For Christians and Muslims that Oppose Homosexuality:

[Pegg]

Which type of sexual behavior is condemned from an individual that has XXY chromosomes and appears to be a physical combination of male and female traits?

what does their body appear as, female or male?

 

[Penumbra]

Here's a template to help some people out.

Defining homosexual sex roughly as 'sex between people of the same sex', and then condemning that type of sex, but then not being able to conclusively determine what sex a person is, makes that whole proposition kind of awkward.

So here's a question. What is the primary factor that should determine what sex a person is so that they can know which type of people they should avoid sex with to make sure they don't have any homosexual sex?


1) Chromosomes?
More than 99% of the time, females have XX chromosomes and males have XY chromosomes. Chromosomes start out as the most fundamental determinant of a person's sex. Sometimes, people have just an X chromosome, or XXY chromosomes, or XXX chromosomes, or XYY chromosomes, or XXXY chromosomes. Probably some other combinations, too.

Should a person's chromosomes be the primary variable to determine what sex a person is? If so, how should we group it?


2) Genitalia?
Usually, males have testes and a penis and women have a vagina and a uterus. Sometimes, though, it's kind of a mix. Since the male and female genitalia develop from the same basic structure, it can result in a mix. There can be structures that appear to be in-between male and female, to the point where a person with a medical degree isn't sure whether it's a male or a female. It's ambiguous.

It's also possible that it can look one way on the outside and the other way on the inside, like a person with an external vagina and internal testes.
Should a person's genitalia be the primary variable to determine what sex a person is? If so, what should we do if it's ambiguous or conflicted?


3) Secondary Sex Characteristics?
In practice, we usually identify people as male or female by their appearance. Women usually have smaller builds, smaller hands and feet, less body hair, softer skin, less muscle mass, fat distribution that influences facial structure and the 'hourglass' shape, and breasts. Men usually have larger builds, larger hands and feet, more body hair, rougher skin, more muscle mass, more bone growth that forms things like a bigger brow ridge and a larger jaw, facial hair, and thicker vocal chords.

For the most part, these secondary characteristics are caused by estrogen and testosterone, and related sex hormones. Some people can have a mix of these characteristics. Or they can have characteristics that completely differ from their genitalia or chromosomal sex.

Should a person's secondary sex characteristics be the primary variable to determine what sex a person is? If so, what should we do if it's ambiguous or a combination?


4) Gender Identity?
Most people view themselves as being female or male. Some people view themselves as neither, both, or a third gender. It was once thought that gender identity was formed only from recognition of genitalia and cultural influences, but through numerous disastrous medical outcomes, this was eventually shown to not be true. Now, evidence indicates that gender identity has a biological basis in the brain, determined by hormonal effects when the person was still in the womb, and decades of research show this to be pretty much unchangeable once it's established. It can result in severe depression if the person's gender identity does not match their appearance or gender role.

For example, people with XY chromosomes and androgen insensitivity syndrome that appear in all ways to be female usually have a female gender identity, because the hormonal effects on her brain the womb were naturally female (because she's immune to the male ones). A person with XXY chromosomes could potentially have either a male or female gender identity, or somewhere in between.

Some people are not classified as inter-sexed and it's biologically clear which sex their body is. But the hormonal affects on the brain during fetal development or some other biological event results in them having a gender identity that differs from their body. So it's a person that has a female gender identity and a male body, or a male gender identity and a female body.

Should a person's gender identity be the primary variable in determining what sex a person is?


5) Something Else?
Should something other than one of those four things be the primary variable to identify a person as female or male?



For those that believe that sexual actions between people of the same sex are sinful, it's probably best to make sure it's clear which sex a person is, right?

 

[Penumbra]

I think you might be trying to make the wrong link between intersexuality and homosexuality. I don't think Penumbra was suggesting that intersex people are necessarily homosexual.

My take on it - and Penumbra, feel free to correct me - is that if you put forward the idea that all people should be subject to a particular standard (e.g. opposite-sex relationships only and no same-sex relationships), then at a basic level, this implies that the standard actually applies to all people. In this context, these prohibitions on homosexual relationships imply that all people have one - and only one - defined sex. It implies that all people are either entirely male or entirely female. The existence of intersex people calls this assumption into question.

^Accurate.

 

[Pegg]

For those that believe that sexual actions between people of the same sex are sinful, it's probably best to make sure it's clear which sex a person is, right?

how do you define a man with no testicles? Is he a female or male?

what about a woman who has had her uterus removed? Should she now have to decide if she is really a woman??? No womb means no babies, so perhaps she's now a man???

What about a woman with a womb but no ovaries? Is she a man?


You can bring up all sorts of scenarios, but the fact is that all the above will still be what they were born as. Women naturally go through menopause...they begin to produce more male hormones...does this make them men now? Of course not.

Have you seen women with hair on their faces and arms? Yes, i have. Does that mean they must really be men because they are producing more male hormone then female hormones? No.

 

[Penumbra]

not in the case where a person chooses to be homosexual, no. The scriptures are clear that when a man has sex with a man, or woman with women, it is going against Gods law.

To my knowledge the only piece of Christian literature that says anything about women having sex with women is Romans 1; one of Paul's letters. Are you saying that Paul's words are the words of your deity?

It will depend on a persons body type. I said earlier that if the body has developed to be a women (even if she doesnt feel she is a women) then she should pair with a man and vice versa.

That is the only way to live in harmony with the scriptural laws regarding sexual behavior.

Which should be the primary physical attribute that determines whether a person is a male or a female?

celibacy.

But most people have a very strong deep need for intimacy and affection, to express and receive love. For what reason should this be given up?

but is it irrelevant to God? I dont think so.

Why would it be relevant to god?

And is it irrelevant to an inter-sexed person who wants to maintain a good relationship with God? No, i dont think it is. Everybody who seeks to maintain a relationship with God must make some sacrifices in one way or another....i've seen homosexuals making such sacrifices and living full happy lives without sex. Sex is not what makes us who we are...its a very small part of us.

Falling in love, raising a family- these tend to be some of the things that make people happiest in life.

what does their body appear as, female or male?

A combination of both.

 

[Pegg]

To my knowledge the only piece of Christian literature that says anything about women having sex with women is Romans 1; one of Paul's letters. Are you saying that Paul's words are the words of your deity?

Yes.
God created a man and woman to be pairs. That is his standard and always will be.

Which should be the primar

their body.

But most people have a very strong deep need for intimacy and affection, to express and receive love. For what reason should this be given up?

it depends on what is important to you. If you value your life, you will be willing to give anything up. Jesus said to tear out your own eye if it is going to make you stumble. Life is more precious then sex imo.

Why would it be relevant to god?

because he sets all the laws in the universe including laws governing human relations...its the way he wants things.

Falling in love, raising a family- these tend to be some of the things that make people happiest in life.

thats true, exactly. And to experience that you need to pair with the opposite sex. Two men are never going to experience the joy of bringing a child into the world in the same way a man & woman will.

And lets not forget that every child deserves to live with, and know, both it parents. Its mother and father.

A combination of both.

as i said earlier, they need to make a decision on which sex they will present as. No one can decide that for them because it should be between themselves and God what they choose. Im not going to say what they should be...let them decide and then it will be between themselves and God. He is a better judge of the situation then i am.

 

[Penumbra]

Yes.
God created a man and woman to be pairs. That is his standard and always will be.

By what method have you determined that Paul's letters have anything to do with god?

their body.

Which part?

As I have described in several instances so far, the body can give very mixed signals about what sex it is.

it depends on what is important to you. If you value your life, you will be willing to give anything up. Jesus said to tear out your own eye if it is going to make you stumble. Life is more precious then sex imo.

For what reason would homosexuality be a sin, if we can't even always determine what sex a person is?

Why would we put up arbitrary barriers between love?

because he sets all the laws in the universe including laws governing human relations...its the way he wants things.

Does he set the laws that result in some people being born inter-sexed?

thats true, exactly. And to experience that you need to pair with the opposite sex. Two men are never going to experience the joy of bringing a child into the world in the same way a man & woman will.

Infertile men and women can't have kids either. We don't tend to demonize them, though.

Some inter-sexed people are not fertile, they cannot have kids. But many of them do wish to have love and affection.

Adoption can be a possibility.

And lets not forget that every child deserves to live with, and know, both it parents. Its mother and father.

In order to avoid forgetting this, one would have to actually demonstrate that it's true in the first place.

as i said earlier, they need to make a decision on which sex they will present as. No one can decide that for them because it should be between themselves and God what they choose. Im not going to say what they should be...let them decide and then it will be between themselves and God. He is a better judge of the situation then i am.

So do you think it's a big deal if they choose incorrectly?

 

[arthra]

Penumbra wrote:

What standards does your religion have for an individual with XXY chromosomes and both male and female physical characteristics? Which type of people can they form sexual partnerships with without violating those standards?

Or an individual with XY chromosomes with immunity to testosterone that appears in all ways to be a female and may not even realize what her chromosomes are until later in life? What are your religious standards for her?

My comment:

Whatever genetic make up a person has is really aside from the point of their capacity to recognize the Manifestation of God for this day. If they recognize the Lord of the age and choose to follow the teachings that's where they are... so there's no specific religious standard for a person with "XY chromosome with immunity to testosterone", also there's no punishment or damnation for them.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Whatever genetic make up a person has is really aside from the point of their capacity to recognize the Manifestation of God for this day. If they recognize the Lord of the age and choose to follow the teachings that's where they are... so there's no specific religious standard for a person with "XY chromosome with immunity to testosterone", also there's no punishment or damnation for them.

Is this statement accurate?

The Bahá'í Faith teaches that the only acceptable form of sexual expression is within marriage, and Bahá'í marriage is defined in the religion's texts as exclusively between one man and one woman.[1][2] Bahá'ís stress the importance of absolute chastity for any unmarried person,[3] and focus on personal restraint.

Homosexuality and the Bahá'í Faith - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Edit: more to the point, does it accurately reflect your views?

 

[Alex_G]

You cannot in this day and age hold such worldviews that are so utterly unsubstantiated. These sorts of views ruin so many lives through the persecution and torment they can cause, its radically immoral to persist to champion them.

Penumbra has been more than clear in this thread. You must accept the fact that there exists in this world people who do not neatly fit into the 2 categories of male/female. How you reconcile a religiously fuelled anti-homosexual worldview with the existence of this ambiguity is unavoidably difficult. It essentially exposes the worldview as the out-dated, unworkable and the morally suspect view that it is. Its no coincidence that these complexities aren’t mentioned or dealt with in scripture, because said scripture doesn’t know what its talking about. And if you truly believe that its the word of God, then clearly he doesn’t either, which should give you serious pause for thought.

Its horribly irresponsible and selfish to stubbornly hold a position that is not only factually incomplete, but morally broken in its conclusions, simply because it is part of something you've invested a lot in.
Furthermore to arrogantly think these views also apply to everyone so far as it justifies the interference in the lives of other people, causing direct harm and the denial of innocent pursuits of happiness through love and relationships, is just not on.

All this pain because people are too proud, too deluded, too ignorant and too scared to take real responsibility for their views. Because even if it’s difficult to face, it should be your duty as a fellow human being to find the courage to admit to yourself where it’s gone wrong, and leave such broken worldviews to fade into history where they belong, because without them would surely mean a better and happier world for everyone. Now that would be a real admirable test of character, one that should there actually be a just God, would undoubtedly make him proud.

 

[Shiranui117]

The question to Christians and Muslims that believe homosexuality is a sin:

To what gender/sex should these individuals form sexual partnerships with to avoid the wrath, violence, or torture from Jesus and his father, or Allah?

At that point, I honestly don't know. They have characteristics of both, so does it even matter at that point? I don't think intersexed people, or anyone naturally possessing both masculine and feminine traits, can be properly classified as homosexuals, no matter which sex they choose to form relationships with. It's a completely different kettle of fish than homosexual intercourse. God knows what's going through their minds and hearts, and I don't think He'd be too upset with an intersexed individual trying to do their best in a society where gender is viewed in a purely dualistic manner.

 

[Penumbra]

At that point, I honestly don't know. They have characteristics of both, so does it even matter at that point? I don't think intersexed people, or anyone naturally possessing both masculine and feminine traits, can be properly classified as homosexuals, no matter which sex they choose to form relationships with. It's a completely different kettle of fish than homosexual intercourse. God knows what's going through their minds and hearts, and I don't think He'd be too upset with an intersexed individual trying to do their best in a society where gender is viewed in a purely dualistic manner.

If there isn't a big deal with intersexed people having sex with people of either sex, why is it a big deal for any biologically 'normal' sexed person to have sex with someone of the same sex?

 

[Shiranui117]

If there isn't a big deal with intersexed people having sex with people of either sex, why is it a big deal for any biologically 'normal' sexed person to have sex with someone of the same sex?

A fair question. The common answer here is "Because the Bible says so." But there are some people who argue that Biblical passages in the NT that seem to be against homosexuality are being misinterpreted, based off incorrect understandings of the Greek words "porneia." and "Malakos." As far as the OT goes, eating shellfish is called an abomination just the same as homosexuality, but you don't see Christians rioting against, say, Red Lobster or Bubba Gump.

 

[Penumbra]

A fair question. The common answer here is "Because the Bible says so." But there are some people who argue that Biblical passages in the NT that seem to be against homosexuality are being misinterpreted, based off incorrect understandings of the Greek words "porneia." and "Malakos."

Thanks for your reply.

Which passages are you referring to here? The ones from Paul's letters, or something that Jesus was quoted as having said?

As far as the OT goes, eating shellfish is called an abomination just the same as homosexuality, but you don't see Christians rioting against, say, Red Lobster or Bubba Gump.

I agree.

The same text that talks about men sleeping with men an abomination also says eating shellfish is an abomination, and says things like you shouldn't mix wool and linen, along with 600+ other commands.

But like you said, Christians rarely mention 99% of that. The most common thing that millions of them seem to take issue with is homosexuality.

 

[Shiranui117]

Thanks for your reply.

Which passages are you referring to here? The ones from Paul's letters, or something that Jesus was quoted as having said?

Both. Romans 1, 1 Corinthians 6:9, Matthew, etc. Everything construed by Christians as homosexuality.

The same text that talks about men sleeping with men an abomination also says eating shellfish is an abomination, and says things like you shouldn't mix wool and linen, along with 600+ other commands.

But like you said, Christians rarely mention 99% of that. The most common thing that millions of them seem to take issue with is homosexuality.

And this leads me to wonder whether the majority Christian stance on homosexuality will eventually be changed(I doubt it'll happen even within my lifetime, though). Even today there seems to be greater room given to homosexuals within Christian circles, and many recognize that shunning them won't help them, and instead offer prayers and support.

 

[Alex_G]

This issue is a pretty serious moral issue in my eyes, and i felt your responses were evasive, obstructive, difficult and lacking in demonstrating an appreciation for the central point, which was far from vague or straw like. I tagged you so you can take it seriously, as indifference, and a lack of outrage allows for such worldviews to endure today.
I will edit my post to chill you out though....

 

[Penumbra]

Both. Romans 1, 1 Corinthians 6:9, Matthew, etc. Everything construed by Christians as homosexuality.

And this leads me to wonder whether the majority Christian stance on homosexuality will eventually be changed(I doubt it'll happen even within my lifetime, though). Even today there seems to be greater room given to homosexuals within Christian circles, and many recognize that shunning them won't help them, and instead offer prayers and support.

Sorry to be repetitive, but which passage in Matthew are you referring to here? I'm familiar with Paul's statements from Romans and Corinthians on the issue but I'm not sure which passage from Matthew you're referencing (and it's the only one you listed without a number to look up ).

 

[Sahar]

I don't think it's possible to give a clear answer to complicated and confusing issues like those mentioned in the OP. And the answer can vary from one condition to another, moreover from one individual to another.

But I don't get how the mentioned examples of the chromosomal anomalies and genetic defects that affect sexual development can be used to advocate homosexual behavior to people who are lucky enough not to have any of these disorders?!

 

[Shiranui117]

Sorry to be repetitive, but which passage in Matthew are you referring to here? I'm familiar with Paul's statements from Romans and Corinthians on the issue but I'm not sure which passage from Matthew you're referencing (and it's the only one you listed without a number to look up ).

Matthew 5:32 and 19:9 are the two verses in Matthew when Jesus allows divorce in the case of "porneia" which is translated generally as "sexual immorality," but is also interpreted as homosexual acts in 1 Corinthians. One could possibly try to interpret "porneia" in Matthew as being both adultery AND homosexual acts, however.

Here's a list of definitions for porneia:

1. illicit sexual intercourse
   1. adultery, fornication, homosexuality, lesbianism, intercourse with animals etc.
   2. sexual intercourse with close relatives; Lev. 18
   3. sexual intercourse with a divorced man or woman; Mk. 10:11,
2. metaph. the worship of idols
   1. of the defilement of idolatry, as incurred by eating the sacrifices offered to idols

Contextually, though, it's clear that Jesus had "adultery" in mind.

 

[Penumbra]

I don't think it's possible to give a clear answer to complicated and confusing issues like those mentioned in the OP. And the answer can vary from one condition to another, moreover from one individual to another.

In what way would it vary?

For example, if a person with XY chromosomes and internal testes but womanly parts between her legs and a body that appears female in all external ways and believes herself to be female has sex with a man, is that homosexual sex? If she has sex with a woman (seeing as how she has XY chromosomes and internal testes but looks like a woman in all ways), is that homosexual sex?

More importantly, does it matter?

But I don't get how the mentioned examples of the chromosomal anomalies and genetic defects that affect sexual development can be used to advocate homosexual behavior to people who are lucky enough not to have any of these disorders?!

If it's not too important who these individuals have sex with, why is it important who any individual has sex with?

If gender/sex is a spectrum of possibilities rather than a binary system, why does it really matter from a moral standpoint which adults have sex with each other?

Isn't the whole concept of the proposed immorality of homosexuality rather outdated and scientifically outdated/irrelevant?