RE: NC Gov on the wrong side of history......
May 13, 2016 at 2:53 pm
(This post was last modified: May 13, 2016 at 2:53 pm by Neo-Scholastic.)
It seems to me that the issue is independent of any theism/atheism divide; but rather whether one believes that some words, like "sex" do or do not refer to objective facts and whether or not some human traits are normative. I was always led to understand that sex and gender identity were two separate things, although not always in alignment. Either being in alignment is normative or it isn't.
Many people have arthritis, but having arthritis is not normative in the same sense that variety skin pigmentation is. If it is not normative, then gender dysphoria would seem to fall under the purview of the Americans with Disabilities act under which would require public and some private organizations to make reasonable accommodations. I could buy into that. What I find problematic is that activists are making the assertion that gender dysphoria is just a one place on the spectrum of normative human traits while at the same time discussing health implications and suggested treatments.
Many people have arthritis, but having arthritis is not normative in the same sense that variety skin pigmentation is. If it is not normative, then gender dysphoria would seem to fall under the purview of the Americans with Disabilities act under which would require public and some private organizations to make reasonable accommodations. I could buy into that. What I find problematic is that activists are making the assertion that gender dysphoria is just a one place on the spectrum of normative human traits while at the same time discussing health implications and suggested treatments.
