SB 2016-007: LGBTQ+ Rights Act (Passed Senate)

[Pingvin]

I will strongly oppose this bill that will let our society spiral further into insanity. What will come after "non-binary genders" (that exist only in the minds of people who had never read a basic biology book - and before you start on intersex infants, they're only about 1,5% of all births and can be fixed through surgery). Will we allow mentally ill to identify as non-humans?

[Pingvin]

Pingvin, the 'slippery slope' argument is more tired and overused than the 'current year' argument.

Besides, what does Pingvin mean by 'allow mentally ill to identify as non-humans'? Last time I checked, that's not currently prohibited, so why is he using that in the classic 'MUH SLIPPERY SLOPE' rant?

1) It's not a "slippery slope" if it's happening before our own eyes, when left is already trying to push the legalization of vile and disgusting degeneracy, therefore it's not a hypothetical situation. Perverts, sadly, already have a platform for free speech , so only we can prevent them from getting any kind of traction in politics and society.

2) To clarify my comments regarding "allowing mentally ill to identify as non-humans", I of course understood that some of them already do - what I meant is that idea of allowing "non-binary genders" on official documents (besides being ridiculous to any sane person) will create a precedent for removing any document marker that will stand in the way of some new, even more bizarre identity politics movement.

[Pingvin]

1. Oh boy, two examples, one from a foreign country far to the left of ours, and one regarding a single person. That sure is convincing. As for the left, I didn't know we were trying to legalize 'vile and disgusting degeneracy', unless that's what you believe LGBT+ individuals do. And I wouldn't be surprised if you do believe that, given that you've probably never met an LGBT+ person in your life.

2. And why shouldn't we allow non-binary genders on official documents? It's literally just typing "Other" instead of "Male" or "Female". I don't see how that will create any precedent, given that it will be a complete catch-all for all gender identities other than male or female. There would be no need for any new gender markers. But please, feel free to go ahead and keep demonstrating the slippery slope fallacy to us.

1. Again, I used these as an example of what will be pushed upon the society if we will let this act slip. While I do not believe that all LGBT individuals are trying to push their agenda, a vocal minority of their activists is incredibly keen on systematically destructing the traditional family, gender and sex-related traditions.

2. The inclusion of "other" on official documents would mean that we officially recognize the concept of non-binary genders existing outside of someone else's fantasy. So called "non-binary" people are either: 1) mentally ill or 2) special snowflakes who weren't parented well-enough.

[Pingvin]

Nay