Send a Message
to TammyBeth

Comments

619

Joined

May 24, 2012

TammyBeth Profile

Forums Owned

Recent Posts

New Albany, MS

Gary aka tammy

I appreciate that, and I don't have any problem with people saying "I don't really understand" – the reason I participate in these threads which so often turn into bashing and nastiness is because I am very happy to help bring about more understanding for those of goodwill who would like to understand (and I might accidentally scatter a little on to the folks who are not even looking for it LOL). Some folks are so closed minded that you can explain anything to them because only their own views matter, never mind the facts. But you can't really do anything about such folk whatever the subject. On the other hand, people who are more interested in the truth than in defending their previously held views only need to be respectfully informed. So, as much as it gets me grief sometimes I try to be as open as possible, within reason, so as to make life easier for those who come after me. I know my own life would've certainly been much different if we had known as much about this condition 30 years ago as we do now.  (Jul 26, 2014 | post #23)

New Albany, MS

Gary aka tammy

Respectful is a two way street. I would suggest that true respect would be to spend as little time dwelling on what's between my legs as I do thinking about what's between yours. There are a lot of really obvious arguments on the subject but I will try to keep this particular post confined to the most obvious ones. First of all, if you follow the logic of that position to the obvious conclusion, then you would also require female to male transsexuals who have a vagina to enter the ladies room. Before you say yes to that, do a Google image search for "Buck Angel" and consider that you would be asking him to join you in the ladies room. And he's not the exception, the vast majority of otherwise fully transitioned FTM's have not had the genital surgery. (It's twice as expensive and not nearly as effective as the other sort) Secondly, all of the 200 largest cities in the US, along with several states, along with many if not most, major retailers(includin g Walmart), and many major employers,have laws/policies which affirm the right of trans persons to use the restroom of the gender with which they identify - and more are choosing to every year. And all that, thousands upon thousands of restrooms and hundreds of people potentially using each one every day resulting in what is surely hundreds of thousands of possible encounters between trans a non-trans people in these restrooms every year… In all that it is virtually impossible to find a verified account of a trans person in any way misbehaving or violating the rights of anyone else in the room. Almost every time you read a story of a woman being violated in some way in a private space the one doing so was a non-trans male who did not in any way pretend to be otherwise or employs the excuse of trans friendly laws in order to gain access. In other words the track record is abundantly clear that trans people are exactly 0 threat to non-trans women, by contrast trans women are routinely violated abused and killed by non-trans men and we no more want to put ourselves in a vulnerable position than you do. Third, the ideas that we would be anything to worry about is based on many false assumptions. For instance, it assumes a sexual intent and yet well over half of trans women are not sexually interested in women at all and moreover people share restrooms with people who are oriented toward their gender every day without incident or worry about incident. So the assumption is false. Beyond that, it makes assumptions about the physical state of others without knowing and without any obvious way to learn what is actually present. Also, it overlooks the fact that this argument often presumes the potential of indecent exposure without considering that a trans woman is the very last person on earth with any desire to expose herself to another sense the part that might be exposed is the part that she would very much like for you to not even realize was there. Generally, we hate the thing (which is why we seek very expensive and painful surgery to alter it) so why on earth would we want you to see it? The bottom line is that gender specific restrooms are nothing more than a cultural tradition. In other cultures (and for most of human history in any culture) they did/do not exist. Too often people argue for it as if it is some sort of God given right and commandment. It's not. It's just a tradition, just like it was once a tradition that women didn't wear pants. Did that tradition makes sense? What we wrong to change it? It was just tradition. Or better example: not much more than 50 years ago tradition said blacks and whites shouldn't share a bathroom so that goes to show traditions can be changed when they are wrong. Folks were uncomfortable than too, but it was right to change it.  (Jul 26, 2014 | post #22)

Ripley, MS

prsyer for Watcher THEOST 153

"donna adams uses this site for attention " just have to point out that if you really believed that then you aren't using your head because every time you call her name you are giving her what you claim she wants. If she, or anyone, is using a site like this for attention sin every time that somebody tries to call her out, troll her, or otherwise get over on her you are fueling the very thing you claim to disapprove of. Not very bright.  (Jul 26, 2014 | post #9)

Ripley, MS

prsyer for Watcher THEOST 153

ATTEMPT? PM me details on Facebook? anything I can do?  (Jul 23, 2014 | post #2)

Ripley, MS

eddie sides

i'm keeping my mouth shut about the business at hand, but i'll just say again that in my experience asking your haters not to gossip about you - whether it's on here or on facebook or right behind your back - is a waste of breath. you might as well be asking for a singing unicorn.  (Apr 3, 2014 | post #31)

Ripley, MS

Gay Marriage - Ripley, MS

holy zombie thread batman typing is difficult for me right now so i'll keep this short(er): CIVIL marriage is the issue at hand, and it is unconstitutional for a CIVIL act to be defined according t0 a RELIGIOUS doctrine.and most of you would not want it to be - lest divorce only be legal in the case of adultery and non-virgin brides be stoned (to name only 2 examples)  (Mar 29, 2014 | post #81)

Ripley, MS

eddie sides

internet gossips hiding behind a fake name starting shit? been there, done that, got a closet full of t-shirts. if you let them get to you, you give them power over you that they don't deserve. whatever is going on in real life always remember to laugh at the clowns that's all they deserve.  (Mar 24, 2014 | post #9)

Ripley, MS

Tammy Rainey (Beth?)

Message from Tammy: Obviously this is being typed for me so I can't make a lot of posts so I hope I can cover everything in this one (1) It's true that because of the tax return we are not broke right now but I will be out of work probably a year, maybe more,assuming I ever get back the use of my hands. so having some money now does not mean that my family wont need help from now on. (2) Help does not necessarily mean money people willing to provide rides to the store and such errands is greatly needed. (3)I do not apologize for buying my kids long awaited and long promise birthday present. there are many things we would have liked to have bought with that money that we choose not to because of this but I can still try to do for my kids.And I must say I have never heard of anyone so cold blooded that they would speak up to discourage anyone from helping a family in need you should be ashamed of yourself . (4) It's about time that hateful people particularly family and or so called friends figure out that when they try to hurt me they end up hurting innocent people in the form of my wife and kids how dare you get on here and let her see you tell people not to help her. (5) Finally, Whatever you think of me if you call yourself a christian or even someone with a little decency please do not use this tread to attack me because I have got bigger problems and you are only hurting the people who loves me. P.S, This site is not suitable for organizing. If anyone wants to do any organizing I suggest facebook. I hope that if you want to do something like that you would talk to me first call or visit.  (Feb 16, 2014 | post #15)

Ripley, MS

any difference since going wet ??

Why is it that so much of the time a person who claims to be pointing to god sounds so much like they are saying "feel free to continue being not-as-good-as-me "? It's probably more winsome to be careful not to sound condescending.  (Dec 2, 2013 | post #41)

New Albany, MS

homosexuals and racism

Oh this is classic. almost makes me think it's parody, but I'm going to assume you were serious. "Women cutting their hair wearing mens clothes-pants and painting up like Jezabel is a sin also." I'm sure I don't have to point out to you that hundreds of millions of very sincere Christians disagree with this doctrine. Make a list of the 20 most admirable prominent christian women you can think of, and see how many of them are - by your rules - "going to bust hell wide open" Do you think that the only "real" Christians are the ones who believe as you do? If so then logically there are FAR more "Christians " (in name only, according to you) corrupting our society than there are homosexuals - so I assume you've written your congressman calling for women to be legally barred from wearing pants and makeup, right? Right? For you other Christians (in name only, according to WTF...by the way, if that poster is so pure and righteous, what does the "F" stand for there? but I digress...) - how would you feel if WTF and those of a similar doctrine had the votes to push their doctrine on those who disagreed via the power of law? does it seem good to you that congress act to ban women from wearing make-up, or pants, or cutting their hair? if that's what the majority religion wants? if you say "No" - then explain how that would be different than the government enforcing your doctrine regarding sexuality on those with whom you disagree?  (Nov 26, 2013 | post #57)

New Albany, MS

homosexuals and racism

it's certainly not at all impossible that some people are born sociopathic and that manifests in violent attacks, for instance. so what? There's no analogy between an inborn trait which provokes you to violate the liberty and/or person of another human being, infringing on their rights and personal autonomy....and one which does not. In short - analogy fail, try again.  (Nov 26, 2013 | post #56)

New Albany, MS

homosexuals and racism

It seems clear you started with the conclusion you liked and reasoned backward in order to find God on your preferred side. You are basically denying the possibility that being gay is a "birth defect" so that you are free to judge behavior you find distasteful. Let's break it down. You said: "People are not "born gay". God doesn't create sin." there are several problems with this. First, you start with the assumption, without demonstrating it, that being gay is sin. You basically start with and end with the same premise, thus one can't be supporting evidence for the other. Second, you say 'god does not create sin' so this directly implies that when one is born, for instance, autistic God SPECIFICALLY ordained that child would be autistic - is that what you believe? That every physical imperfection was ordained FOR that person specifically by an active act of God's will? If that's not, after all, what you believe - then being born with a homosexual orientation would no more be "God made" than an epileptic could say "God made me sick" you said: " God made man in His image and God is not gay." God is not blind, or deaf, or autistic, or epileptic or whatever else one might name either - do you deny such people exist? you have an entirely too literal understanding of "God's image" - it doesn't mean physical image. If you need proof, your bible says elsewhere that god is spirit, not flesh. "He destroyed cities because of the immorality." forcible rape is immoral, no matter what gender is the target. "I'd God allowed man to be with man, he would have made men so they could procreate with other man." This presume procreation is the only reason for human existence. it implies therefore that the infertile should never be in a loving relationship since they cannot procreate. Is that your view? It's the only logical implication of your comment. "It clearly states in the Bible that homosexuality is wrong and against Gods teaching." There is room for disagreement. not everyone believes it is so clear. consider this: there are dozens of different views among Christians about how one is redeemed to God. One says faith alone, one says faith and works, one says faith and being baptized, one says faith and being baptized in a different name....all sincerely supporting the (supposedly) "clear" teaching of the Bible. so ask yourself this - do you worship a god who left so much room for doubt about the MOST important revelation he could possibly make - BUT was CRYSTAL clear about where one puts his penis? Seriously? THAT is God's FIRST priority? Am I trying to change your mind about what Scripture teaches? No, I could give you some food for thought but that's not the point - the point is that just as you respect other denominations having a different view about salvation or baptism or, for instance, the use of alcohol - even so you should respect that other sincere Christians have a different view of the proper understanding of the Bible's teachings on sexuality. "If everybody was gay, the world would come to an end in about 75 years." and if everyone were born infertile, you'd get the same result. we are speaking here of a physical abnormality found in a relatively small percentage of the population - in either case. what is true of the tiny statistical aberration has no logical implications for the whole. "Adam and Steve" that's clever, you should get a copyright or something. Seriously, I could ask you a lot of question on this canard but I'll stick with just one: are you aware of the concept of a "fallen" creation? If you are, then you don't need me to tell you that there are millions of things about this world that are not as they were in Eden, the big majority of them having nothing at all to do with "sin" - so while making your cliche rhyme is really cute...yea.  (Nov 26, 2013 | post #55)

Ripley, MS

needing a job

Tower loans has a help wanted sign up, Dodge place has a sign up  (Nov 23, 2013 | post #4)

Ripley, MS

Religion

D. James Kennedy used to note, quite correctly, that the church historically always was at it's most faithful when it was out of power and, to whatever degree, "oppressed " - and at it's least faithful when it was the seat of power. Nevermind that Kennedy spent a lot of his later life trying to increase the power of the church, the comment was still accurate. The Bible never ever says Christians should seek earthly power for the church, yet they have for 2,000 years. The pattern follows a pretty regular form: oppressed church is faithful and grows....gains power....becomes abusive....encount ers backlash...diminis hes...finds it's correct priority and becomes faithful again....grows...g ains power....repeat and repeat. the church is made up of humans, and humans by their fallen nature tend to abuse power. when you do that, you get a backlash, no matter who you are.  (Nov 15, 2013 | post #4)

Ripley, MS

luv giving boy std luv getting gandbang

you can hit the "report abuse" option Alicen, they do respond to that a lot of times.  (Nov 6, 2013 | post #9)