As I’ve already covered, the LGBT town hall hosted by CNN was a debacle for the Democrats. Their extremism, moral derangement, and disregard for liberty and basic human decency were put on display for all to see. Democratic presidential hopefuls applauded child abuse, announced plans to violate the First Amendment, and called for tax payer funding of genital mutilation procedures, among other things. Of course the moderators were only there to prop up and support the candidates. At no point was any candidate asked anything approaching a tough or penetrating question. Indeed, even when Beto O’Rourke called for the revocation of tax exempt status of churches that support biblical marriage, the moderator didn’t think to ask whether mosques should be punished as well.
But in an alternative universe where the media displays an interest in scrutinizing Democrats with even a fraction of the zeal and intensity with which Republicans are scrutinized, here are two very basic questions, relevant to last night’s town hall, that would surely be asked of every candidate:
1) If you now believe that sex is not determined by biology, when did you come to that conclusion? What made you change your mind? Was there any scientific discovery or breakthrough that caused you to believe that men can have vaginas? If not, how did you arrive at your current position?
2) Please define the words “woman” and “man.”
Every prominent Democrat in the country has adopted the belief — or pretended to adopt the belief — that sex exists on some sort of spectrum. They believe — or pretend to believe — that men can get pregnant, and women can have penises, and a little boy might discover through some mystical revelation that he has a little girl trapped inside his boyish shell. None of these people ever hinted at harboring such notions until very recently. In fact, for their whole careers, they have spoken of “women’s issues,” making it very clear that a subject like abortion is exclusively a concern of women. But if men can get pregnant, then the whole category of “women’s issues” is meaningless. There are no women’s issues or men’s issues because there is no definable difference between those two groups. That is the position now taken by every Democratic candidate. Why? What changed? These are questions an honest media would ask.
Then, once they have explained such a drastic change in thinking, they should be made to answer the second question. Okay, you don’t think the terms “woman” and “man” can be defined biologically. How, then, can they be defined? What is a woman? What is a man? What do you mean when you use these words? You do still use them, after all. You must have some meaning in mind. Explain your meaning. You insist that a man who identifies as a woman is a woman. Fine. What does that mean? He is … what? A woman, yes, but what is that? It’s not a human female, apparently, so then what is it? This seems like not only a fair but utterly necessary question if we will have any hope of understanding each other. I honestly don’t know what the Left means when they talk about women anymore. I have been waiting for one of them to offer some kind of definition, and so far, none have been able to do so. Maybe this illustrious group of candidates is up to the challenge.
Again, all I want to know is when and why these Democrats decided that a woman isn’t a human female. And, as a follow up, what they think a woman is, if not a human female. I don’t think that question is too much to ask. If only we had a real news media to ask it.