Freethought & Rationalism Archive

beth · 07-08-2003, 09:23 AM

Quote:

This week The Observer reported that "Britain's 5,000 transsexuals who have gone through a full medical sex change are to be given the legal right to marry and have the gender changed on their birth certificate."

Quote:

The Vatican responded by saying that Transsexuals suffer from "mental pathologies" and will be ineligible for admission to Roman Catholic religious orders and should be expelled if they have already entered the priesthood or religious life. In a "sub secretum" (under secrecy) document to church leaders the Vatican also concludes that 'sex-change' procedures "do not change a person's gender in the eyes of the church." The document orders bishops "never to alter the sex listed in parish baptismal records" and also confirms that "Catholics who have undergone 'sex-change' procedures are not eligible to marry, be ordained to the priesthood or enter religious life."

To complicate matters, cloning and alternative conception and gestation methods are being developed that will satisfy legal requirements of genetic reproduction by sex-altered couples.

"Over the next 20 years the problem will escalate beyond transsexuality," says Thomas Horn of Raiders News Update. "Through transgenics, humans whose genetic structure has been altered through introducing animal or plant DNA into their genome will make it impossible to define with clarity what it means to be human at all, let alone male or female."

Across Europe where the scientific community has aggressively moved into the mostly unregulated field of transgenics, concerns are being voiced by researchers themselves over breaching the species barrier.

"The technology is an affront to God," Horn continues. "The Bible tells us that God requires humans, animals, and plants to reproduce after their own kind. Biblically speaking, species integrity, including the idea of male and female, is required by God. Transsexual alterations, transgenics, cloning, where's it going to stop? I'm afraid we're opening a Pandora's box to a molecular biological nightmare. Gender definition will be small potatoes compared to the ethical problems we're brewing up for the near future."

Quote:

According to Horn, that is the bigger issue and should frighten the heck out of everybody. "For humanists, altering the species is evolution in reverse and a violation of nature. For those who subscribe to the science of catastrophe, it's Jurassic Park. For believers in God it is an assault on His creative genius."

Well, I don't know about you, but I got a little pissy when I read this.

Rhaedas · 07-08-2003, 09:34 AM

Quote:

The Bible tells us that God requires humans, animals, and plants to reproduce after their own kind. Biblically speaking, species integrity, including the idea of male and female, is required by God.

Didn't the Pope recently concur that evolution was a fact, that it occurs? By definition, there is no such thing as "species integrity"...small changes beget large changes over time.

And they once again use "kind" without being more specific.

Also:

Quote:

the Vatican also concludes that 'sex-change' procedures "do not change a person's gender in the eyes of the church."

Does the Church determine sex initially by external appearance, or by the DNA? If god made someone with XX or XY but accidently attach/omit an appendage, why can't the doctors use their "god given" abilities to correct the mistake?

Enai · 07-08-2003, 09:54 AM

Also, what's about XXY persons or other chromosomal oddities? Or people with XY chromosome set, yet female appereance at birth?

I think they're making things too simple. They'd like the world to be neatly divided in "real men" and "real women", plus children of either of the two sexes. They don't see that there's also another dimension.

Enai

PopeInTheWoods · 07-08-2003, 10:48 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Enai
Also, what's about XXY persons or other chromosomal oddities? Or people with XY chromosome set, yet female appereance at birth?

I think they're making things too simple. They'd like the world to be neatly divided in "real men" and "real women", plus children of either of the two sexes. They don't see that there's also another dimension.

Enai

Great question for the Vatican, Enai! Especially since Joan of Arc is suspected to have been genetically male, but with Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome ....

Andy

yguy · 07-08-2003, 11:04 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by blondegoddess
Well, I don't know about you, but I got a little pissy when I read this.

Leaving the Bible and God out of it, do you think this sort of surgery is morally comparable to, say, a face lift?

Rhaedas · 07-08-2003, 11:16 AM

Yes, both try to improve a person's self worth or self image. A sex change is much more involved and time consuming than a face lift, so they aren't equally comparable.

I don't see sex changes as vanity though, if that's where you're trying to take it. If you are internally a different sex than externally, why would it be immoral to try and fix that? Leaving the bible and god out of it...

Jamie_L · 07-08-2003, 11:18 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by yguy
Leaving the Bible and God out of it, do you think this sort of surgery is morally comparable to, say, a face lift?

In the sense that it's your body, and you can do what you want with it as long as it doesn't hurt anybody else, then sure. A face lift here. A nip and tuck there. Get rid of this pesky penis. Morally, it's all the same to me.

Now, being as gender is such a big factor in who we are and how we perceive ourselves, transgender operations are obviously a much bigger deal for the individual, and I'd argue not something to be taken as lightly as a face-lift. But that is all within the domain of the individual in question. There are risks to the individual (mostly emotional and psychological), but risks to one's-self caused by one's-self aren't moral issues. We might have a moral obligation to make sure someone is aware of the risks they are taking, but that's different from the behavior being morally wrong.

I might tell my friend that riding a motorcycle without a helmet is risky. But it's not, in and of itself, immoral.

Jamie

thebeave · 07-08-2003, 11:51 AM

Maybe the Vatican should tell God to stop putting the soul of a woman into a man's body (or vice versa) at conception. Or if its due to a "mental pathology", maybe God should make his designs a little more robust in the first place, so that they aren't susceptible to these pathologies. Some Creator, eh?

yguy · 07-08-2003, 12:04 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Rhaedas
If you are internally a different sex than externally, why would it be immoral to try and fix that?

The question assumes facts not in evidence. Having observed the phenomenon of a person born with male characteristics desiring to have those of a female, the medical/psychological community, rather than try to address the question of how something so patently anomalous could happen to a person, has decided to call the symptom legitimate and rearrange the patient's physiology to acheive a semblance of internal harmony. To my mind, it's rather like a mechanic who, being presented with a car which has an overheating engine, installs a refrigeration system under the hood to cure the symptom rather than checking the coolant level or the thermostat.

Bree · 07-08-2003, 12:10 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by yguy
...rather than try to address the question of how something so patently anomalous could happen to a person, has decided to call the symptom legitimate and rearrange the patient's physiology to acheive a semblance of internal harmony.

Huh?

Say you and your wife decide to have a baby, and the baby comes out with both female and male genitalia (of course, this would never happen to you because anomalies like this exist only in the sinful). Would you be adverse to consenting to a surgery that would help your child "acheive a semblance of internal harmony" or would you make them live out their life as a societally labelled weirdo, even if they desired to change themselves?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-08-2003, 09:54 AM	#3
Enai Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Germany Posts: 1,479	Also, what's about XXY persons or other chromosomal oddities? Or people with XY chromosome set, yet female appereance at birth? I think they're making things too simple. They'd like the world to be neatly divided in "real men" and "real women", plus children of either of the two sexes. They don't see that there's also another dimension. Enai

07-08-2003, 11:16 AM	#6
Rhaedas Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: USA Posts: 3,440	Yes, both try to improve a person's self worth or self image. A sex change is much more involved and time consuming than a face lift, so they aren't equally comparable. I don't see sex changes as vanity though, if that's where you're trying to take it. If you are internally a different sex than externally, why would it be immoral to try and fix that? Leaving the bible and god out of it...

07-08-2003, 11:51 AM	#8
thebeave Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Silicon Valley, CA Posts: 4,183	Maybe the Vatican should tell God to stop putting the soul of a woman into a man's body (or vice versa) at conception. Or if its due to a "mental pathology", maybe God should make his designs a little more robust in the first place, so that they aren't susceptible to these pathologies. Some Creator, eh?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.