Unaddressed issues: The Religious case for Trans acceptance

[First American Empire]

So you're saying that, even after having sex reassignment surgery and years of estrogen therapy, it's biblically okay for me to marry and sleep with another woman?

No. That's not what I'm saying. I was using men for an example, it goes the other way too. Like I said though, new covenant, matter of interpretation. Not that I agree.

You literally said that you still consider me a man, even though I have a vagina now. You also said you think it's "against the word of God" for me to sleep with a man. Therefore, you're essentially claiming that me sleeping with a woman is not homosexual, and is permitted by the Bible.

[Medwind]

Scientifically

I strongly recommend that you don't use the s-word to argue against trans people.

theologically speaking

Show me where in the Bible it says that gender is biologically determined and unchangeable.

There is a difference between a doctor helping someone with a practical surgery, over a surgery done for non practical, superficial reasons.

Transitioning is neither "non practical" nor "superficial".

Ok, first off, why shouldn't I say scientifically? You didn't refute a single point. Drop some sources that say men who transition to women are 100% women now, can do everything that women can do, and it's the exact same as if they'd been born as such. I already said that there is nothing as far as I know in the Bible that bans it. You're attacking me with a point I'd already conceded. I did however say that Jesus warned against sins of the flesh, but it was a matter of *interpretation* as to whether homosexuality/transsexuality is included. The argument that it is, is, rooted in specific language in the old testament, the argument that it isn't, is in the fact that it was never explicitly banned by Jesus. Your last statement might be true but can you explain *why* it is practical?

[Hanafuridake]

Homosexuality is clearly against the word of God, with many lines in the Bible denouncing it. Although transsexuality isn't explicitly mentioned as far as I know, homosexuality & trans can be lumped together when you consider the fact that if you are born a man or woman, that's what you are, regardless of how you feel about it. So a man who gets a sex change is still considered a man by Christian belief's / the Bible. Therefore a sex-changed man sleeping with another man is still considered homosexuality.

So you're saying that, even after having sex reassignment surgery and years of estrogen therapy, it's biblically okay for me to marry and sleep with another woman?

When Christian insistence on transphobia means they have to accept gay marriage.

[United Muscovite Nations]

No. That's not what I'm saying. I was using men for an example, it goes the other way too. Like I said though, new covenant, matter of interpretation. Not that I agree.

You literally said that you still consider me a man, even though I have a vagina now. You also said you think it's "against the word of God" for me to sleep with a man. Therefore, you're essentially claiming that me sleeping with a woman is not homosexual, and is permitted by the Bible.

Hence why we have to go with the Spirit of the Law rather than the letter.

[Medwind]

No. That's not what I'm saying. I was using men for an example, it goes the other way too. Like I said though, new covenant, matter of interpretation. Not that I agree.

You literally said that you still consider me a man, even though I have a vagina now. You also said you think it's "against the word of God" for me to sleep with a man. Therefore, you're essentially claiming that me sleeping with a woman is not homosexual, and is permitted by the Bible.

In one view it is immoral as it falls under sexual deviancy, as it requires genital mutilation and unnatural sexual acts to preform. On the other hand *new covenant* *Jesus doesn't explicitly mention it* *matter of ***interpretation***


I'm tired of addressing the same things, I gtg soon anyway, however let me try to clarify. I'm not trying to hate on trans people. The OP posed the question of whether its right or wrong biblically speaking. I clearly gave my own answer, which is that it *comes down to interpretation* Basically, just because it's not directly mentioned, doesn't mean that it isn't a sin. There are many tie ins, such as where Jesus explains that sexual deviancy is a sin, and, if you looked back at the old testament, homosexuality is one such sin. However, once again it's a matter of interpretation as to whether Jesus was including LGBT people in his statements. So what I'm trying to say is that it is up to YOU, in your own relationship, and understanding of God, to decide whether you believe that it is a sin or not. Many doctrines say yes, some say no. In the end I don't think you will be sent to the pit for that alone if your wrong. So long as you have faith, did the best you could to be a good person, trusted in Jesus, etc. you should, in my view be forgiven, even if it is a sin, and, if it's not, even better for you.


Edit: however, in my own personal view, it is a sin. It is unnatural, and an abuse of the body God gave you. That's my opinion on the matter, I can only understand God's will so much, so I might be wrong, but it's what I believe from my teachings, the Bible etc.

[Liriena]

I strongly recommend that you don't use the s-word to argue against trans people.


Show me where in the Bible it says that gender is biologically determined and unchangeable.


Transitioning is neither "non practical" nor "superficial".

Ok, first off, why shouldn't I say scientifically?

Because you are wrongly citing "science" as a reason for your transphobia. "Science", insofar as scientific and medical organizations, don't agree with your perspective.

https://genderanalysis.net/factsheets/p ... ical-care/
https://www.ama-assn.org/delivering-car ... ing-policy
https://www.apa.org/about/policy/transgender
https://www.apa.org/topics/lgbt/transgender

I did however say that Jesus warned against sins of the flesh, but it was a matter of *interpretation* as to whether homosexuality/transsexuality is included.

How would living as a woman after being assigned male at birth be a "sin of the flesh"?

Your last statement might be true but can you explain *why* it is practical?

Transitioning tends to significantly improve the quality of life of trans people.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs ... 09.03625.x
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22145968
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/c ... .2013-2958
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23943260

There definitely is a practical benefit to it.

[Medwind]

Ok, first off, why shouldn't I say scientifically?

Because you are wrongly citing "science" as a reason for your transphobia. "Science", insofar as scientific and medical organizations, don't agree with your perspective.

https://genderanalysis.net/factsheets/p ... ical-care/
https://www.ama-assn.org/delivering-car ... ing-policy
https://www.apa.org/about/policy/transgender
https://www.apa.org/topics/lgbt/transgender

I did however say that Jesus warned against sins of the flesh, but it was a matter of *interpretation* as to whether homosexuality/transsexuality is included.

How would living as a woman after being assigned male at birth be a "sin of the flesh"?

Your last statement might be true but can you explain *why* it is practical?

Transitioning tends to significantly improve the quality of life of trans people.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs ... 09.03625.x
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22145968
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/c ... .2013-2958
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23943260

There definitely is a practical benefit to it.

Your sources don't pertain to the question I asked.

[Estonland]

Or how about we just don't involve religion in this?

[Medwind]

Or how about we just don't involve religion in this?

The title of the topic is "The ***Religious*** case for trans acceptance" This isn't a thread for or against Trans, it's about whether or not the Bible prohibits or allows it.

Edit: Therefore the subject is explicitly about religion, how do you take religion out of a religious discussion?

[United Muscovite Nations]

Or how about we just don't involve religion in this?

The title of the topic is "The ***Religious*** case for trans acceptance" This isn't a thread for or against Trans, it's about whether or not the Bible prohibits or allows it.

^This, I'm asking the question more for trans people who are religious.

[First American Empire]

In one view it is immoral as it falls under sexual deviancy, as it requires genital mutilation and unnatural sexual acts to preform.

Where in the Bible is sex reassignment surgery prohibited? (This is not a rhetorical question.)

[United Muscovite Nations]

In one view it is immoral as it falls under sexual deviancy, as it requires genital mutilation and unnatural sexual acts to preform.

Where in the Bible is sex reassignment surgery prohibited? (This is not a rhetorical question.)

Arguably in Deuteronomy, but Christians don't have to follow those laws. Now, there very definitely is a ban in early canons about eunuchs serving as clergy, but there's no ban on eunuchs in-general.

[Liriena]

Because you are wrongly citing "science" as a reason for your transphobia. "Science", insofar as scientific and medical organizations, don't agree with your perspective.

https://genderanalysis.net/factsheets/p ... ical-care/
https://www.ama-assn.org/delivering-car ... ing-policy
https://www.apa.org/about/policy/transgender
https://www.apa.org/topics/lgbt/transgender


How would living as a woman after being assigned male at birth be a "sin of the flesh"?


Transitioning tends to significantly improve the quality of life of trans people.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs ... 09.03625.x
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22145968
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/c ... .2013-2958
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23943260

There definitely is a practical benefit to it.

Your sources don't pertain to the question I asked.

The first couple sources provide some basic information on trans people and, in the APA's case in particular, the minutiae related to gender, gender identity, etc. You argue that "scientifically" trans people cannot be the gender they identify as. Professional organizations not only disagree with that notion, but also oppose attempts to discriminate trans people on the basis of that notion.

My second bunch of sources shows the practical benefits of transitioning for trans people.

[Medwind]

The title of the topic is "The ***Religious*** case for trans acceptance" This isn't a thread for or against Trans, it's about whether or not the Bible prohibits or allows it.

^This, I'm asking the question more for trans people who are religious.

Yes, that is interesting, I'm interested in how they reconcile the two. However, I think that atheism has a much greater following among the LGBTQ community, so I don't know if you'll find too many Christian trans people here. Also there are many people who claim to be Christian but don't know enough about the faith to make convincing arguments based off of the Bible itself. So it might be tough going. I've got to log off but I'll be back to see how this topic went, and to hear new ideas from the more liberal Christians. I actually want to be proven wrong, it doesn't benefit me for more people to be committing sin, and, possibly more people being taken from God, or sent to the pit. If someone can provide a good *Biblically* based argument that it is ok, besides the fact that it's not explicitly mentioned, I'd love to hear it. I don't think it's likely though.

[Liriena]

In one view it is immoral as it falls under sexual deviancy, as it requires genital mutilation

TIL all Jewish people and all circumcised Christians are "sexual deviants".

[El-Amin Caliphate]

Is this thread just about transsexuality and Chrisitanity, of transsexuality and any religion?

[United Muscovite Nations]

Is this thread just about transsexuality and Chrisitanity, of transsexuality and any religion?

It can be of any religion, but I figure most religious people here will be Christians.

[El-Amin Caliphate]

Is this thread just about transsexuality and Chrisitanity, of transsexuality and any religion?

It can be of any religion, but I figure most religious people here will be Christians.

Ok.

Well Islamically speaking transsexuality is Haraam, which can evidenced here:
https://legacy.quran.com/30/30 (this ayah isn't about transsexuality but it can be extended to it, considering it says "No change should there be in the creation of Allah")
https://sunnah.com/urn/630070
So no, Muslims should not be needlessly changing their bodies. May Allah SWT help them and their families, aameen.

[Medwind]

Your sources don't pertain to the question I asked.

The first couple sources provide some basic information on trans people and, in the APA's case in particular, the minutiae related to gender, gender identity, etc. You argue that "scientifically" trans people cannot be the gender they identify as. Professional organizations not only disagree with that notion, but also oppose attempts to discriminate trans people on the basis of that notion.

My second bunch of sources shows the practical benefits of transitioning for trans people.

Look the simple truth is that if a man transitions to a woman, he will still have a different bone structure, genetic differences, different vocal cords, different brain structure, different natural body weight ratio, unable to naturally menstruate, unable to give birth, unable to reproduce at all as far as I know, produce different hormones, and, chemicals, and so on, he might be considered by society to be a woman, but biologically he is not.


Edit: Also, your sources didn't cover what I asked. It's basically scientific pro trans information, but it doesn't cover the question posed.

[Liriena]

The first couple sources provide some basic information on trans people and, in the APA's case in particular, the minutiae related to gender, gender identity, etc. You argue that "scientifically" trans people cannot be the gender they identify as. Professional organizations not only disagree with that notion, but also oppose attempts to discriminate trans people on the basis of that notion.

My second bunch of sources shows the practical benefits of transitioning for trans people.

Look the simple truth is that if a man transitions to a woman, he will still have a different bone structure, genetic differences, different vocal cords, different brain structure, different natural body weight ratio, unable to naturally menstruate, unable to give birth, unable to reproduce at all as far as I know, produce different hormones, and, chemicals, and so on, he might be considered by society to be a woman, but biologically he is not.

Well, good thing that we're talking about gender, the social construct, and not sex, the biological category.

Also, kinda weird to try to make a religious argument based on "biology". Is the body more important than the soul when it comes to determining people's identity in the eyes of God? God, a supernatural entity, is more concerned with some sort of "purity" of the body than with upholding what is true of the soul within the body?

[Medwind]

Look the simple truth is that if a man transitions to a woman, he will still have a different bone structure, genetic differences, different vocal cords, different brain structure, different natural body weight ratio, unable to naturally menstruate, unable to give birth, unable to reproduce at all as far as I know, produce different hormones, and, chemicals, and so on, he might be considered by society to be a woman, but biologically he is not.

Well, good thing that we're talking about gender, the social construct, and not sex, the biological category.

Also, kinda weird to try to make a religious argument based on "biology". Is the body more important than the soul when it comes to determining people's identity in the eyes of God? God, a supernatural entity, is more concerned with some sort of "purity" of the body than with upholding what is true of the soul within the body?

Where did I mention gender? I said that a male who transitions into a female is still male. Thats why I'm scientifically correct, your the one making this about social constructs. Yeah, I'm religious so I can't use science in an argument, is that the sterotype?

1 Corinthians 6:19-20 19Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own; 20you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your bodies.


Edit: where did I say that your body is more important than your soul? You're making jabs where there is no substance.

[Western Vale Confederacy]

Look the simple truth is that if a man transitions to a woman, he will still have a different bone structure, genetic differences, different vocal cords, different brain structure, different natural body weight ratio, unable to naturally menstruate, unable to give birth, unable to reproduce at all as far as I know, produce different hormones, and, chemicals, and so on, he might be considered by society to be a woman, but biologically he is not.

Well, good thing that we're talking about gender, the social construct, and not sex, the biological category.

Also, kinda weird to try to make a religious argument based on "biology". Is the body more important than the soul when it comes to determining people's identity in the eyes of God? God, a supernatural entity, is more concerned with some sort of "purity" of the body than with upholding what is true of the soul within the body?

The pursuit of happiness...

[Liriena]

Well, good thing that we're talking about gender, the social construct, and not sex, the biological category.

Also, kinda weird to try to make a religious argument based on "biology". Is the body more important than the soul when it comes to determining people's identity in the eyes of God? God, a supernatural entity, is more concerned with some sort of "purity" of the body than with upholding what is true of the soul within the body?

Where did I mention gender? I said that a male who transitions into a female is still male. Thats why I'm scientifically correct, your the one making this about social constructs.

You talked about a "man" who transitions to a "woman". So not only are you scientifically incorrect, you are also misrepresenting your own arguments.

A trans woman is a woman, period. She lives as a woman, she looks like a woman, she does everything humanly possible to be a woman, and there is no moment in which she stops living like a woman. And the same goes for a trans man. You can grasp straws and talk about menstruation, birth, genes, etc., but the person standing before you is still very much real and is still very much living as the person they say they are. There's no deception, delusion or fakery involved.

Yeah, I'm religious so I can't use science in an argument, is that the sterotype?

More like "citing menstruation, birth, bone structure and genetics to talk about whether a supernatural being hates trans people is a weird application of the natural to justify the supernatural". Like citing global warming to argue that Hell is real.

1 Corinthians 6:19-20 19Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own; 20you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your bodies.

And how does living as a woman after being assigned male at birth go against that?

[Medwind]

Where did I mention gender? I said that a male who transitions into a female is still male. Thats why I'm scientifically correct, your the one making this about social constructs.

You talked about a "man" who transitions to a "woman". So not only are you scientifically incorrect, you are also misrepresenting your own arguments.

A trans woman is a woman, period. She lives as a woman, she looks like a woman, she does everything humanly possible to be a woman, and there is no moment in which she stops living like a woman. And the same goes for a trans man. You can grasp straws and talk about menstruation, birth, genes, etc., but the person standing before you is still very much real and is still very much living as the person they say they are. There's no deception, delusion or fakery involved.

Yeah, I'm religious so I can't use science in an argument, is that the sterotype?

More like "citing menstruation, birth, bone structure and genetics to talk about whether a supernatural being hates trans people is a weird application of the natural to justify the supernatural". Like citing global warming to argue that Hell is real.

1 Corinthians 6:19-20 19Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own; 20you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your bodies.

And how does living as a woman after being assigned male at birth go against that?

Lmao, I didn't use it as a reason as to why God hates transsexuals, you are completely misrepresenting what I've said here, purposefully imo. As to your top post, semantics, my point was that if you are male at birth you will always be male. I even stated that society might view you as a woman, (IE: social constructs on gender) but your sex is male, and you are a male. I'm not grasping at any straws here, it's a scientific fact. As to your final question, idk, it depends on what you mean on being assigned male, if you were born as an intersex person, I guess that's on you to do you, if you mean that you were born male but decided against it, well, again, that's on you, but you asked why the body matters at all, it's all about the soul, and anything you want to do to your body is fine, is what you were saying, which is simply not true. There are many Bible verses explaining such, and in more detail.

[Cataluna]

The interesting thing about this is that the bible can be used to justify just about any atrocious viewpoint, just as long as you take it out of context. Why do you think Jehovah's witnesses prevent their children from receiving life-saving transfusions? It's a misinterpretation of biblical standards misapplied to the modern day. Historically, blood-eating was associated with ritual pagan sacrifice. Therefore, I don't think it's wrong anymore to not do it.

The case isn't as clear-cut for trans issues either. Sure, God made us "man and woman", but what if that's more of a spectrum? He also created "day and night", but that implies he created twilight and dawn. I don't go out and say, "checkmate God!" because a sunset is outside my window. Somehow, it seems more appropriate to smile and bask in the beauty of creation the Lord has made. A similar issue could be applied to gender.

I doubt this would be much of an issue in late antiquity, but that's another point entirely. Instead, I'll attempt to tell you about my lived experience as a trans Christian. Every day since the day I've discovered I was trans, I've told God that he can just take this away from me whenever he likes, but either he doesn't answer those kinds of prayers, or he's not going to take it away. In other words, it can't be prayed away.

Furthermore, by the typical conservative's definition of sinful homosexuality, and to assume that my body is in fact male and always will be, any sexual interaction I have would be sinful. God creates the mind and the body, and therefore, both belong to him. However, if I should lie with a woman, I commit the sin of homosexuality with my mind, and if I should lie with a man, I commit that sin with my body (supposedly).

Is God so cruel that he would make it so I could never have any sexual interactions? What a wicked God, then, because sexuality is something that most people enjoy, and most Christians see as a sacred moment of bonding between two people deeply in love with the Lord. Am I robbed of this joy? Or is it only my body which sets me apart? Is it a matter of "I can change my mind"?

In that case, isn't it so that God looks at the heart, and not the appearance? Let's ignore, for a minute, the false separation of the body and the mind present in the theology of most Christians, and talk about what my heart has been telling me, to my ignorance for most of my life. My heart says, "I am a woman." You see, that sentence has been the source of torment in my life for years, and now that I realize it, the manner in which it torments me has changed. Rather than a neglected hunger, it is now a throbbing pain, a longing for a body which I do not have. I cannot change my mind without some divine intervention, and the Lord has denied me that.

Either, then, God is cruel and I should not wish to serve him, or he has created me for a specific purpose as a trans woman without any ability to change the fact that I am a woman.

To my siblings in Christ: I know what it is to not be sure if what trans people say is true, but as someone who has discovered I am trans, I know what they say to be true. Gender dysphoria is not a disease, but a longing. It is a mourning that never ceases, a scar that never stops aching. I am not diseased, and if I am, then it is God's cruelty that has made me so in such a way that it has such a drastic impact on my life without any ability to change it. For if I am diseased, as I have mentioned, I am much worse off under God's rule than I would be under the rule of the world. That is not the case. I know the blessings that Christ brings, and I refuse to believe he would be so cruel as to have created me before the world came into being without considering all his.