Select Page

The Fallacy of “My Truth,” And “Your Truth,” When Dealing With The LGBTQ Community

The Fallacy of “My Truth,” And “Your Truth,” When Dealing With The LGBTQ Community

One of the recent movements is the declaration that individuals have possession of the truth that somehow the truth for them is different than it is for others, yet this is all based on a lie, one that we need to look at and expose so this type of reasoning can never be used for us.

I discussed with someone the other day when we were debating LGBTQ ideology and the demand that we accept their sexuality and call him by the pronouns he demanded. he kept telling me that what he said was his truth; maybe it was not mine. Things went downhill when I told him that he had a right to his opinion, we all do, but neither he nor I have a right to our own set of facts.


This was when he started with the first tact that is used by many from the left; he attacked, saying that ‘my truth’ was homophobic.’ it was then that I stopped him, told him if we were going to have a respectful debate on this, we first needed to have some parameters around this discussion. One of the problems was his statement of personal ownership of the truth; this is not workable, no one holds possession of the truth, they can know of it, but there is no ‘my’ or ‘your’ when we are talking about the truth.

I also told him I had no issue with him being gay; in America, we are granted, under the constitution, a right for the pursuit of happiness. If being gay makes you happy, that is great, have at it. The problem is not your right to pursue what makes you happy. It comes when the LGBTQ community tells us we have to accept what they believe, anything that differs is not unacceptable; if we dare to believe otherwise, we are affecting their happiness, and that takes precedence over our own pursuit of the same thing.

I informed him that practicing his sexuality as he desired was his right; I could and would respect that, even if he wished me to call him by his chosen name. I am not about to expose someone, so I will not give his actual name but say it was from David to Debbie; that was his right. I would not argue over this; I had no problem with this. But I would not, nor could say that he was a female, biologically he was a male. Even if he went through a sex change, got hormone shots, breast implants, he was still a male, only now he would be a male without male anatomy, had breast implants and female hormones outside what was natural for males.

This was when he started with my truth, and his truth said that my truth was not compatible. I told him no, truth is immutable; it is not able to be changed by opinions. Instead, what he was mistaken as truth was actually opinions. We have a right to our opinions; some are right, some are wrong, but they are not the “truth,” in the end, they are just opinions, nothing more.

Things started to heat up at this point; he told me that I was bigotted for not accepting him as a female. I told him, “No, there is no bigotry here; I accept that is what you think you are, but the truth, or biological facts, tell me otherwise.” The demand today is we ignore biological facts, accept something contrary to science. Last I checked, a political viewpoint does not own science; it has never been.

Next, I face an assault from a different direction; he accused me of ignoring science. I was using science as an escape, not for the truth. He said that fishes can change sex, so can some amphibians. I told him, “The problem with this is we are neither of these things. We are primates, part of the mammal family. While reptiles and fish can change sexes, no mammal nor primate can do this.”

In the end, to claim that because amphibians can change their sexuality due to environmental needs, such as a loss of the male, only females are left, there is not any mechanism for mammals to do this, our sexuality is decided at birth, no matter how much we change the outward, our DNA never changes, we are down to our very chromosomes what we were when our sex was determined when conceived.


This is where the problem comes in; science has become politicized. When you politicize science, you lose the science part. We are told that we have to accept what the majority believes; this is not what science is. It is never operated by popular belief. It is built on facts.

Years ago, we were told that the earth was flat; we found out later because some went against popular opinion, they were able to prove the earth wasn’t. It was the same way with the idea that the sun circled the earth, that all the universe was grounded to us, moved around our planet because people dared to question popular thought, some at personal risk and loss, we changed our understanding of science. Now we are told that we need to go back to the age of old, where popular thought dictates truth; it never has.

We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.

About The Author

Timothy Benton

Student of history, a journalist for the last 2 years. Specialize in Middle East History, more specifically modern history with the Israeli Palestinian conflict. Also, a political commentator has been a lifetime fan of politics.

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published.