So you’re saying sex is determined by chromosomes?
Are you stating that the church says that those who are infertile are NOT supposed to marry? If so, I’d like a cite for that-that would mean that senior citizens-(post-menopausal women) would be forbidden from marrying. I’ve NEVER heard anything like that.
:dubious:
That is indeed my understanding of it. Though it is possible that I misunderstood and Giltathriel is right, and that people who are not able to consumate their marriage are not supposed to marry.
Really? I’d like, if you could, to see any sort of something even remotely resembling a distant relative of a cite for that.
Man, that SDSAB badge means very little if you’re not willing to see real evidence that might question your ignorance of other people’s ideas (right or wrong as they may be)
Myself being a evil bigoted anti-SSM guy and knowing and conspiring with a plethora of similar rights-denying monsters I can tell you almost 100% would say “He’s a guy, if he wants to marry he should find a girl. If he needs help, we’ll help”. And I tell you, my fellow co-monsters are almost all conservatice catholics … it’s like the HOF unsensitive bigotry.
Sexually-speaking, the only impediment for Catholics to marry is the total inability to perform sexual intercourse. Impotence renders a non-consumated marriage liable to annullment (Once it’s consumated, no annullment of course).
Marriage is denied if there is a clear imposibility of consumating marriage.
A non-consumated marriage can be annulled, but it is not an obligation.
Sterility is not a problem.
It is impossible for any “rulebook” to have rules for every possible situation. In the case of the “guy” with the hormone problem a medical diagnosis could determine what ocurse of action.
If changing one’s sex (or “gender”) can be done so -relatively- simply, can I also change my race? Can I become black or Asian? OR “is it only genetic” a good answer in this case?
A “cite” for my personal experience of what I’ve directly heard, read in occasional news, or seen on TV? I didn’t say it was the result of a study, survey, or peer-reviewed journal. You’d almost be funny if you weren’t the sort of…person…who thinks little of denying me and people like me the basic social human right of marriage.
And cut the “SDSAB Badge” thing out, it makes you look silly and ignorant, especially when it has nothing to do with my anecdotal account.
Finally, you really are ignorant of the facts, given your half-baked response on the AIM issue (which, since your attention span doesn’t seem very good, is what I was responding on). “a medical diagnosis could determine what ocurse[sic] of action.”? Good grief, you’re not even trying to try. There’s already been a medical diagnosis in that case, and one common course of action is have the XY person live as female with estrogen replacement. http://facstaff.l3.drake.edu/abwisniewski/papers/19.pdf
So now do they get to marry a male? Or would that make your invisible pink unicorn in the sky all angry and butthurt? I know the real world outside of church is scary and complicated (especially in the case of the intersexed, which you seem unaware of), but do try to keep up.
Oooh, sorry, don’t cry…like “personal experience” actually flies here. Your reading skills are even worse than mine, I super-qualified my request so it had a bit more weight that “I say so”.
It takes a lot to make me look sillier than I am, but sorry if I hurt your feelings.
I’m sure that AIM has specific treatment, but i was going for the general answer. You know, like medical treatment should fit the patient? Or is that concept too difficult? Because, this may be a surprise, every person is different and treatment may be different in each case. Since I don’t know the particulars of the case, I didn’t comment on particulars.
I’ll continue making fun of your SDSAB badge as much as I want when you flunk basic science.
INVISIBLE PINK UNICORN RULES!!!
Kindly cut it out, ok?
Gfactor
General Questions Moderator
If one examines the hypothalamus (after death, of course) by slicing it open and “unrolling it” one will find the following:
Heterosexual male: hypothalamus is speckled with grainy black specks.
Homosexual male: same.
Heterosexual female: hypothalamus is clear; no grainy black specks.
Transgendered MTF: same.
There is biological evidence to prove that this isn’t just an imaginary hypothetical difference in biology. The sexual center of the brain is visibly, obviously different. I can dig up the photographs online somewhere if you insist. It would be absolute lunacy to ignore the facts and to simply pretend that all men must be men, because they look like men on the outside.
Will do
Can I expect a similar warning for **Una Persson **regarding the “*Or would that make your invisible pink unicorn in the sky all angry and butthurt?” *comment?
Insulting a guy’s deity (false as it may be) seems like a religious insult.
I’ll comply.
Completely agreed, although it is not completely clear how innate this is and how much other things (environment, development) may influence it. But, completely agreed that many (most) cases there is an obvious biological component.
The question is should we treat it? If we could get it back to “normal” (please notice the quotation marks) should we? Should we offer it? Does it matter how biological it is? What if the guy has the “wrong” type of hypothalamus?
But, again, agreed on the biological component.
What’s “normal” and why should it be considered somehow superior to the “not-normal”? We do “treat it” now…by psychological therapy, hormone therapy and sexual reassignment surgery. How do you propose we “treat it”, aside from that?
And even when considering “normal”, that doesn’t solve the problem. Which normality are you talking about - after all, being male or being female is the norm.
The issue is which part is “wrong” and needs to be normalised. Should the body be treated as correct, and the mind wrong? Or the mind correct, and the body wrong? “Getting it back to normal” could mean either approach.
Thanks.
I’ve issued no warnings, just a moderator note asking you to cut it out. I actually didn’t see that comment, but I think Una knows better than to continue that sort of thing, now that you’ve made your feelings clear. If we can all just dial the snark level down to maybe 60 or so, I can finish writing my staff report.
Once again, no warnings issued.
Gfactor
General Questions Moderator
Side question: Does the church include the various penetrating acts as sex? Blowjobs, finger banging and the like? If so, then wouldn’t a fingerbang be sufficient to consummate a marriage? If not, then chaos, right? So yes, they are penetrating acts. Then where does the list of penetrating acts stop? Does one side of the penetrating/penetrated have to be genitalia?
I find the possibility of this conversation occurring between frustrated guys in robes highly amusing.
In this context it means the penis penetrating the vagina and ejaculating inside of it. Even more, only acts after the wedding count.
“Frustrated” as in most people in most jobs?
…ooooooh, it was a joke about celibacy…man, so original, the next beer is on me.