🔵
@realcaseyrollins
Ah yes, dangerous gender transition. This seems like a rather biased source.
@jump_spider They're biased but they're not wrong
@realcaseyrollins
What's dangerous about transitioning?
@jump_spider Firstly, it often consists of genital mutilation, and sometimes includes taking a dangerous level of opposite-sex hormones. Apart from that, people who transition often regret their decision later and wish to reverse it.
But some people have the procedure done and are fine, ignoring the self-injury aspect. Although it's morally wrong, it's more important to address these procedures targeting kids. If a kid has these procedures done, his or her bone plates will not develop properly.
@realcaseyrollins
What academic research has lead you to suggest that most of us regret medical transition?
In what moral framework is medical transition "morally wrong"?
What is the functional difference between someone who pays professional to surgically remove part of their cheek such that their teeth are visible (a well known though obviously extreme form of aesthetic body modification) and genital reconstruction surgery? Is one person's idea of self-mutilation not clearly another person's idea of self-actualization?
What medical research has lead you to suggest that hormone replacement therapy for medical transition dangerous?
Have you considered that a desire to detransition may have less to do with personal regret and more to do with how those of us who do not "pass" even after medical transition are treated by others?
To be frank concerning children who wish to medically transition, because they have not reached the legal age of majority and medical transition being still very much bound in legal approval, how would you suggest a child to be able to pursue medical transition at all? A 16-year-old girl can choose to have unprotected sex and there are many who believe she should accept the lifelong consequences and responsibilities that may result from her choice; why should that be different for a transgender child?
Health risks: https://youtu.be/Eaq6kbk0LZ4 (skip to 3:51 for the scientific evidence)
On regretting sex transition surgery:
https://news.sky.com/story/hundreds-of-young-trans-people-seeking-help-to-return-to-original-sex-11827740
Also chopping off a penis is different than ripping out your cheek. Sure, you've lost a part of your body that helps you eat by keeping food in your mouth, but at least you can still eat.
If you get castrated, you cannot procreate. End of story. It completely removes a bodily function. It's more akin to getting two feet amputated.
@realcaseyrollins
I'll follow the links tomorrow to give my due diligence, but I'm relaxing for the night.
What about phalloplasty and top surgery? Trans femme people are not the only ones who seek GRS.
The statement that vaginoplasty precludes reproduction is factual yet I do not think anything was meaningfully conveyed wrt morality. What about a bilateral salpingectomy? Vasectomy? Orchiectomy? Only the last is strictly related to GRS, but the former are voluntary surgical sterilization procedures in general. Are they immoral and if so, on what basis?
@jump_spider It isn't the losing of a bodily function that makes it sinful, but rather trying to fundamentally physically change what you are because you're not satisfied with how God made you.
🇳🇱
Would that also apply if you go on a diet and loose weight. Shouldnt you just accept that god made you overweight and therefore dieting would be a sin
Or is it more likely that dieticians, diet plans, and medical help to loose weight is as much tools that god puts at your disposal as hormone therapy would be?
Seems to me if we talk about god terms then we have to recognize that god often gives us challenges for the sake of overcoming them. He certainly doesnt expect you to keep things "as they are" lest be in sin. Changing the state of things, changing your own self, is not against god, it is the mostly godly thing one can do, presuming you work towards a state in which you better yourself.
So to me the whole argument "you were born that way dont mess with it" seems anti-god, not pro god. If he wanted you to be born perfect then there would be no need for any form of self-betterment of any kind. and self betterment always inherently means changing who you are in some way.
How do you feel this passage supports your PoV. As I stated, if the challenges faced are placed there by god for you to overcome, then by NOT taking the chance to solve the problem when you have the means (even if that means hormone therapy) then you are working against your maker, since the maker is the one who created the earth, the challenges, and the tools to address them.
@freemo @jump_spider It supports it because it says it's ridiculous to think you know better than God how you should be. Yes, God wants us to work through struggles and personal issues, but tbh, transitioning does the opposite; it seeks to forgo overcoming the personal issues instead of chopping up your privates and pretending to be a different sex.
Perhaps, perhaps not. What means do you have to determine if what god wanted you to be was a transitioning adult?
Since you learn and change every day how could you know what god wants you to be and what he doesnt.
If you take an antibiotic are you going against what god wanted you to be (A dead man with a bacterial infection)?
1. By reading the Bible and acting accordingly.
2. No, because the Bible condones using medicine for healing.
1) the bible makes no mention of trans people and in no way clearly supports your point. You must rely on your own opinion and interpritation of what the passages mean to draw the conclusion you did, so no the bible is still not an authority in that case, as it is still dependent on you.
2) IF the bible condones medicine for healing, then hormone therapy can be seen as medicine trans people take to heal
You may disagree on #2, and again you have that right, but it is clear that the science on this in either direction is non-conclusive.
@freemo @jump_spider Yes I've seen conflicting evidence.
Yea the evidence on if it is helpful is conflicting indeed. But the point here is that when it is unclear on whether it is harmful or curative, as is the case is here, then all the more reason the judgement call should be left with the person who will suffer the consequences.
@freemo @jump_spider True. I think if it could be conclusively proven that it helps gender dysphoria it would be more fitting to consider it an ethical treatment.
It would certainly make such decisions easier for everyone. If i were a parent honestly i dont know what id do. Your concerns are valid that its a mistake that cant be reversed and drasstic. So I understand the caution. But as i said its also a decision you cant make as an adult because it is too late at that poiint
In the end if i were a parent faced with that decision id probably get therapy for both my child and me just to make sure both the therapist and myself can explain the consequyences of the decision Make the child as aware as I can, but in the end, it would be my child's call if i felt they were responsibly working through what they were feeling.
My child is the one facing the consequences so the final say should be theirs.
@freemo @jump_spider Also it's not "God terms", we typically refer to it as "Christianese"
Well god is hardly unique to christianity. God is a figure in most religions.
@jump_spider @freemo Predestination theology, I like it! 👍🏾
You're absolutely right, but it's still sin. It was God's will that Judas would betray Jesus, but none of us would say that's a good thing to do.
As far as I know god wasnt particularly clear in the bible what his thoughts were on transgendered people or hormone therapy.
So lets be clear, it is your opinion of what god thinks is sin, and you are welcome to that opinion, but that is not the same as you invoking god as an authority. He simply didnt say either way if it was a sin or not.
@freemo @jump_spider Well does the Bible say self-harm is a sin?
if you think it is self-harm then your argument has less to do with what god wants and more to do with if its self-harm or not. Incidentally invoking self-harm as something to be avoided is a perfectly fine way to reason about it without needing the question of god to enter in in the first place.
At that point the debate is reduced simply to if it is self-harm or not. Which has the same property as what i described before, namely, that it is your opinion if it is self-harm and that it is not settled science either way. Maybe its harmful, maybe its not, its not as simple as you suggest. It is also very individualistic.
@freemo @jump_spider I'm not arguing that it's self harm, I'm asking if you think self harm is a sin.
@freemo @realcaseyrollins
And perhaps god made some of us transgender for that matter