- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
http://bycommonconsent.com/2015/11/18/continuing-revelation/#more-60829 Quote:There are two levels on which church policy on transsexual surgery may be instructive for the newly announced policy regarding same-gender couples and their children. The first is that both are within the broad spectrum of LGBT issues, which are still unsettled and unsettling within the LDS Church and the larger society. The second is that pattern of policy evolution seen in transsexual surgery may be repeating itself. Consider that in both instances, before there was a policy there was leniency: I witnessed first-hand a same-sex marriage in the temple; and until November of this year same-gender couples were not labeled apostates nor were their children denied blessing and baptism. When a formal policy was first issued, it was hardline in both instances: No temple recommends for transsexual converts, and mandatory excommunication for members undergoing surgery, with no possibility of rebaptism; and the labeling of same-gender couples as apostates and the forbidding of their children to be blessed or baptized. In the case of transsexual surgery, there was then a gradual, usually subtle modification of the policy, with the first significant change occurring three years later and the process of change continuing to the point where, in 1989, only a shadow of the original position remained.
How far and how soon the policy on same-gender couples may change cannot be predicted, but it is instructive to note that the first modification came only eight days later—as contrasted to three years in the case of transsexual surgery—with “a natural or adopted child of a parent living in a same-gender relationship” being changed to “children whose primary residence is with a couple living in a same-gender marriage or similar relationship.” Elder Dallin Oaks recently and famously stated that the Church does not apologize. Note that the remarkable changes in the policy regarding transsexual surgery were never accompanied by an apology—or, for that matter, even an explanation. But they were remarkable changes, nonetheless. And what is continuing revelation, if not change?
He is taking quite a hit over at BCC for this one. I know in my life I can look back at hard times from years ago and find less pain and even good in the experience, I think that is where he is trying to go with this. However in the moment, the painful ripples are still too strong. I would love to get a glimpse of how this policy will proceed as the years roll on. I appreciate him trying to add a voice. My heart goes out to him for the hits he is taking. Quote:Here’s a brand new video of Jennifer Napier-Pearce from The Salt Lake Tribune speaking with Elder Dallin H. Oaks and Elder D. Todd Christofferson of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles. When the apostles are asked directly about the transgender issue Elder Oaks replied that, “being acquainted with the unique problems of a transgender situation is something we have not had experience with, and we have some unfinished business in teaching on that.”
The below quote is a perfect example of how things with transgender individuals can get messy:
Quote:The arbitrariness of gender-based privilege in exercising priesthood is illustrated in one example from the late 1980s. A former missionary elder underwent medical tests and was discovered to possess the complete reproductive and sexual organs of a female beneath a superficial, non-functional male organ. She had surgery to restore femaleness. Her temple marriage was annulled. It was decided that her priesthood would not be revoked, but she was told she could not exercise it. It was also decided that the priesthood ordinances she performed on her mission, including several baptisms, confirmations, and blessings, would stand as valid ordinances. When she was presumed to be male, she was allowed to exercise priesthood. People accepted her authority, felt the spirit of God, and considered her administration of saving ordinances to be valid. Yet she had the reproductive organs of a woman, not a man.
From:
http://signaturebookslibrary.org/?p=981 I imagine that because this young elder did not choose to have a full set of female sexual organs hiding in his body that his gender reassignment surgery to become fully female might not have been considered “elective” in the eyes of the church.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.