Religion
Related: About this forum"By what authority is this true?"
OK, so I was on reddit(I know, I know), and ended up coming across a thread about transgender pronoun usage in r/Catholicism.
I noticed the OP of the post was ignorant on the subject, as were some of the commenters, so I dived in, that was a mistake. Now, I didn't make any personal attacks, I just wanted to dispel myths about transgendered individuals, and present some basic research on gender identity issues and disorders, though I didn't phrase it quite like that.
Ultimately, the OP just couldn't wrap their mind around certain ideas, and said that basically, Church teaching trumps Science.
Honestly, I wasn't so much debating as attempting to educate, but its rather hard to do to a closed mind. But what stuck out for me is the quote in my subject line. I made a basic statement about how brains are gendered, just like bodies are, and he asked the above. I find the wording particularly odd, I mean, I was going by basic research and facts, he seems to be seeking some other type of authority. He wanted me to appeal to Authority as if that was valid by itself.
Link to the thread: http://www.reddit.com/r/Catholicism/comments/1n4shp/transgenders_pronouns_and_sinning_against_god/
I'm also confused by the claim that if he called a transgendered person by their preferred gender, that he would be the one sinning. Also, there seems to be some type of issue with order in biology, or the lack thereof, that disturbs many people, Christians in particular. This is, again, something I don't understand.
Also, does anyone know about this "whole body" theology some of these posters were talking about? I was straight up confused, because I don't remember any of that when I was in Catholic school. I could have forgot it though.
ON EDIT: I'm Sudo_Killall by the way.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
uriel1972
(4,261 posts)like the Bible says this, or the Pope says that, so it must be true, is likely seeking the same type of argument from you. They probably live from a list of rules to be followed. It may be they cannot understand any other type of argument.
I am reminded of the creationists crowing over Darwin's errors or supposed failings, not understanding that science is not about the person's authority, but places greater value on theories that fit reality more readily.
Which is not to say that there aren't "Authority" figures in science, but that their authority rests on producing valid arguments and evidence. Once they have been shown that ideas or evidence that cleaves closer to reality exist, they are supposed to reassess their position.
That this does not always happen is part of human nature. Einstein was only human as was Isaac Newton, They had flaws and their theories had to make way or adapt as new knowledge was and is brought to light.
Someone who argues from authority is unlikely to be impressed by the fluid and mutable nature of scientific thought. The new can frighten them and understanding is probably restricted to their interpretation of what their authority says.
It is most likely that these people are ruled by fear, fear of others and fear of their own desires and selves. What a tragic way to live life. YMMV
Humanist_Activist
(7,670 posts)that is truly frightening them, science is just a means for us to know its mutable.
They think that the universe has a set order, with God on top, and everything below, and God put it that way. In reality, the universe, at least from what we can tell, is orderless and chaotic, pretty much what you would expect from something that is natural, rather than consciously created. The mutability of biology seems particularly disturbing to many of these people.
I'm actually thrilled, exhilarated, and curious about such things, and I truly struggle to understand those who are frightening by ambiguity and the unknown.
xfundy
(5,105 posts)is another way to say, "give us your money or you'll burn in an imaginary hell." It may or may not involve forced sex acts by clergy.
Humanist_Activist
(7,670 posts)was complaining about the transgendered person putting them in a position of having to sin(by lying) or, I guess, get sued. Not sure how that would work, after trying to educate them, I give up, and think that this person's mind is set on this issue, in stone, as it were.
TexasProgresive
(12,157 posts)This came from teachings by JP II during his Wednesday audiences. I don't know much about it just the name.
BTW: I have no dog in this hunt.
http://www.theologyofthebody.net/
The 'Theology of the Body' is Pope John Paul II's integrated vision of the human person - body, soul, and spirit. As he explains, the physical human body has a specific meaning and is capable of revealing answers regarding fundamental questions about us and our lives:
* Is there a real purpose to life and if so, what is it?
* Why were we created male and female? Does it really matter if we are one sex or another?
* Why were man and woman called to communion from the beginning? What does the marital union of a man and woman say to us about God and his plan for our lives?
* What is the purpose of the married and celibate vocations?
* What exactly is "Love"?
* Is it truly possible to be pure of heart?
All of these questions and many more are answered in Pope John Paul II's 129 Wednesday audiences, which were given between the years 1979 and 1984. His reflections are based on Scripture (especially the Gospels, St. Paul and the Book of Genesis), and contain a vision of the human person truly worthy of man. John Paul II discusses who man was in the beginning, who he is now (after original sin), and who he will be in the age to come. He then applies this message to the vocations of marriage and celibacy, in preparation for the Kingdom of Heaven.
Here's a discussion of the subject of transgender/intersex and "theology of the body".
http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=156588
rug
(82,333 posts)TexasProgresive
(12,157 posts)If Elizabeth Scalia thinks there has to be a place in the Catholic Church for transgendered like Sarah then that is something big. She has a lot of influence with conservative Catholics.
Click on the link and read it all. It's good writing if nothing else.
http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/2013/09/is-there-room-for-sarah
I never met Sarah; ours was one of those modern online friendships defined by two people who never reside in the same time zone, yet—thanks to the combox and email—become intimate, devoted friends. She was a Lutheran, a scholar, a veteran who served twenty years in the military and then took up accounting, and she wrote the most fascinating, informative missives. When I mentioned that I was considering purchasing a handgun, Sarah gave me serious advice about what weapon might best suit me and also sent along images of handbags suitable for gun-carrying. When I was slow to make my purchase she hectored me about it, because, in her considered opinion, self-sufficient, firearms-proficient women could civilize the whole world in a week.
I loved her. She was kind and funny, and generous; the sort of person who is aware of her own shortcomings and therefore quick to give everyone else the benefit of a doubt. Although a Lutheran, she loved the Rosary and prayed the beads every night along with a podcast recording I had made of each mystery. She read, and loved, St. Teresa of Avila, St. Edith Stein, and also Pope Benedict XVI, with whom she identified, calling him “undervalued.” Still, she declared she could never convert because “the church wouldn’t have me, as I am.”
By which she meant, as a post-operative, transgendered woman.
trotsky
(49,533 posts)is that even if there is a god, we could never trust any other single human being to be an accurate representative of that god. "By what authority is this true" is completely moot when it comes to religion. But most believers can't understand that.
rug
(82,333 posts)From what I saw, this is one of the points you were arguing over.
Science is amoral so that looks like arguing past each other.
Humanist_Activist
(7,670 posts)issue than viewing them as people to be valued and respected as individuals.
Honestly, that is the last time I look at r/new, stick to the top stories, stick to r/gaming and r/technology and a few other subreddits. That r/catholicism subreddit is worse than r/atheism.
rug
(82,333 posts)But sometimes that drags me into reddit and I have to cut my way out.
