Time for Parents to Resist Transgender Activism

[Rau]

Okay but it was an option for her life. Again a very low percentage of abortions are late term.

One may take some comfort in that, given the late term aborted may experience pain, but that’s not a basis to be comfortable with abortions at an earlier stage where the child may not suffer.

A person with dysphoria just doesn’t “feel” right in their own body. I get my morals from empathy

We understand what dysphoria is, but how one feels is not the basis for defining “boy” vs. “girl”. If the cause of a boy feeling like a girl could be uncovered, and the cause of those feelings eliminated such that they are again comfortable in their own skin - would that be a good thing? Would it be a better solution than cutting of parts of male anatomy and fashioning look-alike parts of female anatomy? I think we agree it would. Of course, we can’t do that. I have sympathy for those who suffer such grievous pain that they pursue surgery. But I have contempt for those who see this as some kind of normal process, an entitlement of anyone who desires it.

While I hope we all feel compassion for those suffering with dysphoria or SSA or similar, it should be acknowledged that confirming a person in their desires is not itself the very definition of moral behaviour.

 

[Rau]

…If you are a man who thinks he’s supposed to be a woman, you need to suppress and abhor those thoughts.

What such a person needs to do is seek to live their life as well as they can.

 

[NM505StKate]

OT guy who was tasked with producing heirs for his late brother but kept spilling his seed on the ground instead of impregnating his brother’s widow. God killed him for it.

Genesis 38.

Okay so he was punished/killed because he didn’t want to get his brother’s wife knocked up. Makes perfect sense.

I read the passage and don’t think of sperm since they had no clue what sperm was. It just wasn’t discovered back then. Heck this is the same book that things putting sheep in front of fences changes their genes.

 

[NM505StKate]

One may take some comfort in that, given the late term aborted may experience pain, but that’s not a basis to be comfortable with abortions at an earlier stage where the child may not suffer.

We understand what dysphoria is, but how one feels is not the basis for defining “boy” vs. “girl”. If the cause of a boy feeling like a girl could be uncovered, and the cause of those feelings eliminated such that they are again comfortable in their own skin - would that be a good thing? Would it be a better solution than cutting of parts of male anatomy and fashioning look-alike parts of female anatomy? I think we agree it would. Of course, we can’t do that. I have sympathy for those who suffer such grievous pain that they pursue surgery. But I have contempt for those who see this as some kind of normal process, an entitlement of anyone who desires it.

While I hope we all feel compassion for those suffering with dysphoria or SSA or similar, it should be acknowledged that confirming a person in their desires is not itself the very definition of moral behaviour.

Can a handful of cells feel anything? Does an amoeba feel anything?

I disagree. I would not want to eliminate someone’s feelings. SSA is not suffering. That is rather condescending to think that.

 

[WonderAndAwe]

All mental conditions are fundamentally treated the same: medicate and realize everything you naturally want to do is wrong because it’s all caused by mental illness and thus opposed to your overall health. It’s only with “trans” individuals where their mind is treated as healthy but their body is treated as sick.

And why aren’t those against the Church inherently Satanists then? Wasn’t that what Jesus said in Matthew 12:30, Luke 9:50, and Mark 9:40? If you aren’t wholly with Him, you are wholly with Satan?

What such a person needs to do is seek to live their life as well as they can.

By rejecting Transgenderism and everything and everyone telling them that they were born in the wrong body and that mutilating their genitals and poisoning themselves with the wrong hormones.

 

[Rau]

Okay so he was punished/killed because he didn’t want to get his brother’s wife knocked up. Makes perfect sense.

No - he was not punished for a lack of desire for something. As the Scripture says, he was punished for “what he did”. It was his **means **that determined the moral species of his act. Had he merely wanted to avoid a child - he only needed to refuse the marriage (or whatever the formalities were). Now that also would have incurred a punishment under the law. But it was not death.

 

[Rau]

Can a handful of cells feel anything? Does an amoeba feel anything?

I very much doubt it - but so what? The sleeping man feels no pain when killed in the appropriate manner. That has NO relevance to the morality of ending his life. So what does?

I disagree. I would not want to eliminate someone’s feelings.

Well that can’t be universally true. Just ask those suffering depression, or various mental disorders. And one wonders why the feelings deserve to be preserved, but it’s ok to butcher the body. Who is the more intact (and who is likely to be the happier) - the man (now) happy in his male body [if only we could make it so], or the man with a butchered male body (or non-functioning female looking body)?

SSA is not suffering. That is rather condescending to think that.

Seriously? Do you think everyone who experiences SSA is happy about it? You are watching too much TV perhaps.

 

[Rau]

All mental conditions are fundamentally treated the same: medicate and realize everything you naturally want to do is wrong because it’s all caused by mental illness and thus opposed to your overall health. It’s only with “trans” individuals where their mind is treated as healthy but their body is treated as sick.

The cause of dysphoria (and homosexuality for that matter) is unknown and no medication for the mind to “treat” these conditions exists.

Transition surgery is in some cases pursued as a means of alleviating suffering. Whether that is ever justifiable, I reserve judgement. It does not follow that the mind is healthy or deemed health; rather it is accepted that we know no treatment for the mind of such a person.

 

[WonderAndAwe]

Well then what are they then? And why isn’t that the same as Satanism?

But the negative thoughts and behaviors caused by the trauma and depression weren’t indulged as healthy and “the right thing to do” like with Trans.

 

[edwest2]

Here is the thing. See Roe v Wade gave states the ability to say after certain trimesters if abortion is okay. That is due to how likely something will survive outside of the mother. To be blunt a baby is a parasite to the mother. It drains nutrients and can cause health problems for the mother. So in the first trimester the zygote is not able to survive on its own and is not a person. Second trimester it might but it might not. Third it probably can. This is for the law as there wasn’t time for a deep debate on when life begins during the trial.

Now back to transgender. Every human starts as “female” and then may develop the Y chromosome. That is why humans with their plumbing on the outside have things that are rather useless where as those with plumbing on the inside have them. Of course there is a chance of XXY and other types. It isn’t as black and white. That is why a person may be born and assigned a gender at birth but may not be that gender,

A radical feminist statement. All women who become pregnant go through the same thing. All women.

Transgender is a delusion. In Roe v. Wade, a deception was spread. Jane Roe, real name: Norma McCorvey, never got an abortion. She didn’t petition for anything but the Supreme Court went along with it, citing “penumbras” and “emanations” from the Constitution. That was all theater. I was there when it happened.

Ed

 

[Cathoholic]

NM505StKate. You said . . .

Yeah I will stick by . . . . Gender and sex are fluid.

Gender and sex are fluid?

I have heard our area University has nixed speakers who are “ex-gay” from coming in and talking to the universty students.

They said “you were BORN homosexual” (or straight).

They said is was “settled science”.

They said it was a “proven fact”.

Now YOU seem to be saying people’s gender is . . . . “Fluid”.

You mean all those “experts” were WRONG for all those years despite . . . “science”?

Why did so many “science” people get it wrong and now YOU know better?

Why should I trust you?

I’m sure this type of thing (even the capricious THINKING, not to mention these types of gender dysphorias) are indeed a cross to bear NM505StKate, and I will keep you in my prayers.

But your thinking here is wrong.

God bless.

Cathoholic

 

[NM505StKate]

No - he was not punished for a lack of desire for something. As the Scripture says, he was punished for “what he did”. It was his **means **that determined the moral species of his act. Had he merely wanted to avoid a child - he only needed to refuse the marriage (or whatever the formalities were). Now that also would have incurred a punishment under the law. But it was not death.

It still doesn’t show that they even knew what sperm was. Far as they knew it was some magic thing that occurred.

 

[NM505StKate]

I very much doubt it - but so what? The sleeping man feels no pain when killed in the appropriate manner. That has NO relevance to the morality of ending his life. So what does?

Well that can’t be universally true. Just ask those suffering depression, or various mental disorders. And one wonders why the feelings deserve to be preserved, but it’s ok to butcher the body. Who is the more intact (and who is likely to be the happier) - the man (now) happy in his male body [if only we could make it so], or the man with a butchered male body (or non-functioning female looking body)?

Seriously? Do you think everyone who experiences SSA is happy about it? You are watching too much TV perhaps.

You are assuming that the “man” wants “his” “male body”. While yes mental disorders need help I don’t see trans as a mental disorder. Of course not everyone would be happy with thinking homosexual thoughts but, probably, was caused by being brought up in a household where it was looked down on.

 

[NM505StKate]

A radical feminist statement. All women who become pregnant go through the same thing. All women.

Transgender is a delusion. In Roe v. Wade, a deception was spread. Jane Roe, real name: Norma McCorvey, never got an abortion. She didn’t petition for anything but the Supreme Court went along with it, citing “penumbras” and “emanations” from the Constitution. That was all theater. I was there when it happened.

Ed

I need to confirm but I believe the reason she didn’t get an abortion was because of how long it took to get the case settled. Penumbra is a law thing that I also need to re research as I have heard it before.

 

[Penitent_Son]

NM505StKate. You said . . .

Gender and sex are fluid?

I have heard our area University has nixed speakers who are “ex-gay” from coming in and talking to the universty students.

They said “you were BORN homosexual” (or straight).

They said is was “settled science”.

They said it was a “proven fact”.

Now YOU seem to be saying people’s gender is . . . . “Fluid”.

You mean all those “experts” were WRONG for all those years despite . . . “science”?

Why did so many “science” people get it wrong and now YOU know better?

Why should I trust you?

I’m sure this type of thing (even the capricious THINKING, not to mention these types of gender dysphorias) are indeed a cross to bear NM505StKate, and I will keep you in my prayers.

But your thinking here is wrong.

God bless.

Cathoholic

I believe you are confusing sexuality with gender.

 

[NM505StKate]

NM505StKate. You said . . .

Gender and sex are fluid?

I have heard our area University has nixed speakers who are “ex-gay” from coming in and talking to the universty students.

They said “you were BORN homosexual” (or straight).

They said is was “settled science”.

They said it was a “proven fact”.

Now YOU seem to be saying people’s gender is . . . . “Fluid”.

You mean all those “experts” were WRONG for all those years despite . . . “science”?

Why did so many “science” people get it wrong and now YOU know better?

Why should I trust you?

I’m sure this type of thing (even the capricious THINKING, not to mention these types of gender dysphorias) are indeed a cross to bear NM505StKate, and I will keep you in my prayers.

But your thinking here is wrong.

God bless.

Cathoholic

Because science accepts being wrong? It doesn’t give absolutes as far as I know.

 

[edwest2]

I need to confirm but I believe the reason she didn’t get an abortion was because of how long it took to get the case settled. Penumbra is a law thing that I also need to re research as I have heard it before.

She had children. She is actively pro-life.

Ed

 

[edwest2]

I believe you are confusing sexuality with gender.

The Church is aware of the roots of this misguided thinking.

"2. Recent years have seen new approaches to women’s issues. A first tendency is to emphasize strongly conditions of subordination in order to give rise to antagonism: women, in order to be themselves, must make themselves the adversaries of men. Faced with the abuse of power, the answer for women is to seek power. This process leads to opposition between men and women, in which the identity and role of one are emphasized to the disadvantage of the other, leading to harmful confusion regarding the human person, which has its most immediate and lethal effects in the structure of the family.

"A second tendency emerges in the wake of the first. In order to avoid the domination of one sex or the other, their differences tend to be denied, viewed as mere effects of historical and cultural conditioning. In this perspective, physical difference, termed sex, is minimized, while the purely cultural element, termed gender, is emphasized to the maximum and held to be primary. The obscuring of the difference or duality of the sexes has enormous consequences on a variety of levels. This theory of the human person, intended to promote prospects for equality of women through liberation from biological determinism, has in reality inspired ideologies which, for example, call into question the family, in its natural two-parent structure of mother and father, and make homosexuality and heterosexuality virtually equivalent, in a new model of polymorphous sexuality.

"3. While the immediate roots of this second tendency are found in the context of reflection on women’s roles, its deeper motivation must be sought in the human attempt to be freed from one’s biological conditioning.2 According to this perspective, human nature in itself does not possess characteristics in an absolute manner: all persons can and ought to constitute themselves as they like, since they are free from every predetermination linked to their essential constitution.

“This perspective has many consequences. Above all it strengthens the idea that the liberation of women entails criticism of Sacred Scripture, which would be seen as handing on a patriarchal conception of God nourished by an essentially male-dominated culture. Second, this tendency would consider as lacking in importance and relevance the fact that the Son of God assumed human nature in its male form.”

Full document: vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20040731_collaboration_en.html

Ed

 

[Cathoholic]

NM505StKate:

Because science accepts being wrong? It doesn’t give absolutes as far as I know.

Ok. So is “gender fluidity” consistent with “science”, now, and if you think it is, do you accept it “absolutely” or do you affirm there could be error in one of the many “gender fluidity” paradigms that you seem to accept NOW?

Aside from “science” do you think ANY absolute truth exists?

Penitent_Son:

I believe you are confusing sexuality with gender.

If someone’s gender “changes” because he/she is “gender fluid” . . . what if their “sexuality” changes right along with their “fluid” gender “change”?

Then what?

Are you saying their sexuality changed, but their gender didn’t?
Are you saying their gender changed, but their sexuality didn’t?

And what if they change BACK again? After all, it is allegedly . . . . “Fluid”.

If it changes “back” consistent with nature, should they be allowed by university administrators to speak on campuses about it?

Should universities who PROHIBIT people speaking consistent with nature . . . lose government funding, or should taxpayers be forced to fund such speech PROHIBITION?

We have governments outlawing reparative therapy.

. . . The Seattle City Council today approved an ordinance barring licensed health care providers from subjecting anyone under 18 to “ex-gay” therapy, sometimes called “conversion” or “reparative” therapy, designed to turn LGBT people straight or cisgender. Every major U.S. health care organization has termed the practice not only ineffective but harmful. . . .

advocate.com/politics/2016/8/01/seattle-bans-conversion-therapy-minors

Does this not implicitly DENY gender “fluidity”.

Or is “gender fluidity” only “healthy” and “normal” when is violates nature?

Or is it some other “belief system” that should be accepted concerning all of this?

 

[edwest2]

NM505StKate:

Ok. So is “gender fluidity” consistent with “science”, now, and if you think it is, do you accept it “absolutely” or do you affirm there could be error in one of the many “gender fluidity” paradigms that you seem to accept NOW?

Aside from “science” do you think ANY absolute truth exists?

Penitent_Son:

If someone’s gender “changes” because he/she is “gender fluid” . . . what if their “sexuality” changes right along with their “fluid” gender “change”?

Then what?

Are you saying their sexuality changed, but their gender didn’t?
Are you saying their gender changed, but their sexuality didn’t?

And what if they change BACK again? After all, it is allegedly . . . . “Fluid”.

If it changes “back” consistent with nature, should they be allowed by university administrators to speak on campuses about it?

Should universities who PROHIBIT people speaking consistent with nature . . . lose government funding, or should taxpayers be forced to fund such speech PROHIBITION?

We have governments outlawing reparative therapy.

advocate.com/politics/2016/8/01/seattle-bans-conversion-therapy-minors

Does this not implicitly DENY gender “fluidity”.

Or is “gender fluidity” only “healthy” and “normal” when is violates nature?

Or is it some other “belief system” that should be accepted concerning all of this?

Indeed, what is being marketed here is a “belief system.” An invention.

Ed