worth our consideration....
In the case of Caster Semenya, someone who by all physical appearance
would be granted the status of female, (encouraged to marry a male because of opposite outward physical sexual organs), her gender is in question. Her right to compete as a female athlete is in question. why? Because she is good enough to draw attention to her unique predicament. One of which her father is
understandably furious about..."Semenya's father, Jacob, expressed anger when contacted by the AP on Friday morning, saying people who insinuate his daughter is not a woman "are sick. They are crazy."
"The Australian newspaper reported in its Friday edition that medical reports on the 18-year-old Semenya indicate she has no ovaries, but rather has internal male testes, which are producing large amounts of testosterone.""Our legal advice is that, if she proves to have an advantage because of the male hormones, then it will be extremely difficult to strip the medal off her, since she has not cheated," Davies wrote to the AP. "She was naturally made that way, and she was entered in Berlin by her team and accepted by the IAAF. But let's wait and see once we have the final decision."
full article HERE
It is my humble opinion, that we rush far too fast in judging what we barely understand as of yet. And this would involve our belief that we have a right to say who can and cannot be married...and what marriage is "bonified" or kosher...In this realization, we cannot disregard those who may indeed be born ****sexual, and are also different from our standard normal definition of
male= masculine heterosexual male
female= feminine heterosexual female
obviously, there is more....
Is it really a new phenomenon?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
sunofmysoul
It is my humble opinion, that we rush far too fast in judging what we barely understand as of yet. And this would involve our belief that we have a right to say who can and cannot be married...and what marriage is "bonified" or kosher...In this realization, we cannot disregard those who may indeed be born ****sexual, and are also different from our standard normal definition of
male= masculine heterosexual male
female= feminine heterosexual female
obviously, there is more....
Because "we rush far too fast in judging what we barely understand as of yet," it is better to side on the error of caution. Since this particular post is on intergender, it is not the same as ****sexuality, so my focus is strictly on intergender. Intergender is easily diagnosed due to the deformity of the reproductive organs. Equating it with ****sexuality, where studies are not conclusive and more oft than not are bias with confounding variables, I would not be supportive of making a statement factual when it is still a hypothesis or even espoused as a theory. It clearly is the case that the intergender is born with their condition.
There is one other thing I would like to comment upon.
Quote:
Trig-The authors of the Bible make no mention of intergender or transgender conditions, and quite likely knew nothing about them. Why should they? They were Bronze Age goat herders.
Am I to ***ume, Trig, that intergender is a relatively new phenomena? I mean, considering that parents, not knowing what gender their child would be because ultrasound was not available during that time, cannot see a child's gender deformity at birth? Or during the development stages where they have to teach their child how to bathe themselves? The Scriptures do not have to say "intergender" but can relate in common terms of everyday language about eunichs being "born that way from their mother's womb" (Matthew 19.12, JB). I guess everyone was blind since generations have existed without contact lenses and spectacles.
Civil law is based on a different realm. In a democracy, it is based on majority of the people. However, we are a democratic republic. As such, telling me not making certain moral laws based on the people's will is pretty much a waste of your time. If I vote for a candidate to represent me, I will vote for them based on my idea of the best candidate that shares my social viewpoint. Wether you consider something fair or not is a matter of competing public voices. My main concern first is search for orthodoxy within the Church, and secondly to act as a responsible citizen and do my part to vote and become educated as best I can under my own living circumstances. I personally think the health care bill that Obama and the majority of Democrats, not counting the blue dogs of course, is an infringement of their world view upon me. Obama said that he want to make it mandatory, just like people driving a car are required to pay for car insurance, he wants to do the same and force everyone to pay for medical insurance. If he succeeds, I will be forced to do something I do not want. It is a political reality and can go both ways. If you think something is wrong, you will fight for it, get penalized for it, and eventually you might win or you might not. Big deal, it is only politics, it has no eternal value.
It's not all a matter of what YOU believe.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Columcille
I addressed the comment that Jill was referencing, you did not reply. But I am coming to the point that pearls before swine is the same as leading a horse to the water, but you cannot make them drink. The only purpose it serves me now is mostly psychological, I am fighting the corrupted impulses within myself by "transforming my mind." The more I realize that I am more than just my sexual impulses, the more I overcome the temptations on a daily basis. The other reason is to make a stand. If Walter Martin can hold his own on a large panel of hostile guests on the Long John Nebel show and the influx of unorthodox posters coming here almost shares the same circumstance, these suggests to me that the level of dialogue here is much more engaging, the moderating is much more fair, and the opportunity to see how 1 Corinthians 1.17-25 really operates (most especially for me to see the change within myself) quite satifying.
Just try to remember, that whether you view people as swine or fellow human beings... your point of view and deeply held convictions (biblically-substantiated or not) are not the only things which define reality for all human beings.
That is, while I don't expect you to communicate everything you believe 'perfectly', I do expect you to understand and ultimately accept the reality that not all people agree with you or believe the same things which you do; even those who know the same things you do, may surely not agree with you.
If "pearls" don't get through to the pigs, then (perhaps) try a carrot.
Live what you believe; don't impose it upon others.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Columcille
...Either you are a bonafide Christian that accepts Scripture or your a fake who picks and chooses what Scriptures you can twist or sounds "Loving" and reject, ignore, or downplay, or shift attention away from what God actually says to his people throughout history of nation of Israel and his Church.
You must ultimately leave such 'judgment' (as you seem to be making) to God.
Live as excellently as you can by the grace of God; set an example with your life. No one who is human, will ever play the role of God or Jesus properly.
