Bruce Jenner's Début as "Caitlyn"

[Cherry5]

I am referring to the article. Of the transwoman I know best all of her siblings wholeheartedly supported her from day 1, her father immediately supported her and her mother wanted to get her to go to a doctor to get her to not be transgender. Her mother feels her Catholic faith cannot accept .

This is a typical response from kids I know as well.
upworthy.com/they-showed-these-kids-current-and-past-pictures-of-caitlyn-jenner-heres-their-reaction?g=2&c=ufb1

 

[JesusPeaceLove]

If this were done by the person himself, then I would call it mutilation (or self-mutilation); but not when a surgeon performs an operation. Otherwise, it becomes essentially a pejorative term. Would you call breast removal for preventing the occurrence of hereditary cancer mutilation? This kind of surgery is no guarantee against cancer and does not actually treat a disease.

Well of course cutting off breasts is mutilation. Which is why it is only justified by the fact that it is done to remove cancer from the body. If it wasn’t mutilation, it would need no such justification to be licit. It would be like cutting hair. But because it is mutilation, you cannot do so licitly unless justified by serious reasons like the body needing part of itself cut off to prevent the death of the whole body through disease. Mutilation seems nothing more than violating the bodily integrity of a person by deliberately making it less whole than nature would have the human body be. You can only do that licitly if something worse threatens that same integrity much more fundamentally than the deliberate mutilating act.

 

[JesusPeaceLove]

Originally Posted by mikekle View Post
Humanity is making a mockery of the Creator. Instead of accepting God’s design, man is deciding for himself what sex he will be. Ultimately, he is trying to become his own creator. This is an act of rebellion at the deepest core. We are witnessing a culture shift that is determined to destroy God’s image of male and female. It is an issue of the heart.

God is always intervening. We do not believe in a God who sits by and watches from a distance but in a very personal one who is intimaately involved in the least of our actions. Often, now as in the past, it seems he isnt doing anything. Reminds me of the exile periods of the children of Israel. It seemed God had abandoned them. He never had. When the intervention of God becomes obvious, it seems sudden. But it never is.

This does seem like the latest tower of Babel. God might punish the West which is leading this proud rebellion as severly as he did other peoples in the past. Perhaps, the very fact that it carries on full speed ahead is itself the punishement. God sometimes punishes by leaving one to one’s own devices…the hardned heart. Even then, he is always intervening calling the person to repentance in one form or another.

 

[JesusPeaceLove]

I personally believe SRS to be much more grievous a sin and rebellion than sodomy or gay sex. Because I think it is a far more fundamental rejection of the order of nature and God’s sovereign prerogative as creator of man than gay unions. The latter don’t deny the integrity of their own bodies as received from God though they deny the nature of conjugal acts as designed by God or the proper use f their integral accepted bodies. Though both deny “male and female made he man” one does so far more radically than the other in my opinion. Besides, a gay person can quickly restore himself and his body to the order of God by repenting and making better choices. All it takes to undo all the damage he has done to the gift of self God has given him is a change of mind. A transexual messing around with his body will only restore his soul but he might never except through very difficult procedures restore the gift of the body God gave him. I personally believe this is the reason for such high suicides. It is a far more damaging sin to the self and includes too many irreversible aspects. Man in his Babel climb has recently figured a way to do this physically something never thought possible before and though the right thing is far too obvious the church will be forced to state this more clearly and I believe eventually this new sin will be listed in the catechism just before sodomy as a sin that cries out to God. To me it is a form of radical sodomy.

 

[JesusPeaceLove]

Yes, you don’t become a real woman just by taking hormones and telling Vanity Fair readers you are a woman. As for 65 year old Jenner I would tell him that we have earned our stripes by being wives and mothers and in some cases, grandmothers.

No one earns being a woman. It is impossible. Just like no one can earn being born a human or existing. It is totally and completely a gift from God without the slightest (name removed by moderator)ut from the individual. Maleness is also a God-given gift. Since it’s totally gift, neither can anyone give himself maleness or femaleness just by asking another human to cut his body. Conceiving and giving birth is a responsible enjoyment of the gift of femaleness.

 

[mikekle]

No, God does not. But we will not be dealt with as the Jews. We have the life, death and resurrection of the Son of God as a propitiation for sins. If we choose to reject Him and His church, we seal our own fate. There have been numerous times since Christ ascended where one would think that God would have intervened, yet He did not, at least as far as we know. The next intervention will be the return of Christ. And at that point, fates are sealed. We cannot get overly wrapped up in the errors of the world. Pray, adhere to the perinial teachings of the Church and the Gospel, and pray some more.

, But when the people at the tower of Babel started to do their own thing, live life in a manner where they didnt need God anymore…God DID set them straight, in dramatic fashion as welll…if he did it then, why not now?

 

[CompSciGuy]

Interesting how Bruce/Caitlyn feels that he needs a new name, massive reconstructive surgery, some stylish new clothes and pounds upon pounds of makeup before he can finally, truly be himself.

 

[CompSciGuy]

, But when the people at the tower of Babel started to do their own thing, live life in a manner where they didnt need God anymore…God DID set them straight, in dramatic fashion as welll…if he did it then, why not now?

In Romans chapter 1, it talks about how God dealt with the pagan gentiles by giving them over to their desires. To live in sin itself is a terrible thing, because it is to live outside of God’s law, which is our guiding light: we were created to live in God’s law. God is patient and will forgive those who repent and turn to Him. That is his policy, and the reason for the sacrifice on the cross. He will stay His judgement until the last day, when all the impenitent will be condemned.

 

[JesusPeaceLove]

Interesting how Bruce/Caitlyn feels that he needs a new name, massive reconstructive surgery, some stylish new clothes and pounds upon pounds of makeup before he can finally, truly be himself.

I know, right? What a false message! You can be yourself only by rejecting yourself. The idea that God gives certain humans a life in which it is impossible to be happy without very modern very expensive surgery is absolutely a big fat lie. That catholics are telling themselves that such a thing is in any way ambiguous as far as catholic faith is another shock. How could catholic faith pssibly ever say that before 1970s, there were humans who simply could never be happy, ever! No matter what they did? A big fat lie is not that hard to recognize if you’re homest with yourself and willing to examine assumptions underlying certain claims. Such a message can only come from the devil who wants humans to believe in a God who deliberately denies them any chance at happiness. A God for whom happiness comes from appearances and other peoples reactions to ones appearances. If I don’t chop off my healthy organs, I cannot be happy. If people dont think I am the opposite gender, I cannot be happy. What an obvious shallow message. Can only be a lie.

 

[Jeanne_S]

I personally believe SRS to be much more grievous a sin and rebellion than sodomy or gay sex. Because I think it is a far more fundamental rejection of the order of nature and God’s sovereign prerogative as creator of man than gay unions. The latter don’t deny the integrity of their own bodies as received from God though they deny the nature of conjugal acts as designed by God or the proper use f their integral accepted bodies. Though both deny “male and female made he man” one does so far more radically than the other in my opinion. Besides, a gay person can quickly restore himself and his body to the order of God by repenting and making better choices. All it takes to undo all the damage he has done to the gift of self God has given him is a change of mind. A transexual messing around with his body will only restore his soul but he might never except through very difficult procedures restore the gift of the body God gave him. I personally believe this is the reason for such high suicides. It is a far more damaging sin to the self and includes too many irreversible aspects. Man in his Babel climb has recently figured a way to do this physically something never thought possible before and though the right thing is far too obvious the church will be forced to state this more clearly and I believe eventually this new sin will be listed in the catechism just before sodomy as a sin that cries out to God. To me it is a form of radical sodomy.

Pope Francis warned yesterday that we shouldn’t broaden our consciences’ so that everything fits. This is exactly what is happening in our politically correct,morally relativistic society.The evil one loves to sow confusion,we are certainly buying into it.That there are Catholic/Christians willing to go along to get along is really reflective of how deeply this PC notion has infiltrated even the Catholic Church. We continue to circle the drain so to speak as a society by accepting all manner of deviant behavior,all in the name of compassion.

 

[qui_est_ce]

It’s the heresy of dualism. Gnosticism, which separates the soul from the body. This heresy was addressed by the early church father, St. Irenaeous. The mind and the body are one. This is a teaching of the Catholic Church.

Only death can separate the soul from the body.

 

[Jeanne_S]

It’s the heresy of dualism. Gnosticism, which separates the soul from the body. This heresy was addressed by the early church father, St. Irenaeous. The mind and the body are one. This is a teaching of the Catholic Church.

Only death can separate the soul from the body.

 

[JesusPeaceLove]

It’s the heresy of dualism. Gnosticism, which separates the soul from the body. This heresy was addressed by the early church father, St. Irenaeous. The mind and the body are one. This is a teaching of the Catholic Church.

Only death can separate the soul from the body.

There are catholics who think they have found a way to justify SRS by looking at the body more like property that you can fashion and refashion to suit your own view as though one’s nature came from their own view rather than from the view of another: God. Being creatures means we get a being matching or identical with an idea of God. These catholics think if they make the person’s own idea the basis of their “true” nature, this somehow becomes caholic or legitimate. A fantasy. A justification that comes only after and because of notions already emotionally accepted rather than objectively discerned. They claim trans-gendered folks don’t think they can choose their sex. O that’s right. They only believe their own idea of who or what they are precedes the objective reality of their God-given bodies. Thats the very definitition of man playing God. Who says your body is fashioned to match your own ideas and beliefs? How about, maybe you the fallible creature is simply wrong? Your body is fashioned already and matches your creator’s idea. The other is the old sin of pride. Your ideas are hardly infallible that you think they are a basis for remaking reality itself in a manner to destroy the essence of the objectively-created reality of God. Nothing like that is catholic. This is a lie. And catholicism will never be compatible with lies.

 

[JesusPeaceLove]

Pope Francis warned yesterday that we shouldn’t broaden our consciences’ so that everything fits. This is exactly what is happening in our politically correct,morally relativistic society.The evil one loves to sow confusion,we are certainly buying into it.That there are Catholic/Christians willing to go along to get along is really reflective of how deeply this PC notion has infiltrated even the Catholic Church. We continue to circle the drain so to speak as a society by accepting all manner of deviant behavior,all in the name of compassion.

I agree. However, I think God is present. One day, this will be very clearly recognized as a crazy error where people for some inexplicable reason just started to believe that their feelings ideas and beliefs were more real than reality.

 

[qui_est_ce]

There are catholics who think they have found a way to justify SRS by looking at the body more like property that you can fashion and refashion to suit your own view as though one’s nature came from their own view rather than from the view of another: God. Being creatures means we get a being matching or identical with an idea of God. These catholics think if they make the person’s own idea the basis of their “true” nature, this somehow becomes caholic or legitimate. A fantasy. A justification that comes only after and because of notions already emotionally accepted rather than objectively discerned. They claim trans-gendered folks don’t think they can choose their sex. O that’s right. They only believe their own idea of who or what they are precedes the objective reality of their God-given bodies. Thats the very definitition of man playing God. Who says your body is fashioned to match your own ideas and beliefs? How about, maybe you the fallible creature is simply wrong? Your body is fashioned already and matches your creator’s idea. The other is the old sin of pride. Your ideas are hardly infallible that you think they are a basis for remaking reality itself in a manner to destroy the essence of the objectively-created reality of God. Nothing like that is catholic. This is a lie. And catholicism will never be compatible with lies.

Well, someone asked where the Catholic Church teaches the “SRS” is wrong. It’s right there in the Catechism. Our souls cannot be separated from our bodies. Our minds do not dictate what our bodies are.

If our bodies don’t match what our minds think they are, why not work on the mind? The mind is obviously delusional in that it thinks it’s a woman, when in reality, its body is a man.

I recently went through a bout with my sister being hospitalized. She was delusional. She kept thinking she was going to have a bar-b-que that night. She didn’t know what day it was. She thought she was at someone’s house. When she asked what we were cooking, we said pork tenderloin. We just played along so as not to embarrass her. I noticed the nurses immediately corrected her, though. I thought it was heartless at the time. A nurse finally told us to quit playing into the delusion. She said we need to bring her back to reality each time. She added, “it is textbook.”

 

[InSearchofGrace]

I am referring to the article. Of the transwoman I know best all of her siblings wholeheartedly supported her from day 1, her father immediately supported her and her mother wanted to get her to go to a doctor to get her to not be transgender. Her mother feels her Catholic faith cannot accept it.

I know you were referring to the article which actually touched on how the author was affected by her father’s decision to transition. You simply disregarded it. She also wrote a book about it, My Daddy’s Secret and has an online ministry Help4Families. You tend to minimize the pain of spouses and children left in the wake of a husband and father who decided to transition, only seeing the POV of your transgender friends.

Well I was more pointing at the fact she lives in a country that has government health insurance and covers it.

You were not clear about it. The point is that the etiology of transgenderism or transsexualism is not established even if those with the condition and their supporters insist otherwise (the so called experts are divided on the issue!). They want nothing less than transitioning, and as you implied, transitioning is but a step to beeline to the next “treatment” which is SRS, the only obstacle being financial coverage. Their psychological plight is unfortunate. It is not hard to see where this is going, they would like SRS to be publicly funded and/or taxpayer borne. Many in this country would not agree to go along with that.

With SRS the patient certainyl does not think it is making it imperfect or damaging their body parts and they don’t think it is depriving them of an essential part and I would agree that the genital are not an essential part.

Does the mad know or accept he is mad?

My friend tried to kill herself twice when there were no cases being reported in the media.

Your friend with largely supportive family members as you related in the beginning of your post was suicidal?

juliaserano.com/av/Serano-CaseAgainstAutogynephilia.pdf
That is an excellent article carving into it.

As indicated above, the experts themselves are not on the same page on the analysis and treatment of transgenderism / transsexualism, its various and crisscrossing forms. A most vexing and profoundly confusing problem for the afflicted, their families, and everyone in society affected.

Transgender demand that sociery accept transitioning and SRS is truly radical, turning the created and family / social order on its head.

This along with and after the legalization of SS"M"!

The self is being made to be king.
,

 

[Joie_de_Vivre]

I know you were referring to the article which actually touched on how the author was affected by her father’s decision to transition. You simply disregarded it. She also wrote a book about it, My Daddy’s Secret and has an online ministry Help4Families. You tend to minimize the pain of spouses and children left in the wake of a husband and father who decided to transition, only seeing the POV of your transgender friends.

I did not disregard it, she said her father’s transition damaged her, but I don’t see how it did.

You were not clear about it. The point is that the etiology of transgenderism or transsexualism is not established even if those with the condition and their supporters insist otherwise (the so called experts are divided on the issue!). They want nothing less than transitioning, and as you implied, transitioning is but a step to beeline to the next “treatment” which is SRS, the only obstacle being financial coverage. Their psychological plight is unfortunate. It is not hard to see where this is going, they would like SRS to be publicly funded and/or taxpayer borne. Many in this country would not agree to go along with that.

I am sorry I was unclear.

Most transgender people given financial means probably would, but there are many who would not.

Does the mad know or accept he is mad?

is the penis an essential part of the body? Does a lack of a penis meaningfully impede one living a good and active life? Does lacking a penis reduce the number of meaningful things you can do with your life by a substantial amount?

Your friend with largely supportive family members as you related in the beginning of your post was suicidal?

Before she came out to anyone in her family she was absolutely terrified that if she told them she’d be kicked out and would have to live on the street. After finding out her family has been supportive she very rarely entertains thoughts of suicide whereas before she contemplated it daily.

As indicated above, the experts themselves are not on the same page on the analysis and treatment of transgenderism / transsexualism, its various and crisscrossing forms. A most vexing and profoundly confusing problem for the afflicted, their families, and everyone in society affected.

So if even a single person in a field disagrees do you regard that as no consensus as to treatment? I would like to note that even Blanchard recommended people for surgery and hormones.

Transgender demand that sociery accept transitioning and SRS is truly radical, turning the created and family / social order on its head.

This along with and after the legalization of SS"M"!

The self is being made to be king.
,

Okay dear.

 

[JesusPeaceLove]

is the penis an essential part of the body? Does a lack of a penis meaningfully impede one living a good and active life? Does lacking a penis reduce the number of meaningful things you can do with your life by a substantial amount?.

“Male and female made he man”

You say you are a catholic and you think our reproductive organs and their capacities are not essential to our nature? Do you think they were an after-thought of God? Or do you accept with the church that our sexuality and the power to co-create with God other humans is something essential to human nature? That the bdily expression of this complemantarity is not a useless appendage? What philosophy are you using to treat our sexual organs as some kind of property we own and can discard at will like our handbags? All our organs and capacities are essential to our nature. You cannot just decide to pull your eyes out because you have a different idea of yourself.

 

[Thorolfr]

All our organs and capacities are essential to our nature. You cannot just decide to pull your eyes out because you have a different idea of yourself.

Matthew 18:9: And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee…

Perhaps a trans-woman’s penis offends her

 

[JesusPeaceLove]

is the penis an essential part of the body? Does a lack of a penis meaningfully impede one living a good and active life? Does lacking a penis reduce the number of meaningful things you can do with your life by a substantial amount?

Id like to add how self-contradictry this is. How can reproductive organs be simulateneously useless and essential depending on how one wants to justify his cause? They are so essential to the transgendered’s identities, apparently, that they have to aquire the opposite organs albeit artificial ones? If they are so unessential, why cant these people be happy with who they are right now without mutilating themselves just to get rid of supposedly unimportant organs? If you believe this, how can you claim that treatment is radical surgery rather than teaching them how unessential these organs are to who they are, supposedly?