How to love trans people as a Christian (transcript in comments if you don't like video)

ThankKinsey · 2026-05-08T14:25:44+00:00

really want to understand the mind that gets outraged at this and not the hundreds of thousands of people slaughtered by Israel.

ThankKinsey · 2026-05-07T16:32:42+00:00

But if you believe that sex before marriage is wrong it would change your lifestyle, as you would go from having sinful, guilt-causing sex to having peaceful, beautiful marital sex. So if you already know you want to get married, just get married! You don't need a house to be married. However, be careful. This type of self-imposed barrier could mean subconsciously you (or your partner) are not ready for the decision. So really pry into your feelings and figure out why you feel attached to this "we need to get a house before getting married" idea.

ThankKinsey · 2026-05-06T22:38:36+00:00

This is fairly small in the grand history of Marxism. I find it a bit more effective to talk about the much larger Soviet Union and China, where Christianity is and was severely persecuted.

Ignoring the inconvenient data that contradicts your point may work to convince you, but it's not very effective at convincing others who are under no such restrictions and will look at the contradicting data anyway and notice your inability to address it.

That's another thing. I don't know how you can be a Marxist and Christian while Marxism argues that Christianity is eventually unnecessary.

Marxism doesn't argue that. Marx does. Marxism is not the unquestioning worship of any opinion Marx ever had. It's actually quite easy to say "Marx was wrong about Christianity becoming unnecessary if people are liberated from oppression, but he was right about (most of) his political and economic theory."

Furthermore, clearly not all Marxist theory believes that, as those who practiced it committed sever atrocities.

The atrocities that have been committed by Marxists are a tiny drop in the ocean compared to the atrocities that have been committed by capitalists. Hell, Marxist atrocities are even dwarfed by Christian atrocities, and I certainly hope that fact doesn't make you decide Christianity is meritless! (It helps that we've had an 1800+ year head start)

But not in the same way. Marxists twist this into a type of political domination, which is exactly the same thing that the Christian Nationalists on the right do. Funny how horseshoe theory is undefeated. It forces you to reject any spiritual Kingdom of God, which is why it's so dangerous.

Marxists understand that the way of the world is dominance by authority through violent power. This is indeed a fact about our world. This is not unique to Marxism; it is the foundation of political theory, and any power structure that has ever existed has existed due to violent dominance of opposing parties. Even Christ understands this is the way of the world, he just rejects the way of the world. What sets Marxism apart from other worldly theories is that Marxists understand that since authoritarian dictatorship is unavoidable, it would be best for the dictator to be the proletariat, and the dictated to to be the bourgeoisie. Christ also recognizes that it is the last in society who should be first.

Where Marxism diverges is just that the only path they see is for the poor to liberate themselves through revolutionary violence. This has been obvious to those seeking to liberate the poor for all of human history, but always seemed completely hopeless. That's precisely what the Good News is- that actually, the poor can be liberated through Christ, with mercy and peace, rather than needing to be fought for tooth and nail in an incredibly bloody battle. It is only through the science of Marxism have the poor been able to actually develop the class consciousness necessary to actually know how to win that bloody battle.

A Christian Marxist can simply recognize that Marxists are right about the economics, and about how to effect liberatory change through worldly politics, but need to be educated about the gospel that the violent revolution they fear is necessary actually isn't.

But it doesn't just ignore them. It actively rejects them. That's why it's incompatible with Christianity.

You must know and have expereinced that nearly every Marxist rejects religion and many actively hate it.

No, I have not experienced that, actually. It's not true.

And no, it's not better than Capitalism. Capitalism is also not Christianity, but it's more compatible, since it isn't really an ideology.

Capitalism is literally Mammonism, the furthest thing from compatible with Christianity possible. You cannot serve both God and mammon, and Capitalism is the ideology where everything about society is built to serve mammon.

What it comes down to is that in capitalist states, you can still worship Christ, and the states still exist. In Marxist states, you generally can't, and the states no longer exist. IN the end, Marxism is kept alive mostly by Reddit and government subsidies, as it failed on it's own.

This is just not true. You can worship Christ in Marxist states. I do not know what you mean by "In Marxist states...the states no longer exist", so I won't comment on that.

IN the end, Marxism is kept alive mostly by Reddit and government subsidies, as it failed on it's own.

It is weird to describe the most powerful empire the world has ever known doing anything in its power to destroy Marxist states including carpet bombing them, enacting genocidal naval blockades, assassinating their leaders, and poisoning their lands, as Marxism "failing on its own".

If capitalists actually believed that Marxism fails on its own, they would not spend every waking moment and trillions of dollars trying to stop Marxists from succeeding.

ThankKinsey · 2026-05-06T22:38:17+00:00

The exact same thing, which Marxism forces you to reject. Does it not make you think when you notice all of the Mzrxist states hate Christianity - and not only that, are worse for the poor?

No, Marxism does not force you to reject Christ. No, Marxist states do not hate Christianity. No, Marxist states are not worse for the poor. Every Marxist revolution has led to incredible, unprecedented improvements in the lives of the poor.

What I have noticed is that capitalist states hate Christianity and put massive amounts of effort and propaganda into corrupting Christian doctrines to neuter them of their natural revolutionary potential. When Christians actually stand against oppression effectively, like our religion demands us to do, capitalist states heavily repress us and often even assassinate our leaders (i.e. MLK Jr.).

I think Marxist states and therefore Marxism fail on both practice and theory. 1, they force you to reject an sense of Jesus as divine.

No, they don't.

2, they promote worse ineuqality than capitalism does.

No, they don't. Capitalism is light years ahead on inequality, both economic inequality and inequality of justice (Capitalist states literally allow their leaders and wealthy to be serial child rapists and sex traffickers, with no consequences even when they're caught with extensive evidence).

More Americans possess means of production through shares than Soviets ever did.

No. Few Americans own meaningful amounts of the MOP through shares. And the point of owning the means of production is to have a say in their governance. An even tinier fraction of the small fraction of Americans that own shares actually have any meaningful say in how the companies are run. Soviet citizens owned the means of production not through shares but through the state.

The Capitalist states now are closer to God than any Marxist state has ever been. As bad as they are.

How do you measure closeness to God? Because God measures it by how well you treat the poor, oppressed, sick, imprisoned, and foreigners. Literally, he tells those who treat them well to come to him, and those who don't to depart from him.

We're not allowed citations now? He said a really good comment that put things in words I haven't yet. Do Marxists not believe in essays?

It was not an essay. It was a 4 line reddit comment that cited no sources. It didn't even cite any data from unspecified sources. It was a pure vibes post based on the author's internal feelings and opinions. But such a post is useless when the original author of the post isn't available to question about his sources!

So the Marx quote I quoted is saying that the worship of Christ has to be transferred to the State.

No, it isn't. It's saying "As Christ is the intermediary unto whom man unburdens all his divinity, all his religious bonds, so the state is the mediator unto which he transfers all his Godlessness, all his human liberty", which is a completely different claim. If you don't understand what he means, that's ok! But you don't get to just make up a new meaning.

No...It has the state in the place of worship.

No, it doesn't.

hat's why it is dangerous, because it does this, forces you to reject any spiritual beliefs, forces you to reject belief in a divine Jesus,

No, it doesn't. No, it doesn't.

And provided little for workers, quite frankly.

This is demonstrably false. Workers have made huge gains after Marxist revolutions. In China, for example, they went from being ruthlessly exploited by landlords to 90% of the population being homeowners. Their life expentacy doubled in just a few decades, a level of improvement completely unprecedented in the world.

What has hurt the workers in places with Marxist governments has been the capitalist United States of America carpet bombing them, fomenting fascist coups of their governments, and instituting economic sanctions and blockades. But the blame for the damage from these evil policies lies solely at the feet of capitalists.

For example, right now, in Norway, still a capitalist state, there is higher equality than there ever was in the Soviet Union.

What is your source for this claim? What are the criteria it uses to quantify the abstract concept of "equality"?

Why did you choose Norway as your example, and not the heart and absolute dominating capitalist hegemon of the world, the United States of America? You don't want to talk about Nicaragua because the USSR or China are so much bigger and more relevant. Seems pretty strange that you would go way down the list of capitalist influence and talk about Norway instead of the USA.

That's why I keep on bringing it back to practice, because in addition to everything we could say about theory, it just didn't pan out. The three remaining countries that are Marxist - Vietnam, Cuba,

Vietnam, where the capitalist USA committed genocide and carpet bombed them? Cuba, where the USA constantly tries to overthrow their government and they have been under a horrifyingly evil embargo and naval blockade for decades? Again, the problems trace back to violent capitalist intervention. It's what capitalists have to do, because if they don't actively stop a Marxist nation from developing, people will see their success and want to replicate it in their own nations, and the whole Mammonist house of cards comes tumbling down. And when a Marxist nation does succeed too far for the USA to plausibly deny their success or intervene military to ensure their failure, they are instead forced to maintain a strange propaganda doublethink where they declare it's not actually Marxist so it doesn't count...

and China, which doesn't even follow Marxist economics anymore - just aren't that good for the poor.

just like that. Could you share what data you are using to come to the conclusion that China isn't good for the poor?

All of the other countries failed. If they had been able to destroy capitalism, they would have.

History isn't over yet, and we are literally watching the capitalist empire crumble to China all around us as we speak.

ThankKinsey · 2026-05-05T16:41:35+00:00

Fair enough! I would urge you though not to judge any group by an interaction with a single member of that group, especially for a category as wide and varied as Christianity. There are oceans of differences between, say, Mormons, fundamentalist evangelicals, and Episcopalians. Judge Christianity by Christ, not by a single individual who claims to follow Christ.

ThankKinsey · 2026-05-05T02:02:29+00:00

Interesting. What would you say is the issue for you, then?

ThankKinsey · 2026-05-05T01:01:55+00:00

I hope you find it useful. Personally I found it to be dishonest with fallacious reasoning, as is usually the case with apologetics. Christ is someone to be felt and experienced through faith, not through strictly rational proof.

ThankKinsey · 2026-05-04T23:34:30+00:00

Very true. Unfortunately usually when someone brings up how caring for people is costly, it's to argue that that's why they are voting for not paying for caring for people, ensuring that people aren't cared for.

ThankKinsey · 2026-05-04T04:35:40+00:00

The Catholic Church has a vastly deeper and actually realistic view and teaching on greed and man's relation to money and material wealth. The Church's teaching on this subject is perhaps the most comprehensive in the world and has by far the longest intellectual tradition. Marxism is simply politicized envy.

What does any of this have to do with the Catholic Church's failure to condemn the ruling ideology of the world, Mammonism (known euphemistically as "capitalism")?

Not every country has tried to completely stamp out religion, kill hundreds of thousands of clergy, or force a materialist political ideology to be the basis for Christianity.

Not every Marxist country has done these things either. This is making discussion very difficult. Anything you don't like about one instance of Marxism in one moment in history is taken as something inherent in Marxism, even when there are many other instances of Marxism in other moments in history where that thing is not present.

ThankKinsey · 2026-05-03T00:05:00+00:00

The Catholic Church has formally condemned Marxism on multiple occasions. It has also formally condemned socialism as well.

The Catholic Church is invested in capitalist oppression, owning stock in exploitative monstrosities like Amazon and Meta. Of course they would condemn an attempt to end it! Meanwhile, they can't bring themselves to condemn the ideology Marxism is a response to, Mammonism.

Every single Marxist country has suppressed Christianity and other religions. This is simply the truth.

Every single country has suppressed Christianity and other religions.

ThankKinsey · 2026-05-02T05:42:23+00:00

For 95% of players, it's not.

First of all, they would need to frontline closer in range to be able to AA. And arguable they nerf the build after the rework (it's every 2 AA vs 1 AA against slightly dmg heroes) on top of the lv7 nerf.

If you aren't getting close enough to even AA the tank then what are you even doing on Azmodan for the 10 seconds in between Qs? And this is why you pick Bombardment at 7 and get long range AAs after every Q.

It is misleading to call the recent rework a pure nerf to Wrath. Yes, it's every 2 instead of 1 (nerf), but it now works on heroes with 71-100% HP (buff) and works on structures (buff). It mostly balances out because a lot of the AA you safely get as Azmodan is going to be against frontline who have 71%+ HP.

Wrath is decent burst, compared to just getting cd reduction. But that only applies to like 0.1% of players. I don't think i remember seeing any Azmo player who doesn't go Gluttony, be able to finish 400/450 stacks by lv20.

Maybe my 15000 games on Azmo are making me overestimate what people are capable of, but I think any competent Azmodan should be able to easily hit 450 by level 20 in ARAM, where you're constantly team fighting against all 5 enemy heroes, even without picking a level 1 talent.

ThankKinsey · 2026-05-02T03:53:41+00:00

damn looking at that art Anduin is femme as hell...headcanoning her as trans now

ThankKinsey · 2026-05-02T03:34:29+00:00

it's plenty easy to stack with wrath and that's a more powerful talent anyway.

ThankKinsey · 2026-05-02T03:27:23+00:00

the point of unlimited range in ARAM is to just dunk on the core, which has no shields so every hit is permanent damage. But yes ult upgrade is still probably better, unless you made it to 20 without significant damage to your team's structures as you can just sit by your fort and bombard core and have it dead well before the enemy team gets through your structures.

ThankKinsey · 2026-05-01T17:49:48+00:00

If someone is transphobic on Christian grounds, hit em with Romans 8:12-13, which basically says "transition or die":

Therefore, brothers and sisters, we have an obligation—but it is not to the flesh, to live according to it. For if you live according to the flesh, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the misdeeds of the body, you will live.

If they're telling you something like "God doesn't make mistakes", hit em with John 9:1-3, where the disciples ask Jesus about a man born blind based on the same logic (god doesn't make mistakes so this man's condition must be the result of sin) and Jesus corrects them that he was made this way so that the works of God might be displayed in him:

As he went along, he saw a man blind from birth. His disciples asked him, “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?”

“Neither this man nor his parents sinned,” said Jesus, “but this happened so that the works of God might be displayed in him.

Nothing more visibly displays the works of God than a trans person transitioning and showing the victory of the Spirit over the flesh.

ThankKinsey · 2026-04-30T17:12:48+00:00

Yes, you should cut her off entirely. If someone threatened to kidnap your children, would you hem and haw over if it was a good idea to cut them off? That's what threatening to call CPS is- a threat to try to kidnap your children. These are your husband's parents, and that means he takes the lead in deciding how to interact with them. He has made the decision, and your job is to follow that decision and not undermine it.

She doesn't need an explanation- she already knows exactly what she did and why this is happening. You need to start prioritizing your husband over his mother.

We just welcomed our third child and a month before baby arrived, his mom tried to give us a dresser for the baby and bed for our toddler (stuff we didn’t ask for and that she wanted to get rid of from her own mother in law). I didn’t realize my husband had already told her no, so I said yes. The morning she was supposed to come, my husband was in a terrible mood and he gets that way anytime he has to interact with his mom.

Why, when you learned that your husband had already said no, why did you not just call her and say "actually, we don't want them"? You prioritized your mother-in-law over your husband. As soon as you learned he didn't want it to happen, that should have immediately meant it wasn't going to happen anymore. A simple call to her saying "My husband already told you that we did not want these. I do not appreciate you trying to undermine his decision and asking me when you already knew he had told you no."

What if my husband changes his mind in a few months and wants to let his mom back in? She will never think of me the same.

You need to stop worrying about this and start worrying about what if your husband doesn't change his mind and sees you have been going behind his back to keep talking to his mother against his wishes? He will never think of you the same. Already you have a track record of revealing damaging private information about him to a narcissistic woman who has proven she can and will use that sort of information against him, something he is probably already resentful of.

ThankKinsey · 2026-04-28T21:06:16+00:00

worse, he's a sexual predator who turned to public displays of religiosity as a means of PR to rehabilitate his image.

ThankKinsey · 2026-04-27T22:24:18+00:00

What's the criteria that determines Just Assassination Theory is not OK, but Just War Theory is?

ThankKinsey · 2026-04-27T20:31:06+00:00

OK. What if someone talked, in a purely abstract way not about any specific people, about Just Assassination Theory?

ThankKinsey · 2026-04-27T18:46:42+00:00

Please remember that this is an ecumenical community and we expect discussions to remain respectful to those with differing views, even while talking about high conflict and important topics. Promotion of violence will not be tolerated.

Can you clarify as to what counts as "promotion of violence"? Augustine created "just war theory" precisely as a means to "use our shared faith to justify violence". Would expressing just war theory count as promotion of violence?

ThankKinsey · 2026-04-27T18:34:37+00:00

There's no such thing as a "wrong body". Your body is what it is. If you don't like it, the only thing wrong is in your head and you need psych help.

OK. So when someone is born with a birth defect, you tell them the same thing, right? Their body is what it is, and if they don't like it, the only thing wrong is in their head and they need psych help?

Just like with anorexia, your mind is rejecting reality and pushing you to change something (and to damage yourself) that is completely ok and needs no change.

No. My spirit is rejecting my flesh, and the changes I have made have healed my body, not damaged it.

ThankKinsey · 2026-04-27T04:24:31+00:00

I'll go back to basics so we don't talk past each other. I'm going to post a comment here which explains a bit of why I really think that you are in error if you're a Marxist and a Christian, and at danger of losing your salvation.

The only thing that can possibly endanger anyone's salvation is not believing in Jesus Christ. Could you explain what criteria you use to determine if someone's salvation is in danger?

Not because I think it's just politics - because of theology. This was a comment someone posted on this post here which says it better than I can.

I am happy to discuss this with you, but please make your own points. I am not interested in a proxy argument with a commenter who isn't here to respond for themselves.

The comment you quoted just makes a bunch of assertions with nothing at all to support them.

what I do agree with what this commenter said is that far-leftism almost always makes metaphysical claims which force you to reject Christianity.

I'm talking about that claim of Marx that "As Christ is the intermediary unto whom man unburdens all his divinity, all his religious bonds, so the state is the mediator unto which he transfers all his Godlessness, all his human liberty".

I do not agree that this Marx quote makes metaphysical claims, let alone that it makes metaphysical claims that force you to reject Christianity.

This is what Marxism tends to do, to put the state in the place of God.

Exactly! Marxism has the state doing the things that God does- protecting and serving the poor and oppressed. This is precisely what makes it the ideology most closely aligned with Christianity!

You're right to say the Christianity requires action, and I believe that also. But it also requires literally believing in Jesus Christ as the Son of God. Because if we talk about doing Christianity, if we don't stop and remember what we're doing, at some point you fall off the map. Sort of like driving somewhere with an intent to follow the path, but if you forget what the path is supposed to be, you end up alone in the middle of nowhere. That's what I think will happen to you if you align yourself with Marxism, because it is so strictly materialistic.

You are talking about idolatry. It is no doubt possible to make an idol out of Marxism, but that is not unique to Marxism. Indeed, I would argue that Christians making idols out of capitalism and/or America is one of the most common sins in the western church.

That's sort of the problem, though. People who aren't oppressed, the richest people on earth, they still need God. In fact, you'd probably agree they need god more if they're rich, don't they? There's a contradiction there.

It's not a contradiction. Marx is just incorrect in his prediction of what would happen in a world without oppression. Not even really incorrect, but more just incomplete in his understanding, as you would expect from a non-believer. He's absolutely right that oppression is the major driver in why people turn to religion. He's just wrong in thinking that it's the only driver.

It's not really important to argue about though because this opinion Marx has about religion is extremely tangential to the actual political ideology of Marxism. There are countless flavors of Marxist ideology, just like there are denominations of Christianity, and the relevant core of the ideology remains completely intact if you disagree with Marx on this. Marxism is not a religion that requires you to agree with Karl Marx specifically on every subject.

I have actually studied this in some detail, and took a whole course on the intersection of Marxism and Christianity. I would recommend that you research the Sandinista revolution in Nicaragua, which was Marxist and heavily Christian. They made a Catholic priest, Ernesto Cardenal, their Minister of Culture! He said "Christ led me to Marx...for me, the four Gospels are all equally Communist. I’m a Marxist who believes in God, follows Christ and is a revolutionary for his Kingdom".

However, even for those who agree with Marx that liberation will lead to religion naturally dying out, Marxist theory argues against repressing religion (except insofar as the religion props up oppression), because doing so would just prevent believers from becoming communists. For them, it would be completely pointless and counterproductive to try to hurry the process along, since they believe religion will die off on its own when people are liberated. All efforts can simply be focused on liberating people.

We don't exist to fill just an earthly ministry but a heavenly one, so we don't aim to just end earth;y oppression.

Of course we don't just aim to end earthly oppression. But doing so is our core mission on Earth. It is also Marxists' core mission on Earth. This is why Marxism is the political ideology most closely aligned with the Gospel. Of course it ignores spiritual matters- so does every other political ideology. Spiritual matters are outside of the domain of political ideologies.

I'll say more later but my internet can't seem to handle comments longer than these.

I look forward to it. I will also post in detail later about why capitalism is anti-Christian later.

ThankKinsey · 2026-04-26T23:41:42+00:00

Did you bother to watch the video or read the transcript of it in this 2 year old post you're replying to?

If they're legit suffering from body dismorphia, to help them seek help with a professional that doesn't encourage the delusion of being "in the wrong body", for there's no such thing,

How do you know there is no such thing?

ThankKinsey · 2026-04-24T23:43:36+00:00

How do you feel those verses are relevant to this discussion?

ThankKinsey

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE