This was a nice attempt but he won't understand it. He's trying to show how enlightened he is and this contradicts everything he has spent arguing. You should have just said: xy chromosome people shouldn't be boxing xx chromosome people. What you did will leave him up all night trying to justify everything he used to believe.
Olympics
- Thread starter Grip220
- Start date
You are correct. I don't know any manuscripts or translations that have John 53 in them. John only has 21 chapters.
That portion is not contained in the 2 Alexandrian texts. There are only 2 complete manuscripts and 2 fragments. There are thousands of texts that comprise the textus receptus and they do have that passage in there. The Alexandrian texts are from Arianism or the original Jehovah Witnesses. They eliminated several verses that they did not like. I'll hang my hat with the thousands of manuscripts that do contain that passage. You can be a JW if you want.
It's not in the earliest texts. It is in a lot of later manuscripts. The most probable explanation is that it was added in the 4th century. This isn't a fringe Jehovah witness thing. It is the academic consensus and is represented in modern biblical translations which place the passage in brackets
Again, you're a bigot. I'm not qualified to suggest the help you need, but may I suggest a therapist.
Then why a separate one for females? If due to superior male physicality (Y chr), aren’t athletic hybrids superior too? Well, the IOC says no, and numbers likely wouldn’t support a hybrid division anyway, so, meh. I was mainly giving intersex hotheads a chance to scream. They heat up quick, as if they have a dog in the hunt. Might be my crotchedy flaring up, but I get a snowflake vibe from young Yubs (sure hope that doesn’t trigger a trip to his/her safe room with a comfort pet).
And I agree with you. Many do see athletic careers end early and, yes, that’s the breaks. That said, no male ever had their athletic goals hindered by opponents strength-enhanced with a chromosome other males don’t have. Our young girls and women fight that battle all by themselves . . . one we mostly and sadly watch them lose.
That would be incorrect. There are only 2 supposed earlier texts. The 2 texts don't even agree with themselves. The textus receptus or majority text is from many thousands of texts. You can trust the 2 arian texts (Jehovah Witness) that don't even agree with each other and I will trust the thousands of texts (some believed to be just as old) that are in harmony with each other. I have completely written off the 2 Alexandrian texts from the JW's.
His comment has nothing to do with bigotry. It is telling the truth from basic biology. You don't "follow the science".
What is incorrect? Nothing in this statement is a correction of my claims. It isn't in the earliest manuscripts. The general consensus is that it was added in the 4th century. It is bracketed in modern translations.
It is absent in later texts. It is located in different locations in some manuscripts. In some manuscripts it's in Luke. It breaks the narrative structure of John. You can skip from 7:52-8:12 and it flows better. It also doesn't sound like John. It includes words and phrases that he uses no where else.
I think the Bible is better for it to include the story with notation that it is likely an interpolation. It likely was a popular oral tradition and that is why it was added. But the evidence strongly suggests it was most likely added later and was not part of the original text.
The idea that “older is better and more logical” is a fallacy. A multiplicity of reliably preserved manuscripts holds far more weight than some scrolls found in the Dead Sea caverns that were lost for 2000 years. Do we really think God failed to preserve His word for 2000+ years? By the way, wasn’t Satan in the garden saying “Yea, hath God said…?”. Didn’t the Apostle Paul say “We are not as many which corrupt the word of God..”. Just because something is older doesn’t make it better.
What bathroom should she use?His comment has nothing to do with bigotry. It is telling the truth from basic biology. You don't "follow the science".
More copies = more accuracy to the original text is also a fallacy. Whether something is better or not is a different question. There are no New Testament manuscripts in the dead seas scrolls.
My point stands that the earliest texts don't include the story. It was likely added later. You can peruse through all of the different versions of the Bible most of the modern translations will footnote the passage noting that it likely wasn't in the original text.
Bible Gateway passage: John 7:53-8:11 - New International Version
[The earliest manuscripts and many other ancient witnesses do not have John 7:53—8:11. A few manuscripts include these verses, wholly or in part, after John 7:36, John 21:25, Luke 21:38 or Luke 24:53.] Then they all went home, but Jesus went to the Mount of Olives. At dawn he appeared again in...
You are free to prefer whatever version you like but that doesn't change the fact that it isn't in the earliest works.
One. Are you conflicting homosexuality with the issue of this lady boxing? Two. Do you think homosexuality is a disease? Three. Born with a vagina doesn’t at least deserve some consideration as being female?Like I said, you need to read.
"In 2013, the most recent edition, DSM-5, was released. Prior to this, fierce debate about the conceptual issues of psychiatric classification spilled over into the public media worldwide. Previous revisions that had followed the period of antipsychiatry [including those by ICD, a competing classification system of the WHO] mostly went unchallenged or were discussed only within academic circles of experts."
Money and popularity caused the change.
When Homosexuality Stopped Being a Mental Disorder
Not until 1987 did homosexuality completely fall out of the DSM.www.psychologytoday.com
Exactly, I learned about this kind of stuff in biology class in college however it’s not something to deal with in my life, it was just a course. But this lady explains it rather well. Appearing to be born with female genitalia isn’t the same thing as being a female. This person has Y chromosomes, and a hormone profile of a man. The plumbing issue doesn’t matter as much as the physiology inside the body for the greater muscle mass and bone density that men have
Born with what appears to be a vagina . The lady scientist, they quoted explain this rather well. In a case like this, it appears they have a vagina. The testes haven’t descended yet, and they will basically be biologically a male due to the XY chromosome and the hormones in the body. She also stated most of these people transition to be a man, or choose to represent themselves as a man because biologically they basically are except what might be some confusing Plumbing down there .
This is an interesting discussion. I agree with you, however, the passage does fit with what Jesus would say and do.
1. I am saying that shrinks operate subjectively and a very sway able.
2. I think homosexuality is a sin and not a disease.
3. Only the chromozones determine sex. Someone with a "Y" chrom has an unfair advantage over full women. The "Y" makes that person male regardless. That is true science.
Bottom line. Is God sovereign and considers His Word holy or not? Cannot God preserve His Word for 1900 years prior to Westcott and Hort or is a holy God satisfied with a polluted Word?
They allowed the busted Chinese to compete too. The IOC is a collection of clowns.
Well if the European VP of the WBO says it... it must be true. The WBO is so holy and above reproach we all know.
Would seem simple that if we could say take testosterone levels and check and see how this compares to normals in the female and male population we could tell and determine if someone was a man based on that.
I find it remarkable that some people argue for these men, and they are men to be able to compete against women, but female women cannot take steroids, which could raise their testosterone level up to beyond what is normal for a woman.
My wife, for example, went on hormonal replacement approximately ago. It was due to pre-menopausal and menopausal issues. Her testosterone level was something like 50 or so, and they raised it up to something around 230 something which the doctor likes.
Her symptoms are doing so much better now by the way, but this therapy would be illegal or banned for Olympic participants. So my wife who is biological female, who is on hormone replacement therapy, cannot compete in the Olympics. No, because she’s not a world-class athlete, however, but she would be banned from that, but these other people can have access high testosterone levels due to physiological abnormality and they’re called women?
Don’t allow them to compete tell them to get a job at Starbucks or learn how to code.
And you think the Olympics are not corrupt? The Olympics are the definition of corruption, look at all the bribery scandals?
I suspect if Yub had to debate or compete athletically with the clearly superior YYub, his tune might change.
I doubt he’s any kind of competitor . Again, look at things such as testosterone levels, etc.? I made mention a post just above this that my wife went on hormone replacement therapy for menopausal symptoms. She’s doing quite well with it and it’s been a gun center tour. However, this would ban her from the Olympics, even though she has a testosterone level now below the low for a male.I suspect if Yub had to debate or compete athletically with the clearly superior YYub, his tune might change.
So these people that appeared to be women at birth, but really have all the biology of a male, and check their testosterone levels? They’re men.
I respect the plight of athletic hybrids (an extreme few), just not at the expense of athletic females (the overwhelming many). As for the IOC decision, I’d ask if only committee women voted the issue. Why? Because, as with my sparring with Yub, I’m more at odds with males who’ll never have to face the unfair, potentially life-goal-crushing obstacle they demand females of all ages merrily accept.
Enjoy your Sunday.
Most things connected to the Olympics are as corrupt as corrupt can be. Nobody said any differently. Everybody knows that.
Hmmm.... "only committee women" (assumed predominantly "normal")... yeah, some might reasonably expect a vast majority to protect their self-interest to the detriment of a small minority, so I don't see the point.
Keep citing the European VP of the WBO as a legit source on this subject. That'll get you far. He's as corrupt and tainted as the Olympic Comm members. Ko Ko was a Hungarian tv variety show host and restauranteur after boxing. Big buddies with the WBO bosses, which is how he got the VP job. He may have an opinion on the subject. But that's all.
Last edited:
A genetics test was done. The "Y" chrom is there. If the test was done and the results are in, it doesn't matter who breaks the story. It is a man fighting women. Go ahead and deny all you want. I only expect sensible and intelligent people to listen to facts anyway.
Dang bro! Didn't know I was living in your head all weekend where you have to bring me up multiple times. Should "super" males born with xyy get their own division also? It is inherently unfair that they also have an advantage. I'll let you have the last word! Gotta go!
Regards,
Yubs, First of their name, Boomer agitator, defender of "Hybrids"
Last edited:
Does this site not have mods anymore? What in the hell happened to talking about wrestling. I think there is more valid wrestling content on the guillotine (Minnesota’s site) than this one anymore. That is not a good thing.
Thank you for raising the level of discourse.
Point being I’m fine with “only females” protecting their self-interest on an issue affecting “only females.” If “to the detriment of a small minority” (ah, is that a victim card you’re playng?) means prohibiting an athletic group with a chromosomal strength advantage to compete against females, give me some detriment. The group being a minority (athletic hybrids) or of equal size (males) doesn’t matter. Females should oppose females. You, Yubs, and IOC disagree. Y’all won. Good talk. Time for freestyle.
No, just pointing out that majorities tend to protect their self-interest with little regard to detriment to minorities (which seems obvious). You seem to state you are okay with this. I am not.
Many are asserting a chromosomal advantage as fact. The fact is the Olympics tends to balance competitive fairness with inclusivity. Those who buy into the OIympic ideals engage the Olympics without concerns similar to that shared by some, like yourself.
Didn't see a similar outrage about Simone Biles ADHD medication as an advantage (like some seem to have here and expressed regarding AB).
Every minute of it at every event, I was mumbling about “that damn Yubs”!
I mean, people stared. Last word, huh?
Okay, that “first of their name” line was waaay too funny. Serious GOT vibe.
Freestyle’s here!
