On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 21:04:44 GMT, "Frank Dresser"
wrote:



Nature is producing a small number of people who psychologically women
but physically men and vice versa. Why is it immoral to use surgery to
make the body match the mind?

Frank Dresser



Who determines this? Man? To me, that is making man god again. If a
person is "psychologically" a woman in a man's body, then why does
that person pursue a female for companionship and not a man after the
surgery? It seems that that the person would be having a sex change
for all the wrong reasons. Although I don't believe in sex
transformation in either case, I could come closer to accepting it if
the person having the sex change was pursuing a person of the opposite
sex.

Tracy

"Tracy" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 21:04:44 GMT, "Frank Dresser"
wrote:



Nature is producing a small number of people who psychologically
women
but physically men and vice versa. Why is it immoral to use surgery
to
make the body match the mind?

Frank Dresser



Who determines this? Man?

If by "this" you mean the difference between the psychological and the
physical person, it would be determined by the person and people who
deal with this problem.


To me, that is making man god again.

OK, but man changes what nature gives him all the time. We change our
enviroment, we change our bodies. Few people would describe every
change as "playing God". It's an exercise in moral line drawing.

If a
person is "psychologically" a woman in a man's body, then why does
that person pursue a female for companionship and not a man after the
surgery?

I don't really know. It's not something I can personally relate to.
It's completely out of my expirence. On the other hand, it doesn't
cause anybody any earthly harm. So why make a big deal about it?

It seems that that the person would be having a sex change
for all the wrong reasons.

I wouldn't have a sex change for a million bucks. I certainly couldn't
tell a person who'd take such a drastic step that there are "wrong" or
"right" reasons.

Although I don't believe in sex
transformation in either case, I could come closer to accepting it if
the person having the sex change was pursuing a person of the opposite
sex.

Tracy

I can't see what difference it makes who a person chooses to live with.
If I was unfamiliar with the people involved, I can't see why I'd give
it a moment's thought.

Frank Dresser

On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 21:48:56 GMT, "Frank Dresser"
wrote:


"Tracy" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 21:04:44 GMT, "Frank Dresser"
wrote:



Nature is producing a small number of people who psychologically
women
but physically men and vice versa. Why is it immoral to use surgery
to
make the body match the mind?

Frank Dresser



Who determines this? Man?

If by "this" you mean the difference between the psychological and the
physical person, it would be determined by the person and people who
deal with this problem.


To me, that is making man god again.

OK, but man changes what nature gives him all the time. We change our
enviroment, we change our bodies. Few people would describe every
change as "playing God". It's an exercise in moral line drawing.

If a
person is "psychologically" a woman in a man's body, then why does
that person pursue a female for companionship and not a man after the
surgery?

I don't really know. It's not something I can personally relate to.
It's completely out of my expirence. On the other hand, it doesn't
cause anybody any earthly harm. So why make a big deal about it?

It seems that that the person would be having a sex change
for all the wrong reasons.

I wouldn't have a sex change for a million bucks. I certainly couldn't
tell a person who'd take such a drastic step that there are "wrong" or
"right" reasons.

Although I don't believe in sex
transformation in either case, I could come closer to accepting it if
the person having the sex change was pursuing a person of the opposite
sex.

Tracy

I can't see what difference it makes who a person chooses to live with.
If I was unfamiliar with the people involved, I can't see why I'd give
it a moment's thought.

Frank Dresser



You make some valid points and some not valid in my opinion. Have you
actually taken the time to look at the person involveds website in any
depth? It not only promotes transsexuality but it does not stop there.
It goes on to have very pornographic overtones.

My original reason for bringing the whole discussion to light was that
fact that Brenda Ann questioned the morals of our president. That
leaves her open to have her morals questioned. Having a sex change is
one thing. Having one to become a lesbian is quite another. Then
creating a website with pornographic overtones makes one question her
decisions altogether. Did she do it for the right reasons? Was it
strictly because she was a woman trapped in a mans body? Or was it
perversion raising it's ugly head?

I can't answer these questions for sure, but, I do retain the rights
to question her morality based on her website. Especially if she is
going to question the morals of our president.

Also, I noted in her posts that she blamed me for attacks on her in
the past. This is totally untrue. Until this incident, I have never
attacked Brenda Ann.

Tracy

No Flame Wars please :-).


Here's my 2 cents worth.


Here's a few other points to consider.


1. Chemical mimmicing Female Hormonal substances are known to cause
gender bender characteristics. I.E A lot of research has been done on
this over environmental issues. Sexchange fish, Hermaphrodite Polar
bears and a new study has found Male Whales, Dolphin, Seals & Otters
exibiting Female characteristics and partial organs.

2. There's also a debate on the effects of Soyamilk on male infants,
causing Feminizing aspects gender identity/hormonal changes on male
babies brains, etc . (Soyamilk was a big thing as a milk alternative
back in the 60s and early 70s and the Phyto-estrogen Isoflavine
contents are believed to in some cases be 5 times more powerful than
natural female hormones! So image what effects it could have on
certain individuals. Also it's been found to sexually early mature
girls!)

3. As a Christian standpoint and Biblical aspects. Yes There are
passages in the Bible condemming Homosexuality, but nothing condemming
someone cutting off their dick and having a sexchange. From memory
there's a passage in the Book of Matthew which says more or less if
your right eye offends your pluck it out! Meaning it's better to live
happy in life than be unhappy or do acts which will condemn you to
hell! (that's the way I interpret it).

4. We mustn't also forget some of the most anti-gay and people of
socalled high moral standards/leaders (including Church ministers)
have actually lead lives opposite to what they were openly
espousing!!) So it's like the pot calling the kettle black. And
IMHO those ones are the worst!



Anyway this is a fricken SW Forum. Not a place for constantly
launching personal atacks against someone or something!! Case
Closed!!




Good DX,


Best Regards, Marian P Rogers.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------


wavecatcher wrote in message ...
Tracy wrote:

Besides, even if you don't believe in God what she did goes strictly
against nature. God did not create what she is, Man did.

Now we're getting to the heart of the misconception that those like
yourself have about people like Brenda. Research has shown that the male
and female brains are different. This is mainly caused by the effect of
certain sex hormones on the brain before birth. A person can be born
with the body of one sex but have the identity of the opposite sex. This
creates a gender conflict. If you believe in a God, it means He makes
some people that way. Otherwise it was a random act of nature.
It won't be long before we will be able to identify the genes that cause
all kinds of sexual problems, including gender conflict. Then you will
realize it could happen to anyone, even you. However for someone like
yourself who apparently learned a rigid set of rules about human
sexuality, this new knowledge may be more than you can accept.


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Diverd4777 wrote:
SNIP ( All Troll ****)

Plonk !

P.S.
Brenda is a great, great person.
She knows more about electronics than I will Ever learn.
I especially apperciate the 12 hour time difference
and the correspondance over the years.

She's One of the people who makes life on this planet
a little nicer...

Dan



Whereas people like Fort go through life making people dislike them
immensely by being complete aholes at every chance they get. Makes you
wonder what kind of person enjoys alienating others rather than doing
and saying things that would make one think kindly of them.

"Tracy" wrote in message
...


You make some valid points and some not valid in my opinion. Have you
actually taken the time to look at the person involveds website in any
depth? It not only promotes transsexuality but it does not stop there.
It goes on to have very pornographic overtones.

I didn't find the promotion of transexuality part. It's not like she's
trying to get other people to become transsexuals. I'm sure it does
promote the accecptance of transsexuality, which isn't quite the same
thing.

I did notice the sex change cartoon. I wouldn't call it very
pornographic, I'd call it weird.

If the website would have held my attention better if it had some
radios.

It seems that others, beside Brenda Ann, post a few links to hard core
porn here a few times a week.


My original reason for bringing the whole discussion to light was that
fact that Brenda Ann questioned the morals of our president.

I checked with the original post, and she said a lack of morality was a
major problem in the world today. She used Enron and Martha Stewart as
examples. She didn't mention President Bush in that post.

The morality of transsexuality might be unclear. The immorality of
cheating and selfishness is quite clear.


That
leaves her open to have her morals questioned. Having a sex change is
one thing. Having one to become a lesbian is quite another. Then
creating a website with pornographic overtones makes one question her
decisions altogether. Did she do it for the right reasons? Was it
strictly because she was a woman trapped in a mans body? Or was it
perversion raising it's ugly head?

Brenda Ann isn't hurting anyone, so I'm not worring about it. Besides, I
ain't Sigmund Freud. Anyway, Freud was a crackpot. But if it's got you
bothered, you might want to crack open a Freud book and look under
"castration anxiety".


I can't answer these questions for sure, but, I do retain the rights
to question her morality based on her website. Especially if she is
going to question the morals of our president.

President Enron? President Stewart??


Also, I noted in her posts that she blamed me for attacks on her in
the past. This is totally untrue. Until this incident, I have never
attacked Brenda Ann.

Tracy

Why have you singled out Brenda Ann for an attack then?

Has she done anything to do anyone else any harm?

Is she less moral than those on this group than those who post hard core
porn links, or take the Lord's name in vain?

Do you disagree with Brenda Ann when she says that a lack of morality is
a major problem in the world today?

Frank Dresser

On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 23:26:02 GMT, "Frank Dresser"
wrote:



Why have you singled out Brenda Ann for an attack then?

Her comments. If you question morality then expect to be questioned
yourself. I made one post asking her to look at herself if she were
going to question morality.

Has she done anything to do anyone else any harm?

I would not know!

Is she less moral than those on this group than those who post hard core
porn links, or take the Lord's name in vain?

In my opinion, yes!


Do you disagree with Brenda Ann when she says that a lack of morality is
a major problem in the world today?

No! I think that she and her type are the root of the problem. That is
why I question her. I not a person to judge. No of us are. But, if you
judge, then expect to be judged.

As I stated earlier, It's not so much the sex change, it's the fact
that she became a lesbian afterwards. At that point, I think that
medical reasoning went out the window and perversion came in the door.
If she felt that she was a female inside why not just get yourself a
man? Why become a woman and then get another woman?

Tracy


Frank Dresser

On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 16:20:56 -0700, JJ
wrote:

Diverd4777 wrote:
SNIP ( All Troll ****)

Plonk !

P.S.
Brenda is a great, great person.
She knows more about electronics than I will Ever learn.
I especially apperciate the 12 hour time difference
and the correspondance over the years.

She's One of the people who makes life on this planet
a little nicer...

Dan



Whereas people like Fort go through life making people dislike them
immensely by being complete aholes at every chance they get. Makes you
wonder what kind of person enjoys alienating others rather than doing
and saying things that would make one think kindly of them.

And I will probably never meet Brenda Ann or you...thank god for
that!

Besides, I don't know you and don't care too. So what's the big deal
about alienating you? I could care less what you think about me but
evidently you are concerned or you would ignore all my posts. Thanks
for reading them.

And welcome to Usenet!

Tracy

"Tracy" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 23:26:02 GMT, "Frank Dresser"
wrote:



Why have you singled out Brenda Ann for an attack then?

Her comments. If you question morality then expect to be questioned
yourself. I made one post asking her to look at herself if she were
going to question morality.

Is she the first person you've noticed here questioning anyone's
morality? Or is she the only one you think is immoral?


Has she done anything to do anyone else any harm?

I would not know!

If you don't know she's done anyone any harm, how immoral could she be?



Is she less moral than those on this group than those who post hard
core
porn links, or take the Lord's name in vain?

In my opinion, yes!

Her website isn't pornographic. She isn't a blasphemer. There's no
evidence she's done anyone any harm. She's contributed to this group in
a positive way.




Do you disagree with Brenda Ann when she says that a lack of morality
is
a major problem in the world today?

No! I think that she and her type are the root of the problem.

Wait a minute. Are you saying transsexuals are the root of all evil?

That is
why I question her. I not a person to judge. No of us are. But, if you
judge, then expect to be judged.

You've judged a helpful person who has caused no one any harm as
immoral.


As I stated earlier, It's not so much the sex change, it's the fact
that she became a lesbian afterwards. At that point, I think that
medical reasoning went out the window and perversion came in the door.
If she felt that she was a female inside why not just get yourself a
man? Why become a woman and then get another woman?

Why let it bother you?

Frank Dresser

JJ wrote:
Diverd4777 wrote:

SNIP ( All Troll ****)

Plonk !
P.S. Brenda is a great, great person.
She knows more about electronics than I will Ever learn.
I especially apperciate the 12 hour time difference and the
correspondance over the years.

She's One of the people who makes life on this planet a little nicer...

Dan



Whereas people like Fort go through life making people dislike them
immensely by being complete aholes at every chance they get. Makes you
wonder what kind of person enjoys alienating others rather than doing
and saying things that would make one think kindly of them.


AAAAHHHH What did you say JJ??????

Burr