F
fix
Guest
The goal of surgery is to correct pathology and make the body healthy again. A defective valve correction is not mutilation. Excising healthy organs is mutiliation, not restoring one to health.
- Status
A
aspawloski4th
Guest
with all that said, I sugest you read post number 76 in this thread which is mine, and answer all the questions. if you are not superficial and have the courage of your convictions you will. you are just the person I want to see give answers to those questions catagorically.see these questions cant be answered superficially. they get to the heart of the matter, something lots of people are trying to avoid. I eagerly await your and others answers.
A
aspawloski4th
Guest
she already said she was steril to begin with, so they arent healthy organs.she got rid of something not functioning to begin with. so that arguement doesnt work.
F
fix
Guest
F
fix
Guest
I have not read every detail of the poster’s medical history, nor do I want to. I try to keep my points in a general manner and not specific to each case as that is often not prudent.
In any event, that one may be sterile does not necessarily mean the organ needs to be excised. There are several factors to consider, so your point may or may not be relevant.
B
Brad
Guest
I already know that I am not superficial but I will take a look at your post 76 despite the fact that you are not responding to my post directly.
A
aspawloski4th
Guest
thankyou !
A
Adonis33
Guest
Your post #76 is not relevant. I do not think that The teacher in question was a hermaphrodite. It seems to me that this was a desicion of his to mutilate his body.
To be honest - I do not know what a hermaphrodite should/should not do, or how parents decide which sex to raise the child. Maybe that should be a topic for another thread.
B
Brad
Guest
I agree with this assessment. I also see some baiting in post #76. Some more narrow focus and specific questions I would be happy to address (as they pertain to the thread topic).
B
Brad
Guest
I don’t want to avoid your questions but I am having difficulty understanding what specific question you have about the topic of this thread. Can you spell out your question more directly? Thanks.
L
Lynn-D
Guest
I see now how bias works. May I too use it to make a point. If a woman has a complete hysterectomy then is she ‘mutilated’ since she is void of ovaries and womb? If she has mammary cysts continually forming but not cancerous but the doctor warns of the very possible danger, is she mutilated because she has the breasts removed? Where does mutilation begin? Perhaps in every event when a surgeon takes into his/her hand a scalpel in some peoples eyes. How about when my chest was cut open to replace a heart valve? That too must be mutilation since many of you use the term so loosely that it should be applied forever in vague terms.
By the way, I did not have a normal male body. I was sterile, only one testicle, had a female brain which doctors and priests confirmed, did not have a prostate and even had a third nipple, although not rare was unusual and a source of ridicule. “Normal”, how so I wonder and might ask, “What is really normal”? I feel quite normal now and nothing can change that feeling.
I need to make this point once more. The Catholic Church never exclaimed that I had sinned, venial or mortal. In fact my baptismal certificate was changed by the church to denote me as female. My name on official church records is in my full female name. Did the Priest, Bishop and the Vatican become part of a sinful conspiracy back then which they now are trying to undo? No, my baptismal certificate is still valid as quite a few priests will attest since I asked them and I am, as I write this, in the state of grace contrary to any sin that might be imposed upon me wrongly by the judgmental.
Lynn-D
A
aspawloski4th
Guest
yes it is very relevent!!! it poves people arent born perfect like some around here seem to think. that answer proves the extreme desire to over simplify things. if you consider earring piercing not to be mutilation you are guilty of a double standard, its ok to cut to be able to put a ring in one’s ear while its not ok for ones sexual identity.
A
aspawloski4th
Guest
simple just answer all the what ifs.
A
aspawloski4th
Guest
narrow focus, more specific? that as specific as it can get. theres no baiting here I can assure you, this line of questioning has been in my mind for a long time. the hermaphroditic question is to address the very common incorrect assumption that you are born perfectly male or female. one cant make the arguement that whether with one’s sex or any other aspect of being human one is born as they should be all the time.with that line of thinking my sister who was an asiamtopic birth was as she should be. if thats one’s thinking I sugest they dont tell my parents that. in nature theres lots of imperfection, ie albinos, congential defects, etc that God doesnt make happen but lets happen. but by the same token he gave us the brains to deal with it, in which case we are advancing on all the time. I think some cant accept sexuality is a part of that imperfect world too.
A
Adonis33
Guest
This thread is not about hermaphrodites. Start another thread if you wish.
Comparing ear piercings with cutting off ones genitals is ridiculous.
A
Adonis33
Guest
It sounds as if you have been through a great deal. I’m sorry. However it seems to me that what you went through, and the subject of this thread, are not the same case.
Nobody on this thread has judged you.
L
Lynn-D
Guest
It has been stated by some in this forum that what I did is considered by the church a mortal sin. If that is not judgmental then may I ask what is???
I do agree that the teacher subject and my travail are not the same but it does intertwine. There are two other threads ongoing that cover this same topic so please forgive me if my thoughts and writings move from one to the other. They are after all dealing with much the same.
I would drop this thread and do so eagerly if others would just do the same. I know nothing of the NJ teacher but that which was presented here by another poster so really can not answer for her nor would I really wish to.
I do know a few professionals, one of which is a teacher and another a retired teacher, who have had the operation. The former teaches in a protestant school and her past is unknown. I also know lawyers, doctors, media people, surgeons, design engineers, business people, ministers and even a bus driver who all work and continue life as the women they are. If these people were out in the open and not so stealth perhaps the public would see us just for what we are and not confuse us with the pseudo types and the wannabee’s who mimic women but have no idea of what it means to be one. We are not exhibitionists but just people who want to live as calm and happy a life as is possible without turmoil.
HAPPY NEW YEAR ALL
Lynn-D
B
BlindSheep
Guest
Yes, if her ovaries and womb are healthy to begin with.
If she has mammary cysts continually forming but not cancerous but the doctor warns of the very possible danger, is she mutilated because she has the breasts removed?
Yes, but perhaps justifiably.
Where does mutilation begin? Perhaps in every event when a surgeon takes into his/her hand a scalpel in some peoples eyes. How about when my chest was cut open to replace a heart valve?
I assume you are not talking about a healthy heart valve? Even if it were healthy, if it is replaced it is not mutilation, only a pointless, unjustified risk.
“Removing or destroying healthy body parts” is a pretty specific definition.
How did this necessitate the surgery you had? You did not have surgery to correct your sterility, did you?
had a female brain which doctors and priests confirmed,
Really? That is an interesting condition. I take it your brain cells contained two X chromosomes? Or are you saying you had an unusual *male brain, *in that was more similar to an average female brain? This would be unusual, but unusual does not always mean pathological. It is difficult (though certainly less so) to go through life as a woman over six feet tall - however, this is not pathological either; and it can even be seen as an advantage in some ways.
did not have a prostate and even had a third nipple, although not rare was unusual and a source of ridicule.
Again, not related to the surgery you describe.
I wonder if feeling normal is all it’s cracked up to be. What about appreciating the way God made us?
Correction: your priest did not. Your priest may or may not represent the Church in this case.
In fact my baptismal certificate was changed by the church to denote me as female. My name on official church records is in my full female name. Did the Priest, Bishop and the Vatican become part of a sinful conspiracy back then which they now are trying to undo? No, my baptismal certificate is still valid as quite a few priests will attest since I asked them and I am, as I write this, in the state of grace contrary to any sin that might be imposed upon me wrongly by the judgmental.
Lynn-D
I’m sorry, I was not aware that you had consulted the Vatican! Do you care to provide a reference?
L
Lynn-D
Guest
Yes, but perhaps justifiably.
So, it seems if qualified you might go along. How would you respond if someone like me told you an ovary was removed when an infant. Think please, there might be a test.
I assume you are not talking about a healthy heart valve? Even if it were healthy, if it is replaced it is not mutilation…,
How about the removal of a healthy kidney and transplanting to a person in need. I would think under your standard it is mutilation. After all a healthy organ was removed and not replaced.
“Removing or destroying healthy body parts” is a pretty specific definition.
My heart was very healthy, the valve was only open 20% but was not diseased, simply a result of a birth defect. Guess you might think this is not mutilation, simply a bad choice. Maybe it is because it does not involve the forbidden fruit.
How did this necessitate the surgery you had? You did not have surgery to correct your sterility, did you?
I could not nor did I have surgery to correct an incurable condition which I did not aspire to in the first place.
Really? That is an interesting condition. I take it your brain cells contained two X chromosomes? Or are you saying you had an unusual *male brain, *in that was more similar to an average female Yes, I do make the claim that my brain was female as hypothalimus studies (BSTc) of transsexuals are now indicating. This would be unusual, but unusual does not always mean pathological. It is difficult (though certainly less so) to go through life as a woman over six feet tall - however, this is not pathological either; and it can even be seen as an advantage in some ways.
Who is over six feet tall? Are you and might you have had some difficulty. The point is somehow lost to me.
No, the BSTc studies, not done by opinionated people but by reputable researchers did those studies and later had collaborative findings which further examined the gnomes which also gave additional supportive evidence accepted in courts of law.
Again, not related to the surgery you describe.
I wonder if feeling normal is all it’s cracked up to be. What about appreciating the way God made us?
I suppose God made us all to be fathers or mothers perhaps with some exclusions. So if someone healthy decided not to follow the design of their God given body and chose instead to be celibate that might not be what God intended? Urm! Now you might have given me some ideas I might not have given thought to before. God make us all to be what we could, he did not assign each a roadmap.
God make me as I am. He did not make me to procreate and that was very clear. I was also given free will which allowed me to search for the answers that would improve my life and find the truth which I know was not sinful.
Correction: your priest did not. Your priest may or may not represent the Church in this case.
The priest told me that the application would have to go to the Cardinal which it did.
I’m sorry, I was not aware that you had consulted the Vatican! Do you care to provide a reference?
The priest later told me that the Cardinal had consultated or forwarded the application to the Vatican. What happened in the process was not made privy to me. Only thing I know is that my baptismal certificate was returned to me and gives my corrected name and not the name on the original baptismal certificate. I have also been told by a number of priests and bishops that my baptismal certificate is valid. I do not exhibit it to others to support my contention but have shown it to one other person who does post on this forum. It will go no further since I doubt it would have any effect upon closed minds.
I see the Galileo syndrome rearing its ugly head once again.
Lynn-D
A
AndyF
Guest
- Status