overly biased against Israel, and I read through a rather awful article on Sapir (which appears to be quite unapologetically Zionist) which indeed makes this claim. Is there evidence to the contrary?

Haha I have a lot of love and joy in my life, do you really need to resort to baseless ad hominems for your argument?

And why exactly do I not have a claim? I cited scripture which directly contradicts your point and provided a clear argument. I could be very easily “talked out” of my position if you simply presented any scripture where Jesus shows support for trans rights. Thus far you have not done that.

Those ads are annoying af

Jesus literally contradicted those passages, both in His most famous teaching (Matthew 22:34-40) and in the “why we can eat bacon cheeseburgers” post-resurrection vision in Acts 10.

I’m looking at the NIV translation of these verses and am entirely unconvinced. Saying some nice platitudes which are in no way specific to transphobia does nothing to undo the transphobic tradition that he is perpetuating.

The most straightforward reconciliation of this is to posit that the pre-Christian israelites either did not preserve God’s law as recorded by Moses after breaking the original tablets, or that Moses himself introduced errors when he carved the second set.

Strongly disagree again. The most straightforward reconciliation of this is to posit that Jesus as well as Moses were mere humans and none of this originates from God. Either way, it doesn’t really matter. If Jesus and/or the author’s of the Gospels had issues with the words transcribed from Moses, they should have addressed those specifically and advocated for trans people instead of staying silent and letting transphobism fester.

Most Jews and Christians don’t require their cloaks to have tassels or religiously mandate fields of monoculture crops or demand that men and women have entirely separate fashion. And even if you did, the most common form of trans-gender expression is to adopt the clothes of said gender, so mere transgenderism doesn’t violate Deuteronomy 22:5 (or 23:2, which is either abelsim or ethnic bigotry and doesn’t even apply to bottom-surgery transexuals.)

What modern religious people practice has little to do with what Jesus said, which is the subject of your original claim. Jesus’ words reified the transphobic tradition of the Old Testament, and without explicit acceptance of trans people and rejection of those original words, I see a very clear case that Jesus was (or at least perpetuated being) transphobic.

(It’s between you and God if you believe in Him or not, FWIW. Im happy to answer any other questions you’d like to ask.)

No I don’t have any questions; I have a claim with substantial evidence that Jesus perpetuated anti-trans beliefs and I have yet to see any evidence to the contrary.

And, just to be clear, you can’t cite any Bible verses about Jesus being transphobic because He wasn’t. All the gospels report Him saying are “don’t stone adulterers”, “divorce and emotional cheating are bad”, and “love each other as you love yourselves”.

I’m not convinced. What do you make of Deuteronomy 22 and 23? They seem pretty explicitly transphobic to me. Granted, these aren’t the direct words of Jesus, and I understand that Jesus “rejected” some of the old testament teachings to some extent… which sounds like a load of BS to me considering the Trinity doctrine. Jesus doesn’t need to explicitly condemn trans people when he propagates a tradition that does it for him.

Man you sound defeatist af. Go organize.

I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree. Like it or not, saying “Who is going to stop him?” is promoting a defeatist attitude amongst anyone who reads it. Why not say, “Fuck this, I’m writing to my congress person and taking to the streets again with everyone who I can possibly convince.” No one person is going to solve this alone, but a whole lot of people saying “Well what now 🤷” isn’t actually helpful.

No, I don’t think enough people are doing that, and I think that organization and advocation is needed rather than going on social media to spread defeatism.

I’m afraid I don’t understand. If Congress won’t hold him accountable, make them.

You’ve got a point for sure but that’s not what gerrymandering means… that is one example of gerrymandering. You could just as well have gerrymandering where a district is constituted by areas which did not previously form a majority of the now-winning party.

Why can’t your congress person do anything? Of course they can. If nothing else they wield power through influence, and at present they are not using that power to push back against these actions in any meaningful way. Clearly they are not being pressured enough by their constituents. And yes, you do need specific scheduled actions. Be part of that change and push back against the government who ultimately answers to you, the people.

edit: like c’mon, the response to your president enacting illegal & fascist orders is not to say “well who is going to do anything?”, it’s to speak out and act up. Are y’all really that defeatist?

There are lots of ways. Here is one set of suggestions: https://newrepublic.com/article/193193/fighting-back-citizen-guide-resistance

The people. Time to rise up, no?

Doesn’t this apply only if you are looking at mean average exclusively? There are loads of other metrics you can look at based on scalar ratings.

Right… Those famous tankies, The Guardian.

Maybe you’re right, but I sincerely doubt that they couldn’t have reported this more accurately without putting themselves at risk.

So in other words they are capitulating to fascists, when the responsible thing to do would be to report that ICE is claiming this isna suicide, not that it is a suicide. Sounds like shitty journalism.