"…they became futile in their thinking and their senseless minds were darkened." (Romans 1:21)
With taunts evocative of the "huffing and puffing" of the "Big Bad Wolf," the transgender (TG) societal agenda is currently plowing roughshod through society with a degree of boldness suggesting that its tenets are grounded in truth. Is that assumption correct? Brashness of this level must surely appeal to some sort of grounds for surety as to the rightness of its cause. Yet I ask, is the impulse that drives its touters legitimately grounded? The sciences have strict rules which distinguish between either factual conceptions or mere emotions and opinions. Consequently, it is high time societal movers face the question whether the TG agenda is based on facts that justify the upheaval that it leaves in its wake.
The guidelines
certifying that knowledge is scientific are strict and clear. Firstly, science draws a sharp distinction
between observation (science) and boundless pondering (fiction). Secondly, scientific insights are gathered
without regard for either the wishes or the loathing of its researchers since only
by its conformity to the facts is its validity secured. Thirdly, qualities which attest that data is scientific
include that it is both measurable AND observable. Only claims that can be reconciled with data
that fulfills both factors qualifies as being scientifically sound. Fourthly, it is fallacious to suppress data in
order to force a desired conclusion. These parameters
do not mean that non-scientific statements are necessarily false. Far from it! (only materialism (MT)
limits truth statements to just scientific discourse). How ironic it is that by their own definition MTs
disqualify their own views as unscientific! Nevertheless, if any conception is subjective
(sourced inside one's head) then it lacks the required grounds that
justify imposing onto NON-TGs, demands that its' champions
allege, can redress what are just fantasies!
It is urgent that these guidelines be rigorously observed. The clarity they bring is like the colored lines drivers look to in order to stay within their lane along a winding road on a stormy night. Firstly, they hinder erroneous claims from getting a hold on audiences due to the seductiveness of charming, though ill-informed voices. Secondly they boost the likelihood that principled scientists will focus their declara-tions on the verifiable realities that their academic curricula convey, thereby highlighting the actual facts of the matter under discussion as opposed to "poisoning the well" through ploys such as gaslighting.
To be continued...
My complete essay is posted complete with footnotes on my website: www.christianityontheoffense.com/articles
