Transgender people in the Church

Post by **_Coggins7** » Thu Oct 18, 2007 3:05 pm

For anyone: What would be the church's position in the case of infants born with ambiguous gentalia?

You mean like Big G? He doesn't appear to have any. Quite ambiguous.

Post by **_moksha** » Thu Oct 18, 2007 4:03 pm

Zoidberg wrote:I would like to address the "rarity" of the issue. According to a study by Blackless et al. cited at the website of the Intersex Society of North America, approximately 1% of people have bodies that differ from standard male or female. That would be about - oh, I dunno - 66 million people? And the Lord's only true church has - oh, I dunno - only 13 million members? Only 1/5 that? You've got to be kidding me! It must not be so insignificant, after all.

This might be a more accurate representation of the numbers: Not XX and not XY one in 1,666 births. Still, this is a number that is not considered by the Proclamation against differing Families, is it?

Post by **_asbestosman** » Thu Oct 18, 2007 5:36 pm

Zoidberg wrote: because it's really about transsexuals and the Church's basis (or lack thereof, IMHO) for discriminating against them.

Thank you for admitting your true purpose.

However, you can only keep asserting that intersex people don't really make a difference if you are willing to admit the LDS church doesn't really make a difference.

Oh brother. Even the website you linked to says, "you’d have to first get everyone to agree on what counts as intersex —and also to agree on what should count as strictly male or strictly female. That’s hard to do."

For all we know, God actually knows which gender the doctor or whoever will eventually choose in cases of truly ambiguous gender and therefore sends a spirit of the appropriate gender into that body. I suspect, for example, that XY females get a female spirit. But that's just my guess.

So anyhow, let's leave intersexed persons out of your discussion since it appears to be a red-herring and stick with the point about transsexuals. How on earth do you possibly think that could work in the LDS plan of salvation? It can't. If the church is true, as I hold it is, then transsexual operations are affront to that plan which is really the whole point of our existence. How could it not be a sin in that way. Do I think the government should discriminate against it? No. But what on earth is wrong with religions specifying that X is wrong even if it's as natural as masturbation? And please, don't try to pull some stunt about how I should be thankful that masturbation never tempted me so that's why I have a different opinion.

Post by **_Runtu** » Thu Oct 18, 2007 5:41 pm

asbestosman wrote:
For all we know, God actually knows which gender the doctor or whoever will eventually choose in cases of truly ambiguous gender and therefore sends a spirit of the appropriate gender into that body. I suspect, for example, that XY females get a female spirit. But that's just my guess.

No offense, but do you not recognize how silly this sounds?

So anyhow, let's leave intersexed persons out of your discussion since it appears to be a red-herring and stick with the point about transsexuals. How on earth do you possibly think that could work in the LDS plan of salvation? It can't. If the church is true, as I hold it is, then transsexual operations are affront to that plan which is really the whole point of our existence. How could it not be a sin in that way. Do I think the government should discriminate against it? No. But what on earth is wrong with religions specifying that X is wrong even if it's as natural as masturbation? And please, don't try to pull some stunt about how I should be thankful that masturbation never tempted me so that's why I have a different opinion.

Again, I'm still wondering why someone who is an "affront" to the plan of salvation would ever want to join the LDS church? Has it ever happened?

Post by **_asbestosman** » Thu Oct 18, 2007 6:13 pm

Runtu wrote:No offense, but do you not recognize how silly this sounds?

No, but I can imagine.

Runtu wrote:Again, I'm still wondering why someone who is an "affront" to the plan of salvation would ever want to join the LDS church? Has it ever happened?

I don't know. Perhaps they obtain a testimony and desire to do the right thing? One can and probably should always hope that anyone will change for the best especially in light of all the dumb things one's self does.

Sometimes I don't know why some sins keep one from enjoying the blessings of the temple while others do not. In the end, all sins for which one does not repent will keep one from the fullness of God's presence.

Post by **_AmazingDisgrace** » Thu Oct 18, 2007 6:13 pm

asbestosman wrote:For all we know, God actually knows which gender the doctor or whoever will eventually choose in cases of truly ambiguous gender and therefore sends a spirit of the appropriate gender into that body. I suspect, for example, that XY females get a female spirit. But that's just my guess.

Then you've got the problem of the doctor's free will. If God knows that the doctor will decide the child is male, and he sends a male spirit based on that knowledge, it then becomes impossible for the doctor to decide the baby is female. No free will.

Post by **_asbestosman** » Thu Oct 18, 2007 6:15 pm

AmazingDisgrace wrote:Then you've got the problem of the doctor's free will. If God knows that the doctor will decide the child is male, and he sends a male spirit based on that knowledge, it then becomes impossible for the doctor to decide the baby is female. No free will.

You mean no libertarian free will. I have toyed with compatibilism.

Post by **_AmazingDisgrace** » Thu Oct 18, 2007 6:37 pm

The important thing is that the doctor still doesn't get to choose, because the decision has already been made by God. To me, compatibilism just seems to be a way of redefining free will into something that is not free will, while still calling it by the same name. And I think it would take a pretty radical reinterpretation of the Book of Mormon's teachings on agency to see them claiming anything other than libertarian free will.

Post by **_asbestosman** » Thu Oct 18, 2007 6:48 pm

AmazingDisgrace wrote:The important thing is that the doctor still doesn't get to choose, because the decision has already been made by God.

That is not my understanding of compatibilism. The doctor chooses, but he chooses deterministically.

Post by **_James Muir** » Thu Oct 18, 2007 7:02 pm

Sethbag wrote:
In reality, there is no such thing as a male spirit, or a female spirit. There are only human beings, who usually are differentiated physically by sex on account of hormonal differences during development which are influenced by the X and Y chromosomes. And sometimes, when things don't go strictly by the plan, as it were, you have a human being who is neither strictly male, nor strictly female. It's real.

This kind of thing is, in my opinion, another subtle reminder of the manmade nature of the LDS theology and religion. It was formulated when only clear-cut man/woman roles and physical bodies were contemplated. It was formulated based on what Joseph Smith and his successors knew. Now we know a lot more, and we realize that the theology that seems so comprehensive and clear as a bell to the true believers is totally inadequate to include, and account for, the rare cases that in fact occur in nature.

LImited imagination to just chuck it all and go neutral. The gospel is not inadequate, its just run by Druid interlopers at the moment. This might be a good time for some guy upheld by the faith of prayers of the people to admit that he lacks wisdom and go ask of God who giveth to all men liberally and ubraideth not. Oh, that's right the little mummy pleasers can't. They only want to spend you money, and make you act so funny, make you feel real loose, like a long neck goose, . Awe baby that's a what I like. Cigarette?