Oh, good. The fucktard wing of of the rafo liberal community comes out to play. I see your handle and I immediately wonder what illogical and unsupported argument I am going to b presented with.

The attraction and desire to do wrong is a fundamental premise of Christian belief, as is the universality of succumbing to the same. Every single human being commits sin. This does not make them ineligible to speak on the topic, or to condemn such action. Nor does it make them hypocrites when they succumb. Hypocrisy would be asserting that such behavior renders another person less than the speaker for getting caught doing what the speaker does in secret, or it would be proclaiming different standards for different groups, such as Al Sharpton or the like demanding racial privileges for their group, while condemn the perception of similar privileges for another group.

If only saints could speak against sin, there would be no one who could. "He who is without sin cast the first stone" does not exclude the possibility of stone casting, nor did Jesus refrain from correcting the sinner He defended with that statement. My own sins might preclude me from prescribing punishment, so I will and have not. Anywhere in this post. It's strange how you seem to think that one Republican's sin means no Republicans can speak against sin, but you make no move to shut down Weight Watchers or Alcoholics Anonymous, where leadership and counseling and the condemning of self-indulgence is done exclusively by those who have committed those sins themselves.

As to the specifics of your post, once again, you presume a great deal about other people, seemingly based on the notion that absolutely no one could come to a different conclusion from the same set of data. Also, you seem to think that the same Hollywood medical establishment that served Michael Jackson so well, can be taken for granted to be behaving in a professionally responsible manner when they treat Bruce Jenner. How many "transgendered" aspirants accept the diagnosis of a doctor who tells them "In my professional opinion, you are the exact right gender and sex and whatever bullshit terminology people invent to twist reality to their liking. Mutilating yourself will only deepen your psychological issues. Instead I recommend we deal with correcting those issues so you can live a normal life, and save money on clothing."? I'll bet the number is similar to the numbers of woman who accept a plastic surgeon's diagnosis that breast implants would be a bad idea, that they would distort her figure, cause back problems, and maybe she should learn to be happy with a B cup. Or that their noses look fine, or that a couple of wrinkles are to be expected at age 58.

Amazing how you can assert that this stuff is necessary and always goes on, but making sure a woman looks at a sonogram of her fetus before killing it is "a war on women." IMO, calling Bruce Jenner and Larry Waichowski women seems a more offensive declaration of war than affirming the special quality that elevates women beyond smaller, weaker and less rational men.