Ideologues and Transgenderism – Frightening Stuff

Anyone involved in the culture wars, in political debates, or in discussing the various social and moral hot potato issues of the day, will be well aware of what it is like to have to deal with ideologues. They can be a very scary bunch indeed.

So just what is an ideologue? A quick search for a few online definitions gives us this:
-an adherent of an ideology, especially one who is uncompromising and dogmatic.
-an often blindly partisan advocate or adherent of a particular ideology.

Victor Reppert, author of C. S. Lewis’s Dangerous Idea: In Defense of the Argument from Reason (IVP, 2003), once put it this way:

“An ideologue is someone who looks at everything through the ‘glasses’ of their favored viewpoint, and refuses to allow any merit in the perspective of someone who sees things from an opposing perspective. In debate or discussion an ideologue will invariably make no concessions whatsoever to the other side. Nothing that someone on the other side says has any legitimacy whatsoever.”

The more dangerous an ideologue is depends on how dangerous the ideology is. If the ideology one endorses and insists upon is morally and rationally unacceptable, they must be resisted all the more. For example, Nazi ideology is not morally and rationally acceptable, so a Nazi ideologue is someone we should strongly object to.

moonbatAnd someone who holds fiercely to a particular point of view even though it is incoherent and not at all in sync with reality would be another type of ideologue we would want to resist, or give a very wide berth to. Folks defending the indefensible, and those defending just plain absurd stances are among the worst of the ideologues we have to contend with.

An absolutely perfect example of this (and yes I know, there would be plenty to choose from here), was just featured in a recent debate on Fox News. This guy was a real lulu. Talk about a mindless ideologue who refuses to let facts and reality get in his way.

I refer to DNC Senior Adviser and head of the Democrats’ Trump War Room Zac Petkanas, and his debate with Fox News host Tucker Carlson. The discussion was on transgenderism, and Trump’s decision to reverse President Obama’s guidelines on transgendered students.

Petkanas called Trump a “monster” for doing this, so Carlson asked him if Obama was also a monster since for seven years he did not come out with this policy. Petkanas simply kept changing the subject instead of answering that question. But soon the debate got real interesting, as Carlson pressed Petkanas to explain just how one can become a different sex simply by saying so.

The gender bender ideologues of course have this at the very heart of their position: gender is simply a social construct, and it has no basis whatsoever in biology or reality. Thus one’s gender is determined in exactly the same way as one decides which colour of socks one will wear for the day: entirely by choice.

Carlson said the debate must move from politics to the actual science: “The core question is, ‘What constitutes male and female?’” If sex is determined by the individual, how do I know if a person is a man or a woman? Is there some absolute standard to meet on this or not?

Carlson had to remind the Democrat ideologue that such anti-biological and anti-reality views have very real implications for all sorts of things. Consider the sex-segregated basis for women’s sporting teams, women’s prisons, women’s colleges, and so on. Can any guy simply call himself a woman and roll up to these things, demanding to be included?

Asked Carlson, “If your sex is what you say it is, then what prevents me from playing on a women’s field hockey team? What prevents me from getting convicted of a felony and demanding to go to a women’s prison? It’s a real question.”

And could a guy for example get a Small Business Administration loan for women-owned businesses if he simply identifies as a woman? Again, Petkanas refused – or was unable – to answer Carlson. All he could come up with was the most moronic and appalling gender bender moonbattery: “One’s gender identity is enough to show what gender they are.”

And again: “Your gender identity determines your gender, period.” Now this is the stuff of mentally challenged ideologues in action. It does not get any better – or worse – than that. When folks live with both feet planted in mid-air, this is the sort of stuff you are going to get.

Thankfully Carlson kept pressing him on this. He kept asking Petkanas to name one scientist or one biologist anywhere in the world who says that your gender is simply whatever you want it to be. “Is there science behind this? I want you to name a single scientist, just one, who says you can determine your own sex just by saying so. Can you name one scientist who says that?”

Petkanas could not, so Carlson took the argument a step further. “What’s the science exactly? That you are what you say you are? Can I change my race too?” Petkanas tried to wiggle out of this one, even accusing Carlson of “right-wing pseudo-science”.

Yes he actually said that! So to insist that a man cannot just become a woman by magic, like pulling a rabbit out of a hat, is just “right-wing pseudo-science”? Really. Thankfully Carlson continued, “If you can change your sex, why can’t you change your race?”

As Petkanas struggled to say anything that made the slightest bit of sense, Carlson kept at it: “What if I said I’m another race, who are you to say I’m not?” Once again, Petkanas was utterly unable to answer. How could he? As an ideologue, he had to stand his ground on his bizarre gender bender ideology no matter what.

He could not admit to any contrary evidence, or indeed, to any evidence at all. He simply had to defend his ideology at all costs. And that my friend is what an ideologue is. Petkanas is the perfect example of an ideologue who has decided that the renunciation of reason, fact, biology and even reality is worth it in order to maintain and defend one’s ideology. No matter how utterly idiotic and lunatic it is, you defend it to the death.

No wonder so many have insisted that liberalism is a mental illness. How else can one explain such total madness? Liberal ideologues are as bad as they come. Petkanas, you sir are an ideologue. Or, to use fully acceptable biblical parlance, you sir are a fool.

You can see the full exchange in this 8 ½ minute video clip:

[1121 words]

11 Replies to “Ideologues and Transgenderism – Frightening Stuff”

  1. Thanks Bill. It seems that there is no longer any requirement at all for progressives to have any sort of sane rationality to their arguments. The only thing that matters is that their ‘side’ wins the debate. The ludicrous nonsense that someone can arbitrarily pronounce himself anything he wants and it becomes so is blind faith of the most inane and dangerous kind. As the Bible says, ‘the god of this age has blinded their eyes’ and so they’re blinded to the most common sense that even a child has.

  2. Yes Dee it has to have a demonic component to it. It is so shocking to encounter. As Paul also said, “For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie”. The deception is palpable.

  3. Carlson must now know that here in Oz some people are allowed to say that they are of a particular race simply by saying so! Or at least by saying so and having others agree with them. (I’m not sure that I’m allowed to say who, though, as Andrew Bolt got taken to court for talking about this sort of thing.)

  4. Thanks for what you do Bill. Below is an extract for my forthcoming fortnightly blog (1/3/17) from my website in which I address this matter:

    Let us be clear about this push, it is undoubtedly an attack on the Creator and his word; the Bible, as is the normalisation of homosexuality which God condemns and the abortion industry as well. It is my belief that Satan is behind them all. God, had Moses, the author of Genesis, to write concerning the creation of mankind:

    “So God created man in his own image. In the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.” Genesis 1:27.

    This statement asserts that there are only two sexes and they are fixed and there is no interchanging. Jesus also, repeats that God created mankind in the form of two sexes which is recorded in Matthew 19:4:

    “Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female.”

    So let’s go to biology for confirmation since it is God’s work in creation. We are primarily composed of cells; skin cells, brain cells, blood cells, liver cells, muscle cells, fat cells, nerve calls, etc. Each cell is a machine of incomprehensible complexity and in each cell, is our genes comprising long strands of DNA in the form of a double helix. These long chains of DNA have over three billion base pairs or links. There are four different types of links (called nucleotides) and it is the order of the links that stores the information that makes us who we are; the colour of our skin, hair, eyes, the shape of our body, in fact every tiny part of us. Just as a computer stores information by a series of 1s and 0s. However, our DNA has another order of complexity because it stores the information in three dimensions as opposed to the two of a computer.

    DNA is not simply one long chain but it is in the form bundles called chromosomes. Humans have 22 chromosomes (autosomes) in duplicate giving 44, plus two sex chromosomes to make a total of 46. Other forms of life have different numbers of chromosomes. The two sex chromosomes for females are two Xs and males have one X and one Y. So, it is very easy to determine the sex of a person from a piece of body tissue, body fluid or hair etc by seeing what chromosomes are present. At conception, the male donates either his X or Y chromosome. If it is the X, then the foetus is female. If the y is donated, then a male is produced. Gender is fixed at conception.

    God has hardwired our gender into our bodies which is consistent with His statement at the time of creation; He created them male and female.

  5. So, Just supposing we have a transgender coroner and he is called to identify the gender of an anonymous dead body, found in a canal , what process will he use to determine its gender, its age or its race? Will there be a second opinion?
    Indeed being treated by either a transsexual doctor, consultant or gynecologist could be a risky business

    If transitioning from being male to female or vice versa is seen as a kind of evolution, at what stage can one claim to be the new assigned gender , as soon as one starts to transition, half way through, or with 99% of the transition completed? Is it ever complete?

    David Skinner UK

  6. It was a great interview. I believe our state is run by ideologues.
    Over the years home schoolers have tried to get some sense in the form of facts from them over why they always want harsher more restrictive regulations to no avail.
    Even though they have no valid reasons they still do it. It is the same with our irrigation water, our electricity, climate change, environment, equality and zoning and heritage laws.
    There is definitely a demonic element that takes control of these people and it is pretty easy to see where it is heading and in the end how they will justify violence just like they did in the former Soviet Union and Nazi Germany.
    We are literally watching the madness of the new word order! Sadly there are elements of it scattered throughout the church, just think of the word emergence

  7. When a male is able to change his chromosomes from X Y to X X which will enable him to suffer from painful periods, Endometriosis, pregnancy, childbirth in its many forms, sore nipples when breastfeeding, has uterine fibroids which can cause reproductive problems including multiple miscarriages or early labor, cervical cancer, ovarian cancer, uterine cancer, poly-cystic ovary syndrome, interstitial cystitis and menopause which can take up to five years I think the science is very much against such a change ever taking place.
    Drs and parents who support providing children with hormones etc should be charged with child abuse.
    When I was young I was considered a ‘tomboy’ because I played with boys and boys games.
    At no time did I ever want to be a boy though.
    As a mother of 5 adult children (4 girls & 1 boy) the grandmother of 12 (8 girls and 4 boys) and great grandmother of 2 (1 boy and 1 girl) I fear for my grandchildren and great grandchildren and the sick world they have to live in. Let us pray earnestly day and night that God will protect this Great South Land of the Holy Spirit from such great evil.

  8. Peter Tatchell in his article “Beyond Equality” states that being any sexual orientation, be it homosexual or heterosexual is “primarily a social construction, rather than a biological given.”

    He continues, “Who we are attracted to largely derives from a combination of social experience and ideology. In other words, everyone is born with the potential to be queer. Exclusive heterosexuality is mainly the result of a socially-encouraged repression of same-sex desire. In a society where there were no pressures or privileges associated with being straight, a lot more people would be queer or bisexual. Lesbian and gay attraction would cease to be a minority sexual orientation and become something that almost everyone would experience.” [1]

    However, out of the other side of his mouth, or whenever it suits the occasion he claims that sexual orientation is the same as race. When campaigning for same sex marriage, which he does not support anyway, he equates not giving gays the right to get married as a form of apartheid, a form of racism. the same as denying marriage to blacks and Jews. [2]

    Hence, returning to the other Peter Tatchell, would he also say that being white was a form of ideological and cultural domination and that where there was no privilege associated with being white, a lot more people could change from being 6 foot tall, white Caucasians to being black, pygmy, Chinese hermaphrodites and that this would be something that we could all experience and enjoy?

    Perhaps in order to not to be caught out by the new transphobic crime, of not calling a person by their chosen gender, schools should engage a type of equality and diversity adviser rarely seen these days, to enlighten the children, teaching staff, governors, cleaners, and dinner ladies [3] so that we all have the equal right to be as stark raving bonkers as Tatchell is.

    David Skinner UK

  9. Well knock me down with a feather, it really has happened.
    In Breibart we read:

    Two years after being exposed as a white woman posing as a black civil rights champion, former NAACP branch president Rachel Dolezal is jobless, welfare dependent, and a month away from being homeless.

    “There’s no protected class for me,” Dolezal told the Guardian. “I’m this generic, ambiguous scapegoat for white people to call me a race traitor and take out their hostility on. And I’m a target for anger and pain about white people from the black community. It’s like I am the worst of all these worlds.”

    In 2015, Dolezal was an African-American culture instructor at Eastern Washington University, head of the Spokane, Washington NAACP, and chair of Spokane’s civilian police oversight committee. A year later, her years-long lie had unraveled, and she was outed as a white woman living in blackface.

    Dolezal says after turning in dozens of employment applications, the only job offers she’s received are from porn and reality TV agents. Having relied on a friend to help pay her February rent, Dolezal is days away from being out on the street.

    In June 2015, Lawrence Dolezal, Rachel’s white birth father, told CNN he didn’t “understand why she feels it’s necessary to misrepresent her ethnicity.”

    According to Rachel, there was no misrepresentation because she believes she’s been black all along.

    “I do think a more complex label would be helpful, but we don’t really have that vocabulary,” Dolezal told the Guardian. “I feel like the idea of being trans-black would be much more accurate than ‘I’m white.’ Because you know, I’m not white.”

    “It wasn’t like the honest thing to do is say, ‘I’m white’, because race is a social construct,” Dolezal explained “And this gave me this great sense of internal freedom: I wasn’t actually all fucked up. I was actually on to something this whole time.”

    Dolezal’s Montana birth certificate states she was born to two Caucasian parents, according to documents shared with CNN. Rachel attended college in Mississippi, where she says she “got more involved with campus activism” and her “appearance became more Afrocentric.”

    “I started wearing my hair in box braids and sporting dashikis and African-patterned dresses,” Dolezal told the Guardian. “I thought these clothes were beautiful, and in the Mississippi heat, the fabric did a good job of keeping you cool.”

    “On the white side I noticed hatred, fear and ignorance,” Dolezal recounted. “And on the black side I noticed fear, anger and pain. I felt more at home with the anger and pain towards whites, because I had some anger and pain – toward not just my parents but also, even though I wouldn’t have been able to articulate it then, towards white supremacy.”

    Tanning her skin, wearing weave, dressing in African garb, and other external vestiges of blackness, Dolezal said, helped her renounce “the propaganda standards of European beauty being superior.”

    Dolezal later attended Howard University on a scholarship. She didn’t identify herself as black on her school admissions application because there was no such option at the historically black university. But most assumed she was black, Dolezal’s mother Ruthann Dolezal told CNN, “because her portfolio of art was all African-American portraiture.”

    According to Dolezal’s parents, 2007 is when their daughter began to identify and consider herself African-American. In 2010, Rachel sought emancipation from Ruthanne and Lawrence Dolezal.

    Ezra Dolezal, Rachel’s adopted brother, says he knew the fabricated lie his adopted sister had created for herself would begin to crumble.

    “I kind of saw it coming,” Ezra Dolezal told CNN. “Instead of sticking to a simple story, she’s been trying to make this really complex and it finally got too big for her to handle.”

    Now, unapologetic, Rachel Dolezal is defiant and doesn’t regret her decision to identify as a black woman.

    “I’m not going to stoop and apologize and grovel and feel bad about it,” she said. “I would just be going back to when I was little, and had to be what everybody else told me I should be – to make them happy.”

    Rachel Dolezal’s story became a national phenomenon.

    Within a week of many prominent liberals and President Obama praising Bruce Jenner’s courageous decision to transition from a man to a woman, many of those same liberals failed to extol or explain how it wasn’t also brave for a white woman in Dolezal to pretend to be black.

    David Skinner UK

  10. Rachel Dolezal must surely be a poster personality for the LGBTs . Perhaps she will be invited to be a guest of honor at the 2017 gay pride parade in London, to be held on Saturday 8th July. This will be the mother of all gay prides for it will celebrate the 50th anniversary of the decriminalization of buggery .
    She certainly does not fit the mold or live to meet the expectations of other people. She certainly changes the game, pushes the boundaries, challenges, subverts, paves the way, smashes the norm, liberates and takes identity politics to another level.
    In essence its message is : be yourself. Whether you are a man or woman, a mass murderer, like the gay Muslim Omar Mateen who murdered dozens of other queers like himself in Orlando, or Mother Teresa, whether you are a paedophile or a baby in the pram, be yourself!

    David Cameron, shape shifter, and former Prime Minister of Britain , before his ignominious resignation from government in a fit of ill – grace, had this to say at the time of the 2016 London Gay Pride [1]

    “Our values – of openness, tolerance, equality and solidarity – that is what makes Britain so special. It is events like Pride that showcase that to the rest of the world. And the theme for this year’s pride, #nofilter, is entirely appropriate. It celebrates the spirit of Pride by asking everyone to do something simple, yet courageous: live your life as you. Because that is what we’ve got to do – even in the face of such violence and terrorism – and even when there is still so much discrimination in our world. We made a lot of progress in tackling discrimination in Britain. The Same Sex Couples Act, so that people in this country can celebrate their love for one another, regardless of their sexual orientation. One of the strongest legislative frameworks to tackle discrimination . And a zero tolerance approach to homophobic bullying everywhere. Now there is of course, more that needs to be done, especially on such issues as the availability of Pre -Exposure Prophylaxis, mental health in the LGBT community, and on the vital task of working internationally to change laws and attitudes. Next year will mark 50 years since the decriminalisation of homosexuality in the UK, a landmark moment for LGBT equality. But there are more laws that need to be passed , more support to be offered, and above all attitudes to be changed. Sadly many people in the LGBT community feel the need to filter their behavior, or hide who they are. But Pride says to Londoners, Britain and the World, be yourself. Live freely and openly . Treat others with respect and tolerance and expect that same treatment yourself. And in he wake of Orlando, as we come together in solidarity with one another today, what better message could there possibly be? Let’s not change who we are. Let’s not hide who we are. Let’s live life with #nofilter. [2]

    David Skinner UK

  11. I recall that in Animal Farm the social constructs were initially based on a form of “fact”, then switched to an opposing “fact” when the mood changed, and eventually “facts” were discarded, just blind adherence to whatever social construct was decided was “correct. This has been seen in such things as the UN’s push for an ecological tax based on “global cooling” half a century ago, which was then changed to “golbal warming” when the data wasn’t found to support global cooling. Now after attempting to fake the data for global warming, the social construct has moved to a point where there is no science needed, it just “is”. Either way we will get a global ecological tax.

    Gender assignment has followed the same course, all based on bulling and conditioning. And because the society is now conditioned, the traverse to “no facts needed” is so much quicker. I saw this interview previously and the DNS spokesperson was amazing – he didn’t utter *any* supportive reasoning at all – he just continued through the checklist of leftist argument method attacking, ignoring, accusing, disqualifying opposing opinion. For any budding liberal progressive it was a master class in obfuscation. An ideological wonder to behold.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

%d bloggers like this: