Are transgender/transsexual people accepted in your religion?

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

And not only that, there are far worse methods of torture/execution than what Christ went through.

It's always convenient that the resurrection stories typically don't involve immolation or beheading or something. It's almost always something that could, on the fringe of medical possibility, happen. If Jesus had come back post being drawn and quartered, THEN I'd be impressed.

I actually did attempt once.

When I was a kid, most of the cassette tapes in my dresser were secret suicide messages.

Basic biology confirms that there are only the two sexes, male and female, and that these sexes have specific physical primary and secondary sexual characteristics.

Nope. Basic biology, after we stopped ignoring the obvious (even ancient myths outside the bible knew of gays and trans and intersexed people ... funny how God doesn't seem to know about it), now has to admit the truth, that it is a spectrum.

Males have XY chromosomes and will forever have XY chromosomes.

There are plenty of women out there with XY chromosomes, though.

Anyways, both God and science have made it very easy to identify a man or a woman. Men have both an Y and X chromosome and women have two X chromosomes.

From here
Humans, as well as some other organisms, can have a chromosomal arrangement that is contrary to their phenotypic sex; for example, XX males or XY females (see androgen insensitivity syndrome). Additionally, an abnormal number of sex chromosomes (aneuploidy) may be present, such as Turner's syndrome, in which a single X chromosome is present, and Klinefelter's syndrome, in which two X chromosomes and a Y chromosome are present, XYY syndrome and XXYY syndrome.[4] Other less common chromosomal arrangements include: triple X syndrome, 48, XXXX, and 49, XXXXX.

 

[Liu]

It's always convenient that the resurrection stories typically don't involve immolation or beheading or something. It's almost always something that could, on the fringe of medical possibility, happen. If Jesus had come back post being drawn and quartered, THEN I'd be impressed.

Seems like you're not the first to think so, later centuries needed some more impressive stories. But not about Jesus, but about saints, because that's what happened to St. George, according to a 9th century poem: He was struck with a sword and then came back from the dead, he was killed with a breaking wheel which separated him into ten parts and then came back from the dead, he was grinded and burnt into dust, and then came back from the dead. And he even healed the blind and deaf etc. and defeated a hellhound. Makes you wonder why he isn't venerated more than Jesus.

 

[Rival]

I voted other because I am non-religious; as for the explanation, since atheism is not a formal belief system, but rather merely refers to one's lack of belief in god(s), there is no reason for me as an atheist to believe there is anything wrong with trans people.

Just putting this out there, not seeking a debate, but atheists can be against transsexualism and other such things. It's not all based around religious beliefs. Socially conservative atheists are rare but they exist. I used to be one.

 

[Sanzbir]

It's all the same to Her and She is the merging and destruction of all qualities and dualities, anyway. She is male, female, both and neither.

Then why call her a "she"? Seems silly that the merging of femininity and masculinity would have a pronoun preference.

For a man to be a Shakta, he must embrace his own feminine aspect in the first place.

I'm afraid I don't understand, can you elaborate?? Your Goddess accepts all gender identities and is in fact the unity of masculinity and femininity, but demands femininity specifically of her servants?? Why/how is that consistent??

I'm also a Satanist and view Satan as either feminine or androgynous.

Well traditionally Satan is androgynous, but then again I get the feeling I shouldn't expect anything but heterodoxy out of a self-described Catholic Shakta Satanist.

 

[Politesse]

Well? Why or why not?

They are in mine. My Goddess doesn't give a damn if you're LGBT or not. It's all the same to Her and She is the merging and destruction of all qualities and dualities, anyway. She is male, female, both and neither. For a man to be a Shakta, he must embrace his own feminine aspect in the first place, making male Shaktas somewhat gender variant in a fashion to begin with. (Which is fascinating and brings up interesting questions for me as a female to male transsexual.)

I'm also a Satanist and view Satan as either feminine or androgynous.

My childhood church had to take a position on this long before it had become a truly popular issue with progressives and the like; they had little to gain, and much to lose when our choir leader chose to transition, and was at a certain point obliged to become public about her decision. But our pastor though conservative in his habits was a good man, and couldn't stand the thought of shepherding a church that tried to keep people out instead of in, and he pressured the council to stand by our friend. It did cause a ruckus; some 50 or so of about 300 members quit the church in disgust, some when she started attending in female clothes, then the other half later, when the church added "open and affirming" to its website description. When the local paper caught wind of the situation, another local church protested us with megaphones and signs for several weeks, and someone threw a brick through a window (WWJD?). But things died down eventually, and our choir leader is still the choir leader.

So I suppose you could say the situation with my birth religion is a bit complicated.

The Pagan group I also attend rituals with is much more openly and unconcernedly welcoming to trans people, though it is also true that Wiccan language surrounding gender can be very dichotomous, and many of the rituals involve sexual metaphors that might not make gay or trans people entirely comfortable; I would say that Pagan worship is more explicitly"gendered" than Christian rituals are, with a lot of talk of the sacred masculine and feminine and congress between the two. But I think if anyone felt uncomfortable, and said as much, our group would tumble over itself to make them feel like there was a place for them; it just hasn't really come up.

 

[The Holy Bottom Burp]

Just putting this out there, not seeking a debate, but atheists can be against transsexualism and other such things. It's not all based around religious beliefs. Socially conservative atheists are rare but they exist. I used to be one.

Just to make it clear, I'm not seeking a debate, but I'm curious why you would oppose transgender/trans-sex people or "other such things" (gay people?) as an atheist. Makes no sense gal.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Then why call her a "she"? Seems silly that the merging of femininity and masculinity would have a pronoun preference.



I'm afraid I don't understand, can you elaborate?? Your Goddess accepts all gender identities and is in fact the unity of masculinity and femininity, but demands femininity specifically of her servants?? Why/how is that consistent??



Well traditionally Satan is androgynous, but then again I get the feeling I shouldn't expect anything but heterodoxy out of a self-described Catholic Shakta Satanist.

Okay, you got me. My beliefs there don't make much sense. I was trying to explore Shakta Hinduism and probably misunderstood it. I tend to hit a wall with Hinduism and Paganism because they are so "foreign" to me and I don't have many resources to go on. So please don't take my words as authoritative on that subject.

It was probably more that I wanted a female Supreme Being. I was feeling uncomfortable with male imagery for deities so I was trying to move away from that. So I was going towards goddess worship. That's really what it was coming down to - wanting to see God as Mother.

I no longer identify as a Shakta or Satanist. I've gone back to Christianity. Your last sentence made me lol, so thanks. Haha. Describes my muddled mind quite well.

 

[Mister Silver]

Just to make it clear, I'm not seeking a debate, but I'm curious why you would oppose transgender/trans-sex people or "other such things" (gay people?) as an atheist. Makes no sense gal.

I was actually going to post something to the effect that he did, that just because I'm an atheist who accepts trans people does not mean that all atheists would be just like me. After all, the only thing all atheists have in common is the lack of belief in god(s).

 

[Politesse]

Just to make it clear, I'm not seeking a debate, but I'm curious why you would oppose transgender/trans-sex people or "other such things" (gay people?) as an atheist. Makes no sense gal.

My roommate falls into this category; apparently shaky biological determinism can be just as seductive to materialists as dogma can be to immaterialists.

 

[The Holy Bottom Burp]

I was actually going to post something to the effect that he did, that just because I'm an atheist who accepts trans people does not mean that all atheists would be just like me. After all, the only thing all atheists have in common is the lack of belief in god(s).

Rival is a woman mate, and I agree with your definition about atheism, but I'm still curious about the reasons why an atheist would object to LGBT. I don't object to heterosexuals for example, it wouldn't make much sense.

 

[Erebus]

My childhood church had to take a position on this long before it had become a truly popular issue with progressives and the like; they had little to gain, and much to lose when our choir leader chose to transition, and was at a certain point obliged to become public about her decision. But our pastor though conservative in his habits was a good man, and couldn't stand the thought of shepherding a church that tried to keep people out instead of in, and he pressured the council to stand by our friend. It did cause a ruckus; some 50 or so of about 300 members quit the church in disgust, some when she started attending in female clothes, then the other half later, when the church added "open and affirming" to its website description. When the local paper caught wind of the situation, another local church protested us with megaphones and signs for several weeks, and someone threw a brick through a window. But things died down eventually, and our choir leader is still the choir leader.

So I suppose you could say the situation with my birth religion is a bit complicated.

The Pagan group I also attend rituals with is much more openly and unconcernedly welcoming to trans people, though it is also true that Wiccan language surrounding gender can be very dichotomous, and many of the rituals involve sexual metaphors that might not make gay or trans people entirely comfortable; I would say that Pagan worship is more explicitly"gendered" than Christian rituals are, with a lot of talk of the sacred masculine and feminine and congress between the two. But I think if anyone felt uncomfortable, and said as much, our group would tumble over itself to make them feel like there was a place for them; it just hasn't really come up.

The world needs more people like that pastor

On the topic of male/female archetypes within Paganism, I personally don't view it as quite the same as sex and gender within our species. I'm biologically a man and identify as male too, but I still have some attributes of the female archetype within my personality. Everybody does to some extent regardless of their genitalia or which (if any) gender they identify as. It's similar to the personality traits that sometimes get attributed to elements and so on.

Now, the caveats to this are that Paganism isn't a single, unified whole. My take on it doesn't imply that's the take on it. I personally don't strongly feel that the male/female archetypes must be male/female. If somebody was more comfortable with sun/moon, night/day, blue/orange, then that would be absolutely fine by me. That may not be the case for other Pagans.

 

[Mister Silver]

Rival is a woman mate, and I agree with your definition about atheism, but I'm still curious about the reasons why an atheist would object to LGBT. I don't object to heterosexuals for example, it wouldn't make much sense.

I suppose it would not make much sense to the typical atheist, but societal life is so diverse that typical should never be considered the norm.

 

[The Holy Bottom Burp]

My roommate falls into this category; apparently shaky biological determinism can be just as seductive to materialists as dogma can be to immaterialists.

Yeah, you are making a lot of assumptions about me there, I think theists get irritated by atheists telling them what they believe, just saying mate. I wasn't looking for a fight, I was just curious about Rival's stance.

 

[Rival]

Politesse pretty nailed it with biological determinism and such. For me it's still a case of biology before mentality. Still, I want to leave it there because a) I'm not an atheist anymore and b) it's a completely fruitless debate or whatever and I'm about to go eat dinner

 

[Erebus]

Rival is a woman mate, and I agree with your definition about atheism, but I'm still curious about the reasons why an atheist would object to LGBT. I don't object to heterosexuals for example, it wouldn't make much sense.

I can't speak for Rival but a couple of reasons I've personally encountered for atheist being Anti LGBT is that they view it as either: A) A mental disorder to be treated rather than accepted. B) Attention seeking and not actually real.

Just to clarify, I strongly disagree with both! Those are just some perspectives I've seen on it that don't come down to religion or theism.

 

[The Holy Bottom Burp]

I suppose it would not make much sense to the typical atheist, but societal life is so diverse that typical should never be considered the norm.

You misunderstand me, I don't consider anything to be "the norm", and what is a "typical atheist" dude? You are contradicting yourself. I was just curious about Rival's positon, only interested in her reason for opposing LGBT.

 

[DavidFirth]

Seems like you're not the first to think so, later centuries needed some more impressive stories. But not about Jesus, but about saints, because that's what happened to St. George, according to a 9th century poem: He was struck with a sword and then came back from the dead, he was killed with a breaking wheel which separated him into ten parts and then came back from the dead, he was grinded and burnt into dust, and then came back from the dead. And he even healed the blind and deaf etc. and defeated a hellhound. Makes you wonder why he isn't venerated more than Jesus.

It doesn't make me wonder.

 

[The Holy Bottom Burp]

I can't speak for Rival but a couple of reasons I've personally encountered for atheist being Anti LGBT is that they view it as either: A) A mental disorder to be treated rather than accepted. B) Attention seeking and not actually real.

Just to clarify, I strongly disagree with both! Those are just some perspectives I've seen on it that down come down to religion or theism.

Thanks for that, at least you tried to answer the question unlike @Rival who apparently would rather eat dinner than answer. Still makes no sense though, I don't oppose people with a "mental disorder" or "attention seekers". I may want the former to receive treatment and care as appropriate, I may think the latter are self centred, but I wouldn't "oppose" them on principle. It seems similar to racism, there are no intellectually justifiable reasons to hold such a view unless you are religious.

 

[Rival]

Thanks for that, at least you tried to answer the question unlike @Rival who apparently would rather eat dinner than answer. Still makes no sense though, I don't oppose people with a "mental disorder" or "attention seekers". I may want the former to receive treatment and care as appropriate, I may think the latter are self centred, but I wouldn't "oppose" them on principle. It seems similar to racism, there are no intellectually justifiable reasons to hold such a view unless you are religious.

I did answer. I said biological determinism. It's biology over mentality. To the biological determinist, if your chromosomes are xx you are a female. End of story.

 

[The Holy Bottom Burp]

I did answer. I said biological determinism. It's biology over mentality.

Well sex between a man and a woman is more about biology then "mentality" correct? Men and women don't "decide" to have sex because procreation keeps the population buoyant, and is therefore intellectually justified do they? They do it because it feels good, and the biological urge is very strong (say it quietly but the same applies to religious people as well!). You are not opposed to heterosexual sex right? Or are you worried that we might not produce enough babies if too many people are gay? Under-population of the world is definitely not a problem at the moment. Bring on the gays and the asexuals I say!