It's only fair to point out that Biden is also racist AF. (AF= as ... can't be mentioned on AN, because we're nurses and we don't swear, ever).
The Omicron variant has so far been detected in South Africa, Botswana, Israel, Belgium, Hong Kong, UK, Germany, Italy, and Czechia. But of those countries the US has implemented travel bans on only two of those countries; South Africa and Botswana. In addition to those two, travel bans have been enacted for eSwatini, Lesotho, Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia, and Zimbabwe, even though no cases of Omicron have been detected there.
I think I understand what you mean. He is most certainly not polite. He says he doesn't care about feeling. Fortunately or unfortunately, people are entitled to their thought and opinions. He's a opinion person so he gives his. I think his religion has allot to do with his beliefs. I just watched him tell Dave Ruben who is gay that if invited he would not go to his gay wedding. Really? So stupid. Oh but he might go to his anniversary party. Dave didn't seem to be too upset about it.
I just noticed my autocorrect flags gay as incorrect spelling! WTH? Anyways
I've only looked into him closely tonight. However I haven't seen him say anything blatantly hateful or enticing harm against anyone who is LGBTQ or saying anything crass homophobic(like slurs and such). I do not appreciate his approach but I do agree with things like biological sex that type of stuff. There is a much better ways to say your opinions than the way he does forsure. I'm not sure if what he does is discriminating tho.
He does seem very educated. But an a hole forsure!! Like the smart kid at school who thought he was above everyone else not realizing no body cared! LOL.
His views on "biological sex" have been scientific idiocy since at least the 1950's, to say in this decade that his views make sense is incredibly ignorant.
I don't think these views are as ignorant as they seem though, being that ignorant would seem really unlikely, but instead it seems his views (and those who share his views) are only claiming those incredibly ignorant views to try and justify behavior that is otherwise outright disgusting.
His view on biological sex is that it's always consistent, there are never any inconsistencies in gender / sex development.
The problem with this of course it that it's easily observable this isn't true. People born with external genitalia of one sex can have internal sex organs of the other sex, people of one genetically-determine sex chromosome can develop the opposite sex organs and genitalia, the list goes on.
Sex / Gender development is more often than not consistently single sex / gender, but is occasionally inconsistent. The argument of some, like Shapiro and yourself, that those who's sex/gender development not been consistent to a particular gender doesn't actually happen, that they're just making it up, is deplorable.
Well, we could get into your sources, and how they didn't really address your claims. But, im tired and feeling lazy. And, it is the holiday season.. I'll go for the low hanging fruit.
Maybe you should get a good night's rest before trying to recover from this.
No, it's not propaganda. It's a style of chat and online interaction. When people offer up content from media outlets known to be biased, inaccurate and inflammatory they are discrediting themselves.
We've spent a few years now listening to conservatives try to discredit all manner of media and media consumers with indiscriminate shouts of FAKE NEWS. Now, you seem to be saying that it's not okay to criticize a media source.
Of course it's okay to criticize media sources. And congressmen, presidents, Prime Ministers. , CDC all forms of government. Is how they are held accountable. Canada is a little bit different but the US is built on the government being accountable to the people. The people do not serve the government.The constitution is designed to prevent government tyranny, correct? With the understanding that a government controlled the people, it may become tyrannical like all the countries that we've seen happened in history.
I do not have a problem with criticism I have a problem with unequal criticism. And I'm sorry but I find allot of "it's okay for us but not for you" coming from the democrats. Not to say Republicans are not hypocritical too but just the way the news is reported today from any source really, it's a clear blatant double standard. 8mo of course. Not saying my opinion is a fact.
Even we criticize Dr. Nurses for our own Healthcare.
Yes fake news is spouted allot! However if you are going to say that cnn is anything but garbage propaganda then .... well I don't think you actually think cnn is a credible news source. It was the one Trump called fake news allot.
His views on "biological sex" have been scientific idiocy since at least the 1950's, to say in this decade that his views make sense is incredibly ignorant.
I don't think these views are as ignorant as they seem though, being that ignorant would seem really unlikely, but instead it seems his views (and those who share his views) are only claiming those incredibly ignorant views to try and justify behavior that is otherwise outright disgusting.
His view on biological sex is that it's always consistent, there are never any inconsistencies in gender / sex development.
The problem with this of course it that it's easily observable this isn't true. People born with external genitalia of one sex can have internal sex organs of the other sex, people of one genetically-determine sex chromosome can develop the opposite sex organs and genitalia, the list goes on.
Sex / Gender development is more often than not consistently single sex / gender, but is occasionally inconsistent. The argument of some, like Shapiro and yourself, that those who's sex/gender development not been consistent to a particular gender doesn't actually happen, that they're just making it up, is deplorable.
I don't want to get into the sex/gender debate. There is a primary sex of almost all species on earth for the function of reproduction.
Does it always work put perfectly ? NO.
The primary is lady parts, member (in humans). Again there can be malformations etc etc. People can very well feel of the opposite sex. And they should live anyway that makes them happy. Does this magically make them the sex they think/are. No. Not biologically. Hence nobody would be trans. But they are still what they say they are.
It's okay to be trans or whatever ypu want to be. However the original design is biological sex.
I think and I've touched on this before people may feel that their sexual identities are being excluded by people wanting to be recognized and accepted. Like "I demand you recognize my sex/gender and by the way, yours doesn't exist". This type of thing isn't going create peace for anyone.
(This is in reference the loud radical minority of both sides of the issue. Everyday people of any sex or gender probably do think or care about all this that much.
If people want to think biological sex isn't real or if people want to believe that no body is transgender then let them. As long as nobody is hurting anyone else, people's thought and beliefs really can't hurt you personally.
However, Ben is rude and condescending . He might be better recieved with changing his tone a bit! Saying they are making it up, some attention seekers maybe, but people with actual gender conflict , they are not making it up.
One more thing. You don not really hear about those born with different/internal external/both genitals and chromosomal differences very much. It seems to be "mostly the people born with the usual(for lack of a better word) sex organs chromosomes.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
3 minutes ago, MunoRN said:
I get the reflexiveresponse that between siding with the Adrenochrome theory and Fauci it makes more sense to side with Fauci, but overall there's clearly more justification to a side that's in between those two.
I don't want to get into the sex/gender debate. There is a primary sex of almost all species on earth for the function of reproduction.
Does it always work put perfectly ? NO.
The primary is lady parts, member (in humans). Again there can be malformations etc etc. People can very well feel of the opposite sex. And they should live anyway that makes them happy. Does this magically make them the sex they think/are. No. Not biologically. Hence nobody would be trans. But they are still what they say they are.
It's okay to be trans or whatever ypu want to be. However the original design is biological sex.
I think and I've touched on this before people may feel that their sexual identities are being excluded by people wanting to be recognized and accepted. Like "I demand you recognize my sex/gender and by the way, yours doesn't exist". This type of thing isn't going create peace for anyone.
(This is in reference the loud radical minority of both sides of the issue. Everyday people of any sex or gender probably do think or care about all this that much.
If people want to think biological sex isn't real or if people want to believe that no body is transgender then let them. As long as nobody is hurting anyone else, people's thought and beliefs really can't hurt you personally.
However, Ben is rude and condescending . He might be better recieved with changing his tone a bit! Saying they are making it up, some attention seekers maybe, but people with actual gender conflict , they are not making it up.
One more thing. You don not really hear about those born with different/internal external/both genitals and chromosomal differences very much. It seems to be "mostly the people born with the usual(for lack of a better word) sex organs chromosomes.
Your post might have been considered simply ignorant in 1960, but to make your statements today is astoundingly ignorant and difficult to suggest it's due to anything other than being a scumbag of a person more than being simply ignorant.
I'm not sure where to even start with the various bogus claims you put forward, but to start with, you're claiming that even though whether an embryo forms either a member or lady parts is the "primary" determinate of whether someone is male or female? Even though that's determined by a narrow balance of chemicals and hormone during an extremely small window of development, and even though it may contradict every other determinate of sex and gender (sex chromosomes, hormonal balance, sex organs, etc), you're saying that if your all of your sex and gender development is consistent with the one outlier being external genitalia then you need to learn abide by your external genitalia?
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
48 minutes ago, Cclm said:
I do not havea problem with criticism I have a problem with unequal criticism. And I'm sorry but I find allot of "it's okay for us but not for you" coming from the democrats. Not to say Republicans are not hypocritical too but just the way the news is reported today from any source really, it's a clear blatant double standard. 8mo of course. Not saying my opinion is a fact.
Unequal criticism is a problem? What does that mean to you? To me it means that people try to find commonality in bad conduct when none exists...like trying to imply that Trump's lies aren't meaningful or dangerous because someone else lied some other time.
"It's OK for us but not for you" deserves an example. Please provide an example that exemplifies democrats holding republicans accountable for something they also engage in but aren't held account for.
No I wouldn't agree that the news is reported the same regardless of source. That is definitely not true. In fact, I would suggest that your view of American politics is skewed significantly to the right because you consume media which is not only biased right but is also not necessarily giving you all of the facts or nuances while using language to inflame. That's why you believe that there is this big double standard with democrats breaking rules while holding republicans to a higher standard.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
56 minutes ago, Beerman said:
Well, we could get into your sources, and how they didn't really address your claims. But, im tired and feeling lazy. And, it is the holiday season.. I'll go for the low hanging fruit.
Maybe you should get a good night's rest before trying to recover from this.
Shapiro is the Daily Wire, not the Daily Mail.
My mistake.
I'll happily correct my error and do that search for you even though you apparently don't approve of my resources for assessing credibility of media. What do you use to decide if a media outlet is worth your time and brain cells?
On my wish list is that we get past the "unequal criticism idea".
Someone here says "Biden lied about such and such" and instead of discussing such and such the response is to say "so Trump's lies then were meaningless to you" and the other response it to attack the source "Daily Wire...hahahaha".
Someone here says anti-muslim slurs were hurled at Omar...and the response is "well can we talk about her slurs against Jews..."
Here's an idea when someone criticizes something that you precede their side did in the past as well: stay on the topic and discuss what they are talking about, don't change the topic to "well your side does it too you hypocrite", talk specifically how the source is spinning and wrong, or just ignore and move on.
By now you realize that's not an effect way of discussing something.
Of course that would eliminate 80% of the posts here, and it would be boring, so on the other hand. Carry on. Who am I to ask you who to discuss. LOL
His media platform is known for inaccuracy, significant right wing bias and intentionally inflammatory language. There are better, more credible sources for accurate and current news and events.
And just because he's an Orthodox Jew doesn't mean that he is a good person. Many supposedly religious people do awful things and many in the Jewish community would agree that he is an awful person. He is extremely devisive and mean spirited. The kind of guy even the rabbi wouldn't like. That's a red flag that he's probably not a good source of news since he has jumped the shark when it comes to using his religion to promote discord.
Fauci recommends you ask your holiday guests to show "evidence" of being vaccinated. I know some here seek and follow his guidance. Who is going to require vaccination cards from their guests?
MunoRN, RN
8,058 Posts
His views on "biological sex" have been scientific idiocy since at least the 1950's, to say in this decade that his views make sense is incredibly ignorant.
I don't think these views are as ignorant as they seem though, being that ignorant would seem really unlikely, but instead it seems his views (and those who share his views) are only claiming those incredibly ignorant views to try and justify behavior that is otherwise outright disgusting.
His view on biological sex is that it's always consistent, there are never any inconsistencies in gender / sex development.
The problem with this of course it that it's easily observable this isn't true. People born with external genitalia of one sex can have internal sex organs of the other sex, people of one genetically-determine sex chromosome can develop the opposite sex organs and genitalia, the list goes on.
Sex / Gender development is more often than not consistently single sex / gender, but is occasionally inconsistent. The argument of some, like Shapiro and yourself, that those who's sex/gender development not been consistent to a particular gender doesn't actually happen, that they're just making it up, is deplorable.