Women’s Ivy League Swimming?

[mikbone]

https://www.swimmingworldmagazine.com/news/in-duel-of-transgender-athletes-lia-thomas-sets-meet-record-in-100-freestyle-completes-ivy-league-triple/

Anyone else confused or concerned?

[mikbone]

[NeuroTypical]

On this subject, I'm in agreement with Caitlyn Jenner. 

 

[NeuroTypical]

I appreciate guidance in the church's handbook:

[NeuroTypical]

Finally, the LGBTQA+ folks are hardly all marching in lockstep in matters of transgender issues.  Gays and Lesbians are being called transphobic because they're not interested in dating someone with the wrong equipment downstairs.  They, in turn, remind everyone about how hard they fought to be accepted as gay or lesbian.  And they point out the similarities in pressure to accept trans gender theory, and the conversion therapies of yesteryear - both pressure gays and lesbians to conform to attractions they simply don't feel - they talk about how this is just a new way to force gays and lesbians back into the closet.

[LDSGator]

13 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

Finally, the LGBTQA+ folks are hardly all marching in lockstep in matters of transgender issues.  Gays and Lesbians are being called transphobic because they're not interested in dating someone with the wrong equipment downstairs.  They, in turn, remind everyone about how hard they fought to be accepted as gay or lesbian.  And they point out the similarities in pressure to accept trans gender theory, and the conversion therapies of yesteryear - both pressure gays and lesbians to conform to attractions they simply don't feel - they talk about how this is just a new way to force gays and lesbians back into the closet.

It’s also interesting to see hardcore feminists get forced to choose a side between transgender rights and women’s rights. 

[MrShorty]

I kind of hate myself for making this about intent, but what is the intent of this discussion?

Are we really interested in the hard conversations around how sporting leagues and organizations ought to accommodate (or not) transgender persons? Usually the hardest questions are around trans-women and any unfair advantage they may have and how do we determine that trans-women have an unfair advantage and does it depend on the sport and the level of competition and does it depend on hormone therapies and on and on and on. I have no answers, nor do I even begin to have any expertise in how to get answers. I expect there is a lot of research and some trial and error that will need to go into finding those answers.

The more cynical side of me worries that this is more of a "because it is difficult to know how to best accommodate trans-women in women's sports, therefore we do not need to do anything in other places to accommodate trans-gender peoples and we can continue to blindly insist that people ought to just accept their "biological sex at birth" designation." I don't think it is right to use challenges with sports as a bludgeon for erasing transgender people. I recognize that the Church has certain spaces where it needs a bright, binary line around gender (and it has chosen biological sex at birth with case by case nods to intersex scenarios as that bright line), but I'm not convinced that this necessarily represents all of the truth there is to know about transgender people and what path each individual ought to choose.

In short, it is a very difficult question that I don't think we have fully answered. I also hope that the challenges for sporting leaques and associations do not give us permission to fail to extend basic kindness and courtesies and acceptance of everyday, run-of-the-mill transgender people we come across who are more worried about navigating mundane life with no aspirations for world records in some athletic competition.

[LDSGator]

56 minutes ago, MrShorty said:

I also hope that the challenges for sporting leaques and associations do not give us permission to fail to extend basic kindness and courtesies and acceptance of everyday, run-of-the-mill transgender people w

No one is going there. Hopefully all of us here agree that we should show basic kindness and courtesy to all people, including those we disagree with. Does that always happen? Of course not, but it’s a nice goal. 
 

You raise a good point. If you don’t show basic respect to others you have no right to play victim when they do the same to you. For example, if you go out of your way to not use a persons preferred name/pronoun, then don’t be shocked when they disrespect you too. 

Edited February 23, 2022 by LDSGator

[Traveler]

50 minutes ago, LDSGator said:

No one is going there. Hopefully all of us here agree that we should show basic kindness and courtesy to all people, including those we disagree with. Does that always happen? Of course not, but it’s a nice goal. 
 

You raise a good point. If you don’t show basic respect to others you have no right to play victim when they do the same to you. For example, if you go out of your way to not use a persons preferred name/pronoun, then don’t be shocked when they disrespect you too. 

I am honestly confused - is it nicer to let those that are lost and confused to remain lost and confused or is it nicer and kinder to help them connect to truth?  I have learned from sad experience that those that dislike the truth - think it hurtful to be reminded of it.  I find the story of the "emperor and his new clothes" as a good example of my problem in dealing with compassion towards those that cannot deal with reality.  

 

The Traveler

[MrShorty]

After reading the article, one thing that stood out to me is that the NCAA is apparently allowing a higher testosterone threshold for trans-female participants than USA Swimming allows (10 nmol/L versus 5 nmol/L. The article also notes that typical cis-female testosterone levels are 0.5 to 2.4 nmol/L). I don't have any insights into why the NCAA chose that threshold for participation, but I did notice a random poll in the sidebar of the article asking if the NCAA ought to use the same criteria as USA Swimming. How should the sport of swimming police this kind of thing?

If I've understood correctly, Henig is trans-male (not taking T supplements, no statement regarding other transition treatments). If I've read correctly, the trans-male athlete was about 0.2 seconds slower than the trans-female competitor. Also, I noted that the 3rd place (presume cis-female?) was about a full second slower than Thomas and Henig. That seems interesting, but it feels like more data is needed to understand the significance here.

It is definitely a difficult question to try to answer.

[LDSGator]

7 hours ago, Traveler said:

I am honestly confused - is it nicer to let those that are lost and confused to remain lost and confused or is it nicer and kinder to help them connect to truth?  I have learned from sad experience that those that dislike the truth - think it hurtful to be reminded of it.  I find the story of the "emperor and his new clothes" as a good example of my problem in dealing with compassion towards those that cannot deal with reality.  

 

The Traveler

Several thoughts. 

You can still be courteous and polite while holding to biblical truths.  Most of the posters here (not me) do exactly that. 

Usually, those who you are preaching to or trying to correct don’t hate truth. They hate your awful attitude and terrible people skills when trying to convey that truth, but those who preach never ever understand that because it doesn’t feed their own self image of the crusading martyr standing up for truth. They want their friends/fellow members to see how righteous and wonderful they think they are. Hence why they often admonish in public, not in private.
 

Amazingly, those who preach/admonish only do so when they have an audience. Never, ever in private or one on one. Why? Well, look above. 
 

That’s one of my favorite short stories too, and we all love that little kid. Until he dares to point the finger at sacred cows we hold dear. 
 

Finally, your average person who you claim “hates truth” will listen to you as much as you listen to them. So don’t be terribly surprised if they don’t listen to you. After all, you won’t listen to them either. So don’t expect them to do something you have no interest in doing. 

Edited February 24, 2022 by LDSGator

[MrShorty]

13 minutes ago, Traveler said:

is it nicer to let those that are lost and confused to remain lost and confused or is it nicer and kinder to help them connect to truth?

I don't know the answer to this. My LDS upbringing naturally wants to answer that the quest for truth is the greatest quest we can undergo, and that finding truth should trump all other pursuits. However, as I have gotten older, I find myself moderating that stance. If someone is wandering lost and confused and seems happy to be lost and confused and they aren't hurting themselves or anyone, how important is it to help them connect to truth? As much as I love the idea of absolute truth, who is going to arbitrate the choices of what is truth and what is "lost and confused?" (Note -- I am NOT volunteering for the position of "arbiter of truth" -- especially when it comes to transgender issues.) For the most part, I've reached a point where -- perhaps in my own uncertainties -- that I would rather leave people to muddle along for themselves and hopefully they will grant me the same courtesy. If I can help someone, I'm happy to offer what little I can to help them navigate confusion, while also seeking the support of others in navigating my own state of lost and confused.

[NeuroTypical]

23 hours ago, Traveler said:

On 2/23/2022 at 10:45 AM, LDSGator said:

If you don’t show basic respect to others you have no right to play victim when they do the same to you. For example, if you go out of your way to not use a persons preferred name/pronoun, then don’t be shocked when they disrespect you too. 

I am honestly confused - is it nicer to let those that are lost and confused to remain lost and confused or is it nicer and kinder to help them connect to truth?  I have learned from sad experience that those that dislike the truth - think it hurtful to be reminded of it.  I find the story of the "emperor and his new clothes" as a good example of my problem in dealing with compassion towards those that cannot deal with reality.  

The church isn't taking a position on why people are transgender, but it is accepting that transgender people exist, and are not in a state of being lost/confused/disliking the truth/not dealing with reality.   Again, this policy is copied and pasted directly out of the church's handbook:

 

IMO, for every actual trans person, there are hundreds, perhaps thousands, of experimenting kids who are sometimes talked, even pressured, into being trans, even though they are not.  That's a cultural issue, and those are the folks you are referring to.   But yeah, trans folks exist.  Can you accept that @Traveler?

 

Edited February 24, 2022 by NeuroTypical

[NeuroTypical]

 

On 2/23/2022 at 10:14 AM, MrShorty said:

I kind of hate myself for making this about intent, but what is the intent of this discussion?

I have no answers, nor do I even begin to have any expertise in how to get answers.

I also hope that the challenges for sporting leaques and associations do not give us permission to fail to extend basic kindness and courtesies and acceptance of everyday, run-of-the-mill transgender people we come across who are more worried about navigating mundane life with no aspirations for world records in some athletic competition

To your first comment, my intent is to share things I've learned, that a lot of people haven't learned.   To your second comment, me too. 

To your third comment, I'll first point out that there's no such thing as an everyday, run-of-the-mill transgender person.  Legitimate gender aphasia is quite rare.  Folks with hormonal/genetic/chromosomal/structural issues are quite rare.  Of course people with mental and physical issues deserve kindness and courtesy and acceptance.   The hoards of people who are buying the current cultural winds of gender theory, where you are the gender you feel like, and maybe you'll feel that way in a year, maybe you won't - those folks deserve kindness and courtesy as well, but acceptance?  Let's talk about what acceptance means.

 

 

[LDSGator]

27 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

Can you accept that?

Yup. I have zero problem with it. Never did.  Maybe one day I’ll get to a point where I think the “sins” of others are worse than mine,  and spend my time lecturing them, but I’m not there yet. Got my own stuff to work on. 

I also agree that there are kids being forced to take hormones, etc when they are just going through a phase. Yes, that’s horrifying. And yes, it would be nice if everyone was more accepting of boys who don’t like sports, cars, camping etc without thinking they are “weak”. Luckily though, society is moving forward on those issues. 

Edited February 24, 2022 by LDSGator

[MrShorty]

@NeuroTypical Yes, legitimate (whatever that might mean?) gender dysphoria and transgenderism is quite rare (I typically see something along the order of 1% of the population). I do not have the expertise to even begin to talk about how doctors and therapists distinguish between legitimate dysphoria and curious exploration. I also don't know how to balance the tension between the conservative "be very careful about changing how we diagnose and treat dysphoria, because some changes could cause additional harm" against the progressive "current diagnosis and treatment is allowing harm to some, so we need to change our diagnostic and treatment to do less harm." Seeing this from the POV of the "hard sciences", it is hard to understand how the "soft sciences" make these kinds of decisions. I'm not sure how much is driven by mere "cultural winds". I hope that our "best practices" can balance both conservative fears of new trends in treatment and progressive fears of getting stuck in "dark ages," but I don't know how to balance those. As a non-therapist, my hope in my interactions with individuals is that I will be kind, tolerant of whatever "whims" the individual expresses, supportive of treatments recommended by the individual's doctors/therapists, and ready to help pick up the pieces when stuff goes wrong.

[Traveler]

5 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

The church isn't taking a position on why people are transgender, but it is accepting that transgender people exist, and are not in a state of being lost/confused/disliking the truth/not dealing with reality.   Again, this policy is copied and pasted directly out of the church's handbook:

 

IMO, for every actual trans person, there are hundreds, perhaps thousands, of experimenting kids who are sometimes talked, even pressured, into being trans, even though they are not.  That's a cultural issue, and those are the folks you are referring to.   But yeah, trans folks exist.  Can you accept that @Traveler?

 

I am not sure that I can accept that such experiments should proceed without a voice of warning - but I will likewise present you with a quote from Spencer W. Kimball in a talk given at General Conference in April 1971 titled "Voices of the Past, of the Present, of the Future":

Quote

The minister quoted is reported to have said: “… two people of the same sex can express love and deepen that love by sexual intercourse.” (Ibid.)

Those are ugly voices—they are loud and raspy.

Why do we speak in this vein? Why do we call to repentance when there are such pleasant subjects? It is because someone must warn the world of its doom if life does not change directions.

My question to you --- Can you accept a warning from our prophets?   I can understand that we ought to show love and compassion towards all mankind.  I also believe that we ought to cry repentance unto this generation.  I personally tend to be blunt so I an seeking from those that have mastered love and compassion as to how they have succeeded.   I have offered science and logic  concerning such matters but it seems that with such things; any warning are considered hateful regardless of intent.

 

The Traveler 

 

[NeuroTypical]

3 hours ago, Traveler said:

My question to you --- Can you accept a warning from our prophets?   

Sure.

Quote

I can understand that we ought to show love and compassion towards all mankind.  I also believe that we ought to cry repentance unto this generation.

Fair enough, but what does that have to do with a legitimate transgender individual, born with some genetic/structural/chromosomal/hormonal abnormality, who is willing to keep all the commandments and remain a member in good standing?  Exactly what repentance do you feel pressed to cry to an individual such as this?

[Traveler]

2 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

Sure.

Fair enough, but what does that have to do with a legitimate transgender individual, born with some genetic/structural/chromosomal/hormonal abnormality, who is willing to keep all the commandments and remain a member in good standing?  Exactly what repentance do you feel pressed to cry to an individual such as this?

I personally do not consider an individual born with some genetic/structural, chromosomal/hormonal abnormality as what is currently defined in our society as "transgender".  It is my understanding that transgender is defined as an individual born with a specifically identifiable gender (male or female) that chooses to identify themself as another gender.  I believe that all should be called to repentance - to come unto Christ - which means to live by his example, covenants, ordnances and law.  I believe that we are not to condemn anyone.  For example, if someone has chosen in their past to smoke and has become addicted - that they should have faith in Christ, that if they exercise faith in Christ, he will free them from their addictions.  But this does not mean that they will never again desire tobacco only that they can overcome such desires.   I believe that as Saints we should encourage that everyone overcome their carnal desires of the natural man - even when they are discouraged from failure.  My problem is that I do not know how to encourage someone that does not desire to overcome their carnal desires of the natural man.

 

The Traveler

[MrShorty]

8 hours ago, Traveler said:

It is my understanding that transgender is defined as an individual born with a specifically identifiable gender (male or female) that chooses to identify themself as another gender. 

For something that is as "in flux" as transgender and other LGBT issues, I'd suggest we be careful getting locked into any one definition of what it means to be transgender. I know that we get uncomfortable by a foundation of shifting sands, but I think, on a topic as in flux as gender identity and transgenderism, we need to be able to somehow manage our discomfort with the shifting sands, because that is part of where the discussions are happening.

8 hours ago, Traveler said:

 I believe that as Saints we should encourage that everyone overcome their carnal desires of the natural man - even when they are discouraged from failure.  My problem is that I do not know how to encourage someone that does not desire to overcome their carnal desires of the natural man.

I think there are two difficulties along the way to encouraging someone to overcome carnal desires of the natural man. Step one is discerning what God believes is included in "carnal desires of the natural man" and the second step is motivation towards overcoming those carnal desires. I sometimes feel like conservative church members are focused on the motivation of step 2 assuming step 1 is completely settled without question. I think step 1 is the more important step, because many (even in the Church) are not convinced that transitioning towards your preferred gender is included in the "carnal desires of the natural man." As a cis-hetero man, I don't feel like I have the stewardship to try to tell anyone what is sin and what is not. I know that I have seen many anecdotes of faithful trans members who feel like God has revealed to them personally that transitioning is not sinful -- that God is accepting of their transitioning. I don't think we have ever adequately addressed the conflict between personal and institutional revelation on issues like this. Until we can adequately deal with the discernment step on this, I don't think there is much we can do on the motivational step.

[mikbone]

1 hour ago, MrShorty said:

For something that is as "in flux" as transgender and other LGBT issues, I'd suggest we be careful getting locked into any one definition of what it means to be transgender. I know that we get uncomfortable by a foundation of shifting sands, but I think, on a topic as in flux as gender identity and transgenderism, we need to be able to somehow manage our discomfort with the shifting sands, because that is part of where the discussions are happening.

The scriptures are clear on foundations.  

Matthew 7:24-27

From a position of common sense arguing the point of tolerating a foundation on shifting sand is ludicrous.

You can choose to build a home on shifting sands. Good luck finding and architect and getting the permits.  You will likely have to spend tremendous amounts of resources and will be unsatisfied with the results…

[Grunt]

2 hours ago, MrShorty said:

For something that is as "in flux" as transgender and other LGBT issues, I'd suggest we be careful getting locked into any one definition of what it means to be transgender. I know that we get uncomfortable by a foundation of shifting sands, but I think, on a topic as in flux as gender identity and transgenderism, we need to be able to somehow manage our discomfort with the shifting sands, because that is part of where the discussions are happening.

 

What, exactly, is "in flux"?

 

Quote

 I think step 1 is the more important step, because many (even in the Church) are not convinced that transitioning towards your preferred gender is included in the "carnal desires of the natural man." 

What do you consider it?   Perhaps I'm misunderstood about what "carnal desires of the natural man" means?   Transitioning medically means you are require First Presidency permission to receive any saving ordinance and results in membership restrictions.  Socially transitioning results in some membership restrictions.

The Church policies towards transgender individuals are all about love and acceptance, so far as it falls within God's desires.

Edited February 25, 2022 by Grunt

[Traveler]

45 minutes ago, MrShorty said:

For something that is as "in flux" as transgender and other LGBT issues, I'd suggest we be careful getting locked into any one definition of what it means to be transgender. I know that we get uncomfortable by a foundation of shifting sands, but I think, on a topic as in flux as gender identity and transgenderism, we need to be able to somehow manage our discomfort with the shifting sands, because that is part of where the discussions are happening.

I think there are two difficulties along the way to encouraging someone to overcome carnal desires of the natural man. Step one is discerning what God believes is included in "carnal desires of the natural man" and the second step is motivation towards overcoming those carnal desires. I sometimes feel like conservative church members are focused on the motivation of step 2 assuming step 1 is completely settled without question. I think step 1 is the more important step, because many (even in the Church) are not convinced that transitioning towards your preferred gender is included in the "carnal desires of the natural man." As a cis-hetero man, I don't feel like I have the stewardship to try to tell anyone what is sin and what is not. I know that I have seen many anecdotes of faithful trans members who feel like God has revealed to them personally that transitioning is not sinful -- that God is accepting of their transitioning. I don't think we have ever adequately addressed the conflict between personal and institutional revelation on issues like this. Until we can adequately deal with the discernment step on this, I don't think there is much we can do on the motivational step.

I am impressed to give you some of my personal history.  I grew up in a family where we provided for ourselves.  We lived in the city and grew much of what we ate.  We also raised chickens and rabbits for meat - hunting was part of how we provided additional meat.  We would purchase some foods when we did not have sufficient.  When I turned 8 I was expected to work outside our home (regular jobs) to provide for my personal needs.  I was also expected to save and pay for my mission, college and other activities.  When I started my senior year in high school I joined the army reserves so I could serve a mission - because of the draft during the Vietnam era.  I was 17 but but small and looked 13.  Within a week of leaving home for basic training I was encourage to sexually experiment with gay relationships - something that I did not think could possibly exist among intelligent individuals.  These encounters always began by someone pretending to be my trustworthy friend.  This all happened when there was no tolerance in the military for gay relationships.

Because of the strong intolerance to gay relationships I was also threatened if I disclosed a fellow recruit.  If I ever left base in my uniform I was targeted.  Quite often my encounters turned violent.   On one occasion I was forced to take on 3 fellows all of whom were much larger than myself.  I knew how to defend myself and hurt someone - but in such encounters there is seldom a winner as often depicted in movies.  There were two things I learned.  First, I learned that regardless of how seemingly harmless it may be presented by those that do not respect the principles of Christ - there is a very dark side to all temptations and those that succumb.  Second, I learned that despite all the arguments to the contrary that human sexual behaviors are learned and are not prewired - otherwise there would never be any suggestions or pressures, from anyone - EVER - that one ought to experiment with their sexuality. 

For much of my younger years I would physically hurt anyone that was gay that would try to show me any affection.  I am a very live and let live person.  What a persons does in private is of no concern of mine as long as they do not "force" anyone against their will.  However, what a person dose or says in public - I believe to be a different matter.  I believe that anything that is deliberately made public is open to public criticism.  In addition I believe that should anyone ask my opinion concerning any subject that I should answer honestly with my opinion.

I admit that for a long time my opinions of those held sexual opinions outside of divinely appointed marriage was based in intolerance.  However, the spirit has softened me greatly over time and taught me to respect whatever good and noble there is in those I encounter.  That there is good and noble in all G-d's children.  I have many beloved friends that I love and hold dear within the LGBTQ+ society.  Mostly I use my example rather than words to demonstrate my beliefs and show as best I am able what repentance and faith in Christ can do to bring peace to society.  I never apologize for my faith in Christ or my adherence to the Law of Chasity or my devotion to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

I have learned not to be offended by those that dislike (or hate) the standards of the church.  But to be honest I do not know how to communicate any thought towards such that does not appear to be received with anything but contempt.   Mostly I ignore those that despise religious standards - however when challenged directly I will respond and generally I am accused of being hateful.  I really do not care about name calling and I am never impressed with such inferior debate tactics.  I have never found a way to deal intelligently with such individuals.  I am not sure what is the kindest way to communicate my lack of interest - As I have said - for those that have found success (without betraying the light of truth) I would like to learn how it is done - or if it is even possible.

 

The Traveler

 

[LDSGator]

1 hour ago, Traveler said:

I am impressed to give you some of my personal history.  I grew up in a family where we provided for ourselves.  We lived in the city and grew much of what we ate.  We also raised chickens and rabbits for meat - hunting was part of how we provided additional meat.  We would purchase some foods when we did not have sufficient.  When I turned 8 I was expected to work outside our home (regular jobs) to provide for my personal needs.  I was also expected to save and pay for my mission, college and other activities.  When I started my senior year in high school I joined the army reserves so I could serve a mission - because of the draft during the Vietnam era.  I was 17 but but small and looked 13.  Within a week of leaving home for basic training I was encourage to sexually experiment with gay relationships - something that I did not think could possibly exist among intelligent individuals.  These encounters always began by someone pretending to be my trustworthy friend.  This all happened when there was no tolerance in the military for gay relationships.

Because of the strong intolerance to gay relationships I was also threatened if I disclosed a fellow recruit.  If I ever left base in my uniform I was targeted.  Quite often my encounters turned violent.   On one occasion I was forced to take on 3 fellows all of whom were much larger than myself.  I knew how to defend myself and hurt someone - but in such encounters there is seldom a winner as often depicted in movies.  There were two things I learned.  First, I learned that regardless of how seemingly harmless it may be presented by those that do not respect the principles of Christ - there is a very dark side to all temptations and those that succumb.  Second, I learned that despite all the arguments to the contrary that human sexual behaviors are learned and are not prewired - otherwise there would never be any suggestions or pressures, from anyone - EVER - that one ought to experiment with their sexuality. 

For much of my younger years I would physically hurt anyone that was gay that would try to show me any affection.  I am a very live and let live person.  What a persons does in private is of no concern of mine as long as they do not "force" anyone against their will.  However, what a person dose or says in public - I believe to be a different matter.  I believe that anything that is deliberately made public is open to public criticism.  In addition I believe that should anyone ask my opinion concerning any subject that I should answer honestly with my opinion.

I admit that for a long time my opinions of those held sexual opinions outside of divinely appointed marriage was based in intolerance.  However, the spirit has softened me greatly over time and taught me to respect whatever good and noble there is in those I encounter.  That there is good and noble in all G-d's children.  I have many beloved friends that I love and hold dear within the LGBTQ+ society.  Mostly I use my example rather than words to demonstrate my beliefs and show as best I am able what repentance and faith in Christ can do to bring peace to society.  I never apologize for my faith in Christ or my adherence to the Law of Chasity or my devotion to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

I have learned not to be offended by those that dislike (or hate) the standards of the church.  But to be honest I do not know how to communicate any thought towards such that does not appear to be received with anything but contempt.   Mostly I ignore those that despise religious standards - however when challenged directly I will respond and generally I am accused of being hateful.  I really do not care about name calling and I am never impressed with such inferior debate tactics.  I have never found a way to deal intelligently with such individuals.  I am not sure what is the kindest way to communicate my lack of interest - As I have said - for those that have found success (without betraying the light of truth) I would like to learn how it is done - or if it is even possible.

 

The Traveler

 

I hate to break it to you @Traveler, but many people, even those you view as sinners, are not stupid. They’ll know within thirty seconds if you are preaching at them out of brotherly love/honest Christian concern or just out of a desire to scream, preach, show off or as an outlet for anger issues. 
 

Ask yourself this (and I mean this honestly)-who are you more likely to listen to? Someone who hates you or someone who actually legitimately cares about you? 
 

If you can’t convey the care part, your words are totally meaningless. 

 

 

Edited February 25, 2022 by LDSGator

[MrShorty]

@mikbone I agree that we need to build our foundation on the words of Christ. As it relates to transgender issues (including how to navigate competitive sports), what are the words of Christ on this issue and how do we know they are the words of Christ?

Perhaps alongside that, in a pluralistic society, how and to what extent should we inject our understanding of the words of Christ into the laws, practices, and procedures of sports' governing bodies and states and nations?