Another article at Strange Notions called Love, Tolerance, and the Making of Distinctions by Fr. Robert Barron has stirred up even more evidence of extreme cognitive dissonance. A note first: while I find most, if not all, the atheists that frequent that site to be philosophically without rudder or clue (and most of them are proudly so) I only find a few of the Catholic commenter their to be worth their salt. So don’t assume I take the Catholic’s side (whoever that may be in a particular instance) or position.
While I am in agreement with a majority of Catholic morality and social teaching that does not mean every word from a Catholic meets my agreement. So don’t take it as a sanction.
Also I need the kind of work these people have. Apparently other people’s work day majorly consists of having unrelated online discussions with strangers!
Let’s break into this discussion (I’m not giving identities this time but will break it up):
We start with this loaded send off (you tell me how many assumptions are in this man’s faith!):
Fr. Barron beats Jenner with the fantasy stick of Gnosticism. (Jenner somehow proposes a female spirit in a male body*.) This is a gross, trumped-up charge, that allows the manifold hatreds of disgusted Catholics to rest easy in the demure shade of a concerned Godly “Love” for a wrong ‘un.
We are, in fact, badly made in no-one’s image by a set of sequenced fabrication instructions, that magnify early errors and that lead us to a premature birth so we can finish brain wiring in a wide variety of cultural environments. (Men, particularly FWIW, are a low tolerance product of their genes, having no back up copy X chromosome.)
We turn out all sorts of ways. The strict gender (and other) conformalisms of many religious faiths are some of the most politically noxious and reductive. The charge of “disordered” has a chilling ring to it. By contrast, cultures have only thrived on the rich stew of diversity.
*The Evidence? Jenner: “Deep down, I always knew that I was a woman, but I felt trapped in the body of a man. Therefore, I have the right to change my body to bring it in line with my true identity.”
I forgot to master the non-sequitor, I should ask this man to teach it to me.
To which a buddy chimes in:
This is a very good point. The false belief that we are somehow “designed” is obviously at work here. It is directly at odds with biology.
Well “designed” in a most generic sense could (used to) mean simply the end state to which man finds himself (his timescale being infinitesimally too small for evolutionary time to mean anything thus we can take a current state “now” as the end state) currently. Thus whether you meant it theologically as in God designed us the way we are now; or, nature through evolutionary processes designed us, or delivered us to the point of nature (our nature) we currently possess.
Obviously for man to have any nature is the view of some drooling Neanderthal.
And then a distant voice from ages past, reaching across the… millennia? no, …centuries? no, …decades? no, …years? I thought so. How about last week?
@William Davis: “It is directly at odds with biology.”
Wrong. A biological male who thinks he is a female would be “directly at odds with biology.”
And in that intervening space, in that whiplash that results when men’s thinking is a reflection of his fickle fashions, the man of just yesterday (literally) is given a bearskin and club and asked to retreat to the wilderness.
You aren’t worth a response.
The two go loggerheads for a few exchanges then the new world man who deemed the Neanderthal not worthy of a response apparently forgets and…
What, exactly, is a “biological male”? And even more problematic, what, exactly, is a “biological female”? If you know, please tell the various sporting organizations that have been unable to answer these questions satisfactorily.
Am I going to, in a few years, have to write out a dissertation when I ask someone to please pass the salt?
What, exactly is “salt”. And, even more problematic, what, exactly, is pepper?
I mean Jesus Tap-dancing Christ what are people willing to do to their minds simply to conform to groupthink? A guy has a ding dong and two balls (one ball is passable, nod to you Hitler ol’ chap), a girl’s got a vagina, hermaphrodites have some aspect of both.
To which the totally sane response is given.
Bruce Jenner has male DNA and has had fathered children. What sporting organization would be confused with that?
Then the inspiration of tonight’s post title…
You seriously need to learn about how genes make bodies and brains. They are not a map or body plan, but a sequenced list of fabrication processes, open to great variation in the final outcomes. Our neotenous nature, the facts of epigenetics and selection pressures affecting gene expression further detract from your simplistic vision of robust body and brain types.
“A biological male who thinks he is a female would be “directly at odds with biology.””.
No. Not at all. It is this variability that is the key to biology’s evolutionary success.
Hold it, the variability of introducing males that want to cut off their genitals is part of biology’s evolutionary success? Only if evolution has gone suicidal. Of course I don’t hold to the modern atheistic notion that evolution explains human behavior.
Which is SensibleMan’s point na-na-na-Na-Na-Na! Charge!
How successful will a colony of trans-gendered be if they “lie down with” those of the same biological sex?
To which Darwin’s deranged ancestor responds with more lip flapping lunacy,
Variability can aid evolutionary problem solving in general, but this specific variation can additionally aid directly.
So, how can non reproductive kin aid their own genetic reproductive fitness?
Have you any idea how much of a burden our effectively premature and helpless off-spring are compared to all other mammals or primates even?
We are the only species to trust even non-kin with the safeguarding of our children, so pressing is the need for childcare.
Before grandparents were invented (quite suddenly during the Aurignacian about 40,000BCE ish) any non reproducing adultish kin would be the ideal first choice. By which service they do pretty well for their own (shared) genes too. Nepotism and mini dynasties do very well for their genes in energy sparse environments, like the past.
Is this guy really implying that gender dysphoria is an evolutionary aid?!?!? That our genes sensed we needed babysitters and so have induced some of us to go around cutting off our wee-wees and women to get (sorry, not sure what women have done to them when they go for genital mutilation) whatever?
Gibberish and complete and absolute nonsense is coherence and common sense. Up is down and down is up.
Look, I’m not the Westboro Baptist Church. But how does making up a bunch of senseless crap help out anyone?
Maybe some of these people could be more helped by a more understanding culture than one that suddenly decides to cut off their own heads to make them feel better (and themselves – nothing like the feeling of being a man in the Now… or so I’ve observed). Like I often say, man is a creature in a small boat that, in trying to keep it level, keeps running frantically from one extreme end to the other.
I personally do not believe many of these people championing gay marriage, gender identity, etc, etc, have anyone’s best interest at heart but their own smug satisfaction and sense of superiority.
Such is usually the case of the man of NOW.
On a personal observation, if anyone told me a few years ago that I would be siding with the Catholics on most issues of the day, I would have had a hearty laugh.
Well, I can’t blame the Catholics, they don’t do the change thing. It is the world that went a little daffy.