Hermaphrodites?

[Ooberman]

How do Christians explain Hermaphrodites? In what world would God care about sexuality, then create people with both sex organs?

Isn't naturalism a better answer?

[Danmark]

And to copy another posters point:

The Bible: God created them male and female
Reality: People and animals are male, female, and intersex

Whaddaya mean, "another poster?"
What am I? Chopped liver?

[Wootah]

[Replying to Haven]

I was pleased to get a straight reply however now I still feel that these questions are unanswered.

If i presume the naturalist will say - hermaphroditism is natural then may i ask what is unnatural?

If you believe in evolution then can there be a mistake in genetics?

Are you saying that there are no genetic mistakes in biology?

[Danmark]

[Replying to Haven]

I was pleased to get a straight reply however now I still feel that these questions are unanswered.

If i presume the naturalist will say - hermaphroditism is natural then may i ask what is unnatural?

If you believe in evolution then can there be a mistake in genetics?

Are you saying that there are no genetic mistakes in biology?

Isn't it genetic variation that makes speciation possible? At least with living human variants, it seems pejorative to call them 'mistakes.'

[Ooberman]

[Replying to Haven]

I was pleased to get a straight reply however now I still feel that these questions are unanswered.

If i presume the naturalist will say - hermaphroditism is natural then may i ask what is unnatural?

"un"natural isn't really a thing. There is Nature.

Some assert there is "supernature", but we know they aren't interested in proving their assertion.

If you believe in evolution then can there be a mistake in genetics?

"if you believe in evolution"... cute. You do know it's a Theory, right? As in, as much a fact as we know any fact?

There aren't mistakes in evolution. nature doesn't make mistakes - there is no plan.

However, there are variations, some less successful, some more. I'm not sure if intersex qualifies.

Are you trying to call all the human beings who have been born as intersex "mistakes"?

No, you are trying to tell us they are abominations made by Sin.

Why would God make people who, in your eyes are "mistakes" or so warped by someone else's sin that they aren't even mentioned in God's Book?


You really have a low opinion of other human beings who don't conform. Do you feel the same way about people with blue eyes? short people? and other people you might find grotesque?

What is you hidden feelings about this? They are seeming to come out.

Are you saying that there are no genetic mistakes in biology?

Answered.


I am curious how you could feel one of God's Creatures is a "mistake". Does God make mistakes, in your mind?


Or, did he plan for people, like you, to become intersex-phobic?

[Haven]

[Replying to Haven]

I was pleased to get a straight reply however now I still feel that these questions are unanswered.

If i presume the naturalist will say - hermaphroditism is natural then may i ask what is unnatural?

If you believe in evolution then can there be a mistake in genetics?

Are you saying that there are no genetic mistakes in biology?

"Mistake" is a value-laden term. As someone who accepts the reality of naturalistic evolution (I don't "believe" in evolution; I accept it based on the evidence), I recognize the absurdity in saying that evolution makes "mistakes." Evolution by natural selection, as an unguided process, can make no mistakes or errors. There is no objective standard by which to measure biological outcomes as "good" or "bad." Things simply are.

By the way, it's intersex, not "h*rmaphrodite." The latter term is offensive.

[Ooberman]

And to copy another posters point:

The Bible: God created them male and female
Reality: People and animals are male, female, and intersex

Whaddaya mean, "another poster?"
What am I? Chopped liver?

haha sorry
. I saw it, copied it and didn't feel like hunting it down...

[Ooberman]

[By the way, it's intersex, not "h*rmaphrodite." The latter term is offensive.

I'm going to continue to try to say "intersex" (Wootah, why don't you, as well. After all,many of us take the time to write "Christian" instead of "xian", or capitalize "C" or "God" or "Bible".)

However, I don't think of hermaphrodite as negative. It's the only term I've known, and I don't think of it as negative. I'm not up on why, but if that's what it is, so be it.

[Realworldjack]

[Replying to post 11 by Goat]

I find the term 'unnatural affection' to be rather biased.

I understand your complaint here. I actually thought about the word, "unnatural," before I used it, to determine if I indeed wanted to use it. I chose to use it, because I believe it is a unnatural desire. But I do not see any difference here between the homosexual, and myself. In other words, according to the Bible, we are all sinners, so then there may be those that struggle with certain sins, I have no trouble with.

After typing the last sentence, I may have misspoke, but I will leave it there for a purpose. We are talking of sexual desires. I may not struggle with the desire for a same sex relation, however, I do struggle with sexual desires, that according to the Bible, are sinful. As you say, I cannot control who I may be sexually attracted to, but I can decide whether or not to act on those desires. The fact that I have such sinful desires, demonstrates that I am a sinner, born with a defect. The sexual desires I have are not my real problem, but rather just symptoms of my real problem. The real problem that plagues me is the condition that I have, which is sin. This condition manifests itself differently in different people. In other words, we may have different symptoms, but we all suffer from the same condition. This is why I decided to use the word, "unnatural," because I do not believe it is biased. I assume, you believe it is biased, because you assume I believe it to be unnatural simply because it is not natural to me, but this is not the case.

My point is, according to the Bible, all the sins I commit are natural to me, because I am a natural sinner. But just because these sins are natural to me, does not mean they are actually natural. Therefore, my point is, this word, "unnatural," is not biased, because I am in the same boat with the homosexual, along with the rest of humanity, that shares the same condition I suffer from.

What person would want to have be in a situation where there is so much prejudice against them.

I have heard this argument before, but it just does not wash. Take for example, why would any woman choose to be a prostitute? Now certainly there are those who are forced into it, and there are those that believe they have no choice, but there are many who simply choose this lifestyle for whatever reason. I could continue on, there are many people who make decisions and most of the rest of us wonder why in the world they would make such a decision.

I'll tell you why a woman would become a prostitute. Because of need and desperation.

Tell me, can you choose who you are sexually attracted to? I can't. I am either sexually attracted to someone, or not sexually attracted to someone. Can you choose to be sexually attracted to a man if you wanted to? I could not.

Some people are attracted to both sexes...and some of those go through cycles of who they are attracted to. I don't.

I believe, I basically said the same exact things you have said here, in my last post. Lets see if that is the case. You start out by saying,

I'll tell you why a woman would become a prostitute. Because of need and desperation.

I said basically the same thing in my last post. Referring to prostitutes, I said,

Now certainly there are those who are forced into it, and there are those that believe they have no choice,

Notice, I go a step further than you, by acknowledging there are prostitutes that are forced into prostitution against their will, but I also acknowledge, as you did, there are those that believe they have no choice, in other words, they are desperate. So we are in agreement here, but the point is there are also women who choose to live this way, because according to them, they enjoy the lifestyle. In reality, we are not talking about prostitutes, I only brought this topic up to make a point. The point was I believe, there are those in the homosexual community that are there by choice. You seem to think, no one would ever make this choice because of the prejudice, but people make choices all the time that continue to cause them trouble. Why would someone, continue to decide to go out drinking, fully knowing they intend to drive, and already have multiple DUI's? Makes no sense, but happens all the time. The point is, just because a lifestyle causes trouble, this does not always deter. Now you also say,

Tell me, can you choose who you are sexually attracted to?

I already addressed this question in my last post, when I stated,

As you say, I cannot control who I may be sexually attracted to,

So I agreed that I cannot control this, but I went on to say that I do not have to act on these attractions. In other words, I may have a strong sexual attraction, for someone other than my wife. This attraction, may feel absolutely natural to me. I may feel as though pursuing this attraction would give me fulfillment, after all it is natural, right? So why not pursue it? Why wouldn't my wife allow this? It is a natural attraction, so why in the world would I not act on this attraction? Could the answer be, because it is wrong! Really? You mean I have to set aside this absolutely natural attraction I have, simply because it is wrong? Are you telling me, my natural desires are wrong? Who are you, to tell me that?

I hope you can see what I am saying here. Just because we have attractions, that seem natural to us does not mean we must act on these attractions. Most all of us as teens go through the point, where we have strong sexual desires, but their are many who do not act on these desires, because they intend to save themselves for marriage, they believe this is the right thing to do. In other words, they set these strong, seemingly, natural desires aside, in order to pursue, what they believe to be right. My point is, someone who is a Christian, that finds they are attracted to the same sex, can decide to place these desires aside, in order to pursue what they believe is right. PLEASE NOTICE HERE, I AM IN NO WAY STATING THIS SHOULD BE A MANDATE. In other words, I am not saying everyone must, or should be doing this. We all have choices, and we are all free to make these choices. So if there are those who find they are attracted to the same sex, but are convinced of the truth of Christianity, then they are free to set these attractions aside, to pursue what they believe to be righteous. Those that are not in the Faith, are free to pursue their own happiness, and I should not interfere with this. But, having made this statement, I do not have to agree with their choice in lifestyles. In other words, I should not be forced to consent, that this is a natural, normal lifestyle. This seems to be, what a lot of people are wanting Christians to do. They seem to want us to acknowledge, that this is a natural, normal, lifestyle. There is a tremendous difference between not interfering with someone's pursuit of happiness, as opposed to acknowledging, that the lifestyle they are pursuing is natural, or normal. In other words, if you choose to believe that this lifestyle is natural, and normal, then you are certainly free to believe this, but please do not attempt to force me to believe the same as you.

At any rate, I do not think it is uncommon for us to set aside our natural desires. Example; There are times when someone will say something that rubs me the wrong way, and I will have a natural desire to choke the life out of them. Should I set this desire aside, or should I act on it?

[Wootah]

[Replying to post 34 by Ooberman]

The issue here is that there are some things that we both acknowledge should be counteracted.

By the current logic cancer is natural however I am fairly sure you agree with the fight against cancer. Or to make it a bit more trivial my eye sight is bad and I wear glasses. Is the deterioration of my eyesight natural or is the correction natural?

If unnatural is not your preferred word what is? There must be a word you are willing to offer the debate that I can use that makes sense of our the normal desire to remove cancer and wear glasses.

You argue that there aren't any mistakes in evolution. To my knowledge all biological processes try their hardest to replicate themselves according to their programming. Like when a cell duplicates itself, it follows the programming and even detects copy mistakes and so on.

What is a mistake? When I mistype on the keyboard is that a mistake or is that not possible because there are no mistakes in evolution?

Are you trying to call all the human beings who have been born as intersex "mistakes"?

No, you are trying to tell us they are abominations made by Sin.

Why would God make people who, in your eyes are "mistakes" or so warped by someone else's sin that they aren't even mentioned in God's Book?


You really have a low opinion of other human beings who don't conform. Do you feel the same way about people with blue eyes? short people? and other people you might find grotesque?

What is you hidden feelings about this? They are seeming to come out.

I want to use common words that seem to describe the situation. No one looks at a genetic deformity and thinks it is natural. Every parents counts their child to have 10 fingers and 10 toes. We spend a fortune on correcting issues in a profession called medicine. However you seem to be arguing that deformity is normal.

If you don't mind I will ignore the insinuations in your post. I want to converse in the same language so how can we do so when you are calling everything in biology natural?

I am curious how you could feel one of God's Creatures is a "mistake". Does God make mistakes, in your mind?

Or, did he plan for people, like you, to become intersex-phobic?

God doesn't make mistakes. He cursed the world after the fall. If am intersex-phobic then isn't that my biology and therefore natural?

[Wootah]

[Replying to post 35 by Haven]

Is a down syndrome person a natural state of affairs?

Suppose we had the science to repair a down syndrome person should we use it?

I really loathe using the PC version if a word. To my knowledge the word is not offensive. I don't mind digressing a bit to learn how it became offensive though.

What is the non value laden term a parent can use when their child is born deformed?