Gay Marriage and Freedom of Religion

[AngelAshley]

According to Wikipedia, true hermaphrodites don’t exist.

Are you reading a different part to me? I just read that it’s very rare:
Wikipedia:

“True hermaphroditism”

With some conditions of intersex, even the chromosomal sex may not be clear. A “true hermaphrodite” is defined as someone with both male gonadal tissue (testes) and female gonadal tissue (ovarian tissue).

In 2004, researchers at UCLA published their studies of a lateral gynandromorphic hermaphroditic bird, which had a testicle on the right and an ovary on the left. Its entire body was split down the middle between male and female, with hormones from both gonads running through the blood.[39] This is an example of mosaicism or chimerism.

This extreme example of hermaphroditism is quite rare.

Doesn’t mean it’s impossible. Besides, even if one is, biologically “mostly male” or “mostly female” then first of all that proves the existance of hermaphrodites, and secondly, who here can explain the impact of hermaphroditism on social gender? Anybody?

You choose to live as a female, yet you are calling for gay marriage. Does that mean that you are legally a male? I mean, what is preventing you from marrying a man if you want to?

No, I am legally female and I am attracted to females.
Basically I was born with the body of a male yet throughout my childhood I could not relate to the masculinity that I was socially being forced into - this made me depressed. Through my teens, I related better with girls than with boys, and I was very feminine. At the age of 17 I discovered that I suffer from Gender Dysphoria so had sex-reassignment surgery and hormone therapy to change my body into that of a female (at least as far as medical science can get it). I changed my name, and my legal gender on my drivers license & passport etc. is now female. I am now more than happy with my body and my life and no longer suffer from the severe depression that I used to before the surgery.
Throughout the entire process I have always been attracted both sexually and romanticly to females. I would like to get legally married to my girlfriend at some stage.

 

[wanner47]

Correction: I am the exception that proves that there is no rule. There is no connection that states that all people born with a penis are socially male and all people born without a penis are socially female. I was born with the former but I am socially female. (I have had surgery to bring my physical genetalia in line with how I feel mentally)

Like I said, you are the exception, not the rule. If you were the rule, then ALMOST ALL males would be born wishing to be female, and ALMOST ALL females would be born wishing to be male, with a few rare exceptions. However, it’s the opposite. Hence, you are the exception to the rule.

You “feel” like a woman, and yet you are also attracted to women. I think you’re a man, attracted to women, who is just very confused about his gender role and has been for quite some time. What was your upbringing like?

Genetically, though, you are a man. No amount of surgery can ever change what is in your DNA.

There could also be a chemical reason; perhaps in the womb you were exposed to high levels of female hormones (such as the type that’s found in drinking water, caused by all the birth control chemicals that have gotten into water sources due to all the people on birth control).

 

[AngelAshley]

Like I said, you are the exception, not the rule. If you were the rule

Exactly my point! So you agree there can be exceptions to the rule? Great! Then we must cater for these exceptions.

You “feel” like a woman, and yet you are also attracted to women. I think you’re a man, attracted to women, who is just very confused about his gender role and has been for quite some time. What was your upbringing like?

I “feel” like a woman because I “am” a woman, inside (and mostly outside too, now). I used to be confused about my gender role, I used to think I was supposed to be doing masculine things but this didn’t fit very well with me so I started doing feminine things and now I couldn’t be happier. (Unless gay marriage was legalised!).
My upbringing was pretty typical, loving mum and dad, one older brother, middle class family in a small UK town, good education… can’t really fault my childhood aside from my gender dysphoria.

Genetically, though, you are a man. No amount of surgery can ever change what is in your DNA.

Unfortunately, yes. But that makes little odds to me any more… my looks are very feminine, the hormone therapy has given me breasts and feminine facial looks and a feminine body shape, society accepts me as a female, as do my family and my girlfriend. And that’s what matters at the end of the day, not my DNA.

There could also be a chemical reason; perhaps in the womb you were exposed to high levels of female hormones (such as the type that’s found in drinking water, caused by all the birth control chemicals that have gotten into water sources due to all the people on birth control).

Yes, that’s the reasoning behind it that I’ve always gone by. There’s still some scientific debate over the causes, but the generally accepted theory is hormonal imbalances in the womb.

In actual fact the way I’ve seen it is that the body is female by default, it is not until the introduction of male hormones that it starts to grow into a male - which explains why males have nipples - they form just before the introduction of hormones and then stop growing once hormones are introduced. In my case and probably the case of others like me, the hormones were delayed for whatever reason, allowing my brain to develop into that of a female before male hormones were introduced. Of course this is all scientific theory and I’m not 100% sure it’s the case, but it seems reasonable to me…

 

[wanner47]

Exactly my point! So you agree there can be exceptions to the rule? Great! Then we must cater for these exceptions.

Um, I said that in my very first post on the topic. You disagreed with me, remember? I also disagree that we must *cater *to exceptions to the rule. By that logic, we must cater to the individuals who claim that they have were “born” pedophiles or “born” alcoholics, and so forth.

I “feel” like a woman because I “am” a woman, inside (and mostly outside too, now). I used to be confused about my gender role, I used to think I was supposed to be doing masculine things but this didn’t fit very well with me so I started doing feminine things and now I couldn’t be happier. (Unless gay marriage was legalised!).

If I feel like a duck or a horse inside, that doesn’t make me one.

My upbringing was pretty typical, loving mum and dad, one older brother, middle class family in a small UK town, good education… can’t really fault my childhood aside from my gender dysphoria.

Does your brother also have gender confusion? What about your religious upbringing?

Unfortunately, yes. But that makes little odds to me any more… my looks are very feminine, the hormone therapy has given me breasts and feminine facial looks and a feminine body shape, society accepts me as a female, as do my family and my girlfriend. And that’s what matters at the end of the day, not my DNA.

Doesn’t change your DNA, though.

Yes, that’s the reasoning behind it that I’ve always gone by. There’s still some scientific debate over the causes, but the generally accepted theory is hormonal imbalances in the womb.

In actual fact the way I’ve seen it is that the body is female by default, it is not until the introduction of male hormones that it starts to grow into a male - which explains why males have nipples - they form just before the introduction of hormones and then stop growing once hormones are introduced. In my case and probably the case of others like me, the hormones were delayed for whatever reason, allowing my brain to develop into that of a female before male hormones were introduced. Of course this is all scientific theory and I’m not 100% sure it’s the case, but it seems reasonable to me…

Right. Which still means that the reason you “feel” like a woman inside is because of chemical imbalances, not because God made you that way or whatnot. Have you ever tried taking *male *hormones?

 

[AngelAshley]

Um, I said that in my very first post on the topic. You disagreed with me, remember? I also disagree that we must cater to exceptions to the rule. By that logic, we must cater to the individuals who claim that they have were “born” pedophiles or “born” alcoholics, and so forth.

No, I did not disagree - I said that there is no “rule” - basically implying that you can have transexual people and there is no rule that states people of the biological sex of male must also have the social gender of female. Just a different way of saying that the rule has exceptions really, if it has exceptions, then is it really a rule?
I am not claiming** to be born this way, it is scientific fact. There is no scientific basis that peodophiles and alcoholics were born that way, and even if there was, the fact is that peodophillia and alcoholism are damaging. Transexualism is not. And going beyond that, yes, we should have to cater for alcoholics and peadophiles just as we cater for transexuals. I am thankfull that I have been catered for, and through medical science my condition has become acceptable. We should cater for alcholics by helping them to quit, we should cater for peadophiles by helping them realise that their sexuality is damaging.

If I feel like a duck or a horse inside, that doesn’t make me one.

Thats because there it is not possible, regardless of DNA, hormones, etc. for you to ever BE a duck or a horse. Given that I most likely had an imbalance of hormones in the womb, there was scope for me to go either way. See my explanation above.

Does your brother also have gender confusion? What about your religious upbringing?

Nope, he does not. I had no religious upbringing. My parents were both athiests. I was taught religious education in school though.

Doesn’t change your DNA, though.

Yes, I know, as I said. But I also said my DNA does not matter any more.

Right. Which still means that the reason you “feel” like a woman inside is because of chemical imbalances, not because God made you that way or whatnot. Have you ever tried taking male hormones?

It can only be down to Chemical/Biological effects and not God because God does not exist. Yes, I had male hormones surging through my system for the first 20 years of my life. They did not change how I felt inside, I still felt like a girl. I started taking androgen blockers about 3-4 years ago, along with female hormones**

 

[wanner47]

No, I did not disagree - I said that there is no “rule” - basically implying that you can have transexual people and there is no rule that states people of the biological sex of male must also have the social gender of female. Just a different way of saying that the rule has exceptions really, if it has exceptions, then is it really a rule?
I am not claiming**** to be born this way, it is scientific fact.

No, your DNA says you are a male, thus it is a scientific fact that you are a male. You are not genetically female. Feelings and chemical imbalances don’t change that fact.

There is no scientific basis that peodophiles and alcoholics were born that way, and even if there was, the fact is that peodophillia and alcoholism are damaging. Transexualism is not.

 

[royal_archer]

What stops them from getting that “fatherly” advice from a lesbian parent who provides a “father” figure? What is it about the fact that her physical body is female that prevents her from giving advice normally associated with males?

Normal boys will not feel comfortable discussing their desires with regards to women with a woman. Regardless of what the desires of the woman are, the child sees the individual as on the opposite side of the desires, where they see the man as someone whom they can relate with.

Woah woah there batman, society does not need to lower it’s morals in order to accept homosexualality. In fact if anything it needs to strengthen its morals - i.e. the moral of treating everyone equally. You may consider homosexuality immoral but that’s your personal view based on teachings from some outdated and quite frankly unreliable source. Don’t force those views on the rest of us, thank you. A forward-thinking person can see that homosexuality causes harm to nobody, therefore what’s wrong with it?

Your perspective is atheist in nature and the majority of Americans (make that humans) believe in God. While we the majority do not have a right to force morality we have every right to declare and openly speak about morality.

 

[AngelAshley]

Normal boys will not feel comfortable discussing their desires with regards to women with a woman. Regardless of what the desires of the woman are, the child sees the individual as on the opposite side of the desires, where they see the man as someone whom they can relate with.

One would hope that that child would be bought up with the understanding that he can feel comfortable talking to a woman about these things.

While we the majority do not have a right to force morality we have every right to declare and openly speak about morality.

Openly speak out, yes, but I believe the Catholic Church has gone far beyond that. It bugs me that Catholics say they want “Freedom of Religion” and that legalization of homosexual marriage will infringe on that, yet they fail to see that imposing their morals on others through lobbying to keep homosexual marriage off the table is in fact infringing on our freedom of religion.

 

[fix]

The response right after this one states that marraige. Considering the first statement in this quote, I’m not sure f you realse how many contradictions that exposes.

If marriage is marriage, how can you feel that civil divorce is occasionally needed.

Because such a divorce may be necessary to secure rights and protect lives. That does not make marriage plastic as you desire it to be. It does not change the nature of marriage to mean anything you want it to mean.

The church does not believe or support divorce in any way.

You may want to check the CCC:
2383 The *separation *of spouses while maintaining the marriage bond can be legitimate in certain cases provided for by canon law.177
If civil divorce remains the only possible way of ensuring certain legal rights, the care of the children, or the protection of inheritance, it can be tolerated and does not constitute a moral offense.

So assuming your were honest when you said divorce can be needed, and that you believe the church’s teaching, how can you not see the difference between religious and social marriage?

See above.

Side note: both the church and natural law have been sued as defence to forbid social (that is, not religious) gay marriage, yet according to you, this time the contradict each other. Interesting

No, they need to be properly understood in context.

As far as homosexual parenting being abusive, I’m not sure how you came to this conclusion, could you explain?

You are once again comparing a concept to a physical object, they are not the same. You say marraige has been proved right by the following, I offer the following questions:

reason: Does love follow reason in the first place? Giving up your life completely for someone else? Assuming we’re referring to the same concept of reason, that does not work.

history: Has everything in history has been shown to be right and ok? See wars and epidemics.

common sense: see reason

the Church: is rejected by some people in society, so why then should a church teaching have bearing over someone who doesn’t follow it? A catholic does not allow Muslim beliefs to have bearing of your actions.

Biology: As far as biological reproduction goes, a couple does not need to be married for it to biologically happen. Marriage does not really have a connecting to biology, intact it kind of impedes it. Biologically speaking, the point of reproduction to to continue your line of DNA, the best way to do this is sharing with other forms of DNA, not just one, in order to produce at least a singe organism with part of your genetic line that will survive. Mating with only one other limits that chance.

And to prevent this from going off topic once again by responding to every point in your last response, and to halt attacking my beliefs (which you don’t even truly know by the way), I pose this question about truth and the difference between faith and knowledge. In a society where individuals are free to believe in a god or not, on what grounds can religious proof be used to control an individual’s actions?

Why must society accept you limited understanding of truth, marriage, or love?

The problem we have is that you see the state as a type of god that is free to impose itself without any infusion of moral truth.

 

[magdelaine]

Openly speak out, yes, but I believe the Catholic Church has gone far beyond that. It bugs me that Catholics say they want “Freedom of Religion” and that legalization of homosexual marriage will infringe on that, yet they fail to see that imposing their morals on others through lobbying to keep homosexual marriage off the table is in fact infringing on our freedom of religion.

You fail to realize the legal implications of gay marriage. And yes, it does pose a serious threat to freedom of religion.

As soon as it is legal, then it falls under the protection of the laws of the state concerning equal treatment. Organizations who do not allow adoptions to homosexuals on moral grounds will be forced to do so or shut down. Therapists who refuse to counsel gay couples because they believe that a homosexual relationship in inherently disordered will be sanctioned and removed of their license. Parents who do not want their children taught that homosexuality is normal and NOT sinful will not have the choice of opting out of such teaching for their children in public schools. Ministers who speak out against the sin of homosexuality in their own church will be brought up on charges of hate speech against this “normal” behavior.

Surely you recognize that for adoption agencies, therapists, ministers and parents this represents a **loss **of freedom for all and not a gain?

All of these things have already happened in Canada and Maine. I can provide you with references if you wish.

Finally, what in current law is preventing homosexuals from buying wedding gear, exchanging rings, having a party, and calling themselves “spouse”? What is preventing them from dedicating themselves to the god Baal if they want to? Absolutely nothing. That, sir, *is *freedom. Just as I can’t force you to accept to the beauty and truth of the Catholic Church, you shouldn’t be able to force me to accept legalized SSM.

It is clear that if you continue to believe there is “no harm” in institutionalizing homosexual “marriage” then you are ignoring the facts.

 

[Gethsemane]

**The ministers of the Sacrament are the bride and groom. The Priest gives it the Church’s blessing. **

The ministers of this Sacrament are increasingly unaware that it exists. It’s not God’s providence that’s doubted but being able to make good of it.

Thank you for clarifying the issue for me, I do agree with you.

 

[fix]

Social issues are beliefs, ususally steping from religion vs. no religion debates. In this case, the majority should not be able to force their beliefs. Economic issues are governmental in nature and exist only in law. In this case, it is not about forcing beliefs, but passing laws.

Beliefs can be true or false. You keep using the word belief as if it means we cannot know what is right or wrong.

 

[fix]

The question is whether to make it legal under secular law. I say that it should be legalized under secular law. But we should not be afraid of this because of what Job has taught us and what common sense may on occasion dictate. Just because something is made under secular law doesn’t mean the occurance of it will increase, nor does it change God’s law and that fact that it is morally wrong. Just because it’s legal, doesn’t mean all the homosexuals are going to run out and do it.

The law is a teacher. For better, or for worse, it helps form consciences.

 

[royal_archer]

One would hope that that child would be bought up with the understanding that he can feel comfortable talking to a woman about these things.

I guess that because you are not and never were a straight boy you will not understand this.

Openly speak out, yes, but I believe the Catholic Church has gone far beyond that. It bugs me that Catholics say they want “Freedom of Religion” and that legalization of homosexual marriage will infringe on that, yet they fail to see that imposing their morals on others through lobbying to keep homosexual marriage off the table is in fact infringing on our freedom of religion.

Marriage is our institution you are trying to move in on it.

What is the homosexual religion? What do homosexuals worship?

 

[royal_archer]

You fail to realize the legal implications of gay marriage. And yes, it does pose a serious threat to freedom of religion.

I am sure the homosexual movement understands this as clearly as the serpent in the Garden of Eden undersood the truth behind the tree of life. In both cases they are trying to portray a significant sin as benign.

 

[magdelaine]

I guess that because you are not and never were a straight boy you will not understand this.

Forgive me if I am wrong, but my understanding is that Ashley is indeed a straight boy who is so uncomfortable with his masculinity that he has used surgery and medication to appear otherwise. However, his ordering is hetero.

 

[AngelAshley]

magdelaine:

Organizations who do not allow adoptions to homosexuals on moral grounds will be forced to do so or shut down.

Then perhaps they should reconsider allowing adoptions to homosexual couples, or reconsider offering a service to the public. If a service if offered to the public, it should be inclusive and non-discriminatory.

magdelaine:

Therapists who refuse to counsel gay couples because they believe that a homosexual relationship in inherently disordered will be sanctioned and removed of their license.

Great! Leave the religion at home. Don’t take it to work with you.

magdelaine:

Parents who do not want their children taught that homosexuality is normal and NOT sinful will not have the choice of opting out of such teaching for their children in public schools.

Fantastic! Then maybe their kids will grow up to see the truth that there is actually nothing wrong with homosexuality and not be groundlessly discriminatory like their parents!

magdelaine:

Ministers who speak out against the sin of homosexuality in their own church will be brought up on charges of hate speech against this “normal” behavior.

Awesome! Never have been a fan of hate speech, you know.

magdelaine:

Surely you recognize that for adoption agencies, therapists, ministers and parents this represents a loss of freedom for all and not a gain?

Yes, but not a loss of freedom of religion - they are still free to worship whichever imaginary being they choose to, they are just not free to discriminate and spout hate speech in public. Which is really how it should be.

magdelaine:

Finally, what in current law is preventing homosexuals from buying wedding gear, exchanging rings, having a party, and calling themselves “spouse”? What is preventing them from dedicating themselves to the god Baal if they want to? Absolutely nothing. That, sir, is freedom. Just as I can’t force you to accept to the beauty and truth of the Catholic Church, you shouldn’t be able to force me to accept legalized SSM.

Nothing. But in doing those things, they will not be seen as equal under law. That’s the fundemental thing we are fighting for. There’s many laws you are forced to accept. We don’t have choice in which laws we live under you know…

Oh, and “sir” is a masculine pronoun - I am female.
royal archer:

I guess that because you are not and never were a straight boy you will not understand this.

Actually before my sex change I thought I was a straight boy… in some ways. Complicated subject, mind you…
royal archer:

Marriage is our institution you are trying to move in on it.

Whose institution? The Churches? No it’s not. Hetrosexuals? Then it should be opened to include homosexuals so that it is no longer discriminatory.
royal archer:

What is the homosexual religion? What do homosexuals worship?

“Freedom of religion” also means you are free not to follow a particular religion. (I get the impression that most Catholics take it to mean “You are free to worship under the Catholic faith but nothing else”!)

Forgive me if I am wrong, but my understanding is that Ashley is indeed a straight boy who is so uncomfortable with his masculinity that he has used surgery and medication to appear otherwise. However, his ordering is hetero.

Now it seems like you are just trying to be insulting. It is polite to use female pronouns when addressing those who relate to the female gender.
I am not a boy. I relate to the female gender. My genetalia, breasts and other aspects of my body reflect that of a female. My DNA might be male, but if that’s how you determine my sex and gender then you are simply short-sighted and ignorant.

 

[royal_archer]

Quote:
Originally Posted by royal archer
I guess that because you are not and never were a straight boy you will not understand this.

Actually before my sex change I thought I was a straight boy… in some ways. Complicated subject, mind you…

As I said I do not believe you are capable of understanding.

Quote:
Originally Posted by royal archer
Marriage is our institution you are trying to move in on it.

Whose institution? The Churches? No it’s not. Hetrosexuals? Then it should be opened to include homosexuals so that it is no longer discriminatory.

The religious community.

Quote:Originally Posted by royal archer
What is the homosexual religion? What do homosexuals worship?

“Freedom of religion” also means you are free not to follow a particular religion. (I get the impression that most Catholics take it to mean “You are free to worship under the Catholic faith but nothing else”!)

Are you trying to imply that atheism is the religion of homosexuals? You can worship under what ever faith you want. I believe God wants us to follow and love him willingly, not out of coercion. However your religion or lack of religion does not give you the right to falsely identify yourself under terms or our religions. To use another analogy, I can not go around passing myself as a Budist munk or a Jewish rabbi with out meeting the criteria associated with those titles.

 

[royal_archer]

Forgive me if I am wrong, but my understanding is that Ashley is indeed a straight boy who is so uncomfortable with his masculinity that he has used surgery and medication to appear otherwise. However, his ordering is hetero.

Obviously a confused individual and therefore incapable of providing guidance to a normal straight boy on issues of social interaction and masculinity.

 

[maggiemay2u]

Obviously a confused individual and therefore incapable of providing guidance to a normal straight boy on issues of social interaction and masculinity.

A person who needs our prayers. Regardless of how s/he lashes out, there must be a lot of underlying pain and the lack a properly formed conscience.

Relying solely on the votes of the states where voters, regardless of demographics, have made their will known, the redefinition of marriage is not desired.