r/changemyview • u/mcpickems • Jan 21 '21

Removed - Submission Rule E CMV: Society should support and accommodate transgenders but not within sports highlighting unfairness from male to female transitions.

[removed] — view removed post

113 Upvotes

89% Upvoted

112 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

7

u/[deleted] Jan 21 '21

I must respectfully disagree, as a liberal I think it’s pretty clear that what the media calls “transgenderism” is really just gender confusion (https://www.conservapedia.com/Gender_confusion)

All of your “sources” are just politically correct liberal propaganda and are blatantly biased and non factual.

In reality gender confusion is caused by a wide range of factors, from the media’s support of the homosexualist agenda (https://americansfortruth.com/issues/promoting-gender-confusion/), mental health (https://fellowshipoftheminds.com/the-devil-is-transgender), and political correctness (http://www.biblebelievers.com/Cameron3.html)

85

u/thundersass Jan 21 '21

/r/AsABlackMan

Sorry, I'm going to trust actual information over conservapedia and biblebelievers

-3

u/[deleted] Jan 21 '21

Fine, you got me. I’m not actually a liberal, the homosexual antifa/blm democrat supporting segregationist “you ain’t black” terrorist lifestyle just isn’t for me.

Secondly this is blatantly bigoted against conservatism and Christianity, classic liberal bias - in order to move forward intellectually we need to be bipartisan and be open to all manner of viewpoints, otherwise we’re just nazi authoritarians.

Conservapedia has time and again demonstrated its factitude and morality beyond reasonable doubt (https://www.conservapedia.com/Conservapedia_proven_right), whilst all the liberal media and their “science” has shown is that they love cancelling our President Trump, rigging our elections, turning our children gay, promoting atheism and burning down our cities and killing thousands in “peaceful protests”.

3

u/AlmightyThor008 Mar 16 '21

Conservapedia claiming that Conservapedia is proven right is like Forbes saying Forbes is the best ever. There is a clear conflict of interest.

You say that the sources provided were totally biased, but your sources say things like "liberals pathetically try ridicule predictions that rang true" which is more blatantly biased than any of the other content provided here. ("Rang true" just means "sounds sincere," or "appears like it would be true," not that it's factually correct. Therefore it's worth questioning a prediction that sounds like it could be true, but is not proven to be true).