[FrankBlunt]

I'd like to advise everyone in advance that this post is highly controversial, but I hope to have a mature discussion without insults toward the parties mentioned.

A friend and I were on the subject of the 11:11 phenomenon a couple days ago, and she quoted some numerological data related to it. One of the expected traits among those who are "called" is androgyny. I knew that this was a reference to embracing the masculine and feminine qualities of one's soul equally, not the physical representation of androgyny.

In any event, I began wondering what position the organized religions of the world take on those born as hermaphrodites, or conjoined twins for that matter. There are also genetic males born as females due to hormonal imbalances during gestation, and vice versa. Does religion determine gender on the basis of genes or hormones? What is the stance on the matter of marriage? Conjoined twins would have the "One man, one woman" issue to contend with, while hermaphrodites and hormonal males/females might worry about committing homosexuality.

The conditions described, while uncommon, remain part of creation. Does The Church view these anomalous births as being God's will, or is the subject yet to be broached? I'm familar with the story of Hermes and Aphrodite, but I was unable to locate any details on social mores from church doctrine.

[emberlake]

Quote

I'd like to advise everyone in advance that this post is highly controversial, but I hope to have a mature discussion without insults toward the parties mentioned.

A friend and I were on the subject of the 11:11 phenomenon a couple days ago, and she quoted some numerological data related to it. One of the expected traits among those who are "called" is androgyny. I knew that this was a reference to embracing the masculine and feminine qualities of one's soul equally, not the physical representation of androgyny.

In any event, I began wondering what position the organized religions of the world take on those born as hermaphrodites, or conjoined twins for that matter. There are also genetic males born as females due to hormonal imbalances during gestation, and vice versa. Does religion determine gender on the basis of genes or hormones? What is the stance on the matter of marriage? Conjoined twins would have the "One man, one woman" issue to contend with, while hermaphrodites and hormonal males/females might worry about committing homosexuality.

The conditions described, while uncommon, remain part of creation. Does The Church view these anomalous births as being God's will, or is the subject yet to be broached? I'm familar with the story of Hermes and Aphrodite, but I was unable to locate any details on social mores from church doctrine.

I'm not an expert on religion, but I don't believe that a 'birth defect' is considered a 'religious disorder' now-a-days.

It matters only how the family cares for the child and helps it reach it's full potential and if possible utilizing the medical community.

Is it God's will? Humans are subject to biological law. How our genes line up to make a baby is the result of hereditary and environmental factors.

God can heal, comfort or help the child and parents to get through the negative and find the positive in the extreme issues presented to them.

I apologize, if I offended anyone.

[luminousphoenix]

First of all I don't mean to offend anyone with my reply. Just throwing in some thoughts.

I was raised Catholic but I no longer believe in religion itself. Catholicism teaches you that everything is sinful and you risk losing your soul in hell for just about everything and anything you do in life. Based on the teachings I grew up with I can tell you that they believe homosexuality and other sexual anomalies are "evil" and probably the doings of the devil himself.

As for myself, I don't necessarily think that having a duality to the soul (both female/male qualities) causes genetic disorders or homosexuality. In fact I think every soul has a duality to it. We just manifest usually one or the other based on the gender we are born with. I think it's more nature at work (passed thru the genes) and other environmental variations.


In nature there should be a reason for everything. Perhaps it's nature's way of controlling the population?

[emberlake]

Quote

In nature there should be a reason for everything. Perhaps it's nature's way of controlling the population?

I didn't think of that. You may be on to something there.
Good point to ponder...

[FrankBlunt]

Quote

I'm not an expert on religion, but I don't believe that a 'birth defect' is considered a 'religious disorder' now-a-days.

Hello, Dea,

It wasn't my goal to imply that birth defects are religious disorders, but to inquire how so many behaviors can be deemed evil by institutions that have the diverse products of God's work staring them in the face.

A few years back I learned of conjoined twin girls living in the Midwest of America, and they share a single body below the position of the liver. There is no ethical way to separate them, and I believe they are entitled to every bit of happiness this world has to offer. I don't view it as wrong for them to fall in love with and marry two partners. Do the current definitions of marriage under church regulation and state law allow this? I doubt it, but failing to make an exception for them may well be tantamount to spitting in the face of creation. What human is prideful enough to challenge God's design?

Quote

It matters only how the family cares for the child and helps it reach it's full potential and if possible utilizing the medical community.

I agree that caring for the child as an equal member of society is of the utmost importance, but I disagree that it is the only thing that matters.

Quote

Is it God's will? Humans are subject to biological law. How our genes line up to make a baby is the result of hereditary and environmental factors.

I see everything as God's will, but I don't believe in an intrusive God: creation without ownership or interference, so to speak. When I asked about God's will, that was mainly a question to organized religion, but I do appreciate your input.

[FrankBlunt]

Quote

As for myself, I don't necessarily think that having a duality to the soul (both female/male qualities) causes genetic disorders or homosexuality. In fact I think every soul has a duality to it.

I hope it wasn't inferred by my original post that a soul's nature leads to genetic disorders. Emotional androgyny was simply the transition that led me to an exploration of the physical form and the limitations that society attempts to place upon freedom.

I agree that the duality exists in every soul. In the thread titled, "An Odd Question", I held a brief debate regarding the misconception that men are lacking in sensitivity compared to women. Repression and hostility are the stereotypical masculine approach to concealing or expressing that same capacity for emotion.

Given the existence of hermaphrodites and others with biological gender ambiguities, is it fair to suppress lesser practiced varieties of sexuality? I'm not a supporter of marriage to begin with, but the exclusivity of the institution disregards those who fall outside the standard definitions of male and female gender.

[emberlake]

My mistake, I'm sorry, I thought your post was about children with birth defects and if religion would deem them 'God's Will'

---
Have you ever raised a child?
I reconfirm my statement in regards to 'children':
"It matters only how the family cares for the child and helps it reach it's full potential and if possible utilizing the medical community."
How a child is raised and cared for will determine how it adjusts in society. And like it or not, how the child behaves also determines how most of society will accept him/her.
---

Now, about adults born with 'birth defects', I think it's their business how they choose to live.

I don't know any religious or legal stance about the marriage issue and will have to leave it for others to comment on.

I apologize for the confusion.

This is an interesting topic and it'll be interesting to see how it goes.

[FrankBlunt]

Quote

My mistake, I'm sorry, I thought your post was about children with birth defects and if religion would deem them 'God's Will'

Not a problem. Intelligent design is part of it, but I'm addressing millenia of closed-mindedness and denial above all else. I think it would be difficult for most western religions to argue that an omnipotent being has no control over genetic mutation since genetics, and one such as Satan, would reside within that sphere of omnipotence.

Quote

Have you ever raised a child?

I have a genetic eye disease that leads to blindness, so I will not have children, but I worked with the severely handicapped and the emotionally disturbed in the mid 90s.

Quote

I reconfirm my statement in regards to 'children'

Don't get me wrong. I don't disagree with you to that great an extent. My basis rested in your use of the term, only. Legislation, much less church doctrine, is not generally swayed by the few. The homosexual community is being met with enormous opposition in pursuit of marriage rights, and they are failing in most states. How would the public react to a task force aimed at seeking a refined definition of marriage for the sake of conjoined twins or hermaphrodites?

It's abundantly clear that we live in a world obsessed with maintaining a false ideal of normality. Not until recent years was I aware of a condition known as sacral agenesis. I've now seen profiles of two with the birth defect. There is no gender ambiguity in that case, but my point is that anything different, especially the subject of severe birth defects, tends to get swept under the rug. People often possess fear, and the ever-popular guilt for living well, when encountering those with even the slightest of physical impairments. Although I'm merely legally blind, the fear and misplaced sympathy I've witnessed is ridiculous.

As an adult I've seen one episode of Oprah. That was the story of the Egyptian surgeons who separated a set of conjoined twins. To illustrate my point about fear and normality obsession, Oprah persistently referred to the underdeveloped twin as a parasitic head. The surgical team spoke of the suckling reactions of the baby's mouth and its awareness of object movement, reiterating that it was a human life worthy of respect. Again and again, Oprah would jump in with her cruel "parasitic head" label.

A parent's best efforts in raising a child with a severe birth defect present little competition for that fear, which shapes public opinion, ultimately legislation.

Quote

Now, about adults born with 'birth defects', I think it's their business how they choose to live.

Absolutely.

[Never_Hit_Nirvana]

You probably didn't find an answer because it doesn't really matter to religion if the meatbag is misshapen; it is the soul, the spirit that matters.
As far as the conjoined twins thing...that is a twisted question. I like. As legal entities, if the girls have separate names, thus separate SSNs and records and such, they are probably allowed to marry. Religiously speaking, if there are believed to be two souls, the same should apply. Practically speaking, good luck finding two guys willing to switch off sloppy seconds for as long as the four of them should live. Unless the girls could find a set of male conjoined twins...Gawd, that is a mental image. Like a sea anenome.
And as far are hermaphrodites go...most of them are given gender assignment surgery shortly after birth. I imagine the religious position would be to play the role you were assigned since God doth hate the poofterish behavior:
I Corinthians 6:9-10 "9 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals,[a] nor sodomites, 10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God."
That's a first, unbelieving, argumentative me posting Bible verses.
As far as other religions...I dunno. I imagine most of them have some kind of prohibition against homosexuality, so the same way of thinking should apply.
But you are right, I have never heard of a religious position on hermaphrodites. Kinda odd. Unless they just ignore it, since it is the soul that counts.

[mako]

Since Jesus was a Jew, followed the Jewish religion and stated that he did not come to change the law, that the law would never change, not one jot or tittle, then the physical condition of a person (the meatbag) seems to matter:

Handicapped people must not approach the altar. Lev 21:16-23

21:17 Speak unto Aaron, saying, Whosoever he be of thy seed in their generations that hath any blemish, let him not approach to offer the bread of his God.
21:18 For whatsoever man he be that hath a blemish, he shall not approach: a blind man, or a lame, or he that hath a flat nose, or any thing superfluous,
21:19 Or a man that is brokenfooted, or brokenhanded
21:20 Or crookbackt, or a dwarf, or that hath a blemish in his eye, or be scurvy, or scabbed, or hath his stones broken;
21:21 No man that hath a blemish of the seed of Aaron the priest shall come nigh to offer the offerings of the LORD made by fire: he hath a blemish; he shall not come nigh to offer the bread of his God.
21:22 He shall eat the bread of his God, both of the most holy, and of the holy.
21:23 Only he shall not go in unto the vail, nor come nigh unto the altar, because he hath a blemish; that he profane not my sanctuaries: for I the LORD do sanctify them.

You can't go to church if your testicles are damaged or your penis has been cut off. Deut 23:1

23:1 He that is wounded in the stones, or hath his privy member cut off, shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD

[FrankBlunt]

Quote

As legal entities, if the girls have separate names, thus separate SSNs and records and such, they are probably allowed to marry. Religiously speaking, if there are believed to be two souls, the same should apply.

The girls will soon reach womanhood, and they are two distinct individuals with unique personalities. Do you sincerely believe that parents would give a single name to two daughters who happen to share the lower portion of a body?

Quote

Practically speaking, good luck finding two guys willing to switch off sloppy seconds for as long as the four of them should live. Unless the girls could find a set of male conjoined twins...Gawd, that is a mental image. Like a sea anenome.

I know you're only being honest, but this is a tangent that may result in the thread being closed. I feel that this subject is too important to be taken lightly, or viewed in a sexually graphic manner that is not germane to the discussion. Comparing human beings expressing love for their partner(s) to sea anemones is the type of insult I was hoping to prevent.

About your "sloppy seconds" comment, I'm going to restrain my disgust and respond with a polite, rhetorical question to illustrate a point. Have you ever been intimate with someone who dated another before you? What it boils down to, in concept, is a temporal issue in that case, as with the twins. The 'damaged goods' expression is old and should have retired before it entered the workforce.

I would not dare stand in judgment of whatever relationship in which those women partook because I have never lived as a conjoined twin.

When the parents were asked by the news anchor if they could envision their daughters marrying one man, they gleefully responded, "Yes!" When asked if two men were a potential, the parents gleefully responded, "Yes!"

Quote

As far as the conjoined twins thing...that is a twisted question. I like.

I'm sorry that you find twisted a question of marital and reproductive freedom for individuals who were born into rare circumstances. Unfortunately for the twin whose spine did not fully develop, the growth during adolescence led to scoliosis.

Quote

And as far are hermaphrodites go...most of them are given gender assignment surgery shortly after birth.

But the whole point is that hermaphrodites are born without gender identification. Man is deciding the fate with King Solomon reasoning, altering what may very well have been God's intention through genetic mutation.

Quote

I imagine the religious position would be to play the role you were assigned since God doth hate the poofterish behavior:

We really don't know what lifestyles or behaviors God hates, do we?

[FrankBlunt]

Quote

Since Jesus was a Jew, followed the Jewish religion and stated that he did not come to change the law, that the law would never change, not one jot or tittle, then the physical condition of a person (the meatbag) seems to matter:

Thanks for the citations, Mako!

21:18 counts me out. Shucks! I'm under the impression that a particular 20th century exterminator paid too much attention to Leviticus, Chapter 21; and I don't mearn Clark Pest Control.

Not that I have to share this with one as educated as yourself, but to Nirvana and others who are convinced that only the soul is relevant to organized religion:

Prayer to protect the living and believing that those who narrowly escape disaster are saved by the hand of God further solidifies the attention upon the body.

[War-Junkie]

i am a caltholic and i belive in this religon but i think most of the things thay say about disabled people or birth defects were written by humans because they at the time did not know how to react to them because i dont think a god would just cast out one of his own creations and if he did thats one messed up god. like a kid on an ant hill

[FrankBlunt]

Quote

i think most of the things thay say about disabled people or birth defects were written by humans because they at the time did not know how to react to them because i dont think a god would just cast out one of his own creations and if he did thats one messed up god. like a kid on an ant hill

Hi, War-Junkie,

When I posted "Attack of the Giant Purple People Eaters" several months ago, I was making a point on this very issue. A single falsehood, one deception, or in some cases a bogus chapter or two, has a profound impact on the entire work if it's to be acknowledged as precedent. Some who replied jumped to the conclusion that my story related to Christ, but that was not the case. I never responded to the queries because spoonfeeding is a disservice to both critical thought and inspiration.

http://www.unexplain...m...c=59473&hl=

As Gideon Mage wrote recently, the symbolism in scripture and whatever benefit may be reaped seems more reasonable than dwelling upon or arguing whether or not the texts were designed to be taken literally.

There are other threads for this type of discourse, but I wanted to address a practicing Catholic who is questioning the verses in Leviticus as they pertain to the disabled. That's not a minor event in my opinion, and thanks for sharing.

[Never_Hit_Nirvana]

You could learn much from Frankie Goes to Hollywood:
"Relax."
I understand you view this question as very serious, but to me it really is very simple: spirit reigns over flesh, except in the case of hermaphrodites -- as I stated the Christian view would probably be to play the role you are given. Yes, their role is assigned by man, but, it is the appearance of things that matters in this instance. If the hermaphroditic child grows up to look like a man, then most religious institutions, if they are Christian and pay any attention to the instruction manual (The Bible), then they would tell the child to play the part of a man. Since the Bible says, and the gays rights advocates can scream about this all they want, that God hates Homosexuality and Sodomy. Is it a load of crap? Probably, but that is what is stated pretty clearly in The Christian's Handy Dandy Answer For Everything Book. And I know the reasons for that statement run deeper than that, but most Christians would only look at the verse and start screaming "Burn Elton John!!!"
And most others most others that contain a prohibition against homosexuality would follow suit.
And excuse me for finding humor in almost everything. If it offends you, I can only say: lighten up. It is sad that people have to be born with disabilities and disfigurements, but to me, it lessens them as human beings to weep over them and show them pity. It is more respectful to me to treat them as I would any other human being: a source for good-natured amusement. If that offends you, please look into purchasing a sense of humor. Life has to be funny, other wise we would all go nuts.
And the question of the conjoined twin's marriage was kind of silly, and the answer more than obvious. Of course the girls should be allowed to marry, it should be allowed in the secular and religious worlds, but good luck finding anyone willing to do it. I would never argue with an individual's right to marry -- I so want to clarify that with "a member of the opposite sex", but I will save that argument for later -- I was simply pointing the feasibility of it. I repeat, good luck finding a couple of guys to do it, since marrying one guy would be illegal and condemned, unless they're Mormons.
And as far as the larger question of does disability and disfigurement effect religious beliefs? It shouldn't really -- a soul is a soul is a soul, even it comes in a male wrapper, wears miniskirts, makeup and has a thing for Show Tunes -- and doesn't change my beliefs. But it does matter, in some cases (i.e hermaphrodites) to organized religion because we are all sad sick little monkeys and tend to get hung up on things (like being completely unable to take a joke). Welcome to Earth, enjoy your stay and please don't feed the Mexicans.
And with that I leave you to weep for the disfigured -- who do not need your tears, but your goodwill and smile instead -- and to ponder the abundantly obvious.