Gender Identification - NO HATE!

[Guest]

50 minutes ago, lostinwater said:

Thank-you.  Yes, i am quite sure.  A female spirit is one that came into existence as female.  A female spirit believing the body she inhabits does not match her spirit's gender is not equivalent to homosexuality.  

I'm having difficulty reconciling this with other things you've said.  If we don't really have a definition of a "female spirit" then you can't really have a valid claim to putting a female spirit into a male body.  All we do know is that we have a male body.  And if that male embodied spirit has desires to mate with a male, then that is homosexuality.  And if we look at it from your perspective, a male embodied female spirit that is married to and having sexual relations with a female body, then that would be some sort of spiritual homosexuality.

So, you can't really completely separate them.

Edited February 21, 2017 by Guest

[estradling75]

19 minutes ago, lostinwater said:

No doubt there are such cases.  What is frustrating to me is the assumption the two are unequivocally linked.  And i interpret your and yjacket's statements as attempting to make that association -  in the hopes of destroying the validity of my friend's feelings.  i hope you will tell me i am wrong in that interpretation?

 

Not only are they doing that... they are ignoring my post here

Where I speculated how such an event could occur.  Neither one of them have countered showing how anything I put forth is against the doctrine or understanding of the church.  The best they can say is that it is speculative.  But it shows that their arguments that can't happen are based on just as much speculation. 

[Guest MormonGator]

6 minutes ago, estradling75 said:

 they are ignoring my post here

Sometimes people ignore posts because they don't want to argue or don't feel like dealing. It's not personal. 

[estradling75]

1 minute ago, MormonGator said:

Sometimes people ignore posts because they don't want to argue or don't feel like dealing. It's not personal. 

Indeed,,, if they didn't want to argue or deal.. then they would stop... walk away.. whatever...I got no problem with that..

But if they do want to argue and deal (which it appears they do)  then asking them to address the points made is totally reasonable.

[lostinwater]

5 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

I'm having difficulty reconciling this.  If we don't really have a definition of a "female spirit" then you can't really have a valid claim to putting a female spirit into a male body.  All we do know is that we have a male body.  And if that male embodied spirit has desires to mate with a male, then that is homosexuality.  And if we look at it from your perspective, a male embodied female spirit that is married to and having sexual relations with a female body, then that would be some sort of spiritual homosexuality.

So, you can't really completely separate them.

Probably why my friend has chosen to remain unmarried and celibate.  Is extremely confusing for them.  i can't comment on every other person with transgender feelings - i don't know them, and don't feel i should pass judgment without talking to them and at least attempting to understand them first  So that goes back to your question earlier regarding what makes up a female/male spirit.

The best answer i can give is still the same.  It feels to me like gender is an expression of who we are.  In the same way an artist's art or a painter's painting is an outward expression of who they are on the inside.  Please don't mistake - i am not saying that gender is fluid.  

[Guest MormonGator]

1 minute ago, estradling75 said:

Indeed,,, if they didn't want to argue or deal.. then they would stop... walk away.. whatever...I got no problem with that..

But if they do want to argue and deal (which it appears they do)  then asking them to address the points made is totally reasonable.

Oh we agree 100%. Just an important reminder. 

It's sad that not everyone has the class and grace to ignore what they don't agree with. I'm just as guilty of course-but even I can walk away sometimes. 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, lostinwater said:

It feels to me like gender is an expression of who we are.  In the same way an artist's art or a painter's painting is an outward expression of who they are on the inside.

That has no logical or reasonable or intelligible meaning.  I'm not saying that to insult you.  That is my well thought out analysis of these sentences.  They mean absolutely nothing.

[Rob Osborn]

3 hours ago, lostinwater said:

No doubt there are such cases.  What is frustrating to me is the assumption the two are unequivocally linked.  And i interpret your and yjacket's statements as attempting to make that association -  in the hopes of destroying the validity of my friend's feelings.  i hope you will tell me i am wrong in that interpretation?

Not exactly knowing your friends situation I do know that there is a direct link with sexual identity and family association coupled with moral values. I have never seen or witnessed a person who has had sexual identity problems that have a strong moral lifestyle and are in traditional mother and father homes who are teaching and living according to godly principles. In saying that, every single person I know who currently has, or had sexual or gender identity problems has had a past or is currently in a situation of a bad moral lifestyle and a failed family situation in some element of decay.

[Rob Osborn]

Also of interest, male homosexuality, transgenderism and pornography all go hand in hand. Im not saying that viewing pornography will make one gay, I am only saying there is a direct link of male sexual deviancy with viewing pornography. Pornography is a readily accepted part of the homosexual lifestyle. 

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

I have never seen or witnessed a person who has had sexual identity problems that have a strong moral lifestyle and are in traditional mother and father homes who are teaching and living according to godly principles.

You can count my brother as one.  While my family had many issues that I certainly found disdainful, we had a traditional mother and father home. We had LDS values taught in our home.

But it was pretty apparent that he was gay from a somewhat young age.  It's just that being gay wasn't a "thing" like it is today.  So, the signs didn't become as obvious to the observer back in the day until much later in life.

[Rob Osborn]

Just now, Carborendum said:

You can count my brother as one.  While my family had many issues that I certainly found disdainful, we had a traditional mother and father home. We had LDS values taught in our home.

But it was pretty apparent that he was gay from a somewhat young age.  It's just that being gay wasn't a "thing" like it is today.  So, the signs didn't become as obvious to the observer back in the day until much later in life.

The moment you said "While my family had many issues that I certainly found disdainful" it throws up flags immediately that opens the door for a member of that family to have gender and/or sexual identity problems.

[lostinwater]

On 1/24/2017 at 9:21 AM, Anddenex said:

Are you referring to this statement of mine, "Hermaphrodites"? I am not understanding what you mean by "ambiguous" genitalia?

Thank-you.  Here is one example.  Granted, my friend is not like this.  But, someone who bases their conclusion that my friend is wrong on the idea that there is no ambiguity - that just isn't accurate.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19155947

 

[Guest MormonGator]

6 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

The moment you said "While my family had many issues that I certainly found disdainful" it throws up flags immediately that opens the door for a member of that family to have gender and/or sexual identity problems.

@Rob Osborn that's not fair to @Carborendum No family is perfect-and just because a family has problems here or there does not equal "red flags". 

 

Edited February 21, 2017 by MormonGator

[Vort]

4 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

The moment you said "While my family had many issues that I certainly found disdainful" it throws up flags immediately that opens the door for a member of that family to have gender and/or sexual identity problems.

So what would it take to convince you that your opinion is ill-considered? Do you require perfect LDS parents in a celestial setting? Consider that the third part rebelled premortally from the perfect Father of us all, and perhaps it won't be too hard to believe that even a strong, righteous LDS family can have such issues.

[lostinwater]

4 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

The moment you said "While my family had many issues that I certainly found disdainful" it throws up flags immediately that opens the door for a member of that family to have gender and/or sexual identity problems.

I'd keep in mind that according to mormon beliefs, a third of the heavenly family got sent to hell. That seems like a pretty dysfunctional family?  i mean, what family isn't dysfunctional?  I've yet to meet one.

[Rob Osborn]

Just now, MormonGator said:

Rob that's not fair to Carb. No family is perfect-and just because a family has problems here or there does not equal "red flags". 

Every family has red flags, its just a matter of how many, or how frequent or severe those flags appear coupled with circumstances.

[Guest]

Just now, Rob Osborn said:

Every family has red flags, its just a matter of how many, or how frequent or severe those flags appear coupled with circumstances.

So, you agree that your concern is unfounded.

[Vort]

4 minutes ago, lostinwater said:

Thank-you.  Here is one example.  Granted, my friend is not like this.  But, someone who bases their conclusion that my friend is wrong on the idea that there is no ambiguity - that just isn't accurate.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19155947

 

Interesting that the mother was XX karyotype. My first thought was wondering whether the mother contributed the Y chromosome and the father the X. Apparently not. How the mother can sex-select the baby has yet to be determined. Fascinating stuff. I wish I could live 20 or 30 lifetimes and allocate two or three to this topic.

[Rob Osborn]

Just now, Carborendum said:

So, you agree that your concern is unfounded.

We do know that during the millennium children will grow up without sin unto salvation. It is therefore possible to raise a family correctly without gender or sexual identity problems. The family experience/relationship is paramount to the correct gender and sexual development of children.

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, lostinwater said:

Thank-you.  Here is one example.  Granted, my friend is not like this.  But, someone who bases their conclusion that my friend is wrong on the idea that there is no ambiguity - that just isn't accurate.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19155947

On the one hand, I find this study fascinating.  And I can understand the one conclusion (that elimination of the testes would increase female fertility).  But the other conclusion that they have a genetic predisposition to male offspring?  That is correlation without causation.  What would be the mechanism by which that would happen?

On the other hand, if your friend is not like this, I fail to see what this has to do with your case.

[Guest MormonGator]

1 minute ago, Rob Osborn said:

. It is therefore possible to raise a family correctly without gender or sexual identity problems. 

It's also profoundly naive and incredibly insulting to think that parents with homosexual children were in some way spiritually or morally deficient in their abilities. Way off base. Not even close to the truth. 

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

We do know that during the millennium children will grow up without sin unto salvation. It is therefore possible to raise a family correctly without gender or sexual identity problems. The family experience/relationship is paramount to the correct gender and sexual development of children.

Now you're making more politically correct statements.  And these ^^ I can't argue with.

What you said before about all those you're aware of grew up in morally disfunctional homes coupled with the statement "everyone's home is dysfunctional" essentially negates any meaning in your position.  It's like saying "I've never seen any homosexual people who weren't human.  Therefore, being human causes homosexuality."

Edited February 21, 2017 by Guest

[Vort]

4 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

We do know that during the millennium children will grow up without sin unto salvation. It is therefore possible to raise a family correctly without gender or sexual identity problems. The family experience/relationship is paramount to the correct gender and sexual development of children.

Don't you think that might have more to do with (1) the societal mores of the time and (2) the specific individuals assigned to that period than with the righteousness and/or parenting techniques of the parents?

[Rob Osborn]

4 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

It's also profoundly naive and incredibly insulting to think that parents with homosexual children were in some way spiritually or morally deficient in their abilities. Way off base. Not even close to the truth. 

You left off the other half and that being the childs own moral compass. I sated that when you have "both" a good family upbringing coupled with a strong moral compass then you shall not deviate.

[Rob Osborn]

5 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

Now you're making more politically correct statements.  And these ^^ I can't argue with.

What you said before about all those you're aware of grew up in morally disfunctional homes coupled with the statement "everyone's home is dysfunctional" essentially negates any meaning in your position.  It's like saying "I've never seen any homosexual people who weren't human.  Therefore, being human causes homosexuality."

You missed the point.