A Thought on the Issue of Transgenderism

MWynn · Valued patron of the building

A Thought on the Issue of Transgenderism

Texiecan · Patron of the building

It concerns me -- after seeing two mothers of pre-puberty children make their case on TV -- that transgenderism is so quickly accepted by families when children are not old enough to make any other life-altering decisions. It also concerns me that the high -- 33% by two accounts -- suicide rate among transgenders is being blamed on a lack of societal acceptance rather than internalization of serious psychological difficulties. I find it ironic that the first thing that comes to my mind is an older Star Trek movie in which Spock responds to the needs of the many rather than the few, or even the one. Companyies such as Target (which is not alone) opening public restrooms without heed to gender responds to the desires - not necessarily needs - of very few and ignores the requirements of the many.

Christ did not question why people came to Him for forgiveness or healing. Of course, He already knew their situation. He did, however, exhort them to change the direction of their lives when He admonished them to "Go, and sin no more." A recent study in James left me with a memorable verse: Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin. (James 4:17 KJV)

We cannot change anyone, nor should we attempt to do so. As Christians, we should (as MWynn states) "We will continue to preach the love and grace of Jesus Christ, and salvation for all who believe. We will continue to refuse the mistreatment of any other human being." I also believe that disagreeing with someone and stating biblical truth is not mistreatment, but speaking the truth in love:

That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive; But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ: (Ephesians 4:14-15 KJV)

Tea Party Man · Valued patron of the building

MWynn wrote:
I realize that this is a "hot topic" of our current culture, and is a discussion that can ignite great emotions and reactions. However, I would like to appeal to those who are rational and make use of common sense thinking.

Prior to making my points, I would like to state that I view the issue of homosexuality and transgenderism as two separate and distinct issues. It would not appear that a homosexual is saying "God made a mistake when He made me." However, it does appear that is what the transgenders are saying. I believe it is incorrect to state that, because someone questions the validity of transgenderism, they are automatically bigoted towards anyone who is homosexual. Therefore, this post deals solely with the issue of transgenderism. Here are my thoughts...

First, why is society giving in to the pressure from a block of society that represents less than .03% of the entire population? This is not to say that they are not important, or that they do not have rights. However, it is not wise to value political correctness over rational and logical thinking.

Second, is it truly possible to be "transgendered." The answer is an emphatic "No." A person is what they are at birth. God created male and female, and He makes no mistakes. There is no such thing a being transgendered. The defining chromosomes cannot be changed. There ARE people who are so deceived by sin that they believe God made a mistake and made them the wrong gender. Yet, that is the sinful thinking of fallen man.

Third, should society seek to accommodate those who claim to be transgendered, by permitting the rest of society to be at risk? Yes, many of those who claim to be transgendered have other sexual issues as well. A man who fancies himself a woman, is a potential danger to genuine women when he enters the area of their public restroom.

When SCOTUS opened the Pandora's Box last June by their same sex marriage ruling, we knew it would not be long until other serious issues arose. The cultural tide would not be abated simply by the redefining of marriage. Other relational boundaries would soon be threatened. We are there now, and more will be coming.

No, I'm not in favor of mistreating or hating anyone. As a Christian, I cannot mistreat another person and claim to be like Christ. However, mankind is fallen and the tentacles of sin's depravity have reached into the soul of our nation. We are to love sinners, pray for them, and give them the gospel of Jesus Christ. Sin is a human problem that has touched every mortal being that has been born, and not just a LGBT problem.

At the church I pastor, all people are welcome to come and they will be treated with love, courtesy and respect. Yet, we will continue to insist that men be men and women be women. We will continue to preach the love and grace of Jesus Christ, and salvation for all who believe. We will continue to refuse the mistreatment of any other human being.

You hit the nail on the head. This problem effects such a small group of people that we should not cow into that small group and their perceaved right at the detriment of a much larger group and their safety.

toddzmom · Valued patron of the building

I think it's very naive to say that one can't be one sex in the wrong body. I think it has happened in every age. We certainly see it happening today. And in my opinion it has nothing to do with rebellion. My daughter has a little friend in her class that isshowing signs of this and this child is too young to want to rebel against God. We ought to have compassion for these people.

MWynn · Valued patron of the building

I do agree that we must always show compassion to people, including those who are wrestling with gender issues. However, a child must be taught what is right. God never makes a mistake and puts a person in the wrong body. If a child is wrestling with gender identity, they must lovingly and compassionately be counseled through it. Unfortunately, our culture has bred much of this confusion. Culture has rejected the idea of absolute truth. Therefore, many things have become fluid in ideology and practice.

Yet, as you accurately state, compassion must always be the practice. Even the Scriptures say that we are to speak the truth in love.

Thanks for your input.

Smell Gorgeous · Valued patron of the building

I think our society has opened a pandoras box in this last year and who knows what else is going to fall out. I have mixed emotions on how we should respond to all the different things we have had to face.

ThatGirl · Active patron of the building

I too think it's naive to say there is no such thing as transgender. First of all...I don't even believe your God exists. There is no evidence of any such thing being real. I do not believe in a creation fantasy and to say that God created male and female shows that you are very wrong because the world is full of intersexed people. People who were born with any combination of both male and female reproductive organs both internal and external. I am a veterinary technician and I see this in animals all the time as well. I own a cat who is intersexed. Are we so arrogant to pretend that the same intersexing can't occur on a chromosome or hormonal level? We KNOW that more than two genders exist. The book of your religion is simply wrong about this.

To answer your question, "Why is society giving in to the pressure from a block of society that represents less than .03% of the entire population?" Because they are human beings who were born with inalienable rights. We are not a democracy. In a democracy the rights of a few can be taken by the vote of the majority. We live in a Constitutional Republic where Constitutional rights belong to everyone. Whether they represent 0.3% or the majority. The majority does not get to take away inalienable rights from the few.

MWynn · Valued patron of the building

ThatGirl, you are certainly within your rights to not believe in God or creation. Yet, to say there is no evidence, is to ignore so much. Yet, that is for another discussion.

On this issue, you reply to my question on the .03% by stating, "Because they are human beings who were born with inalienable rights." Really? If there is no God, then who endows humans with those inalienable rights? If there is no God, would not Darwin be right with his "survival of the fittest" theology?

You are correct that everyone is important. Yet, when a basic premise is flawed, it cannot be accepted as truth. I firmly believe that there is no such thing as transgender. I have worked with people who struggle in the area of gender and sexuality. I never belittle or attack them, because they are people who are deserving of respect. Yet, it is a historically proven fact that all humans are either male or female. Yes, there are the intersexed persons, who are born with both sets of genitalia, or some variation. Yet, their chromosomes are either XX or XY. Does their existence prove that there are more than two genders? No. It proves, as the Bible says, that the curse and consequences of sin takes its toll on all of creation. Just like some babies are born with other physical or mental deformities, there are some born with genital deformities. Does such disprove the existence of God. To the contrary. As stated in the Scriptures, all of creation is under sin's curse and consequences (Romans chapter 8).

I know that you hold a different position. As I said, that is within your freedom as a human being and an American. Also, it is apparent that you do not state an opinion without first giving it thought. Thank you for your civil discussion. That is always good. I also appreciate the fact that Al host this forum for these kind of thought provoking discussions.

ThatGirl · Active patron of the building

You are a kind person. I like to talk to people like you. :) To answer your questions...first of all, the definition of inalienable is "incapable of being alienated, surrendered, or transferred". It is not endowed by anyone. It is yours simply because you exist. Second, I don't see what Darwin's survival of the fittest theory has to do with this unless you are suggesting that people who are neither male nor female are not somehow really human. Intersexed people are fully human and adapted to this environment just as much as you are. Intersexed people won't go extinct because it is something that is buried in our genetic code. They have always and will always be a part of us. They are therefore, human beings who are fully worthy of the same rights as everyone else. It has nothing to do with survival of the fittest, which is the continued existence of organisms that are best adapted to their environment, with the extinction of others.

And I'm sorry but you simply are wrong about chromosomes. We are not only XX or XY.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XY_sex-determination_system

ThatGirl · Active patron of the building

Also, please understand that I am not suggesting that transgender people are intersexed. I am suggesting that we shouldn't be so quick to determine that there is not a cause for being transgender when we know that gender is not always black and white. I have a very dear friend who is transitioning right now. She was born and raised male. She is 50 and this isn't just something she decided to do on a whim. It has cost her everything. She would not put herself through this just for the fun of it. I have walked with her every step of the way since we were kids. Being forced to live as a man has been hell for her.

magniliaman · Valued patron of the building

There's only two sexes male and female and thats the end of the story. God did not make a mistake and its either confusion or rebellion that would make man think he was a woman.

Al · Valued patron of the building

What about the little boy that never cared for sports but did want to play dolls and house? Or the little girl that never cared for make up and dolls but would fight you in a second? There ARE people that will tell you that they NEVER thought like the sex to which their chromosomes assigned them - that their insides and their outsides NEVER meshed.

What about them?

What about the little boy who at six years old stood in his first grade class room door watching the little boys playing ball and thinking of them as "they", not "us". Was he really sinful at six years old?

All through history there have been "sissies" and "tomboys". If there is no such thing as transgender then,

Why?

Smellin Coffee · Valued patron of the building

Historic Judaism has historically recognized at least 6 different genders (some believe in 7 or 8). The idea of transgender living is nothing new, nor was it condemned in Torah. There is a possibility Joseph may have been trans, at least in attire. Pretty obvious he was gay. David and Jonathan were also a “couple” at one point, intimating David was bisexual. I am not Jewish but do periodically read Jewish commentary to understand context as a part of the Old Testament. I certainly am not a Jewish scholar, but I do understand Jewish people don’t view Torah or OT writings through the lens of purity culture those in Western Christianity choose to do so. There was plenty of opportunity for ancient Judaism to condemn LGBTQ+ lifestyles, and even though these lifestyles were/are recognized therein, they are not condemned (even with our misinterpretation of the Leviticus passage).

Tea Party Man · Valued patron of the building

Smellin Coffee wrote:
"Historic Judaism has historically recognized at least 6 different genders (some believe in 7 or 8). The idea of transgender living is nothing new, nor was it condemned in Torah."
You don't think condemning a man to death for wearing womens' clothing - was condemning "transgender living"?

"There is a possibility Joseph may have been trans, at least in attire. Pretty obvious he was gay. David and Jonathan were also a “couple” at one point, intimating David was bisexual. I am not Jewish but do periodically read Jewish commentary to understand context as a part of the Old Testament. I certainly am not a Jewish scholar, but I do understand Jewish people don’t view Torah or OT writings through the lens of purity culture those in Western. . ."
What is purity culture?
""Christianity choose to do so. There was plenty of opportunity for ancient Judaism to condemn LGBTQ+ lifestyles, and even though these lifestyles were/are recognized therein, they are not condemned (even with our misinterpretation of the Leviticus passage)."

Sentencing a man to death for "lying with another man" is not condemning that lifestyle?
Also, what IS the right interpretation of the Leviticus passage?

-- Edited by Tea Party Man on Wednesday 22nd of December 2021 06:57:45 PM

Smellin Coffee · Valued patron of the building

I suggest reading rabbinical interpretation to understand the context in the original Torah. Here is a start: https://mobile.twitter.com/TheRaDR/status/1276278899723440129

Smellin Coffee · Valued patron of the building

Link isn’t working as the url is pasted from a mobile device but I will get you the info when I am able to respond from a laptop. In the meantime, you can find a Twitter thread on the topic by googling Rabbi Danya Ruttemberg Leviticus 18 and it is found in the very first search result along with a couple other references she refers to.

Smellin Coffee · Valued patron of the building

Pasting a series of tweets from Rabbi Ruttenberg on Levitcus 18. (She also posts other Rabbinical sources in her tweets that can be read, if interested.)

"So, OK. Sin of Sodom isn't sodomy, despite how the people who invented that word may have misread that text. What about Leviticus?

Do not lie with a man the lyings of a woman; it is abhorrent. (Leviticus 18:22) (also see 20:13). There are a few readings of this.

One is that what's being forbidden is, again, rape & domination, given Holiness Code context forbidding eg incest, or cues from Sodom.

Also some suggest it's a way of applying all the anti-incest stuff in the Holiness Code to male relatives.

OR it could be problematic bc associated w/idolatry. Some have theorized that male-male sex happened in Canaanite temple cults.

In which case connecting that verse with not sacrificing your kids to Moloch makes a bit more sense.

That's how the Rabbis sometimes read it.

"Bar Kappara said to Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, 'What is the meaning of the word to’eva [abomination]? To’e ata bah [you will go astray because of it]" Talmud Nedarim 51a

Which made sense in their world, when homosexuality and Greco-Roman culture were so intertwined--the things that happened at the bathhouse to Aphrodite and etc.

Here's another theory, from
@IdanDershowitz, both the popular summary:

t.co/Qc4NPhGro5

And the more academic paper, if that's your jam:

www.academia.edu/36473338/Pre-print_Revealing_Nakedness_and_Concealing_Homosexual_Intercourse_Legal_and_Lexical_Evolution_in_Leviticus_18

Another Rabbinic read:

Said Raba, Bar Hamduri explained to me as follows: “Do not lie with a male as one lies with a woman [lit. the lyings of a woman]” -- Who is a male who has two “lyings?” Conclude: this is an androginus. (Talmud Yevamot 83b)

AKA here they read Leviticus as saying don't have vaginal sex with an intersex person. Which, OK, isn't very intersex-folks affirming, but is a MUCH narrower way to understand the verse. And yes, it's an exegetical choice, but y'all, we all make choices when we read. You, too.

If you think the verse in Leviticus is clear, that's only because you're bringing your own assumptions and baggage with it, or you're reading a VERY bad translation. As you can see above, the meaning is far from straightforward.

Some Jews who embrace Jewish law--which ultimately did read Leviticus as about homosexuality--say, OK, so no anal sex, but other stuff yes.

(Note that if two people of whatever gender are together, what they decide to do & not do in bed is their own damn business.)

All this to say, there are LOTS of ways to read these Biblical texts that affirm & celebrate loving partnerships of all gender combos.

Also, you will note that lesbianism is nowhere in this thread. Why? BECAUSE IT'S ABSENT FROM THE BIBLE! (Sorry, Ruth/Naomi shippers)

(Sorry, I'll buy the argument about David and Jonathan-"Your love to me was more wonderful than the love of women.”--but Ruth and Naomi always felt like a stretch.)

ANYWAY. Female homosexuality isn't in the Bible.

Probably because the worldview was that if there wasn't a penis involved, it couldn't possibly be sex.

Rebecca Alpert has a great essay on this in my anthology Passionate Torah, if you're interested.

t.co/GdF8FzxXT5

And while not Biblical per se (well, mostly, anyway), if this thread if of interest this book probably will be as well. (There are a ton of queer Jewish resources, not gonna list them all, but
@KeshetGLBTJews
is certainly a major one also.)

t.co/a89XeiCNuH

People keep asking me about Genesis 1:27 with regards to this thread so start here about that. Really more about gender than sexuality tbh. Whole thread is kind of a hodgepodge of trans, intersex, GNC and nonbinary gender stuff in Judaism.

Christian friends, there are lots of places to go to hash out the New Testament verses that are used to substantiate homophobia—and lots of excellent scholarship complicating and refuting those clobber readings—but that’s not my lane.

Also keep in mind that the Ancient Near Eastern context of Genesis and Leviticus is not exactly the same as the Greco-Roman context of the New Testament, and each merits its own independent consideration in its own in its own cultural time and place."

The end of the copy/paste