The Instigator
radz
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
xXKorvexiusXx
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Being Transgender is not a Sin

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/3/2016 Category: Religion
Updated: 6 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 627 times Debate No: 94300
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (13)
Votes (0)

 

radz

Pro

PRO: Being transgender is not a sin.

CON: Being transgender is a sin.

Note: Con should be a "Christian" (of any denomination) who strongly believes that transsexualism is a sin.

Pro's arguments:
Gender Dysphoria does exist (DSM-5) and its medical treatment is the most effective treatment available based on studies. Therefore, being transgender is not a sin.

Questions to Con:
1. Does the Bible say that being transgender is a sin?
2. Is the diagnosis of Gender Dysphoria real?
3. Why do you think that sex reassignment is sinful?

References that can be used:

1. The Holy Bible

> The Bible is silent on the issue of transsexualism yet we can use Bible principles to address it (Phil 4:8;2 Timothy 2:15; 3:16-17).

2. Scientific studies

> Empirical data matters since arguments on the ethics of sex reassignment includes biology and psychology. Christians sometimes uses science to determine the sinfulness of something (e.g. cigarettes smoking is dangerous to health and thus, forbidden by Christians).

Sequence of Debate

Round 1: Acceptance / Answers of Con to the questions of Pro
Round 2: Rebuttal of Pro
Round 3: Argument of Con
Round 4. Rebuttal of Pro
xXKorvexiusXx

Con

I accept. In accordance with the terms set by Pro, I will quickly answer each question, and in my next post, I will lay out my sources and an argument in support of my position.

1. Does the Bible say that being transgender is a sin?

The Bible does not explicitly reference transgenderism, however in my further arguments, I will show that transgenderism contradicts God's plan and morality.

2. Is the diagnosis of Gender Dysphoria real?

Yes, Gender Dysphoria is a clinically diagnosed mental disorder.

http://www.who.int...

3. Why do you think that sex reassignment is sinful?

I will lay out my argument and position in my post, as I will mainly use this one for acceptance. In Round 2, Pro will try to show transgenderism is consistent with the Bible's morality, and I will try to show the opposite.
Debate Round No. 1
radz

Pro

Thank you for accepting the debate challenge!

Definition of terms

Genotypic sex - one's gender based on the number of chromosomes (X,Y).
Phenotypic sex - one's gender based on outward form.
Gender Identity - one's sense of being either male or female.
Transgender - one whose gender identity and phenotypic sex is incongruent.
Transsexual - one who undergone or undergoes gender reassignment.
Gender Reassignment - the treatment for Gender Dysphoria which consists of the Gender Affirming procedures (psychotherapy, hormone therapy and surgery).
Gender Dysphoria - the distress that comes from being transgender.

Being Transgender is not a Sin

The axiom that the Bible is the only source of morality is prevalent in Sola Scriptura Christian believers.Being transgender isn't a sin since there is nothing in the Bible that says so. In fact, the Bible implicitly tells us that being transgender is not a sin since being a transgender is an inborn condition (a congential condition). We read in John 9:1-3: "As he passed by, he saw a man blind from birth. 2 And his disciples asked him, “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?” 3 Jesus answered, “It was not that this man sinned, or his parents,but that the works of God might be displayed in him."Jesus himself said that birth defects are not caused by anyone's sin. By implication, every congenital defects/disorders is deemed to be as no one's fault.Transsexualism is a congenital condition. Thus, being transgender is not a sin.

The strongest evidence to suggest that abnormal prenatal brain differentiation may lead to gender identity disorder comes from a recent study examining hypothalamic brain nuclei in men with gender identity disorder. Zhou et al. (1995) found that the central subdivision of the bed nucleus of the stria terminalis (a region of the hypothalamus) was smaller in MF transsexuals compared to normal males but similar in size to normal females, a difference that was not accounted for by hormone therapy.

The fetal brain develops during the intrauterine period in the male direction through a direct action of testosterone on the developing nerve cells, or in the female direction through the absence of this hormone surge. In this way, our gender identity (the conviction of belonging to the male or female gender) and sexual orientation are programmed or organized into our brain structures when we are still in the womb. However, since sexual differentiation of the genitals takes place in the first two months of pregnancy and sexual differentiation of the brain starts in the second half of pregnancy, these two processes can be influenced independently, which may result in extreme cases in trans-sexuality. This also means that in the event of ambiguous sex at birth, the degree of masculinization of the genitals may not reflect the degree of masculinization of the brain. There is no indication that social environment after birth has an effect on gender identity or sexual orientation (Garcia-Falgueras A 2010).

1.God created mankind in his own image. The binary gender (male and female) reflects the divine image. The Bible says "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him;male and female he created them (Genesis 1:27). Yet Transsexualism and hermaphroditic conditionboth blurred the lines of binary concept of gender.

The improvement of the DSM is not only in line with recent scientific discoveries but also in line with what the Bible says. Being a female isn't a disabling disorder and being a male isn't a disabling disorder. In other words, the female gender identity is good and the male gender identity is good. In Genesis 1:27, God created mankind -- male and female -- in his own image and verse 31 says that it was very good.Gender identity is not a disorder. Gender identity is in fact very good.It is never wrong to be a male and it is never wrong to be a female.In fact, science has shown that gender identity is innate or inborn. It is not shaped by environmental factors.

Although the mechanisms remain to be determined, there is strong support in the literature for a biologic basis of gender identity (Sarswat A et al. 2015).

The American Psychological Association (APA) renamed the diagnosis Gender Identity Disorder as Gender Dysphoria in theDiagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5).The former shows that gender identity per se is a disorder while the former shows that the disorder is the distress that comes from the incongruent gender identity and phenotypic sex.The American Psychological Association (2011) explains that a“psychological state is considered a mental disorder only if it causes significant distress or disability."

Therfore, what is considered as a mental disorder in Transsexualism is the disabling discomfort of gender identity and phenotypic sex incongruenceand not the gender identity of the Transsexual.In other words, gender identity is not a disorder sincebeing a male or a female is not disabling.

2. If you believe that Gender Dysphoria is a real diagnosis? Why ,then, are you against its medical treatment?

Gender Dysphoria is real and its medical treatment is the most effective treatment available.


3. Sex Reassignment Surgery is part of the medical treatments for Gender Dysphoria.

Gender reassignment (which includes psychotherapy, hormonal therapy and surgery)has been demonstrated as the most effective treatment for patients affected by gender dysphoria (or gender identity disorder), in which patients do not recognize their gender (sexual identity) as matching their genetic and sexual characteristics (Selvaggi G, 2011).

Although current transgender treatment is relatively invasive and does not address the problem completely,it is the most successful intervention available. Studies report very high transgender patient satisfaction with sexual reassignment. Thus far, the largest evaluation has been a survey of Dutch transgender patients. Among the 1,285 patients surveyed, 1,280 were satisfied (Joshua D. Safer et al. 2008).



References

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...
xXKorvexiusXx

Con

I'd like to thank my opponent for commencing this debate. First, before I lay for my case to show transgender is inconsistent with the Bible, I will rebut his arguments.

First, my opponent claims that transgenderism is implicitly said to be okay in the Bible, because one type of congenital condition is not sinful, but he concludes that therefore no congenital condition is sinful, which seems to me to be a Fallacy of Equivocation. First of all, there is scientific evidence to show transgenderism is not congenital. The fact is, 70%-80% of all kids with transgender tendencies spontaneously lose them [1]. If this was truly congenital from birth like blindness is, which was the subject of the Biblical passage he referenced, this would not be possible. You cannot spontaneously lose your blindness, yet this is possible for transgenderism? Lastly, blindness is not a mental disorder, unlike Gender Dysphoria.

Clearly, there is no way for this to be a set faculty in your brain from birth. The scientific evidence shows that transgenderism is either a non-congenital behavior that can be spontaneously lost over time, or a non-congenital tendency that is the result of an actual congenital disorder known as Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia (CAH). Now, CAH is an inherited disorder in which adrenal glands produce an excessive amount of androgens, which results in 5-12% of all people with CAH getting Gender Dysphoria according to a peer-reviewed scientific study [2]. Scientific studies have also shown severe CAH appears within 1 in 16,000 births [3], and as many as 1 in 100 people have non-classical CAH [4], which is higher than the percentage of trans people out there.

Now, this would clearly indicate that transgenderism is not congenital. The only way for transgenderism to even appear from birth is through an unnatural fluctuation of male and female hormones, which of course is caused by other disorders, not transgenderism in and of itself.

Now, my opponent says the following;

"Transsexualism and hermaphroditic condition both blurred the lines of binary concept of gender."

They certainly did not, hermaphroditic conditions are just that, conditions, they are genetic deficiencies, and completely unnatural. For it to be consistent with God's design, it must be possible for Adam and Eve to have it, however there is no coherently possible way that God would have created either Adam and Eve with Gender Dysphoria/any hermaphroditic conditions, and thus this could not possibly be in line with God's plan.

Now, I will lay out a Biblical argument against transgenderism.

As we've seen, anything inconsistent with God's original design plan is set as abominable, immoral, and sinful. Let us examine this plan. God created two humans, one man, and one women, in order to be attracted to each other, and bear children. Now, anything inconsistent with this has been deemed as sin. Homosexuality, as in sexual tendencies towards the same sex, is inconsistent with man and women being attracted as God had created it, and thus it is a sin [Leviticus 18:22, 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, Romans 1:26-28]. God had set Adam and Eve, only humans, to have sexual relations with women, not animals. Thus, bestiality (having sex with animals) is a sin [Exodus 22:19, Leviticus 18:23, 1 Corinthians 15:38-39]. Other examples can be given, but it is clear that if it contradicts God's original design plan, it is a sin. Thus, if transgenderism is not a sin, then God could have used it in his original design plan with Adam and Eve. Of course, this is false, as if either Adam or Eve were transgender, and undergone some sort of Sex Reassignment Surgery or something, you would either have two males, or two females, rather than a male and a female, and it would be impossible to follow God's command to "be fruitful and multiply" [Genesis 1:28]. Because it fails to be fruitful and multiply, it fails at going through with God's original design plan, is inconsistent with it, and is thus a sin. Some may argue that things have changed after Noah's flood, but this is not so, the only covetal change was when the New Testament came, however the New Testament still placed massive emphasis on the original design plan of God, and thus things like homosexuality, premarital sex, adultery, bestiality, is still forbidden.

Secondly, we can see the Bible clearly condemns behavior and tendencies directly associated with transgenderism. For example, let us see this verse;

Deuteronomy 22:5; " A woman must not wear men"s clothing, nor a man wear women"s clothing, for the Lord your God detests anyone who does this."

Clearly, crossdressing is immoral. If God created you a man, and you became a women and then necessarily crossdressed with your new "sex", you would be sinning. Secondly, in 1 Corinthians 6:9, it condemns homosexual offenders, however the Greek term translated into "homosexual offender" literally means "effiminate". The word effeminate is defined in the dictionary as;

"(of a man or boy) having traits, tastes, habits, etc., traditionally considered feminine, as softness or delicacy" [5]

Clearly, this is exactly what transgender people are, this can almost outright be taken as condemnation of transgenderism, and to me, it would seem that to deny this would require serious playing with words, however if my opponent remains convinced of his own position after this, I will be expecting a legitimate response, I shall give him an opportunity to defend this.

Thirdly, according to the Bible, if a man gets rid of his genitals (penis), then he literally cannot stand before the assembly of God.

Deuteronomy 23:1; "No one who is emasculated or has his male organ cut off shall enter the assembly of the LORD."

Clearly, if you willingly remove your penis, you are forbidden from God's assembly (Heaven?) -- transgenderism is an extremely serious abomination to God in Christianity and the Bible. If my opponent wants to appeal to the New Testament to say this is false, and that this no longer applies, he is mistaken. With the New Testament, the Ceremonial Law of the Old Testament was affected, not the Moral Law. For example, you are no longer to put people to death for having homosexual death, however homosexuality is still forbidden. Likewise, you are not any longer to put transgenders to death (assuming this is the punishment), but transgenderism is still forbidden.

From what we have seen, we have seen that transgenderism contradicts God's original design plan, and tendencies directly associated with transgenderism is directly outlawed by the Bible and made to be seen as an abomination. There is no possible way that God designates this as a moral thing. The Bible says it is GOD who makes us in our womb [Psalms 139:13], to tell God that you are truly the opposite gender and you were born in the wrong body is an INSULT to Him, it is to tell him he made a MISTAKE, but God is perfect [Psalms 18:30], he cannot make any mistakes. If you are born a man, God created you as a man, and if you are born as a women, God has made you a woman, and attempting to change this is sinful according to the Bible, thus being transgender is indeed a sin.

1. http://www.wsj.com...
2.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...
3. http://www.cc.nih.gov...
4. http://www.newbornscreening.info...
5. http://www.dictionary.com...
Debate Round No. 2
radz

Pro

Being Transgender is a Congenital Condition

Transgender women are women because of biological reality. Many studies show that transgender women's brain are physiologically female. In this sense, transgenders are in the same boat as intersex people. Both faces biological reality, so to speak.

Male-to-female transsexuals have female neuron numbers in a limbic nucleus (Kruijver et al. , May 2000).

In their study of six MTF GID sufferers, a femaleR08;sized BSTc was present in all subjects. Additionally, the size of the BSTc was not influenced by taking sex hormones in adulthood. This implies that these individuals had a powerful biological force compelling them to be female, rather than just a psychological conviction" (Nicola Tugnet et al. 2007).

For a number of sexually dimorphic brain structures or processes, signs of feminisation or masculinisation are observable in transsexual individuals, which, during hormonal treatment, partly seem to further adjust to characteristics of the desired sex (Smith ES, 2015).

According to a 2009 study, being a male to female transsexualism has a genetic cause.

Australian researchers have identified a significant link between a gene involved in testosterone action and male-to-female transsexualism.A significant association was identified between transsexualism and the AR allele, with transsexuals having longer AR repeat lengths than non-transsexual male control subjects (p=.04). (Hary L et al. 2009).

Not all cisgender women (women born with XX chromosome) experience "menstrual cramps, pregnancy and dozens of other things women experience." For instance, a cisgender woman with Mayer-Rockitansky-Kuster-Hauser syndrome (MRKH) does not have a uterus or a womb.

Studies show that transgenders are born that way.

The strongest evidence to suggest that abnormal prenatal brain differentiation may lead to gender identity disorder comes from a recent study examining hypothalamic brain nuclei in men with gender identity disorder ( Zhou et al. 1995)

The fetal brain develops during the intrauterine period in the male direction through a direct action of testosterone on the developing nerve cells, or in the female direction through the absence of this hormone surge. In this way, our gender identity (the conviction of belonging to the male or female gender) and sexual orientation are programmed or organized into our brain structures when we are still in the womb. However, since sexual differentiation of the genitals takes place in the first two months of pregnancy and sexual differentiation of the brain starts in the second half of pregnancy, these two processes can be influenced independently, which may result in extreme cases in trans-sexuality. There is no indication that social environment after birth has an effect on gender identity or sexual orientation (Garcia-Falgueras A 2010).

Rebuttals

Most gender dysphoric children grow up to be gay or lesbian.Patients with non-persistent GD (whether children, adolescent or adult) is not a case of Irreversible Transgenderism because by very definition GD is persistent cross-gender identification.

Only 2.5% to 20% of all cases of GID in childhood and adolescence are the initial manifestation of irreversible transsexualism (Alexander Corte et al. 2008).

Most children with gender dysphoria will not remain gender dysphoric after puberty. Children with persistent GID are characterized by more extreme gender dysphoria in childhood than children with desisting gender dysphoria. With regard to sexual orientation, the most likely outcome of childhood GID is homosexuality or bisexuality (Drescher J et al. 2014).

Of children with even severe gender dysphoria and cross-sex identification, about 85% do not develop a persistent transsexual identity in adolescence. Reliable indicators are not so far available regarding which gender dysphoric children cease to be so in puberty and who develop transsexual identity. Medical interventions are therefore not warranted in pre-pubertal children In light of current knowledge, transsexual identity in adolescence is persistent and medical interventions may be appropriate (Riittakerttu Kaltiala-Heino et al. 2015).

Con, note that sexual orientation is different from gender identity. Do not confuse the two.

Deuteronomy 22:5

Deuteronomy 22:5 prohibits cross-dressing. CAH and other forms of intersex conditions with GD diagnosis (e.g. XX male syndrome etc.) show us that genes and genitalia are not the determiners of gender but the brain itself. Thus, if the scope of Deut 22:5 were universal, then, intersex people with GD is wrongfully included in that proscription since modern science hasn't yet been available in the ancient world. Yet in our time Deut 22:5 is not applicable to intersex people with GD since all of today's Christian denomination encourage sex reassignment and gender transition to such people! Why not encourage sex reasignment to transsexuals with GD as well?

Bottom line: GD diagnosis covers both intersex people and transgenders. Patients with GD (whether trans or intersex) equally deserve to receive medical treatment for GD.

1 Corinthians 6:9

The only Biblical usage of malakoi [male prostitutes, NRSV] in the context of sinful behavior is found in 1 Corinthians 6:9. Since malakoi is side by side arsenokites [man lying in bed], it connotes same-sex sexual activity. In the context, it refers to heterosexual males commiting homoeroticism as a form of idolatry (cf. 1 Corinthians 6:17-18).

Bottom line: Con's argument is wishful thinking.1 Corinthians 6:9 does not talk about people with GD because if it were, then, intersex people will be included in that proscription!

Deuteronomy 23:1

Deuteronomy 23:1 is clearly about eunuchs. In Matthew 19:12, Jesus himself welcomes eunuchs! Therefore, [Jesus] cogently argued that Deuteronomy 23:1 is now null.

Psalm 139:13

God is perfect (Psalm 18:30). Every one is created by God from birth even from the womb (Psalm 139:13). Blindness is not part of the original design (Genesis 1). Judaism believed that being blind from birth is a sin (cf. John 9:3). Being an eunuch is excluded in Judaism (Deut 23:1).

The argument of Con holds no water because in the New Testament, both conditions were welcomed by Jesus Christ himself! There's a man blind from birth (John 9:1) and there's a man eunuch from birth (Matthew 19:12). Birth defects are not mistakes but God's way of displaying his glory(cf. John 9:1-3; Matthew 19:11-12). Neither Eve were created blind nor were Adam created an eunuch!

The Biblical Ethics of Gender Reassignment

You say, "I am allowed to do anything"--but not everything is good for you. You say, "I am allowed to do anything"-- beneficial. 1 Corinthians 10:23 (NLT)

Dear friend, I hope all is well with you and that you are as healthy in body as you are strong in spirit. 3 John 1:2 (NLT)

The Bible allows gender reassignment since those medical treatments are good and beneficial for the health of patients with Gender Dysphoria.

has been demonstrated as the most effective treatment for patients affected by gender dysphoria (or gender identity disorder), in which patients do not recognize their gender (sexual identity) as matching their genetic and sexual characteristics (Selvaggi G, 2011).

Although current transgender treatment is relatively invasive and does not address the problem completely, it is the most successful intervention available. Studies report very high transgender patient satisfaction with sexual reassignment. Thus far, the largest evaluation has been a survey of Dutch transgender patients. Among the 1,285 patients surveyed, 1,280 were satisfied (Joshua D. Safer et al. 2008).

I can't understand why people suffering with GD is being tauted as sinning. People who twist God's word to say what it doesn't say is the one sinning!

Bottom line:

Being transgender is not a sin because any patient with GD diagnosis receiving medical treatment is not sinning.

xXKorvexiusXx

Con

First, I will rebut my opponent's arguments, and then I will defend my own.

Now, my opponent begins by placing emphasis on establishing a congenital basis for transgenderism, however as I have shown, the majority of transgender cases are in fact non-congenital. First of all, I have shown that Gender Dysphoria can arise from CAH, which makes CAH the cause of Gender Dysphoria, rather than a biological cause. Secondly, I have also shown that 70-80% of all transgender cases disappear spontaneously with children, and thus the vast majority of transgender cases, are in fact, non-congenital, and even in fact end up dissipating. In fact, me opponent, in the beginning of his rebuttals, even seems to cite three sources that confirm that the vast majority of the time, Gender Dysphoria spontaneously disappears through the childhood and puberty of a person. It seems that my opponent wants to claim that these cases are actually just homosexuality, not transgenderism, but all sources seem to contradict him by affirming this is actual transgenderism.

However, it is fair to say that there seems to be indicating that a small minority of the time, about 2.5%-20% of cases according to one of my opponents own sources seem to indicate that sometimes, this case might in fact be congenital, however this does not show it is Biblically acceptable. My opponent might try to disagree by citing Psalms 139:13 to show that in such a case, God would have made us transgender, but this of course is ridiculous for two reasons. One, some people seem to equally have a biological basis for pedophilia or even homosexuality, but these are Biblical abominations no matter how you look at it. Secondly, according to Romans 1:24, God gives some seriously abominable people to sin, and in 2 Thessalonians 2:11, we are even told God places a strong delusion on some sinners as their righteous punishment. Being congenital does not show it as permissible in the slightest according to Christian doctrine.

Now, for his rebuttals to the verses from the Bible I posted. In respect to Deuteronomy 22:5, he appeals to intersex people. However, this "intersex" gender is not natural, God did not create it. The Bible says God created us man and women [Genesis 1:27], intersex is a genetic deficiency and cannot be possibly used to defend people with Gender Dysphoria from cross-dressing. My opponent claims that Deuteronomy 22:5 is not universal, however this is a ridiculous statement as the Bible does not limit it to any people. In the New Testament, Jesus said "So then, whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do likewise will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven" [Matthew 5:19], this makes it evident that Christianity absolutely forbids limitation or removal of these teachings.

As for 1 Corinthians 6:9, my opponent claims that the Greek term 'malakoi', which means effeminate, does not actually mean effeminate here if you take into account the fact that it is beside arsenokites, which references same-sex activity, and thus the entire thing only references homosexuality. However, this is false, if it simply wanted to deny homosexuality, it would not include 'malakoi', such as other verses in the Bible where homosexuality is forbidden but 'malakoi' does not appear like Romans 1:27. Many translations include "effeminate", including the INT, NAS, and notably the KJV. It is clear that effeminacy is involved, as no such grammatical rule in the Greek would filter out malakoi in this passage, it is very clear.

Now first, my opponent tries to show that blindness is a sin in Judaism by referencing John 9:3, however John 9:3 is not part of Judaic belief, and there is no Old Testament indication to show blindness is of sin in Judaism. Rather, if you look at the verse earlier, some Jews invoke that the man is blind because as part of God's punishment towards his parents for sinning. But once again, this is some random Rabbi in John 9:2, Judaism has no teaching indicating blindness is a sin if it is not in the Old Testament or Talmud.

Secondly, he says "blindness is not in the original creation". Well, duh, but blindness is compatible with the original creation, as if either Adam or Eve were blind, or even both, they would still have been able to obey God's command, reproduce, and "be fruitful and multiply". However, if either Adam or Eve were transgender, and undergone Sex Reassignment Surgery or something like that, it would be impossible for them to "be fruitful and multiply", it would not even be a possibility, God would have to annihilate them for failing to meet His orders. Remember, an illness on its own does not condemn you (like per say, a genetic deficiency that keeps you from reproducing), however if Adam or Eve by their own decision underwent a process (Sex Reassignment), then you have now condemned yourself by going through with your sin rather than fighting it. Indeed, transgenderism is incompatible with God's Design Plan, and it is thus immoral.

In response to Deuteronomy 23:1, my opponent says these are eunuchs, and eunuchs are validated in Matthew 19:12. However, Biblically, a eunuch is someone who removes their testicles to get rid of sexuality [3], and to pacify themselves from sexual immorality, and this is the only way in which it is permitted, however removing your testicles in order to change your sex has a much, much different intent than exterminating your sexual immorality, and thus is not protected by Jesus. Thus, they remain condemned by Deuteronomy 23:1.

Now, my opponent tries to post Biblical verses to show that transgenderism is permissible by the Bible. First, he quotes 1 Corinthians 10:23, however, he completely rips it out of its context, let's see what it says combined with the next verse as well, verse 24;

1 Corinthians 10:23-24; ""I have the right to do anything," you say"but not everything is beneficial. "I have the right to do anything""but not everything is constructive. No one should seek their own good, but the good of others." [1]

Clearly, the passage says NOT to seek your own good or health, rather the good of others. Paul tells us that he , at much time had nothing to eat in repercussions for spreading teachings and truth of Christianity [2]. Would it not have been better for him to give up on spreading it all his life, maybe take a few months of, maybe avoid these dangerous conflicts in order so that he may be in good health? Of course not, his health, his anxiety is not of relevance, it is the others that were in his mind, and such a person with Gender Dysphoria must not give in, and must make themselves a righteous example of one who fought against the sins, so that others may follow.

Then, my opponent posts 3 John 1:2, but if you simply examine the verse, it clearly shows that what is taught here is that OTHERS are to pray for you, so that God may deliver good health from you, and perhaps free you from your transgenderism. Again, if you just look at 1 Corinthians 10:23-24, you are NOT to seek your own benefit, you seek to help othes and others will seek to help you.

People who SUFFER from Gender Dysphoria do not sin, but if you ACKNOWLEDGE your illness, and even attempt to change the body that God personally made for you [Psalms 139:13], then this is indeed a sin according to Christianity.

Once again, Christianity teaches GOD has created us in our mothers wombs, and Sex Reassignment Surgery is devising and destroying what God created. Clearly, the Bible makes it evident that transgenderism is not moral under Christian theology, and thus the Con position is accurate.

1. https://www.biblegateway.com...
2. http://biblehub.com...
3. http://www.gotquestions.org...
Debate Round No. 3
radz

Pro

Con wrongfully equated Gender Dysphoria with Transgenderism as seen in his very words.

"Now, my opponent begins by placing emphasis on establishing a congenital basis for transgenderism, however as I have shown, the majority of transgender cases are in fact non-congenital."

Such faulty understanding of what Gender Dysphoria is made Con's arguments built upon a sand.

Con needs to know what Gender Dysphoria REALLY is. Con, I urge you to pay attention, Gender Dysphoria is the set of symptoms of gender incongruence, gender variance and gender nonconformity.

Being transgender and having Gender Dysphoria are not the same thing. The simple fact is that a psychotic can have Gender Dysphoria, a homosexual can have Gender Dysphoria, an intersex can have Gender Dsyphoria and of course, a transgender can have Gender Dysphoria.

1. Majority of Gender Dysphoria in children arises from homosexuality since it is empirically known that Gender variant children did not persist in GD but grew as homosexuals.

Most children with gender dysphoria will not remain gender dysphoric after puberty...the most likely outcome of childhood GID is homosexuality or bisexuality (Drescher J et al. 2014).

2. Gender Dsyphoria can arise from psychosis.

The successful treatment of a gender dysphoric patient with pimozide (Puri BK et al. 1996).

3. Gender Dysphoria also sometimes arises from intersex conditions (CAH, XX male syndrome; XX female syndrome etc).

4. Gender Dysphoria also sometimes arises from transgender people since it is empirically known that irreversible transsexualism does exist.

Only 2.5% to 20% of all cases of GID in childhood and adolescence are the initial manifestation of irreversible transsexualism (Alexander Corte et al. 2008).

Of these four, only intersex and transgenders need medical treatment for Gender Dysphoria. Children with non-persistent Gender Dysphoria are homosexuals and therefore, they obviously do not need the medical treatment for Gender Dysphoria.

Of children with even severe gender dysphoria and cross-sex identification, about 85% do not develop a persistent transsexual identity in adolescence.Medical interventions are therefore not warranted in pre-pubertal children In light of current knowledge, transsexual identity in adolescence is persistent and medical interventions may be appropriate (Riittakerttu Kaltiala-Heino et al. 2015).

The medical treatment for Gender Dysphoria is the most effective treatment available.

Gender reassignment (which includes psychotherapy, hormonal therapy and surgery) has been demonstrated as the most effective treatment for patients affected by gender dysphoria (Selvaggi G, 2011).

Although current transgender treatment is relatively invasive and does not address the problem completely, it is the most successful intervention available (Joshua D. Safer et al. 2008).

Deuteronomy 22:5

Con said:

"My opponent claims that Deuteronomy 22:5 is not universal..."

Con badly misinterpreted my words. What I really said is this:

Thus, if the scope of Deut 22:5 were universal, then, intersex people with GD is wrongfully included in that proscription since modern science hasn't yet been available in the ancient world.

I did not say that Deuteronomy 22:5 is not universal. On the contrary, I do I agree that it is in fact universal. However, what I argue about it is that such universality would include intersex with Gender Dysphoria in the proscription. That reality is simply not allowed in our time. Why do you use Deut 22:5 against contemporary transgenders with GD and not also to intersex people with GD? Practicing "eisegesis" is never a godly habit, Con.

John 9:2
The incidence in John 9:2 is a remarkable historical passage showing us the views of Jews in the Second Temple period Hellenic Judaism in the first century.I won't argue any further on this (It merits another debate challenge).The internet or one's local library has lots of knowledge to offer Con about such matter.

The argument that transgenders cannot "be fruitful and multiply" simply won't work. A cisgender person with a healthy functioning reproductive system can also not be "fruitful and multiply" simply because he/she can choose celibacy. Regarding the medical treatment for Gender Dsyphoria and what the Bible says about it, read on.

The Biblical Ethics on Gender Reassigment

1 Corinthians 10:23 and 3 John 1:2 are both Bible passages which are written FOR US but certainly not written TO US. Every Sola Scriptura agrees on it. Yet the message these passages is applicable for us 21st century Christians. 1 Corinthians 10:23 focuses on the permissibility of anything good, beneficial and constructive to the body of Jesus Christ. 3 John 1:2 tells us John's prayer for Gaius to be healthy in his body just as he is spiritually. Applying these Bible principles to the issue of Gender Dsyphoria and its medical treatment is completely in line with Sola Scriptura (2 Timothy 3:16-17). I have shown that transgenders with Gender Dysphoria cannot be sinning by undergoing Gender Reassigment. Why would any one sick be sinning by receiving a treatment or a cure?

1 Corinthians 6:9

The most accurate translation of malakoi [Literally, soft] in 1 Corithians 6:9 is "male prostitute" (NIV 1973, NLT, NRSV, NC, ISV, WEB).Even if the word is translated effeminate , it still cannot refer to trans females. Effeminacy in this passage can only refer to either straight men or gay men.

Calling a transgender woman with Gender Dysphoria effeminate because she has a male body is the same as calling an intersex female (XX male syndrome) with Gender Dysphoria because she has a male body. The only difference between the two is the form of biological etiology of their innate conditions, the former physiologically and anatomically female in brain (with genetics of course but not regards the chromosomes ) in a male's body while the latter is geneticaly female (XX chromosomes) in a male's body. Both are literally "women trapped in men's bodies."

Con said:

"However, However, this "intersex" gender is not natural, God did not create it. The Bible says God created us man and women [Genesis 1:27], intersex is a genetic deficiency."

Yet it is not a sin for intersex with Gender Dysphoria to receive Gender Reassignment, right?

For those with true Gender Dysphoria, it would seem that it could be biblically acceptable to seek surgical intervention, such as those with an intersex condition (having a mixture of male and female sexual characteristics) or some other surgically-reparable birth defect. However, for those seeking a sex change for some other reason, it is clearly unbiblical (http://www.compellingtruth.org...).

Aligning the gender of the BODY with the gender of the BRAIN in intersex people IS . NOT . A . SIN . The same logically applies to transsexuals.

SUMMARY

None of the Bible verses which Con has cited supports the ideology that being transgender is a sin. One of it (Deut 22:5) possibly does so but it also covers intersex conditions with Gender Dysphoria (which all modern day Christians believed to be not sinning when receiving Gender Reassignment). Based on empirical data , both trans and intersex are in the same boat. My debate challenge speaks of "Being Transgender is not a sin." I have shown that being transgender is a congenital condition just like intersex conditions. It is not a sin to be transgender just as it is not a sin to be intersex.

CONCLUSION

I do believe that Con has been refuted since Pro has cogently argued that transgenders with Gender Dysphoria are not sinning by receiving the most effective treatment for Gender Dysphoria: Gender Reassignment.


Reference

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...
https://books.google.com.ph...
http://www.compellingtruth.org...

xXKorvexiusXx

Con

My opponent makes a number of errors, let us analyze his comment.

First, my opponent accuses me of equating transgenderism with Gender Dysphoria, however this is obviously false, as my statements imply that all transgenders have Gender Dysphoria, which is correct. By definition, Gender Dysphoria is the term that references the condition, and a transgender is what you call a person with this condition. My opponent says "a homosexual can have gender dysphoria" and "a transgender can have gender dysphoria", but this is strange to me because if a homosexual has gender dysphoria, then the person is also a transgender and thus exactly the same as his other claim, "a transgender can have gender dysphoria".

Now, I will present a defense for the Biblical passages I quoted.

First, on Deuteronomy 22:5. He says this cannot apply to ALL people, like intersex, but directly quoted from his comment, his reason for suggesting this is "That reality is simply not allowed in our time.". This is obviously ridiculous. He goes on to say this as well;

"Why do you use Deut 22:5 against contemporary transgenders with GD and not also to intersex people with GD?"

This is a classical Strawman Fallacy, as if you go to any of my arguments and posts, I never dis-included intersex people from Deuteronomy 22:5. On Christian theology, which is the discussion, this would definitely ascertain prescription upon these people as well, and so my opponent has never actually, in any of his comments since I've posted this, given us a viable reason to disdain this passage against transgenderism, which is the topic of this debate. Even if it did not appeal to intersex people, that STILL is nothing more than a Red Herring because my opponent must explain that it does not apply to TRANSGENDER people. If you see the title of the debate or even the Con position explained by my opponent in his original first comment, my position is "being transgender is a sin", not having gender dysphoria, which my opponent seems to confuse (which is strange considering, if you recall, he just explained to us all transgenderism and gender dysphoria is not the same thing).

My opponent once again appeals to John 9:2 to show Judaism teaches blindness is a sin, but once again, as we have seen it only says that people are blind because their parents sin (John 9:1-2), and I have shown the context, and even then it would not show Judaism teaches it is a sin, but just that a few Jewish people believe it. I told my opponent that to show this exposes blindness as a sin, he would have to quote Jewish scripture, like the Old Testament or the Talmud, but he has failed to do this knowingly.

In regards to my argument that transgender is a sin, because at the Garden of Eden it would be impossible for transgenders to "be fruitful and multiply" as God commanded, as if one of them changed sex procreation would be impossible, his argument is "heterosexual people capable of reproduction can choose celibacy [to abstain from marriage and sexual partners]". Now, this is ridiculous, as in the Garden of Eden, Adam personally went through all the animals God shown him, and was told to choose a partner, and he ended up choosing Eve. The idea of these people practicing celibacy is completely incompatible with Christian theology, and thus this does not protect counter-argument to the fact that transgender is a sin as it is incompatible with God's Original Design Plan.

My opponent then goes back to 1 Corinthians 10:23 and 3 John 1:2. Now, I have already posted the context of Corinthians, showing that it tells us NOT to seek our own good, and thus this seems like an intentional misrepresentation here. As for 3 John 1:2, I also shown the context on this, and it clearly says to PRAY FOR OTHERS and nothing else. None of these could possibly show actually being transgender is free from sin. My opponent asks "why would getting treatment [sex reassignment surgery] be a sin [for gender dysphoria]?".

It is because of the argument that my opponent repeatedly has ignored since my first comment, and that is the passage of Psalms 139:13, where it literally says that God makes us in our wombs. God makes us male or female, God makes us in all our flesh and bones. If God made you a male, God has made you a male, and likewise with being a female. If you were meant to be a female, then God would have made you a female. If you are made by God as a female, and then take Sex Reassignment Surgery, you have destroyed God's creation, which is a very big sin to say the very least. God has made you who you are, and attempting to become something else and divert from God, and change our bodies, is literally pursuing our fleshly ways in this world, which is a sin [1] in Christianity.

In regards to 1 Corinthians 6:9, which condemns men for being effeminate with the Greek term 'malakoi', as my opponent even conceded, this shows that men trying to become women is a sin, as it is becoming effeminate if you literally become a woman. In response, my opponent says this;

"Calling a transgender woman with Gender Dysphoria effeminate because she has a male body is the same as calling an intersex female (XX male syndrome) with Gender Dysphoria because she has a male body. The only difference between the two is the form of biological etiology of their innate conditions, the former physiologically and anatomically female in brain (with genetics of course but not regards the chromosomes ) in a male's body while the latter is genetically female (XX chromosomes) in a male's body. Both are literally "women trapped in men's bodies.""

Now, this is quite lengthy and very flawed. They are not "women trapped in men's bodies", what Gender Dysphoria exactly is, is a psychological feat that makes you feel like or want to be the opposite sex. Scientifically speaking, although transgender males have similar brains to females in a few aspects, it is the FEELING that you are a women trapped in a mans body [2], there are still countless similarities between a transgender males brain and an actual males brain, in fact it is more than the other way around [2].

Then, my opponent says this;

"Aligning the gender of the BODY with the gender of the BRAIN in intersex people IS . NOT . A . SIN . The same logically applies to transsexuals. "

God made our bodies, not our mind. Thus, it sounds ridiculous to say that our bodies must conform to our mind rather than the other way around, this can hardly pass as an argument.

Lastly, my opponent COMPLETELY IGNORES one of the passages of the Bible I posted against transgenderism and Sex Reassignment, which is Deuteronomy 23:1, in which it flat out says that a man who has his genitals removed literally cannot stand in the assembly of God. He did not address this in his final response. Previously, he tried to appeal to eunuchs to protect transgender people from this, but as I have shown, an eunuch is someone who removes genitals for the purpose of removing their sexuality, and an eunuch is a very strict guideline in the Bible where such a thing is permitted, Deuteronomy 23:1 completely repudiates transgenderism and Sex Reassignment and my opponent has failed to defend his position.

In conclusion, we have seen Christian theology is incompatible with transgender. My arguments have shown transgenderism is quite literally incompatible with God's Original Design Plan, that removing your genitals is outright outlawed by God [Deuteronomy 23:1] (unless one is an eunuch, completely different than transgender), we have seen men being effeminate, such as changing your body into a woman is a complete sin in Christianity [1 Corinthians 6:9], and cross-dressing is a sin [Deuteronomy 22:5], which would necessarily happen if a man has sex reassignment and dresses like a women. Transgenderism could not possibly be free from sin. Vote Con.

1. http://biblehub.com...
2. https://www.newscientist.com...
Debate Round No. 4
13 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by xXKorvexiusXx 6 months ago
xXKorvexiusXx
@Degenerate867 If you're convinced by my arguments, vote Con :)
Posted by Degenerate867 6 months ago
Degenerate867
First off I myself am not a Christian. One of my top 10 reasons for choosing not to be was brought up in another comment about denomination. If Gods word was Gods word there would not be room for debate or interpretation. Face it y'all can't have different views and be right. Anyway with all that said what I know of the religion this is simply a sin. I've never understood the basis of these arguments either. Just as with homosexuality this is clearly a sin as defined by the bible. These arguments exist I believe due to someone on the other side wanting to be excepted but I can't fathom wanting to be accepted into a community where the God clearly doesn't accept you.
Posted by HeavenlyPanda 6 months ago
HeavenlyPanda
It's not exactly a sin, its a mental disorder.
Posted by SFG2344 6 months ago
SFG2344
The lack of a specific Christian denomination is a problem: various denominations have differing views on how to interpret what the Bible says. In Roman Catholicism, for example, The Bible's proper meaning comes from within the tradition of the Church, and thus references to apostolic and church writings would be necessary. On the other hand, in many evangelical denominations the Bible's meaning can only come from within the Bible itself and thus such writings would be invalid. By specifying a denomination, the Pro and Con will both be on the same page as to what constitutes a valid argument based on Biblical interpretation.
Posted by xXKorvexiusXx 7 months ago
xXKorvexiusXx
I would accept this debate as it is certainly an intriguing topic, but I "don't match the instigators age or rank criteria" because I am a new member. I hope the instigator changes this so I can take him up on the debate.
Posted by Whatsreallyright 7 months ago
Whatsreallyright
@lannan that is not the point of the debate. And it is how you see sin not how a believer sees sin.
he is saying in a more objective way as far as the bible is concerned being transgender is not a sin
Posted by Jry2001 7 months ago
Jry2001
Disagree with what Discipulus_Didicit said. It would push the BoP to the Pro side. In this debate, the BoP should be shared since both sides are trying to prove a positive point; radz isn't simply staying neutral on the issue. I feel that the current resolution implies the shared BoP better.
Posted by Discipulus_Didicit 7 months ago
Discipulus_Didicit
Why not make the resolution "Being transgender is a sin" and take the con position?
Posted by lannan13 7 months ago
lannan13
Awe, but I was going to run that sin is a social construct and doesn't exist, hence you can't argue something isn't something that doesn't exist.
Posted by Whatsreallyright 7 months ago
Whatsreallyright
First off the most direct verse would be Deuteronomy 22:5.

But in addition to this a many people that are trans would say that they feel that they simply are the wrong gender and express themselves as a different gender. And then still others take this farther to get surgery and pretend to be the opposite gender(scientific fact is that a person cannot really change gender because of the xx and xy chromosomes. so there is comparatively many less people who can actually use the argument such as being born xxy which is just simply rare). And God is supposed to be infallible and perfect. So saying that would be suggesting God made a mistake about your gender. And it also says that your body is not yours but his temple and to change it in such a way would be desecrating his temple.
No votes have been placed for this debate.