Anti-Gay But Pro-Transgender, Iran Encourages Gender Reassignment Surgery

[Ben]

www.youtube.com/watch?v=TdyoqixegQQ&list=UU1yBKRuGpC1tSM73A0ZjYjQ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TdyoqixegQQ&list=UU1yBKRuGpC1tSM73A0ZjYjQ)

[martin48]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7259057.stm

[AshlynCreamher]

Yeah they "like" trannies

[natina]

women and transsexual are 2nd class citizens in an islamic state.

some muslim do not accept transsexuals as women.


Yeah they "like" trannies

[Dahlia Babe Ailhad]

Hi all,

I didn't watch the video but i am sure i saw a whole documentary on SRS in Iran some time ago.

From what i remember, Iran will not stand for gays, so, if you are a TS then you are simply a gay wearing female clothes.
So seeing as you are wearing female clothes and want to live as a woman, it's better than being a male-on-male gay in their opinion.
So, they will allow SRS only because they don't want to see male-on-male lovers walking down the street hand-in-hand, arm-in-arm.

They don't really care about your mental state and the difficulties you have being a TG. All they want is an image of "normalcy" in the country so they actually prefer that you self-represent as a female instead of a gay male.
(Geez, i hope i didn't forget something about that documentary.)

Anyway, that's what i got from what i saw a few years ago.

Babe,
xoxo

[martin48]

Some Muslim countries are not that great in the way they treat women.
Bit of a shock if they get to Jannah and find 42 transsexuals!




women and transsexual are 2nd class citizens in an islamic state.

some muslim do not accept transsexuals as women.

[Dahlia Babe Ailhad]

women and transsexual are 2nd class citizens in an islamic state.

some muslim do not accept transsexuals as women.

Good morning, natina,

Muslims are ruled by their Holy Koran. Check this out. You might find it pretty informative.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fi3jhhBUXmg

Babe,
xoxo

[trish]

Theocracy, by it's very nature, is an unjust form of government. Fantasies and superstition might be good for entertaining and scaring children, but it's not a fit basis for government. That's why I never understood why "freedom loving Americans" long for the Monarchy of Heaven and bow their heads in obeisance to a "Lord."

[Stavros]

Yes, Trish, but religion -more precisely, Christianity- has been fundamental to the creation of the United States even if it has been challenged many times, and without much success- indeed, perhaps it is the failure of Congress to reverse decisions made in the 1950s which speaks volumes about the 'separation' of 'church and state' in the USA. It is a confusing situation.

Consider the way in which the Pledge of Allegiance was changed in the 1950s to include the phrase 'under God' -Bellamy's 1892 original stated I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all, or the annual 'Prayer Breakfast' -a more occasional event in the Clinton White House, not to mention -again, a 1950s ruling- the stamping of In God We Trust on your coinage and banknotes.

It is ironic that I live in an officially Christian state -indeed, the head of state, our gracious and most noble Queen Elizabeth II is head of the Church- yet the Queen's Prime Ministers not only do not end speeches declaiming 'God Save the Queen!' even less 'God Bless the United Kingdom!' but would probably feel awkward doing so -'God Save the Queen' when it is used is used as a toast at a ceremonial dinner.

I only discovered today that while we now wonder what would happen if an American President did not end his speeches with God Bless America this only happened for the first time when Richard Nixon said it -in a note of desperation- at the end of a televised speech in 1973, and neither Gerald Ford nor Jimmy Carter bothered with it. Reagan used it enough times for it to become de rigueur and thus has it remained.

The settlers who left Europe for the Americas were called Pilgrims because it was their religion -and their desire for religious freedom- that motivated them to leave oppressive Europe, moreover, here is de Tocqueville's observations on the American communities he visited before the Civil War:

Upon my arrival in the United States the religious aspect of the country was the first thing that struck my attention; and the longer I stayed there, the more I perceived the great political consequences resulting from this new state of things.

In France I had almost always seen the spirit of religion and the spirit of freedom marching in opposite directions. But in America I found they were intimately united and that they reigned in common over the same country.

Religion in America...must be regarded as the foremost of the political institutions of that country; for if it does not impart a taste for freedom, it facilitates the use of it. Indeed, it is in this same point of view that the inhabitants of the United States themselves look upon religious belief.

In the United States, the sovereign authority is religious...there is no country in the world where the Christian religion retains a greater influence over the souls of men than in America, and there can be no greater proof of its utility and of its conformity to human nature than that its influence is powerfully felt over the most enlightened and free nation of the earth.

In the United States, the influence of religion is not confined to the manners, but it extends to the intelligence of the people...

Christianity, therefore, reigns without obstacle, by universal consent...

I sought for the key to the greatness and genius of America in her harbors...; in her fertile fields and boundless forests; in her rich mines and vast world commerce; in her public school system and institutions of learning. I sought for it in her democratic Congress and in her matchless Constitution.
Not until I went into the churches of America and heard her pulpits flame with righteousness did I understand the secret of her genius and power.

http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/cdf/onug/detocq.html

[trish]

Nature's God: The Heretical Origins of the American Republic by Matthew Stewart

[Stavros]

Trish, thanks for the reference to a book I was not aware of.
I should also have drawn attention to this story that appeared earlier this year, about the US Airman who was denied the right to re-enlist because he refused to recite the the last phrase of the oath which states:
I, ____________________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.”

Apparently it is US law that service personnel in the Air Force must recite these words if they wish to serve.

http://archive.airforcetimes.com/article/20140904/NEWS05/309040066/Group-Airman-denied-reenlistment-refusing-say-help-me-God-

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/10/us-air-force-sergeant-reenlist-god-oath

[trish]

In 1776 the Oath of Enlistment read, "I _____ have, this day, voluntarily enlisted myself, as a soldier, in the American continental army, for one year, unless sooner discharged: And I do bind myself to conform, in all instances, to such rules and regulations, as are, or shall be, established for the government of the said Army. "


The example of the serviceman who was refused re-enlistment because of the oath speaks to my point. It is neither just to theists that the defense of the country should fall upon their shoulders (because of an oath to "God"), nor is it fair to atheists that their service is refused. It's not the worst injustice one can imagine. Atheists can (and do) grit their teeth, take the oath and serve their country well. But it's a petty and nasty thing to do to someone who is willing to give their life for freedom (including the freedom of religion).

[Stavros]

You have a balanced, and logical answer, but as an American you might want to ask more questions about the attempt a part of your society -your fellow Americans- is making to change the secular foundations of American institutions, and to make fidelity to Christian belief the litmus test of loyalty to America itself. Ergo the 'military evangelism' referred to in the introduction to this article:

Coercive evangelizing and official promotion of evangelical Protestantism is rife and systemic within the US military. Soldiers at Ft. Eustis who would not volunteer to attend a command-sponsored evangelical concert were marched to their barracks and punished with a lockdown until the concert ended. US taxpayers partially funded and Ft. Bragg chaplains co-sponsored an evangelical rally held on Fort Bragg’s Main Parade Field and intended to take “the Christian message to all of Fort Bragg and the surrounding community.” Officers gave evangelical missionaries from the Gideons both an introduction and preferential access to enlisted recruits. Cadets at the U.S. Air Force Academy face a gauntlet of evangelical professors, staff, chaplains, and upper class members, with command authority, who pressure them to attend worship services, receive evangelical instruction, and evangelize their fellow cadets. Commanders pressure soldiers to attend marriage conferences run by the evangelical Focus on the Family, which has a Department of Defense contract to host the conferences.

http://instituteforscienceandhumanvalues.com/articles/religious%20discrimination%20military.htm

[trish]

You have a balanced, and logical answer, but as an American you might want to ask more questions about the attempt a part of your society -your fellow Americans- is making to change the secular foundations of American institutions, and to make fidelity to Christian belief the litmus test of loyalty to America itself. Ergo the 'military evangelism' referred to in the introduction to this article:
...
http://instituteforscienceandhumanvalues.com/articles/religious%20discrimination%20military.htm
Indeed. I’m well aware of the political pressure of religious fundamentalism in the U.S. Your example of its infiltration of the American military is to the point. Other examples include the 2008 passage of California’s prop 8 (the amendment against same sex marriage) which was hugely financed by the Mormon Church. We’ve had a “Christian” cult that attended military funerals to protest sodomy (although I never really understood the connection it was apparently clear to Our Lord in Heaven). Not only our currency but Indiana license plates declare “In God we trust.” Fundamentalists on school boards throughout the “Bible Belt” regularly and illegally foist creationism onto the biology curriculum. Fundamentalists not only preach, protest and legislate against contraception and abortion, they have encouraged more violent forms of dissent. Doctors have been murdered.

When I say, “Theocracy, by it's very nature, is an unjust form of government,” I’m not just talking about Islam. But I’ll add, that as bad as the U.S. is it is no more a theocracy than it is a police state.

From abolitionists to prohibitionists, religious zealots have influenced our evolution as a nation for good and ill. I suspect Islam has had good and ill influences as well on the social evolution of the Middle East (and Indonesia). But governments, to be just, need to be open to all personal perspectives on the Cosmos.

[Misterman1993]

Iran is a paradox of a country.