A response to Kelly Scoles' letter:

Hello again, Kelly,

You ask why I "have such a heat on for the "evil" of transgenderism." It is because transgenderism has become central to my fear of the disappearance of normal logic. I fear it as a harbinger of "doublethink" as explained by 1984'sWinston Smith, which is "To know and not to know, to be conscious of complete truthfulness while telling carefully constructed lies, to hold simultaneously two opinions which cancelled out, knowing them to be contradictory and believing in both of them, to use logic against logic, to repudiate morality while laying claim to it, to believe that democracy was impossible and that the Party was the guardian of democracy, to forget whatever it was necessary to forget, then to draw it back into memory again at the moment when it was needed, and then promptly to forget it again: and above all, to apply the same process to the process itself."

I know, stealing 100 words from George Orwell's 1984 here is unfair and unprofessional. But it takes Orwell's genius to decipher Kelly's arguments this week - and typical Progressive thought. Looking at some "doublethink" pieces from the letter:

"Bedrock reality significantly challenged." I ask, by whom? Challenged, always. "Significantly" never. Archeologists discover new proof of Biblical history every year. Some editions of the Bible are more "lyrical" (King James) than many modern versions; but the Bible is not meant to be a mere musical sheet. And it is a "history book," as a history of God's revelation to mankind. When Putin arbitrarily decides to make war on Ukraine by murdering hundreds of thousands of innocent people, and making the land "uninhabitable", that is pure evil which no one finds "thrilling". God is omnipotent, Kelly, as such He permits his human creations to exercise free will, (instructions were included in the plan) which many choose to ignore.

Genesis tells of the beginning, explaining our earthly purpose for being. In America at least, you can believe or not; that is our God-given "inalienable" right. Within the Judeo-Christian tradition one God is worshiped, He is all good. It is not true, as you say, that "All religions hold that God can do no wrong." From a Judeo-Christian perspective other gods can personify evil. You say I "misunderstood" Genesis when I said God created two perfectly distinct sexes." Well, how else can we interpret this? "So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them." No one is forced to believe this, but that's what the Good Book says. How else can this statement be understood?
Kelly, did you happen to view Oprah's interview with David Reimer before he committed suicide? I recommend you do so. Listen to how he tried, unsuccessfully as a little boy, trying to act like a girl, when he wanted to play with toy trucks instead of the dolls offered him. At this point my temper, you might say, becomes "a heat on" for decidedly un-Christian kinetic justice! Also, David Reimer never tried to "reclaim his gender identity." He wanted his biological sex returned, which had been cut away. He didn't desire to become a female construction project.

A question: Do infants and toddlers also suffer from gender dysphoria, as sometimes "diagnosed"?
About your "tiny smile" over the "concept of pure evil versus good" as a "foundational principle of our Republic." If you found that statement to be so "so erroneous on so many levels" with "grotesque logic", a single example of one of those levels would have greatly enhanced your case. If you don't recognize our Bill of Rights as a shield against "pure evil", Kelly, you're blind. This prompted me to consult my Blackstone's Commentaries, a foundational Constitutional source. Rather than provide individual examples of America's primal Judeo-Christian base (to a man, every Founding Father, even Thomas Paine, proclaimed the absolute necessity of religion for national success) I offer you the Commentaries which are saturated with evidence of American Judeo-Christian faith. Find it online, some 1,000 pages.

Blackstone's work was "Perhaps the most important legal treatise ever written in the English language. Sir William Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England (1765-69) was the first effort to consolidate English common law into a unified and rational system. Clearly and elegantly written, the work achieved immediate renown and exerted a powerful influence on legal education [and constitutional thinking] both in England and America. In addition to the law of nature, Blackstone identified "the revealed or divine law," defined as those specific legal rules and principles found in the Bible.” He concluded, "Upon these two foundations, the law of nature and the law of revelation, depend all human laws; that is to say, no human laws should be suffered to contradict these." Not surprisingly, it is reported that the Bible was Blackstone's "constant companion" while he wrote the Commentaries. [And the Commentaries, similarly, accompanied the Founders] For all of the Founding Fathers, Blackstone's Commentaries were required reading. It is a literary jewel.
You say, "afraid to consider the reality of others." I don't understand this statement. "Evil is a weapon we brandish for our own "protection"? No, pure evil is sexually mutilating a little boy to try and make him look like a girl - until he grows-up to understand what has been done to him, then commits suicide. That is the reality of pure evil!