Horrifying Republican response to Bishop's sermon

People are spending a lot of time and effort coming up with theoretical future problems for people while ignoring the actual factual realities of what is actually happening.

Fact: this executive order benefits women. Immediately. Women in prisons, women and girls in sport, women in employment.

Theory: somehow this executive order makes life terrifying for trans people, will end their rights, lead them to being demonised, genocide/exterminate them depending on your degree of hyperbole.

As I said earlier, nothing about this stops trans people existing. Nothing about this stops trans people from claiming to be trans, or claiming to be the opposite sex. Go for your life if that’s what suits you.

You just won’t be able to compel someone to use wrong sex pronouns.

You will just have a passport that reflects reality.

You will not be able to be imprisoned with women if you’re a man.

You just won’t be able to smash a volleyball into a girl’s face in college sport.

If not being able to do any of these things “terrifies” you then maybe it’s time to reevaluate why these things are needed to validate your life and seek mental health support.

The Democratic Party had every opportunity to listen to the opinions of feminist and women’s groups and make decisions and policies that offered equitable solutions that worked for all those who needed those protections. They didn’t.

Where have the Republican Party ”poured vast energy (and money) into putting out messages framing the simple existence of transgender people as an enormous problem and threat to women.-” Or have the party discussed the significant issues that should have been already discussed and solutions found under a Biden government ?

"As a result women will no longer have to share showers and cells with males in federal prisons. Do you think this is a good thing or a bad thing?"

She wasn't asking him to rescind this order.
will.

Republicans have used people's fear of transgender people as a political tool. They've poured vast energy (and money) into putting out messages framing the simple existence of transgender people as an enormous problem and threat to women. This is making life terrifying for many transgender people.

He is a despicable human being. However, feminists have shaped and written this EO. Why would you deny who wrote it and focus only on the person who signed it.

I never said he was a feminist. Of course he isn’t. But it doesn’t matter. A feminist lawyer wrote the executive order, stuck it under his nose and he signed it. As a result women will no longer have to share showers and cells with males in federal prisons. Do you think this is a good thing or a bad thing?

@NotBadConsidering the "pussy grabber" is a rapist. Not a feminist. I assure you.

BTW - I've looked at the social media responses to this speech.

The numbers of comments attacking this woman as 'demonic' and trashing her for her looks and her assumed sexuality is something else.

Trump 'restrained'?

The comment he put out in response to the sermon referred to her as 'the so called bishop' and a 'radical left Trump hater' 'nasty in tone, not compelling or smart'.

He's demanded she apologise.

It is not political to point out the true teaching of the New Testament. Republicans don’t tend to like it though as they follow prosperity gospel which has very little to do with the man that threw money lenders of the temple and deliberately chose to associate with people who were shunned by wider society. Reminding someone who claims to be a Christian of what that actually means is not political in anyway.

He's all about the hate.

Yet despite this, the 1487 males currently in federal women’s prisons will be moved out as a result of this executive order and the lives of thousands of women prisoners negatively impacted by their presence - having to shower, change, live and interact with violent males - will almost immediately be improved as a result.

So despite being “all about the hate”, this executive order instantly improves the lives of women. Of course women prisoners aren’t worthy of the same compassion in this bishop’s eyes, or gender ideologues, but it’s what we’ve come to expect.

https://www.thefp.com/p/biden-transgender-federal-prison-policy-rhonda-fleming

He is a politician. He put through an EO and has included this issue in his list to address because he understands that will influence people to vote for him. Biden also signed an EO on his first day that was about these issues but prioritised people’s gender over sex. So, it is not rocket science that Trump decided the issue was important enough to give his attention to.

He has listened to his own advisors who have paid attention to the issue and the woman who wrote the EO is, I believe, a lawyer who has already represented women and girls in law cases that are about deprioritising sex over gender when sex matters. I believe she is part of his team at the moment.

You can believe he is doing it for whatever reason you wish to attribute to him personally, however, he listened and understood that this was an issue that was influential.

Just as Starmer finally understood because people kept discussing it with their MPs and on door steps in campaigning that he needed to stop dismissing the voices saying there are issues to address here. Many of the democratic countries undergoing elections this year will find they will have to at least listen to feminists and not dismiss them on this issue if they want to be considered by the voters. It is an issue that crosses party lines.

He's not doing that because he cares about kids who have gender dysphoria or women's right though. I can assure you of that. He's all about the hate.

Despite believing that women and girls have a right to their own spaces, I also believe that Kellie-Jay Keen is pretty far to the right. I don't support her or Trump.

You think that this bishop thinks that trans people are going to be demonised. This is your opinion on her opinion. If it’s an opinion, it’s an ideological opinion and not something based on fact.

I think what you mean by “demonised” is face the reality of their sex and the notion that people won’t be obliged to pretend they’re the opposite sex anymore. There’s a group of trans activists who have spent years following the Dentons playbook and they’re seeing all their sneaky work being undone in front of their eyes and they can’t do anything to stop it.

So their response is to mobilise their supporters, including vulnerable people who identify as trans, with claims of persecution and fear because it’s a last gasp effort of an ideology to keep hold of perceptions. All other ideologies have done it too: claim that people simply stopping believing is a sign of a godless society, only in this instance, that god is “gender identity”.

It won’t work. People who don’t believe can now not believe freely, and people who do believe will act scared, then realise that no one cares and have to move on with their lives. Life goes on.

She was very brave indeed.
I'm an atheist but she's my idea of a proper Christian.

Jesus said "Be wise as serpents and innocent as doves".
In other words, don't lose your innocent good intentions, but they are not enough on their own. To do any real good you need also to engage your brain and understand the situation before you act. Otherwise you'll just end up reacting to the loudest sob-story, not the greatest need.

Do you think Jesus would have made a woman in prison share a cell with a sex offender just because the sex offender said they were a woman? Or told rape survivors who wanted same-sex counselling to "reframe their trauma"? Frankly I don't. Because those are the sort of things that happen when people rush to "be kind" without really thinking it through. And Jesus was always very respectful of women. That's one thing that really stands out about him.

A church wasn't the place for her to do that. Trump had to sit and listen. People voted for Trump due to his policies not Harris.

The idea that Jesus was a woolly, fuzzy-feelings hippie who never had a bad word about anyone and simply wanted to preach love and tolerance is a modern, watered-down perception of Christianity.

Jesus Christ did preach love and tolerance. He urged his followers to leave their worldly possessions behind and follow him. He hung out with and helped the outcasts of society. He encouraged others to do the same. His anger was reserved for the rich and the powerful who exploited others. It's not a watered down perception of Christianity. It's Christianity as described in the Gospels.

Thank you for posting what she said in full @JessaWoo.

Not that it will matter to those who see everything through the prism of trans. Be it from a pro or anti stance where nothing else matters.

From what I understand it's "restricted" political asylum.

It's hard to know what to make of that without more details.

I think the ability to claim political asylum is important. I also think that the system used now was set up in a time when things like travel, and even the ability to make false claims, were very substantially differernt.

I don't think that system is currently working well, not just in the US, in many places. It's creating an administrative and financial burden that isn't sustainable. And if the governing classes don't find a way to address it, it's going to just collapse, or people are going to be voting in governments that no longer accept the idea of asylum even in principle.

So I am interested to see what they actually mean by that. I haven't seen any other place really come up with a good approach, it's a really difficult problem.

That's an easy one. It's already occurring!

So she directed her sermon at Biden then, given he was in charge until 2 days ago?

This vitriol here

What vitriol?

The Farms

Are you serious?

The absence of gender-affirming care - the spectrum of care (not surgery).

How is restricting access to harmful treatments to children that have no evidence base “demonising” trans people?

Allowing (even encouraging) discrimination and bullying against LBTQI

How? What’s your evidence for this? How does an executive order about biological reality of the sexes allow or encourage discrimination or bullying against lesbians, for example? It’s protecting lesbians.

Making education more faith-based, and in doing so, calling being LBTQI a sin

Teaching gender ideology to children is faith-based. It relies on the faith-based belief in an innate gender identity and that children can change sex. Gender ideology teaches that disbelief or disagreement with it is also a sin. So you think it’s ok to teach that faith?

How does any of your supposed points clearly indicate that trans people will be demonised?

There's vitriol here?