Unaddressed issues: The Religious case for Trans acceptance

[Bienenhalde]

I thought that contraception and homosexuality were forbidden because they inhibit reproduction.

Contraception is in the Roman Catholic Church, but it's only in the Roman Catholic Church, most Christians don't share this interpretation.

Homosexuality is forbidden in large part because it is sodomy, not that it inhibits reproduction.

You never defined what you mean by "sodomy", though.

[Soviet Computocracy]

You realize that nobody's asking you to do anything, right?

Last I checked we were discussing whether I should be allowed to have sex.

[Salus Maior]

You realize that nobody's asking you to do anything, right?

Last I checked we were discussing whether I should be allowed to have sex.

If you're within the Eastern Orthodox/Christian religion.

Are you in the Eastern Orthodox/Christian religion?

[Thanatttynia]

It's a sort of interesting sort-of-contradictory quandary.

If you accept the dictates of ancient Jewish patriarchs written exclusively for Jews.

Well, this thread is about a Christian case for trans acceptance, so it would follow that any debate would accept and build from basic Christian teaching.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Contraception is in the Roman Catholic Church, but it's only in the Roman Catholic Church, most Christians don't share this interpretation.

Homosexuality is forbidden in large part because it is sodomy, not that it inhibits reproduction.

You never defined what you mean by "sodomy", though.

Anal intercourse.

[Soviet Computocracy]

If you're within the Eastern Orthodox/Christian religion.

Well we didn’t plainly specificy that did we?

I may know that, but you didn’t plainly say it.

[Salus Maior]

If you're within the Eastern Orthodox/Christian religion.

Well we didn’t plainly specificy that did we?

I may know that, but you didn’t plainly say it.

He's talking about trans acceptance from his own religious worldview, how is that not specific?

Or did you just see "religion" and "trans" and make assumptions from there?

[Liberated Communist States]

As a Norse Pagan, the viewpoint of Trans people is not an issue for me.

[Soviet Computocracy]

Or did you just see "religion" and "trans" and make assumptions from there?

One actually can assume an attempt to dictate to the wider public where some states in the U.S. are concerned.

[Salus Maior]

Or did you just see "religion" and "trans" and make assumptions from there?

One actually can assume an attempt to dictate to the wider public where some states in the U.S. are concerned.

So you admit you didn't even read the OP.

[Soviet Computocracy]

So you admit you didn't even read the OP.

I did, the language of the thread in general nowhere specifically states exclusive applicability to voluntary members of the Byzantine heresy.

[Cetacea]

No, I don't know why you all of the sudden have an obsession with whether people can reproduce. It has no bearing on whether they're allowed to have sex.

I thought that contraception and homosexuality were forbidden because they inhibit reproduction.

Onanism is spilling the seed and refers to either coitus interuptus or masturbation (ie letting the semen fall on the ground rather than into a vagina) as an extension Roman Catholics hold that condoms and other forms of contraception do the same thing

Sodomy (ie anal) is also prohibited in the Old Terstament, but nothing in the bible rules out Homosexuality that does not involve sodomy.

theres also nothing said about Tans

[United Muscovite Nations]

So you admit you didn't even read the OP.

I did, the language of the thread in general nowhere specifically states exclusive applicability to voluntary members of the Byzantine heresy.

That's true, but I'm talking about religious views, not law.

[Soviet Computocracy]

That's true, but I'm talking about religious views, not law.

Your language specifically states allow and disallow.

[United Muscovite Nations]

That's true, but I'm talking about religious views, not law.

Your language specifically states allow and disallow.

For those who wish to receive communion.

[Grenartia]

Pretty much this. You cannot neatly separate continued homophobia and acceptance for trans people. At least not ethically. *stares at Iran*

How are the two necessarily linked?

Well, lets take the example of a trans girl and a cis guy. There is no way they can have sex, even under the blessing of matrimony, that would not arguably qualify as "sodomy".

Likewise, there is no way for a trans girl to have sex with a cis woman under the blessing of matrimony without either refusing to acknowledge the trans girl as a woman, or refusing to allow them to be married because its gay.

Its like electricity and magnetism. Technically different things, but so inextricably linked that whenever one comes up, often times, the other pops up as well.

Pretty much this. You cannot neatly separate continued homophobia and acceptance for trans people. At least not ethically. *stares at Iran*

Do you have any evidence for your assumption that UMN is homophobic?

His own words in this very thread:

I lean towards accepting sexual activity by trans people as long as it isn't sodomy.

I thought that contraception and homosexuality were forbidden because they inhibit reproduction.

Contraception is in the Roman Catholic Church, but it's only in the Roman Catholic Church, most Christians don't share this interpretation.

Homosexuality is forbidden in large part because it is sodomy, not that it inhibits reproduction.

If you go by Ezekiel 16:49, sodomy has nothing to do with sex (except arguably rape), and everything to do with greed, xenophobia, and inhospitality.

You never defined what you mean by "sodomy", though.

Anal intercourse.

It also includes oral actions according to the legal definition.

[Soviet Computocracy]

For those who wish to receive communion.

Now you’re being more specific.

[Salus Maior]

So you admit you didn't even read the OP.

I did, the language of the thread in general nowhere specifically states exclusive applicability to voluntary members of the Byzantine heresy.

Well, you're being unnecessarily bitter to a guy who's trying to be accepting of you.

[United Muscovite Nations]

How are the two necessarily linked?

1) Well, lets take the example of a trans girl and a cis guy. There is no way they can have sex, even under the blessing of matrimony, that would not arguably qualify as "sodomy".

2) Likewise, there is no way for a trans girl to have sex with a cis woman under the blessing of matrimony without either refusing to acknowledge the trans girl as a woman, or refusing to allow them to be married because its gay.

Its like electricity and magnetism. Technically different things, but so inextricably linked that whenever one comes up, often times, the other pops up as well.

Do you have any evidence for your assumption that UMN is homophobic?

His own words in this very thread:

I lean towards accepting sexual activity by trans people as long as it isn't sodomy.

Contraception is in the Roman Catholic Church, but it's only in the Roman Catholic Church, most Christians don't share this interpretation.

Homosexuality is forbidden in large part because it is sodomy, not that it inhibits reproduction.

3) If you go by Ezekiel 16:49, sodomy has nothing to do with sex (except arguably rape), and everything to do with greed, xenophobia, and inhospitality.

Anal intercourse.

4) It also includes oral actions according to the legal definition.

1) Unless you acknowledge the transwoman as a woman.
2) I'm don't think the Orthodox Church should allow lesbian marriage, so I'm fine with that.
3) The word has evolved to mean something else.
4) Yes.

[Kombinita Socialisma Demokratio]

Isn't legalism also technically forbidden?

[United Muscovite Nations]

Isn't legalism also technically forbidden?

Legalism isn't liked because the law exists to serve the people, not the people the law.

[Grenartia]

I did, the language of the thread in general nowhere specifically states exclusive applicability to voluntary members of the Byzantine heresy.

Well, you're being unnecessarily bitter to a guy who's trying to be accepting of you.

He needs to try harder, specifically regarding LGB people in general. We're a package deal.

[Grenartia]

1) Well, lets take the example of a trans girl and a cis guy. There is no way they can have sex, even under the blessing of matrimony, that would not arguably qualify as "sodomy".

2) Likewise, there is no way for a trans girl to have sex with a cis woman under the blessing of matrimony without either refusing to acknowledge the trans girl as a woman, or refusing to allow them to be married because its gay.

Its like electricity and magnetism. Technically different things, but so inextricably linked that whenever one comes up, often times, the other pops up as well.



His own words in this very thread:





3) If you go by Ezekiel 16:49, sodomy has nothing to do with sex (except arguably rape), and everything to do with greed, xenophobia, and inhospitality.



4) It also includes oral actions according to the legal definition.

1) Unless you acknowledge the transwoman as a woman.
2) I'm don't think the Orthodox Church should allow lesbian marriage, so I'm fine with that.
3) The word has evolved to mean something else.
4) Yes.

1. You specifically cited anal as sodomy, and agree that oral counts as sodomy, too. How is a pre-SRS or non-SRS trans woman supposed to consummate her marriage without engaging in sodomy?

2. That's precisely the problem.

3. Its about damn time it revert back, then.

[Soviet Computocracy]

Well, you're being unnecessarily bitter to a guy who's trying to be accepting of you.

I’m not interested in being accepted under the conditions of celibacy and broad referential dictatorship.

[Grenartia]

Well, you're being unnecessarily bitter to a guy who's trying to be accepting of you.

I’m not interested in being accepted under the conditions of celibacy and broad referential dictatorship.

'Conditional' acceptance is non-acceptance.