In which our regular writers toss around
subjects a little more volatile than usual.
Bill C-16 amends the Canadian Human Rights Act to add gender identity and gender
expression to the list of prohibited grounds of discrimination. It also amends
the Canadian Criminal Code to protect any section of the public that is
distinguished by gender identity or expression against “hate propaganda” and to
increase sentences accordingly against those who violate it.
Tom: The bill was rammed through Parliament with little discussion, no
public consultation and no recorded vote. Thank you, Justin Trudeau! Last I heard it’s before the Canadian Senate for final approval. If the bill becomes
law, people who say they’re transgender become a specially protected class of
citizens in Canada.
How do you feel about that, Immanuel Can?
The Political Game is Afoot
Immanuel
Can: Well, two things: first of all, I guess we
could remark on the legal angle. Trudeau’s been very unwise there, of course.
But the other issue is transgenderism itself. Now that men who want to be women and vice versa have become a matter of
both public celebration and of law, it looks as though one way or another
Christians are going to be facing issues related to that.
Tom: In fact, I know of a situation in which transgender activists are
already impacting a Canadian local church. So yeah, here we are. The political
game the Left is playing with the Canadian public is that the so-called
discrimination that transgenders and would-be transgenders face from their fellow citizens is quite literally killing
them; therefore, society must change its tune. Do you buy that?
Discrimination and Suicide
IC: No. First, we
have to bear in mind that by “discrimination”, all people mean is “not agreeing
with” or “not endorsing”. (We’re not talking about purges or stonings
here!) So the question becomes whether disagreeing with people can kill them.
The suggestion is patently absurd in the first place, and clearly refuted by
all the science.
Consider
this: if any link between discrimination and suicide was remotely reasonable,
then the very highest documented suicide rate would surely be among visible
minorities and women. But among blacks in the real world, the suicide rate in 2015 was 5.6%. Hispanics were at 6.2%. And at the same time, it was 15.1% among
whites; highest, as always, among males by 3.5 times compared to women.
If discrimination causes deaths, then these statistics would surely be
reversed: more women than men, more visible minorities than whites, and so on.
For sure.
Tom: So they’re
scamming us as usual. Why am I not surprised? But you were talking about the
science. What’s the scientific scoop on the legitimacy of transgenderism?
Biology and Desire
IC: There is a
difference between people who have definite, legitimate gender problems and
those who do not. On the legitimate side there are some infant victims of
what’s called “gender-assignment surgery”. That’s an awful thing if it
goes wrong, and it apparently results in many later-life transgender issues
that are very real, very physical in origin, and no fault of the victim. People
who deal with the fallout from that deserve 100% of our sympathy, I would say.
But most of the “transgender” conversation today has to do with people who
simply either want to become, or want just to act like a
different sex than is mandated by their chromosomes or physiology.
Tom: What if they feel
in their bones that they were born in the wrong sort of body?
IC: Well, there are
legitimate desires and illegitimate desires, aren’t there? Just because one has
a feeling one is not duty-bound to act on it. In fact, we are often better for not
acting on such things.
Tom: Well, you
understand the argument: “It’s not a mere desire.
Because it’s constant, it’s clearly an indicator of who I am at the core.
You’re denying me my true self! You’re denying me authenticity!”
Letting Out My “True Self”
IC: Have you ever
noticed something about the “true self” argument? It contradicts itself.
If you already have a true self, then you can’t be anything other than that and be authentic, according to the argument. The problems is this, though: if
you have a true self, then people are NOT free to become whatever they want
to be in terms of gender, and their real identity as male or female is a given.
But what the trans lobby wants us to accept is that you can have it both ways:
I can be whatever I want to be, and if you say otherwise, you’re oppressing me
and denying me choice; at the same time, I want you to believe I have a true
self which I have no choice about. So which is it? Are you making a choice to which you feel entitled, or is it not a choice for you
at all?
Tom: Wait, you mean
the Left is being intellectually incoherent AGAIN?
No,
it’s a very good point, but not one you can argue with them. They want what
they want, whether it’s logically defensible or not.
IC: The idea of
authenticity you mention also seems to me to be a key to the trans arguments.
The way they use it reminds me of your recent post on the new conception of “honesty” as saying whatever one feels rather than telling the truth. The New Authenticity
means “conforming my exterior choices to whatever I feel inside”, not “staying
consistent to what I actually am”.
Tom: Let alone
conforming my behavior to what is socially acceptable and pleasing to God;
developing my character as it ought to develop regardless of my natural
impulses. That’s right off the table.
IC: By their
standard, an alcoholic who gives in to his addiction would be more “authentic”
than the AA member who refuses to drink, or an angry woman who explodes on her
husband is being more “authentic” than the one who controls herself.
The Word of God Says …
Tom: So it’s
unscientific, it’s incoherent, and now, maybe, it’s about to be law. What’s our
biblical basis for rejecting the notion of transgenderism, other than the fact
that it doesn’t conform to observable reality and is therefore a violation of
the truth?
IC: Well, just viewed
as one of many human temptations to sin, it’s a thing which one is to overcome,
and for which God has promised to be sufficient: that answers the “orientation”
argument. As a practice, of course, it’s wrong by both OT and NT precepts, so
that puts paid to the “alternative lifestyle” argument. The “can’t help it
argument” is just a denial of human autonomy, so we ought to disregard that.
Like any sin, we can’t go excusing it.
Tom: For those keeping
score, that’s 2 Corinthians 12:9, Deuteronomy 22:5, Romans 1:24-27,
1 Corinthians 11:3-15 and Romans 6:1-2.
IC: However, like
homosexuality (with which it is usually, but not always paired), we need to
realize that the route that takes someone to that sort of degradation is often
complex. Common factors associated with professions of “transgenderism” range
from promiscuity to unhealthy parenting, to mental illness (like body
dysmorphic disorders), to self-loathing and self-abuse, to a past involving
sexual abuse or exploitation, to cognitive challenges (such as Aspergers
Syndrome, which is also associated with dysmorphia), and so on. Some people are
struggling with sin, pure and simple; but more are struggling with some variety
of mental illness.
Tom: Interesting.
Normalizing and Traumatizing
IC: This is where the story gets really cruel: according to the progressive advocates of
transgender “rights”, the thing these people need is normalizing. Per
this narrative, the only problem is discrimination, and the sufferers
are not sufferers at all. Thus they are not to be offered therapy,
counseling or any kind of practical mercy. First, their illness is to be
celebrated and then, secondly, they are to be told to carry on as they are, or
to get body-mangling surgery if that’s the direction their disease rages. They
are not to be delivered from their delusions; and anyone who would
suggest they should be is simply to be labeled a bigot.
Tom: I have read that
the rate of post-surgery suicide is equal or higher to the rate of pre-surgery suicide among transgenders, so surgical intervention
is not a reliable fix.
IC: Quite right. But
how does the progressivist narrative play out when that has happened? If you’ve
been “normalized” and indulged in your transgenderism instead of helped out of
it, and then it turns out you’re still unhappy and mentally ill afterward, you
are in despair. The thing that was supposed to solve it all did not. But now
the sanctimonious liberals who advocated for your “normalization” have no
further stake in you. In fact, you’re now a problem for them: being
transgendered was supposed to make you “normal”, meaning as happy and
well-adjusted as anyone else. If it hasn’t, you’re now a stroke against the
narrative. You needn’t look to them for any further sympathy or help, because
they’re busy telling everyone that people like you don’t have
a problem!
Truth vs. Fiction
Tom: And this is where Christians come in, in that we can as kindly and
lovingly as possible point out the truth rather than perpetuating a fiction.
But of course if that becomes illegal, we have to make a choice …
IC: Oh, right … but
let’s dwell on that for a minute. These mentally-ill people are not going to be
loved by the progressivists. The liberal set will be done with them in the very
minute they get their “rights”. Furthermore, their narrative will not allow
such people any further help. It’s at that point that we come into
the picture.
Tom: Well, yes. With a
different narrative, and hopefully one that is more in keeping with reality. As
the Lord himself said, “Those who are well have no need
of a physician, but those who are sick.” You can’t fix it if you won’t admit it’s broken in the first place.
Loving the Mentally Ill
IC: Right. The
question here is really, “Who is going to love the mentally ill —
especially those who are in this debased, self-loathing and distressed
condition?” Historically, there have been other questions like this: for
example, “Who will love the slave?” or “Who will love the poor?” or “Who
will love the addicted?” or “Who will love the criminals?” And historically,
the answer has never been “The liberal left”. But Christians have reached
out to all of these groups, and many more like them.
So
I’m suggesting we need a wise and genuinely Christian way of responding to this
very difficult (and quite disturbing) problem. It won’t appear often, because
by any count “transgenderism” is very rare by percent. But I know some people
who are struggling with it, and I wouldn’t be surprised if others among us did
too. One thing we need to do is to distinguish among cases ...
Tom: Which is not something most Christians are equipped for.
A Better Story
IC: I mean only in the
most rudimentary way. We cannot “fix” transgenderism. It’s a sin
problem, and a very complex one. But we need to remember our duty to
resist the false narrative about it, refuse to “normalize” it, and if we have
means, point its sufferers to as much counseling or other medical aid as we
can find.
Tom: Easier said than done.
IC: Yes. Sadly, in this political
environment, there are few counselors and hardly any resources for helping
these folks, so there aren’t many places to direct them. (Ironically, that’s
not because of discrimination, but because of the liberal narrative that
forbids medical professionals from identifying their condition as
unhealthy.) So some of these people will remain victims of that
cruel narrative.
But the
church’s most important role here is as the alternative to that evil,
self-serving, virtue-signaling, liberal “story” about transgenderism.
Tom: Because we have a
better story to tell …
IC: The church is forever a pointer to the story of how a gracious God made us who we are, loves us unconditionally and
meets our need for love, has sent his Son to free us from all sins, and yearns to receive every sinner who repents. That is the only road for the
transgendered ... indeed, the only road for any of us.
Thank you for letting us in on this important conversation. Things are only going to get increasingly difficult for anyone willing to stand up for the truth, particularly the Truth. One has to wonder how much worse things will be allowed to get before the Lord comes back. Makes me shudder to think of how bad things must have been in Noah's days...
ReplyDelete