Are you talking about where it speaks of a type of fish where it is possible to artificially induce XX males, and YY females with out killing them? This is not the norm.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Sex/Gender
- Thread starter The Hammer
- Start date
Ignatius A
Well-Known Member
I've noticed some people are allowed to play with definitions while others are not.
Ignatius A
Well-Known Member
How is that an insult? According to the "it's legal" argument we can't disagree with slavery if "it's legal".
You can agree with slavery if you think it scores you points, to me its just an insult to humanity.
Ignatius A
Well-Known Member
It's almost has if you purposely decide not to follow the discussion
And yet you still throw insults, its almost as though you have nothing else to argue with
I feel sorry for you, that you cannot understand that there are many things that are mere human constructs, and as such, fall on the definitions humans give to them. Where this involves matters considered legal, then laws are made and definitions provided. For example, Canada makes no law concerning marriage from the ecclesiastical standpoint, except to say that no church can make a marriage that is NOT legal under Canadian law. And in Canadian law, "Marriage, for civil purposes, is the lawful union of two persons to the exclusion of all others." So a church may, if it chooses, marry a man and a woman, or two men or two women.
A church may decline to marry a same-sex couple, but no civil authority may if there is no other bar to the marriage.. But no church may declare such a civil marriage to be invalid, except within the church itself, which is of no effect outside of said church.
In 1967, when I was already 19 years old, the Supreme Court, in Loving v. Virginia, a unanimous Court struck down state laws banning marriage between individuals of different races, holding that these anti-miscegenation statutes violated both the Due Process and the Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment. Luckily for Justice Clarence Thomas, who by the way would like to ban same-sex marriage again.
We all know what a bicycle is, and we all know that it is in one way different from a motorcycles (the mode of propulsion) -- and yet nobody has any difficulty at all calling them both "bikes." When a teenager with a bag of newspapers says he's going to get his bike, we do not interpret that in quite the same way we do when a scruffy, leather-clad dude with artwork all over his body says he's going to get his bike.
How, I wonder, does it actually impact you personally, that two men (say Pete Buttigieg and Chasten Buttigieg), or two women (say Ellen DeGeneres and Portia de Rossi) are married? If marriage is good for people (and I think it is) how does those couples' taking advantage of that good harm you? What interest or stake do you have in those good people finding their own happiness, meaning and security in their own way?
Last edited:
Another strawman. And a bad one because it assumes something absolutely not in evidence.
Let me be perfectly clear -- if slavery were legal in my nation, I would work very hard to change that law. When same-sex marriage was not legal in my nation, I worked very hard to change that law, too. And it was finally changed, in 2005, when I was already 57 years old. I never expected to be married, so it never became part of my life-view for myself, and the same is true of my partner, who I have been with (and who also fought for the rights of others like us to be married if they wanted to) for over 30 years now. So we never married, though we are recognized as spouses by our Federal and Provincial governments because we pay our taxes together as spouses.
I would really like you to apologize for that remark, because it was gratuitous and insulting to me personally.
No, but being right very often becomes legal because it is right. And wrongs very often become illegal because they are wrong, and society comes to realize it.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
When you are all out of facts and evidence insults are all that one has left. You don't expect your opponent to be reasonable and admit that he is wrong, do you?
It would be nice, the honest thing to do but no, i don't expect an admission of wrong
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Meanwhile I have been digging a little more into the concept. Part of the reason that there is a spectrum is because life can become very complicated. One possible cause of transgenderism, and there is not single "THE CAUSE" is human chimerism. From various sources it appears that some degree of chimerism is far more common than people recognize. Perhaps as high as 10%. It is not easy to get a hard figure on it since chimerism may show up in just one small part of the body. But a person having a male brain and a female body is possible. Though what is more likely is that a mix of organs can send conflicting biological signals. Which is why "non-binary" is a real thing as well. It is not people just making things up as some claim.
EDIT: Just one of many articles on the topic. I have painstakingly translated this from Norwegian for you:
Not both genders, but all genders.
22.11.2018: From the editor - Biologically speaking, we all fall somewhere along a spectrum of gender, of which male and female represent the extreme ends.
My absolute favourite bit from that link is this:Meanwhile I have been digging a little more into the concept. Part of the reason that there is a spectrum is because life can become very complicated. One possible cause of transgenderism, and there is not single "THE CAUSE" is human chimerism. From various sources it appears that some degree of chimerism is far more common than people recognize. Perhaps as high as 10%. It is not easy to get a hard figure on it since chimerism may show up in just one small part of the body. But a person having a male brain and a female body is possible. Though what is more likely is that a mix of organs can send conflicting biological signals. Which is why "non-binary" is a real thing as well. It is not people just making things up as some claim.
EDIT: Just one of many articles on the topic. I have painstakingly translated this from Norwegian for you:
Not both genders, but all genders.
22.11.2018: From the editor - Biologically speaking, we all fall somewhere along a spectrum of gender, of which male and female represent the extreme ends.tidsskriftet.no
"The pattern is one of ageing, authoritarian, heterosexual men discriminating against minorities in a wish to appease their voters. There is no room in their world view for the human complexity that actually characterises the societies they are elected to govern; but the ideas of purity that are partly rooted in national conservatism and partly in religious fundamentalism are not echoed by science."
That is so incredibly well said! And yet, it speaks to something even deeper in what it means to be human, and that is that ignorance is frightened by complexity, the unfamiliar, difference and non-conformity, while those with learning, who are information-seeking, readily adopt those very things.
Did you read the article you linked? Fish don't even have xx and xy, they have an entirely different chromosomal pairing called zz/zw, just like birds and some reptiles.
I'm talking about the intersex condition mentioned in the article you gave me called xx male or de la Chapelle and xy female or swyer. Because the karyotype didn't determine the phenotype.
I also mentioned xy/xx chimerism because having both phenotypes spread throughout their body doesn't make them male, and literally nobody classifies them that way.
Secret Chief
Very strong language
I'm not "playing" with definitions. Do you have respected online dictionary definitions which say that gay marriage is not actually marriage?
There are a lot of things that are not normal nor common. He was the one who brought up his mutation in a conversation about things that are abnormal.
Unfettered
A striving disciple of Jesus Christ
Absent unusual conditions, one's sex isn't a complicated question or matter. Human beings and human societies can be quite complex, though.
I don't believe you. Prove it.
Unfettered
A striving disciple of Jesus Christ
Only if you're genuinely confused about it.
Absolutely confused.