Jumi
Well-Known Member
There are plenty of clueless mothers too.However the mother may be in denial
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
There are plenty of clueless mothers too.However the mother may be in denial
I would go with the established legal age of adulthood. Typically 18 although some might consider 21 more appropriate.What arbitrary age is enough, if you break someone's mind as a child, what age would you allow them to start to recover their own identity?
Possibly the worst feature of revealed religions, like Mormonism and Christianity and Islam, is the tendency to encourage meanness and primitive ethics among their adherents.That being said, no child should be forced to refer to another child as their "preferred pronoun" rather than the pronoun decided by their biology.
If people before 18 or 21 didn't think about sex, that would be a decent idea.I would go with the established legal age of adulthood. Typically 18 although some might consider 21 more appropriate.
Wow, sounds like very traumatizing to refer to someone with a pronoun as a way of respecting who they are.That being said, no child should be forced to refer to another child as their "preferred pronoun" rather than the pronoun decided by their biology.
Forcing someone to say something they do not believe is "mean" and "primitive".Possibly the worst feature of revealed religions, like Mormonism and Christianity and Islam, is the tendency to encourage meanness and primitive ethics among their adherents.
Tom
Possibly the worst feature of revealed religions, like Mormonism and Christianity and Islam, is the tendency to encourage meanness and primitive ethics among their adherents.
Tom
I would go with the established legal age of adulthood. Typically 18 although some might consider 21 more appropriate.
Possibly the worst feature of revealed religions, like Mormonism and Christianity and Islam, is the tendency to encourage meanness and primitive ethics among their adherents.
Tom
I would go with the established legal age of adulthood. Typically 18 although some might consider 21 more appropriate.
If people before 18 or 21 didn't think about sex, that would be a decent idea.
If people before 18 or 21 didn't think about sex, that would be a decent idea.
Since transgender children are far more likely to get raped than normal children, I would tell my children not to associate with transgender children and if they have to interact with them, I would tell them to ridicule and degrade them.
This is what I meant when I said they were likely to "be targeted by inconsiderate people who lack empathy for their fellow humans."
I feel deeply sorry for your children, if you have them. And if you don't, I hope you learn to treat people with basic human decency before you do.
Very much on the contrary.
I think parents who encourage their children to dress and behave like freaks are the ones who lack empathy.
It's not hard to raise a child properly and in a way that is likely to mitigate the potential for them to experience harm and maximize their potential to succeed.
The idea of an adult encouraging a child to experiment with their sexual identity or gender identity is sick and repugnant at best and a form of criminal sexualization at worst. It's practically child abuse.
Raising and encouraging a child to behave and be normal is the best way to go in every circumstance.
Since transgender children are far more likely to get raped than normal children, I would tell my children not to associate with transgender children and if they have to interact with them, I would tell them to ridicule and degrade them.
So, if a boy decides to be a girl in a prepubescent classroom, do you think there is any negative impact on the developing mind of a child being taught to call he/him her/she and accept it as nothing disordered or unhealthy?
Should "she" use the girl's room?
I don't find your reasoning to be a good justification to deny all kids presenting with gender dysphoria access to the correct facilities. Yes, there are cases where they are not actually trans but obviously there's actual trans people, as you admit. So why hurt the actual trans people? We know that trans people pose very little risk to cis people. It's almost always cis people harassing and violating trans people in restrooms than the other way around (yes, including cis women harassing and assaulting trans women). That in mind, it makes more sense to let them use the facilities of their stated gender unless there is an objective reason not to. People should be treated as individuals. We are talking about kids and not adults, so I'm not sure what harm people are expecting from this. It's actually extremely perverse because it seems that adults are projecting perverted sexual intentions onto kids, which wouldn't even have a concept of such things. Adults are the messed up ones in this world, not children.Nope. Based primarily on the answer above.
AgreeI think this is less relevant than the well being of a child who believes they are transgender. More is "not" known than "is" known about this phenomenon. I think we are too quick to accept such claims. But because there is enough evidence to suggest that there are such conditions, they shouldn't be offhandedly dismissed either. I think it is much more complex than "how one feels inside" and I hope for more objective criteria to separate those who may be suffering from other psychological/identity issues from those who truly are transgender.
As to the OP question, no. I fail to see any harm. I would tell my child, "Sometimes this is the case, but I don't think it is always the case just because someone says so. But I don't know that for sure. So until we know, I think it is best to be very nice to that person and treat them as they want to be treated."
Disagree.Nope. Based primarily on the answer above.