Christian refusal to sanction the mutilation of children is "problematic"

Discussion in 'Anglican and Christian News' started by Ananias, Sep 21, 2022 at 8:53 AM.

  1. Stalwart

    Stalwart Well-Known Member Anglican

    Posts:
    2,710
    Likes Received:
    2,502
    Country:
    America
    Religion:
    Anglican
    I don't think that's accurate, at least for the United States. We already have a very robust non-TEC Anglicanism here, in the guise of ACNA, and our bishops have made very strong statements against sodomitical lifestyles, and gender ideology. I expect there will be further strong denunciations of Transgenderism to come.
     
  2. Ananias

    Ananias Well-Known Member Anglican

    Posts:
    728
    Likes Received:
    623
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    ACNA
    I disagree. Molech is the blood god, and the transgender medical movement -- like the abortion industry -- is providing blood for the blood god. Transsexuals themselves are the sacrifices, whether they know it or not. The true demons here are not the gender-dysphoric people, but the enablers and medical "professionals" who take advantage of their illness to make bank and further their own transhumanist agendas. The Vanderbilt story should remove all doubt about the financial incentives at play here.

    This whole transgender craze is basically about the systematic indoctrination, corruption, and exploitation of children and young teens. The movement to decriminalize pederasty is the next stage, and is already well underway.

    That slippery slope we bible-thumpers were warning about in the 1980's is now well behind us -- we are on a rocket-sled ride to the abyss at this point.
     
  3. Tiffy

    Tiffy Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    2,643
    Likes Received:
    1,204
    Country:
    UK
    Religion:
    CofE
    Not at that early period of his ministry, certainly. Paul may have changed his mind though as his theology matured through study and experience. His latter works reveal a gradual development of Paul's theology on many subjects of interest to Christians, finally resulting in the great epistle to the Romans, where we see the end result of years of study and experience of God's guidance through the Holy Spirit.
    Agreed, it is for us now, merely a medical procedure sometimes beneficial for those whose foreskin is too tight to comfortably pull back over the glans to enable cleanliness and pain free sexual intercourse. No doubt the medical condition has a name of some sort.

    It is a fact I'm led to believe that circumcised males are less likely to cause cervical cancer in their partners. Uncircumcised males who do not regularly clean smegma from beneath their foreskin are more likely to infect their partner with various unpleasantries during intercourse.
    .
     
    Last edited: Sep 22, 2022 at 4:30 PM
  4. Melkite

    Melkite Member

    Posts:
    39
    Likes Received:
    6
    Country:
    United States
    Religion:
    Melkite Catholic
    Phimosis, a condition that is rare and usually can be resolved without circumcision. Though it tends to be more common in America due to the scarring caused by forced retraction in early childhood.

    Cervical cancer comes from HPV, not smegma. I've seen studies that show no significant difference in HPV rates between circumcised and uncircumcised men. But still, our body parts shouldn't be amputated to preserve your health. The most common cause of cervical cancer is your own promiscuity. Uncircumcised men don't cause it.
     
  5. Ananias

    Ananias Well-Known Member Anglican

    Posts:
    728
    Likes Received:
    623
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    ACNA
    Healthy, functional body parts should not be amputated, certainly. Gangrenous limbs or those too damanged in an accident are different story. Likewise many must have their appendix or tonsils removed when they become infected.

    The point is that these sorts of surgeries heal rather than destroy the body. This in the final estimation is the value of a surgical procedure. Consider plastic surgery. If it is done in the service of vanity or pride it is wrong, certainly; but how about those who suffer terrible burns or suffer from congenital defects like a cleft palate?

    Transsexual "treatment" destroys healthy tissue, ruins health, and often ruins the transsexual's quality of life forever afterward.

    Doctrinally, all a Christian has to do is ask, "Which body will this person be resurrected in? The body God gave them, or the body some surgeon stitched together out of spare parts?" It always bears remembering that our bodies are not our own; they belong to God.

    1 Cor. 6:13-20:
     
    Last edited: Sep 22, 2022 at 5:27 PM
  6. Invictus

    Invictus Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    2,093
    Likes Received:
    1,071
    Country:
    United States
    Religion:
    Episcopalian
    What isn’t clear to me is what specific laws VUMC is alleged to have violated. Some of the allegations are 2-4 years old. The Governor of the State is talking about signing legislation next year to ban what VUMC has allegedly been doing, which shouldn’t be necessary if the medical center has been violating existing law. We need more facts and less rhetoric.
     
  7. Melkite

    Melkite Member

    Posts:
    39
    Likes Received:
    6
    Country:
    United States
    Religion:
    Melkite Catholic
    I don't think anyone would disagree that circumcision is OK when done because the foreskin is diseased. But in the West, circumcision is almost always performed on healthy, functional foreskins. Also, what Tiffy was talking about is healthy, functional foreskins being amputated, not even for the future health of its owner, but the future health of its owner's wife. Doubly sinful.
     
  8. Tiffy

    Tiffy Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    2,643
    Likes Received:
    1,204
    Country:
    UK
    Religion:
    CofE
    "Doubly sinful"?

    To equate foreskin amputation with 'sin' on account of it affecting the future health of it's owners wife, seems doubly Pharisaical in attitude and theological outlook, to me. Seems almost like you might consider it 'sinful' to pull your son or your ox out of a ditch on the Sabbath.

    This thread is getting silly. :laugh:
    .
     
  9. Melkite

    Melkite Member

    Posts:
    39
    Likes Received:
    6
    Country:
    United States
    Religion:
    Melkite Catholic
    Sure. If you had your clitoris removed, and it was done so for your future health, but also done for some absurd belief it would keep your future husband healthy too, it would constitute two sins. One would be the ignorance of your bodily integrity. The other would be the use of your body as a tool for the utilitarian benefit of someone else.