What is the Church's position on the Intersexed and Transsexed?

[savienu]

Agangbern, Zoe and other here have provided the science you seem to be ignoring. I don’t need to repeat it for you. Read up on this thread. No where have I said they shouldn’t be treated with equal dignity. On the contrary, you are claiming they DON’T EVEN EXIST, which is NOT just. Zoe has provided the science, Zoe has told you she fathered a child. Zoe has told you she is a woman. Not that she FEELS like a woman trapped in a man’s body, but that she IS a woman, who has both male and female genitalia. For you to deny that, despite evidence to the contrary, shows merely your own prejudices and lack of compassion.

Oh, and prior to the fall, we only ate vegetables. It is right there, plain as day in the text. You will find it in Genesis 1.

How would they affect the ovary and the uterus?

Does he have an ovary and uterus?

You who allege that there is a male (one who begot a child) who also has an ovary and uterus capable of bearing a child, you who allege that is the one who has the duty to prove that here. Not I. So, quote here that science that you claim to be and give the link to it.

You are jumping to conclusions without foundation, savienu! Where did I accuse Zoe of lying? Never, savienu. For to doubt what one says does not necessarily mean we are accusing him of being a liar! No, savienu. It simply means we need more proof of what he says. Did it really sound “as though it is Zoes’ choice to be intersexed”? Where is that sound, savienu?

It was clear to you that I used the word reproduction specifically in relation to the presence or not of ovary and uterus to settle the issue of whether an individual is male or female. Only up to that aspect. Therefore, even if the individual is sterile for so long as he is male, he is male.And if she is female then she is female even if she is unable to bear a child.

When and where did God tell you that?

But Jesus did not raise any doubt as to whether the eunuchs are male or female. For all you know, eunuchs are males.
Here:

eunuch
One entry found.
Main Entry:
eu•nuch
Pronunciation:
\ˈyü-nək, -nik\
Function:
noun
Etymology:
Middle English eunuk, from Latin eunuchus, from Greek eunouchos, from eunē bed + echein to have, have charge of — more at scheme
Date:
15th century
1 : a castrated man placed in charge of a harem or employed as a chamberlain in a palace 2 : a man or boy deprived of the testes or external genitals 3 : one that lacks virility or power
— eu•nuch•ism -nə-ˌki-zəm, -ni-\ noun
merriam-webster.com/dictionary/eunuch

 

[Ephilei]

Unfortunately this thread has de-evolved past any useful dialogue. That’s a shame.

 

[savienu]

Unfortunately this thread has de-evolved past any useful dialogue. That’s a shame.

I know I contributed to that a bit. For my part, I do want to apologize to you, Zoe, and everyone else. God bless.

 

[cristininha]

 

[aspawloski4th]

Unfortunately this thread has de-evolved past any useful dialogue. That’s a shame.

These threads usually do here amungst other forums. There are those who insist on sciance that was obsolete even at the time I came into this world in 1967. Thats too bad and it’s very sad. There is a very old Catholic mentality coming in to play here. Catholics in our life time like things to work, but work a certain way rather than just work. When they get out of their Catholic world and realize the rest of society just wants things to work, they either pull out of society or stubbornly fight the rest of the world. Poeple are going to have to read up on the current understanding of human biology and whatever they learned 50 years ago , should be disguarded. I’m not letting sciance thats older than me decide that I should keep pretneding to be male for the rest of my life.

 

[ClementRome]

isn’t it true if you get an “intersex” baby that if you let nature take its course that his/her body and hormones will level out to the correct gender of the child?

It seems like its best to let nature take its course in these situations. surely nature will find a way.

 

[aspawloski4th]

isn’t it true if you get an “intersex” baby that if you let nature take its course that his/her body and hormones will level out to the correct gender of the child?

It seems like its best to let nature take its course in these situations. surely nature will find a way.

Sometimes that happens and sometimes it doesn’t.

 

[agangbern]

Agangbern, Zoe and other here have provided the science you seem to be ignoring. I don’t need to repeat it for you. Read up on this thread. No where have I said they shouldn’t be treated with equal dignity. On the contrary, you are claiming they DON’T EVEN EXIST, which is NOT just. Zoe has provided the science, Zoe has told you she fathered a child. Zoe has told you she is a woman. Not that she FEELS like a woman trapped in a man’s body, but that she IS a woman, who has both male and female genitalia. For you to deny that, despite evidence to the contrary, shows merely your own prejudices and lack of compassion.

Oh, and prior to the fall, we only ate vegetables. It is right there, plain as day in the text. You will find it in Genesis 1.

Here you are again making false conclusions. I never said they don’t exits. What I am saying is: the external organs are not sufficient proof that the individual is a woman. Tell me frankly: Does Zoe have ovary and uterus? Did she ever bore a child aside from begetting one?

 

[agangbern]

Unfortunately this thread has de-evolved past any useful dialogue. That’s a shame.

Intersexed and transsexed are human beings like each one of us. And as human beings, they are not exempted from this teaching of the Church:

369 Man and woman have been created, which is to say, willed by God: on the one hand, in perfect equality as human persons; on the other, in their respective beings as man and woman. “Being man” or “being woman” is a reality which is good and willed by God: man and woman possess an inalienable dignity which comes to them immediately from God their Creator.240 Man and woman are both with one and the same dignity “in the image of God”. In their "being-man" and “being-woman”, they reflect the Creator’s wisdom and goodness."http://www.vatican.va/archive/catech...s2c1p6.htm#III

 

[Ephilei]

Here you are again making false conclusions. I never said they don’t exits. What I am saying is: the external organs are not sufficient proof that the individual is a woman. Tell me frankly: Does Zoe have ovary and uterus? Did she ever bore a child aside from begetting one?

And I keep asking you, on what basis do you believe gonads determine sex? (Does someone with a hysterectomy cease being female?)

And no one is debating chastity here. Yet you keeping bringing it up for some reason we can’t decipher.

What I keep stressing is God does not create everyone only female or only male as proven by the existence of intersex people. So far you haven’t been willing to explore that subject.

 

[agangbern]

These threads usually do here amungst other forums. There are those who insist on sciance that was obsolete even at the time I came into this world in 1967. Thats too bad and it’s very sad. There is a very old Catholic mentality coming in to play here. Catholics in our life time like things to work, but work a certain way rather than just work. When they get out of their Catholic world and realize the rest of society just wants things to work, they either pull out of society or stubbornly fight the rest of the world. Poeple are going to have to read up on the current understanding of human biology and whatever they learned 50 years ago , should be disguarded. I’m not letting sciance thats older than me decide that I should keep pretneding to be male for the rest of my life.

Why do you have to pretend to be male? If you have the ovary and the uterus of a woman, then no doubt you are a woman. Be happy with that and live with who you are. The Church’s teaching about humans is clear:

369 Man and woman have been created, which is to say, willed by God: on the one hand, in perfect equality as human persons; on the other, in their respective beings as man and woman. “Being man” or “being woman” is a reality which is good and willed by God: man and woman possess an inalienable dignity which comes to them immediately from God their Creator.240 Man and woman are both with one and the same dignity “in the image of God”. In their “being-man” and “being-woman”, they reflect the Creator’s wisdom and goodness."http://www.vatican.va/archive/catech...s2c1p6.htm#III

 

[agangbern]

And I keep asking you, on what basis do you believe gonads determine sex? (Does someone with a hysterectomy cease being female?).

The answer to that question is very obvious! For no man has a right to make a woman into a man. The Lord God placed the womb there. If man removes that womb, the fact would still remain that the Lord God willed that she be a woman.

What I keep stressing is God does not create everyone only female or only male as proven by the existence of intersex people. So far you haven’t been willing to explore that subject.

So you are protesting against what is written in Genesis and in the teachings of the Church that says,

369 Man and woman have been created, which is to say, willed by God: on the one hand, in perfect equality as human persons; on the other, in their respective beings as man and woman. “Being man" or "being woman” is a reality which is good and willed by God: man and woman possess an inalienable dignity which comes to them immediately from God their Creator.240 Man and woman are both with one and the same dignity “in the image of God”. In their “being-man” and “being-woman”, they reflect the Creator’s wisdom and goodness."http://www.vatican.va/archive/catech...s2c1p6.htm#III

Oh, I see. Your public profile says you are slightly protestant. No wonder then you are protesting against Catholic teaching.

 

[Ephilei]

The answer to that question is very obvious! For no man has a right to make a woman into a man. The Lord God placed the womb there. If man removes that womb, the fact would still remain that the Lord God willed that she be a woman.

You seem to be talking about non-intersex people, but the rest of us are talking about intersex people. If you don’t actually address the issue, I’m giving up. WHY do you say gonads, not genes or genitals, determine sex?

So you are protesting against what is written in Genesis and in the teachings of the Church that says,

Not at all. God creates humanity male and female. That does not discount the fact that some humans have both male and female elements. Scripture does not say God created humanity male OR female as many people infer. If anything, intersex people fulfill this verse MORE than non-intersex people. And you keep talking as if the Roman Catholic Church has made a statement about intersex people which, from what i can tell, she has not.

 

[agangbern]

And I keep asking you, on what basis do you believe gonads determine sex?

Take it from the definition of “female” itself, specifically the one in relation to reproduction, for so during creation the Lord God commanded them to “Go to the world and multiply…”

Here is its definition:

fe•male (f m l )
adj.
1.
a. Of or denoting the sex that produces ova or bears young.
b. Characteristic of or appropriate to this sex; feminine.
c. Consisting of members of this sex. See Usage Note at lady.
thefreedictionary.com/female

Clearly, female is one who has ovary, for so she is suppose to be the one to produce ova. And where does the ova suppose to go? Naturally to the fallopian tube and then to the uterus.

Again, let us not make clear and simple things complicated and confusing. As you can see, X chromosome and Y chromosome are not part of the definition of “female”. So, do not insist to make the chromosomes part of the definition.

 

[Ephilei]

Thank you, at last.

1 Genesis is not in English, so quoting an English dictionary means nothing.

2 By that definition, someone who cannot give birth is neither female NOR male which contradicts Genesis. (That would include not just most intersex people but prepubescent children and post-menopausel women.)

3 I fail to see any logic by the fact that because God said, “have children” therefore sex is determined by the particular function during procreation. Please explain your thought process. Several verses earlier, God said the same thing to the water animals yet some fish, like `clownfish, are hermaphroditic - both female and male.

4 Sex is not simple. If it were simple, intersex conditions would not exist. Thus it is complex and attempting to view it simply will over-simply it.

 

[agangbern]

Scripture does not say God created humanity male OR female as many people infer.

Not OR but AND. This is what is written: "*God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; **male and female *He created them."

If anything, intersex people fulfill this verse MORE than non-intersex people. And you keep talking as if the Roman Catholic Church has made a statement about intersex people which, from what i can tell, she has not.

Of course the Church would not give special mention to intersex people. Human beings are equal before God. So there is no need to make special mention of intersexed people. Unless of course you think they are suppose to be given more (or less) respect than other human beings.But I don’t think you subscribe to the idea that they are entitled to greater (or lesser) respect than other humans.

 

[agangbern]

2 By that definition, someone who cannot give birth is neither female NOR male which contradicts Genesis. (That would include not just most intersex people but prepubescent children and post-menopausel women.).

No, It does not necessarily follow from the definition, that one who cannot give birth is neither female or male. There is no logic in such inference.

3 I fail to see any logic by the fact that because God said, “have children” therefore sex is determined by the particular function during procreation. Please explain your thought process. Several verses earlier, God said the same thing to the water animals yet some fish, like .

That is why I resorted to the definition of “female” itself because many find Genesis sometimes hard to understand using “logic.”

And no, it is not true that God also commanded the water animals to “Go to the world and multiply.…”

 

[agangbern]

4 Sex is not simple. If it were simple, intersex conditions would not exist. Thus it is complex and attempting to view it simply will over-simply it.

But as to whether an individual is male or female, it is simple to tell. First, see the external organs. If it could not be categorically determined from the external organs, then see whether the individual has ovary and uterus. As simple as that. No need to complicate things.

 

[savienu]

But as to whether an individual is male or female, it is simple to tell. First, see the external organs. If it could not be categorically determined from the external organs, then see whether the individual has ovary and uterus. As simple as that. No need to complicate things.

And as has been repeated over and over again, it is NOT as “simple as that.” It’s a shame that we keep going around in circles like this with you, and that you seem to be unwilling to expand your thinking just a little bit.

 

[Ephilei]

No, It does not necessarily follow from the definition, that one who cannot give birth is neither female or male. There is no logic in such inference.

That is why I resorted to the definition of “female” itself because many find Genesis sometimes hard to understand using “logic.”

And no, it is not true that God also commanded the water animals to “Go to the world and multiply.…”

Obviously we’re wasting our time. You’re not even reading Genesis. You are right about one thing and I can think of a particular person who cannot use logic.