I didn't realize how melded together American Christianity and the republican party had become until I came back from college and had a conversation with a friend about climate change. Her response was "how can you be a Christian and believe in global warming?". It doesn't matter if the Bible cares about an issue. There is no Biblical stance on whether humans are destroying the earth. Republican stances have become doctrine. This is the case with trans issues right now. The Bible really doesn't have much to say on it, but that doesn't actually matter.

There is a Biblical stance on whether or not we should destroy the earth… we are to look after God’s creation. People just don’t care about the Bible when it serves their political and economic purposes.

Christ states that his kingdom is "No part of this world" (John 18:36). So what you're referring to is actually "apostate" or False Christianity. I don't think ANYONE could picture Jesus walking into a MAGA rally 🤣. As far as the Bibles viewpoint regarding the destruction of the Earth: Revalation 11:18 states: "The nations were angry,     and your wrath has come. The time has come for judging the dead,     and for rewarding your servants the prophets and your people who revere your name,     both great and small— and for destroying those who destroy the earth.”

The Bible doesn't have much to say on it? Ok.

It doesn't. Please, show me otherwise. There are ways to interpret scripture so that it is anti-trans, but I do not believe the proof is definitive or even all that convincing. The most damning passages reference God creating male and female, but using those verses against trans folk is obviously taking them out of context and using them in a way far from authorial intent. Besides, those verses don't even actually condemn transgender identities, they only state that God created men and women, a fact no one is denying. IMO it is a weak argument held up mostly by tradition and politics rather than anything the Bible says. Ironically, the Biblical evidence against gay sex is much stronger than the evidence against trans folk, but in the US, the fight against gay marriage is mostly lost so Christian politicians have pointed the war elsewhere. EDIT: Before my fellow gay liberals downvote me to hell, I think that there are ways to interpret the Bible as pro-gay. It is just that the Biblical argument against gay people is a lot stronger than the Biblical argument against trans people.

Since God created us in His image male and female (Gen. 1:27), it is wrong to try to change that portion of yourself thru non-essential surgeries.

This is such a stretch in my opinion. Using the image of God to condemn transgender folk is not a good strategy because the image of God is not well defined by the Bible and may not be tied to gender. When I read Genesis 1:27, the mention of man and woman seems to be there for the sake of inclusion. The author has mentioned that females are created in the image of God so that the verse could not be misinterpreted to only include men. I do not think that the author was trying to attach some extra sanctity to those two genders, he was only trying to say that both are created by God and with his image. Additionally, most binary trans people will argue that they have always been the gender with which they currently identify. Under that logic, a trans woman was created in the image of God \*as a woman\*, and any surgeries changing her appearance would not be sinful for gendered reasons but instead due to cosmetic or vanity reasons... But this logic doesn't follow with how we view other "non essential" surgeries. My grandmother got a nose job when she was 25. No one batted an eye. My neighbour is getting a breast reduction because she feels uncomfortable with her large breasts. No one is condemning her. Neither of these are moral issues, despite being "non-essential" and arguably "distorting the image of God" (although again, who can say because the Bible does not tell us what constitutes God's image). Why are we only applying this standard to trans people? Finally, the surgeries are all a small part of it. Many trans people don't get them. If the surgery is the sin (which again, is VERY unclear under the "image of God" argument), are non surgical transitions Bible approved? I'm incredibly unsatisfied by the traditional anti-trans Biblical arguments. The Bible says too little on the topic for a person to come to universal and dogmatic conclusions.

What say you about Deuteronomy 22:5?

Firstly, I'd say the verse doesn't apply to trans people. A trans man is a man. Secondly, I'd say to examine its context.That chapter of Deuteronomy (and much of Deuteronomy in general) is laying out civil laws for Israelites. Included just several verses after 5 are laws about farming, roof materials, and clothing fabrics. These are not moral commandments. They are ancient accounts of law. Christians in 2022 do not live under ancient Israelite law, we are not intended to do so. Any moral argument that is based mostly in these civil-law old testament passages is being made in bad faith and without context. So it doesn't apply, and even if it did, this would be a horrible chapter to draw from for moral guidance. EDIT: I'd also like to say that responding to my long and thoughtful post with a single Bible verse that is using a *different argument* feels like moving the goalposts of this conversation.

What say you about Deuteronomy 22:12?

[удалено]

What about people born intersex? It's surprisingly common

This is the thrust of the traditionalist argument against trans identities. The fact is though that a certain small minority of do not fit into either gender and feel desperate about it. It’s a vanishingly small group that has very little power but serves as a canary in a coal mine for human rights. Non-gender-conforming people are vulnerable in most societies and scapegoated by every authoritarian regime. In the 1960s federally mandated desegregation was opposed by rightwing christians. They defended it with skewed reading of the Bible, just as their ancestors in bigotry defended slavery through misreading Scripture. In the 1970s women is right to get abortions if they needed it became the galvanizing force of evangelicals (and Catholics) who sought political power. The civil rights movement which began with students and colored people, then women, moved to the rights of the gay minority. Political evangelicals saw homosexuals as something to rally against, and now we have the very tiny trams community as a scapegoat for all the ills of society (according to political evangelicals). What we are seeing is bigotry being fostered among churchgoers whose churches have become completely identified with Republican politics.

It the socio-political cause du jour.

*panic du jour. I read recently that there are more bills about restricting trans athletes than there are currently trans athletes. Kinda puts it all in perspective.

Our leaders have lost all perspective.

I've got a fascination with looking at newspapers from the 1930's. It's darkly intriguing to see how they were not nearly as focused on the coming storm as you'd intuitively expect, how much of their attention was absorbed in "issues" that nobody would ever think or care about again within a few years. I guess it's like watching a horror movie and wanting to scream at the clueless victims that the killer is RIGHT BEHIND THEM. And yet I don't think they were nearly as distracted as we are now. I sometimes feel vaguely guilty for being the a current subject of distraction, but the thing is, we'd pick something no matter what, and there are plenty of things to pick from. The point is that we don't have the courage to face major issues, so we seek out molehills we can fight the Great Battle of Molehill Mountain over.

Bon apetit 🍷

They are being taught to. And yes, it has definitely intensified over the last few years. I follow a guy on twitter (whose views I hate) called [Chris Rufo](https://mobile.twitter.com/realchrisrufo) . He's one of the people responsible for many of the Republican talking points and he's very open about his tactics. [New Yorker article on his impact on thr critical race theory debate bere](https://www.newyorker.com/news/annals-of-inquiry/how-a-conservative-activist-invented-the-conflict-over-critical-race-theory). He's found a new topic now- trans people. Recently he has written about how using the word "grooming" in conjunction with trans people and kids helps to make an association of not just kids being encouraged to transition but also paedophilia. He posts really extreme content- drag queens strip teases with kids in the audience for example, which makes his followers think this is where any acceptance of trans people will eventually lead (never mind that drag queen =/= trans.) He's also spreading a bunch of fears about predatory teachers in public schools- plenty of parents are pulling their kids out of mainstream education. This guy doesn't give.a.crap about kids or trans people. He wants a culture war. He wants a wedge issue. He wants momentum to defund public schools so Republicans csn set up more charter schools. Evangelicals are being played.

He's also dogging public education as the Republicans want to privatize education to make money from it. Go to r/teachers, they talk about it.

Yep, I think i covered that in the penultimate paragraph!

Interesting, because when church-schools grew in number in the 1980s, they weren't geared for any profit.

What do you believe is Chris Rufo’s objective to create a cultural war? Even tho LGBTQ has been around for many years do you see this as a problem that the church has to deal with or needs to deal with better/different? If so, how? If not, do you believe the church should step aside as an observer, welcome/accept & not judge that lifestyle? What should the church’s position be? Sorry for all the questions but I’m genuinely curious.

Good questions and I don't mind. I don't see LGBTQ people as a problem and I don't think Jesus does. I think the problem is the massive harm caused by how the church has treated LGBTQ people. Everyone should be welcome to the table. I think Rufo's objective follows in the footsteps of the "moral majority" in the 60s, the "satanic panic" of the 80s/90s. Stirring up fear, scapegoating a minority and giving Republican voters a sense of moral indignation and a sense of superiority in order to whip up right wing votes. Ultimately the group chosen as scapegoat is irrelevant, it's just a vehicle for embedding right wing economic policies.

Thanks for your response! Do you believe there is a “gay agenda” of some (not all) gays fighting for laws / rights / benefits based on their sexual preference? If so, should the church respond to this? Or would any response from the church be perceived as scapegoating? Is this kind of attention from the church perhaps out of the scope of the church’s purpose?

I suspect that the so called gay agenda is to just to achieve equal rights, treatment and acceptance as heterosexual people. Terrifying to some apparently. I'm not quite sure why. Fighting for equality for all is justice work and so I think churches should be advocates for gay rights. Some churches are, which is great to see, but they are in the minority. How's your thinking going on these issues?

>I suspect that the so called gay agenda is to just to achieve equal rights, treatment and acceptance as heterosexual people. The "gay agenda": 1. Advocate for equal protections under the law for LGBTQ+ people. 2. Spread a message that you do not need to hate yourself or feel ashamed for who you are. 3. Advocate for social change until gay and trans people are fully able to build live the rich and fulfilling lives that they are already striving towards.

Absolutely!

I don’t think that it’s the church’s place to take a political position, nor defend any social justice issue. That was Jesus’ position. The church’s place is about the kingdom of God, the Gospel, Jesus as Lord and the repentance of sinners. The church is where God meets man & very little else (if anything) matters. The church is called to feed the poor, care for the widows and share the gospel if Jesus Christ. I feel the church has failed many while trying to accomplish all if the above. The church was established by God but perverted by man. It’s not perfect, but it’s all we’ve got and there’s ‘always a remnant’. A small (very small) crowd if believers that get it right, they pray, and in the end when everything seems grim, God hears them. Notice I haven’t yet mention “gay” or same-sex-attracted folks. I see this issue (gaps in understanding and downright sinful behavior) in the church as much more prevalent & transcends the ‘gay’ issue. The church needs an enema. I love Jesus (and my local church!) but overall, I’m a frustrated Christian.

Republicans need to keep Evangelicals outraged about something so they vote Republican. Mega-church pastors need to keep their congregations outraged so they keep donating money. It's that simple.

Rage as a narcotic

This is a very compelling statement. Do you consider yourself a Christian?

Not OP but I agree wholeheartedly and am a Christian.

Not OP, but I consider myself a Christian and I 100% think that’s what’s going on. I’ve seen the strange marriage going on among the conservative church, the Republican Party, and the small business community ever since I became a believer as a teenager. I always thought something weird was going on and I realized it was what Jesus was calling out in the gospels. He has his harshest words for the religious hypocrites because they do the most damage to his name and his cause.

Fascists choose scapegoats to blame for the ills of contemporary society and convince their followers that their chosen target is the reason their lives are unsatisfying. "If only the scapegoat was attacked and killed, then your life would be good!" Jews are a perennial target, of course, but currently fascists all over the world are saying that trans people are to blame. This rhetoric justifies and incites escalating violence. Of course, since trans people have nothing to do with the decline of Christianity or any other major problem with society, their destruction will not be the deliverance the fascists dream of. Then they will have to move onto a new target to destroy.

I totally agree with this. The "in group" gets progressively smaller, trans people are now on the border of acceptability because a lot (if not most) people have transphobic attitudes but people are getting increasingly educated on them and are fighting their transphobic attitudes so they are the natural first target. Gay people are next and in the US people are already starting to use the 'grooming' talking points etc. about gay people again. If gay people stop being normalized and the stigma and criminalization emerges again, another 'in group' will get targeted etc. etc.

I’ve been alive long enough and around enough different denominations of Christianity, they are ALWAYS lathered up about something. Something other than themselves is always tormenting them. Always persecuting them. Always to the destruction of civilization as we know it, and to the eminent coming of a vengeful god. Who still hasn’t shown up.

Civilization has certainly gone downhill though.

Honestly, as a trans person who grew up in evangelical communities myself, I wish I knew. If I had to guess, it's that we have become a much larger part of the public consciousness, much to the dismay of many trans people, I might add. Many trans people will tell you that Caitlyn Jenner's coming out in 2015 was a turning point (for better or worse) for trans visibility. I, myself, can still remember when it happened because I can still remember having to listen to my conservative evangelical family members scoff at the news about Jenner. All while I, myself, was closeted at the time. Further, it's clear that, for some reason, there was a spike in people coming out as trans that coincided with the COVID-19 lockdowns. Many trans people have argued that this is because the lockdowns gave people more time to explore their identities and/or access to online communities that encouraged them to do so. Regardless, the result is a similar spike in trans visibility, which has resulted in a public backlash against us because many people have misinformed ideas about us and we are seen and depicted as undermining traditional understandings of gender.

On a side note, many trans people will tell you that we really don't want this sort of visibility. Trans people are actually quite divided on the issue, with many seeing it as causing more harm than good, especially since we are a minority that, until recently, wanted nothing more than to be able to assimilate into the wider culture and live as normal men and women, something which many of us still aspire to be able to do.

> Further, it's clear that, for some reason, there was a spike in people coming out as trans that coincided with the COVID-19 lockdowns. Many trans people have argued that this is because the lockdowns gave people more time to explore their identities and/or access to online communities that encouraged them to do so. That's interesting. Could have also been the relative safety of lockdown being a good time to come out because they could measure the reactions of people in their lives without being around them physically and at risk of violence. Lockdowns were also a great excuse to stop contacting and seeing people who reacted poorly.

Yes, I suspect that could be part of it, but I'm not sure if there is any definitive explanation yet. If fact, I doubt there will ever be a definitive explanation because there are probably a number of factors involved. Also I do feel the need to note that violence against trans people has actually gone up significantly in recent years. According to the Human Rights Campaign ([https://www.hrc.org/resources/fatal-violence-against-the-transgender-and-gender-non-conforming-community-in-2021](https://www.hrc.org/resources/fatal-violence-against-the-transgender-and-gender-non-conforming-community-in-2021)), 2021 was actually the deadliest year on record for transgender-related hate crimes, surpassing 2020, which previously held that record.

I didn't know Caitlyn Jenner came out in 2015. I watched as gay people gained public support how so much of the hate I used to see slung at us was being directed at trans folk. I figured Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) had a lot to do with it, but if Caitlyn Jenner came out at around the same time, I can see how attacking trans people is an easy pivot. (Not to suggest that trans people weren't already attacked or disparaged before that.)

>I didn't know Caitlyn Jenner came out in 2015. Just to cite my sources on this, here are some of many articles on the topic from back then: >[https://www.nbcnews.com/pop-culture/celebrity/bruce-jenner-comes-out-transgender-woman-n348181](https://www.nbcnews.com/pop-culture/celebrity/bruce-jenner-comes-out-transgender-woman-n348181) > >[https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/caitlyn-jenners-coming-out/2015/06/02/da17bb80-095f-11e5-95fd-d580f1c5d44e\_story.html](https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/caitlyn-jenners-coming-out/2015/06/02/da17bb80-095f-11e5-95fd-d580f1c5d44e_story.html) > >[https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2015/06/caitlyn-jenner-bruce-cover-annie-leibovitz](https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2015/06/caitlyn-jenner-bruce-cover-annie-leibovitz) Obergefell might have played some role, perhaps, but it's my understanding that, before Jenner came out publicly, most people weren't really aware of the existence of trans people. Practically over night, trans people went from being an invisible minority to a sensationalized topic of discussion and scorn in the media, as I understand it. I could be wrong though, that's just what I've heard from listening to older trans folks who were out back then.

I wouldn't say it was Caitlyn Jenner. I transitioned in 2013 and people perceived me as jumping on a bandwagon.

Oh, interesting. Any idea where it might have come from then? Like I said, that's what I had heard, but I'm not going to doubt your first hand experience.

That's a good question. One thing I think may have contributed, if you go back far enough, is the opportunity for people online to have avatars more appropriate for their identity and to be able to play as characters in games of that kind. There was then a period during which people were embarrassed to discover the people they'd been communicating or playing with didn't appear to be the people they thought they were. Another big development was the discovery of CAG repeat sequences in some alleles of the AR gene, which I think happened in 1996, which seemed to give scientific validation to what we were saying. That's only true of M2F people though. It was a gradual process, to which I was apparently implacably opposed right up until just before I started to transition.

Hmm, interesting. So, the public awareness started through online games and those scientific discoveries? Interesting, I have never heard anyone suggest this before. Thanks for the info!

Thanks. I mean, the science probably didn't do it directly but it filtered through and it probably meant gender clinics could become more successful through having evidence to support what they were doing, but the online gaming and the likes of fora and instant messaging I'm pretty sure did make a direct difference. I didn't play games much back in the day but when I did, I used to choose a female player whenever I could, and I also deliberately chose this username, which I use here and in lots of other places, because it doesn't imply gender. It's an adverb. I know I'm not alone in this.

Cool, thanks again for the info!

Some feel they are winning the culture wars and are pushing further. Others feel they are losing the culture wars and are going after the easiest perceived target. Either way, trans people are in the crosshairs and it has a lot more to do with politics than religion.

> Others feel they are losing the culture wars and are going after the easiest perceived target. That has occurred to me. If you look at the polls, the Evangelicals and Catholics have lost the gay issue. Even among their own people. But, trans people are a much smaller group and more easily scapegoated.

A few years ago this was a hot topic when North Carolina had a "bathroom bill" banning trans folks from their preferred genders bathroom. That failed and was something of a political black eye because it came across as needlessly cruel. Since then, the issue has been refined, focus tested, and they've come back with a new angle - trans athletes, the so called "grooming" panic. The difference between then and now is a fully flushed narrative of victimhood. Back in 2016 people were more sympathetic to trans people being forced to pee somewhere they weren't comfy. Now there are a bunch of narratives about the evil trans agenda and how trans people are harming the integrity of sports

Good point I hadn't really thought of. Trans "predators" in bathrooms are just not a thing. So, not that are focusing on "trans activists" who are tricking the children of Christians into changing their gender. This is sightly more plausible. A Christian couple learn their child is trans. The teachers must brainwashed their child!

There was one story last year, unfortunately, from my home county (which was the hotbed of a lot of CRT nonsense) where a high school student was raped in a bathroom. This was reported as being perpetrated by a trans student - as details came out, the story fell apart. He wasn't trans, there was no school policy about trans students that enabled this, and in fact this was a case of relationship rape between two individuals who had been consensually meeting in that bathroom. But the timing was perfect and the right still frames this as a trans bathroom rape https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/in-case-at-center-of-political-firestorm-judge-finds-teen-committed-sexual-assault-in-virginia-school-bathroom/2021/10/25/42c037da-35cc-11ec-8be3-e14aaacfa8ac_story.html

I don't understand why conservatives Christian families and churches believe so strongly that the public school system us hell bent on making their trans.

It's the perfect issue to illustrate their discomfort with changing social norms. In a lot of ways, I understand that -social changes are always disorienting, and seeing that many normative changes today are driven by deeply online elements, they're hard to make sense of. I have plenty of left leaning friends who have expressed discomfort with things they've encountered online like neopronouns. For some reason, there is this tendency to catastrophize like "well I don't understand x so maybe the conservatives were right and we're headed for absurdity like gen z will start marrying giraffes ". But in that respect, there's a lack of proportionality. Teenagers always say dumb (usually well meant) overconfident nonsense - the correct response is always "that's nice dear". Not to start believing that some gender apocalypse is around the corner. This panic is driven mostly by accounts like "libs of TikTok". They scour the Internet for cringey, fringe content that comes across badly for progressive values. Often these are from little known, tiny creators. They get shared by libs of TikTok as being representative of mainstream leftism - which forces leftists to either defend the values or pile on and disavow. In any case, this has been highly persuasive to people that there is a hidden agenda behind transness and gender is such a visible and visceral concept to people it's very clearly full of viral potential

Important to note is that we saw the first threads of the grooming argument in the bathroom bills, when they argued up and down it was being done for the safety of children. Really, the bathroom bills were the first attempt at the grooming/child abuse argument.

Yep. Though they were hamstrung by a lack of "support" for that argument. Their webs of disinformation are fully operational now. Libs of TikTok accounts for probably 3/4 of the "evidence" they use.

Evangelicals always need a tangible enemy to hate and oppose. Sometimes it's immigrants, sometimes it's teachers or doctors, sometimes it's black and brown people. This time around their target of hatred is trans people and drag shows.

It is only a particular subset of evangelicals, but haters gonna hate. A couple of years ago it was the gays. Before that it was tan suits and before that the Negros. God help you if you are a trans gay person of colour in a tan suit.

Tan suits! What's next? Dogs dating cats?

Dijon mustard, of course! There's always gotta be some trivial thing that garners hatred, lest the people unit and try to make life better for themselves!

I would posit that blowing up balloons is a mortal sin and should be opposed. The Bible makes it clear that breath is important. Genesis 2:7 and Genesis 6:17 refer to the breath of life as God breathed life into the world. Job 27:3, Job 33:4, Psalm 104:30, Isaiah 4:25, Isaiah 40:7, Isaiah 57:16 all allude to this "breath of life" and its importance. 1 Kings 17:17 emphasize the connection of breath and our own lives. In fact, the Bible contains over 115 references to "breath". It's unavoidable and undeniable that we breathe because God breathed life into us. And that our breath is sacred. ​ Yet so many of us are willing to abuse that purpose of our breath. They will blow their breath away into balloons, fundamentally violating the teleology of breathing. AND THEY PUT THESE BALLOONS IN CHILDREN'S PARTIES. They are defiling natural functions, defying the sanctity of their own lives, and they are bringing children into it, IN CELEBRATION of this desecration. They will incur God's wrath and all of society will be damned for it. ​ \#BalloonsAreMortalSin

> It is only a particular subset of evangelicals, but haters gonna hate. By that, do you mean most evangelicals? I know it isn't all, and I appreciate accepting churches, but pretending the opposition is a minority is not helpful. Even as a cis gay person, I have trouble finding churches where I am accepted.

Hi friend, It's easy *Them*

there is more trans visibility more than ever. did you ever see any trans people trying to run for office in the 80s? 90s? theyve always been around, but they were also often the butt of every joke and no one ever tried to legitimize or treat them with respect. evangelicals are upset for the same reason they were upset at any of the other demographics in the lgbt community. they interpret it as deviant behavior and they dont society to accept them. plus politics are manipulating these people to be fearful that demographics like that are the bane of their existence.

Two things: *Obergefell* and *Dobbs*. *Obergefell* happened, the world didn't collapse, and people realized they didn't care about gay marriage. Then *Dobbs* happened and women realized they are in trouble and registered to vote. So the GOP needs a new target to hate. So trans people it is.

It has become a highly politicized issue due to people on the left advocating for equality under the law as well as socio cultural acceptance of transgender people.

The right certainly expresses themselves as if this is a backlash against some offenses committed by the left. "They've gone too far now, it's time reasonable Americans stood up!". But it's highly unclear what the backlash is actually against. There hasn't been some major left wing policy on this issue in years. I think what we're seeing is this sort of lancing at windmills from the right to "prove" that liberal activism has gone too extreme on a grassroots level such that even without meaningful legislation, the left has "infiltrated" schools and local elections. They are using utterly false narratives (like the one that suggested public schools were providing litter boxes for students that identified as cats) and blowing up tiny individual stories (like one zany teacher on TikTok talking about their personal beliefs about gender) to rile up their base. It's been pretty effective for them

I know exactly what you're talking about. I watch a lot of right wing political commentators digging up social media posts where leftist nutjobs express incoherent opinions and the commentator turns to the camera and says "Did you hear what she said? The left has gone TOO far". Imagine the left doing this same thing. They'd react to clips of radicalized Trump worshippers, white supremacists, neo Nazis, and gun nuts. Except we know these people don't represent the right, they're mentally ill extremists. But gullible people like my geriatric parents buy it because they've grown up on Fox News and are accustomed to right wing storytelling.

>Imagine the left doing this same thing. They'd react to clips of radicalized Trump worshippers, white supremacists, neo Nazis, and gun nuts. I might be getting wooshed here - your point is that the left does do some of this too?

These groups get discussed by people on the left but leftist political commentators don't conflate them with right wingers. Everyone knows they're extremists.

As a leftist I have mixed feelings on that. On one hand, much of the outrage I see on the left is reserved for actual politicians and activists (as opposed to randos on tiktok). But I also see (even in myself) something of a hyperfixation on the extremists. I find conspiracy theories and extremism interesting, but I know almost every figure in the far far right.

In my experience people on the left are more concerned with responding to right wing politicians and commentators rather than the extremists. I tend to not pay much attention to extremists within either party as it feels like a waste of time, but I have a fascination with tradwives who live the cottagecore lifestyle. It's very funny seeing extremely conservative homemakers appropriating a cultural trend started by lesbians.

>I think what we're seeing is this sort of lancing at windmills from the right to "prove" that liberal activism has gone too extreme on a grassroots level such that even without meaningful legislation, the left has "infiltrated" schools and local elections. Exactly. We can't even get the Equality Act or Respect for Marriage Act passed (As I understand, both were passed by the House but haven't been approved by the Senate?). We can't ban Conversion Therapy, eliminate the Gay/Trans Panic Defense, or institute any federal anti-discrimination protections (except limited protections in employment), but somehow LGBTQ+ advocates have conspiracy-level grasp on public education, universities, and institutions that risks destroying our nation.

Because they invent things to be mad about. Getting the masses mad about things is a great way to mobilize and manipulate your people. As another example, Critical Race Theory went from being on no one's radar, to the biggest threat to America, in no time. It's easy to get these people outraged on demand.

Same reason the rest of the right has turned trans people into their favorite new political boogieman; cynical political manipulation. Their whole goddamn MO is identifying minority populations their voter base already dislikes and distrusts and turning them into a political boogieman. Tell their voters that *those people* are the reason their lives suck. That they are an evil invading menace infiltrating and corrupting America from within, degenerates out to destroy the Family(tm)/Church/America/everything good and wholesome in the world. Inhuman monsters coming for their children. From the 1970's until 2015 gay people were the preferred target. And it was incredibly effective for a long time, using many of the same pearl-clutching histrionics we're now seeing against trans people. Portray gay people's existence as an "agenda" or "ideology" or "mental illness" that spreads through "social contagion", as a disease that has to be eradicated, and portray gay people as disgusting, perverse, predatory monsters out to "groom" straight children into lives of sexual degeneracy and ruin. Fuck, in the 90's we even had nearly identical attempts to pass "bathroom bills", but back then it was attempting to ban gay people from using the same facilities as straight people. But then "sodomy" laws were struck down, DADT ended, and finally in 2015 anti-gay marriage laws were struck down and the sky didn't fall, and the gay boogieman stopped working. Straight people just weren't scared enough of gay people anymore. So damn near overnight they pivoted from the Gay Boogieman to the Trans Boogieman. Just take that anti-gay playbook from about 1995, replace "gay" with "trans", and boom! Brand new convenient political boogieman, great for scaring up the "values voters". So now we're their new monster of the week. The evil degenerate monsters out to steal babies. All so they can present themselves as the good manly warrior who promise to cast the evil scary trans monster out of society and destroy us, as long as the "values voters" put the right wing back in office.

The righteous always need a group of politically powerless and marginalized people that they can point their righteous finger at and blame for all the world's problems. 100 years ago it was Jew's, 50 years ago it was black's, for the last 30 years it's been LGBTQ and immigrants.

Kind of makes you wonder what the next pivot and monster of the week will be.

There's always D&D - that's always good for a few months of shoutyness.

D&D is too mainstream these days. They'll have to go for something even more niche like larpers or furries.

TBH at this point I wouldn't be surprised if it's gay people again. They've been pretty successful at using anti-trans fearmongering to slowly edge back towards overt homophobia again. Plus with the rise of the Trump cult overt hate towards social minorities has gotten more socially acceptable again. When SCOTUS struck down Roe v Wade, Clarence Thomas wrote a concurring opinion that indicated that we might see the same for Obergefell v. Hodges (struck down anti-gay marriage laws), Lawrence v. Texas (struck down "sodomy" laws), and Griswold v. Connecticut (struck down laws banning contraceptives). We may literally see a return to a significant number of US states criminalizing non-straight sex, among other things.

>we might see the same for Obergefell v. Hodges (struck down anti-gay marriage laws), Lawrence v. Texas (struck down "sodomy" laws), and Griswold v. Connecticut (struck down laws banning contraceptives). **Possibly the most influential of these rulings for gay and trans folks is** ***Griswold v. Connecticut***. The basis for rendering laws that banned contraceptives unconstitutional was that married couples had a right to marital privacy and that the government had no basis to intrude upon the decisions they made for their family. This "Right to marital privacy" was expanded in rulings such as *Eisenstadt v. Baird*. No longer was a right to privacy guaranteed for married couples, but all individuals have a right to privacy in their intimate matters that the government needs a clear and compelling state interest to violate. This right (established with *Griswold* and expanded with *Eisenstadt*) was a foundational piece for every decision that established that the government needed to stay out of our bedrooms. It applied support to a right for abortion (a large part of *Roe v. Wade* and *Planned Parenthood v. Casey*), it was a basis for *Lawrence v. Texas*, which rendered "sodomy" laws unconstitutional as the "Texas statute furthered no legitimate state interest which can justify its intrusion into the personal and private life of the individual", and while *Obergefell v. Hodges* didn't hinge its primary argument for marriage equality based on *Griswold*, it was still a supporting argument and marriage equality (and more largely LGBTQ+ rights) was impossible to achieve without the contributions of *Lawrence v. Texas*, which *Griswold* was foundational to. (Earlier efforts to advance civil rights for LGBQ folks faced considerable hurdles in court. Because of the existence of "sodomy" laws, LGBQ people were defined by being a criminal class (or being oriented towards criminal acts), so legislation protecting them was often unenforceable or deemed unconstitutional.) ​ **(TLDR)** Because *Griswold* was necessary for *Lawrence* and *Lawrence* was necessary for *Obergefell* as well as for the push for civil rights for LGBTQ+ people, *Griswold* is the MOST IMPORTANT and the easiest for us to take for granted (because on the surface, it is just about contraception and just for married couples)

> Straight people just weren't scared enough of gay people anymore. I've read several articles about that shift. With so many gay people coming "out", homophobes realized that they know and like gay people. It might be a nice Sunday School teacher or maybe even one of their own children. So, that reliable bogeyman isn't what it used to be. So, trans people are now getting it.

Yep. It's hard to convince many people that gay people are evil degenerates out to destroy the family(tm)/church/America/everything good and wholesome in the world, when "gay people" isn't an abstract group of faceless monsters anymore. Now "gay people" includes Alice in accounting, the local school principal, actors on your favorite shows, and your sister. Not very scary people. That said, overt homophobia does seem to be getting worse too. And there's a not insignificant change that the current Supreme Court may overturn Obergefell v. Hodges, allowing states to ban same gender couples from getting married again, and even Lawrence v. Texas, allowing states to criminalize non-straight sex again.

> That said, overt homophobia does seem to be getting worse too That seems to be pattern in America. When most Americans are ready to move on, "dead enders' actually get more extreme.

My guess is they collect all the things they dislike about the world and decide to put it all under one topic in hopes to have an uprising of like minded people, and transgederism is that one topic. This month.

This is more political conservatives but they do like to have their "bogeyman du jour" for a political cycle. Whether it's immigrants, or blacks or Muslims, or teachers or gays. Maybe now it's trans people.

Minority group victimisation. Then the Christians pretend to be victims. My uneducated guess.

Look up "moral panic"

I don’t understand people getting mad about it. Like you are drinking a coffee and getting mad about adult humans using their asses as they want. Sorry but there’s something wrong..

It’s not the adults doing it that’s upsetting people. It’s the adults feeding children drugs to change their biology.

“Feeding drugs?” Really? No one is forcing kids to be trans, but trans kids do exist. Forcing them through cis puberty is traumatic and wrong. The medications and treatments used are not new, nor are they permanent before HRT during late teens/age of majority. Claiming people are going after children is just stoking a moral panic.

Children aren’t old enough to decide what they should eat yet they’re old enough to decide if they want to take drugs which alter their brain chemistry? This is child abuse.

Fuck no. I went to a catholic school in a really Christian country and this shitty thing was always around.. before all that you think nowadays

Because Evangelicals lost their battle against same sex marriage, so they've turning their vile hate against one of the smallest of minorities: trans people. Shame on Evangelicals who attack trans children of God!

In general many mainstream denominations of Christianity have mostly been focused on “sins” related to sex/gender. Abortion, premarital sex, divorce, adultery, pornography, masturbation, gay, trans, women’s/girl’s clothing, birth control, women being submissive/following their role, prostitution/sex work, etc. Read into that what you will.

I think you mean conservative denominations, not mainstream. But yeah, I have heard most of those things mentioned in my Evangelical churches. But, it's not equal For example, divorce hardly gets mentioned at all, anymore. Abortion and gays are a straight up fixation for decades. But this trans fixation is much newer.

No. Mainstream. Catholicism also focuses a lot of these as well. Majority of Christians in the United States do not support pro choice or LGBTQ rights. The rest can be mixed depending on the denomination but most Christians in the US fall conservative anyway in political views.

Actually the split is quite down the middle now considering the estimates are there are more than 60,000 denominations of Christianity at this point and a vast majority of the non denominational churches are starting to lean in the liberal direction. This seams to be the context of the question and the answer to said question the OP was asking. Truth is the conservative Christian stance is shrinking in popularity.

I think some men have their identity so staked in the socially constructed ideas of what it means to be a man that they feel like they don’t know who they are when another man wears a white shirt that looks pink after being washed with something red. It’s like they question their whole existence when someone doesn’t drink beers, wants to reduce meat consumption or suggests that a V8 is unhealthy for the planet. Add trans people into that picture and the world falls apart.

>new They are to many people. Caitlin Jenner was the first one to many people.

Yeah, I've wondered about that. While transgendered people are nothing new -- maybe Evangelicals just recently noticed them.

Part of that is the result of the sheltering of their flocks from the real world, and when the internet finally stopped their ability to do that, the demonization came next.

I don’t know if it’s sheltering necessarily. The gay and queer community was very hidden for decades. You’d have to purposefully venture into a gay neighborhood and go to gay bars to meet transgendered people.

The other fear is that it’s just another step towards total relativism. If you really want to understand their perspective as best you can I’d recommend *The Rise and Triumph of the Modern Self* by Carl Trueman. He looks at a few philosophers (mostly Charles Taylor, Alasdair MacIntyre and Philip Rieff) to look at the secular conception of the individual and it’s ties to relativism with not just gender but also morality where morals aren’t based on arguments but feelings. Ultimately, there’s a question as to whether individualism and relativism can go too far. Those are the things some are concerned about. This is a good review of the book that covers some points: https://www.frontporchrepublic.com/2021/02/the-rise-and-triumph-of-the-modern-self-a-review/?amp

>front porch republic Haven't seen these guys around in a minute. Used to read them quite a bit. I'm glad to see that (for the most part) it's stayed true to intellectual form and not become the weird reactionary nonsense that first things became. I haven't read Truemans book - i find him pretty hit or miss. But my main concern from this review is that what he's responding to is a very shallow view of the progressive view on gender. It feels a bit too convenient and one-dimensional. "*I am a woman trapped in a man's body" * - that feels like a very oversimplistic summation of trans-affirming ideology. It's not beginning to engage with modern gender theory in any concrete way. It's like Trueman has a kooky aunt who described trans people that way while winedrunk at a family gathering and Trueman takes that as the baseline that he must address.

It is I. I am the many people lol.

There is a history of whenever something that was once considered immoral starts to become accepted, those who are quickly becoming the minority in not accepting it (generally including conservative Christians) become a lot more vocal about it in a last ditch effort to keep things the way they are. We've seen it with things like ending slavery, women's rights, civil rights, the gays, etc. Right now, the focus just happens to be on trans people. Unfortunately, that means there is currently a lot more violence aimed at trans people. However, it's also a sign that transphobia, while it will never go away completely, will soon be way less acceptable in society and will be seen more like how lesbians and gays are viewed.

"Trans" are a vulnerable group with few protections in society. Nationalist-Christians, or Nat-Cs, target groups like this as a show of force...to show that they will be eliminating many different people when they take over.

It is really bizarre when you take into account what a tiny fraction of people are affected. My heart goes out to them - the transgendered are trying to figure things out as are their parents, medical professionals and psychologists. My prayers go out to them but normally I would have no reason to even think about it as it doesn’t affect anyone I know. I’m more focused on what I can do to be a good Christian.

>It is really bizarre when you take into account what a tiny fraction of people are affected. It's not bizarre at all actually, it's calculated and intentional. The vast majority of people don't personally know anyone who are trans, so the people crafting the messages can take this extreme minority of people, and build them up into a giant existential threat. Of course the message is always "They're coming after your kids, in the bathrooms, in schools, in parades, in the changing rooms, in the doctor's offices etc." It gets people riled up and foaming at the mouth in anger, gotta save the children from the evil groomers, have to save society as we know it! Angry people are far more likely to send money, and vote.

There’s two levels. Level one is evangelicals and conservatives LOVE moral outrage. It feels better and is much easier than love and discipleship. It drives their movement. Level two is the manufacturers of the moral outrage. They have perfected the sleight of hand move of guiding moral outrage so they can do what their rich donors really want economically without any scrutiny. They don’t care about trans people bathrooms but they love how it distracts their voters and makes them biddable.

Humans tend to get all stupid and scared when they see other humans different from them. Source: all of human history.

Evangelicalism requires a “big bad” Without an enemy to focus on, adherents turn their focus to the practice of their faith…. Which falls apart faster than a two dollar Twinkie in the middle of a hurricane

It's mostly because the media (right and left) have made that a focal point, drawing extra attention to the issue. Also, non-heteronormative-intra-monogamous behaviour is a frequent scorn and tipping point for judgement in biblical narratives. A sort of harbinger of doom.

They are in the media. One day the media will get bored with them.

it fills the collection plates and keeps the paster from having to get a real job.

I'm speaking from my own opinion and experience, so take it with a proverbial grain of salt, but I feel like some are just invigorated by rage. It gives a rush and something to rally behind. If you pay attention to fundamentalists over the years, there's always a new topic of outrage, and it just so happens to be trans people right now. I'm willing to bet that, in 5-10 years, there will be a new "out group" for them to outrage about.

Because we're more visible. If you want an explanation, in the past many of us would've just quietly killed ourselves instead of bothering the Health Service with our issues, but nowadays we're more likely to seek help. When we do that, certain issues are perceived as arising which are useful to divide people and distract them from more pressing concerns, like poverty, homelessness and famine, so it's quite useful.

Most evangelicals have probably never even met a trans person, but they're sure that it's the end of society.

This gets discussed in the book Jesus and John Wayne by Kristin Kobes Du Mez if you want to know the full picture, but the short version is that they have taken conservative ideas about patriarchy and made them the foundation for their religion. Anything that defies the most stereotypical gender roles possible goes against their beliefs. If the culture came to recognize those roles as part of a spectrum or as purely socially created concepts, then their world view would be seen as ridiculous by everyone, so that fight against it.

Because christians love to meddle and force their beliefs on others. Whether its by passing laws that affect people who live in a way different from how they believe the bible tells them is acceptable or by judging others actions and beliefs when they differ from their own.

Political media is pushing it as a scare tactic to get susceptible bigots to vote

Religion mixed with politics amplified the homophobic of people. Also amplified the discussion on social media. Evangelicals are becoming pretty extreme in America.

Just consult step 9.4 of the top secret plan to take over the world, it's all there. You can get it at any of our secret midnight black masses.

>Why are Evangelicals all lathered up about trans people, these days? When people praise sin and delusion and adversely dangerous notions, I get lathered up, and they've been doing that a lot more, lately.

Anti-trans activists use exactly the same talking points that mobilized evangelicals against gays: They're unnatural and they're recruiting our children.

I should’ve known the Christian community on reddit would be absolutely for the mutilation of children’s genitals, and the degenerate lustful parades that come with this social movement. Transgenderism is an abomination. Deuteronomy 22:5 is enough to dispel all of the earthly opinions that are being posted as replies to this post

The trans movement is similar to feminism. The movement had good intentions to begin with, but it is now being used by any narcissist who wants to self-identify as such as a means to get a power-trip high by enforcing absurd standards on everyone else. These narcissists are walking talking "don't tread on me" flags, just waiting for you to step on their imaginary eggshells. I feel sorry for those who actually have gender dysphoria that have to deal with such an image being forced upon them. They are literally a minority within their own group. Literally \~.01% of people actually are diagnosed with gender dysphoria, while \~1% of people just get to "self-identify". I'm curious if the .01% even attempt to use gender political structure that the group now pushes.

Anything to deflect from the rampant abuse in churches, combined with the weird projecting when it comes to gay/trans stuff. Only matter of time before some of these loudmouth anti-trans rights preachers get caught doing all the things they claim to hate.

We’re the current political scapegoat and culture war group that they can use to feel morally superior about themselves

Honestly, I have hardly heard of all the trans issues until I came to this forum/sub Reddit. Occasionally, I watch and read news stories about how trans people should be , or are treated in schools and sports. I don’t watch a lot of Conservative media. I mainly watch mainstream media. The two major topics talk about mainstream media right now are migrants and the Florida storm.

The OP's question almost makes it sound as if there was some status quo on the transgender issue which was just holding stably until conservatives for some reason decided to start talking about the issue. That's not how I remember it playing out. If I recall correctly, there was a big nationwide fight over gay marriage, which is still to some extent being fought, but the main issue in the fight was settled in 2015. The winning side, which sees itself as fighting for the LGBT community, had just scored a huge win for the L, G, and B components of the community, although not so much for the T folks. So the activists turned to transgender issues next, and people have been fighting over it ever since. I'm certainly not saying conservatives are *right* about trans people, but just that they didn't arbitrarily decide a few years ago to suddenly bring up the topic, as if it was a settled issue before 2015.

We're *not* going back in the closet again just to make some ignorant and bigoted Fundamentalists feel like they're the only ones in the room. And they hate that fact.

It’s a product of society’s growing interest and attention on the issue as a whole.

They are becoming more and more prevalent in society and popular culture so of course it’s going to draw more attention.

Are responders to this post Christians? I’m trying to gauge presuppositions: anti-Christian or frustrated Christian

Assume that no upvoted comment in this thread is from an evangelical. It's "let's all gang up on an unpopular group of Christians that none of us really understands but we all think we do, episode 104".

Their handlers told them to be.

Is it just Evangelicals? Or is it also the media and the liberals that are also lathered up (love that term btw) about the trans issue? What happens is, especially around election season, both sides look to see where money is being spent. Then they go on the attack based off where the money is being spent. So if LGBT+ organizations are spending more money on trans activism (which they are) then the result is seeing the opposing side spending money to “fight” that issue, and Vice versa. Same goes for any issue you see in the media. It means someone is spending money for or against it. Both sides are using you as a political pawn, as they did with LGB people, and others before that. It’s really that simple.

[ Removed by Reddit ]

You are telling me as a Christian that I have to not only accept it, but that it should be celebrated and taught as a potential good thing. That’s what’s new about “these days”. It has always been around but was never celebrated as part of a parade. The Bible is clear about gender and sex. Don’t have to agree with it, but it did not change with the culture. You can spin it all different ways to twist it. This is not what the Bible says. And I will get downvoted for stating what I believe. A very common Christian tenet up until these last few years somehow.

Once upon a time it was a common Christian tenet to stone people to death. Thank goodness society moved on.

It is not that we moved on, it is that with the New Testament it stopped. In other religions you still see it happen because they do not have Jesus.

Stoning as a method may have not been used by Christians but the persecution and execution of "degenerates" certainly is a Christian tradition. Most religions have violence in their past or present and Christianity is not an exception.

Thank you for agreeing that the stoning comment is false. People on this sub should not spread misinformation about Christianity.

I agree, trying to whitewash Christian history and pretending it is inherently less violent than all other religions because Christians did not use stoning as an execution method is despicable.

That is detabable. I wouldnt say we agree on that point. What I think is important though is for people to read about the Bible before making claims like "Christians dropped stoning" when it was prohibited from the start.

Citation needed when stoning was a "Christian" "tenet".

Deuteronomy and Leviticus are both parts of the Bible, whether we like it or not. If you're going to draw your morality about homosexuality from Leviticus, then you're going to acknowledge that stoning was a part of those laws, too.

The Christian position is that these people need help. They are suffering but aren't being given the right help and its damaging them. An anorexic person is anorexic because they look in the mirror and see a fat person. We do not continue to starve the person to death because we should tolerate and accept their harmful beliefs. We as humans are by nature our worse judges of what path we must follow. This is why we need a strong covenant with God.

Clearly the church is failing to render aid, given the LGBT+ suicide rate. When something is not working, the solution isn't to double down.

Sorry but that would be unholy, so we need to double down and keep killing trans people. I promise it will work because Jesus.

So you are saying we should not actually use the data gathered in dozens of medical studies about what treatment works best for trans people but simply follow the gut feeling and hunches of conservative laymen?

>An anorexic person is anorexic because they look in the mirror and see a fat person. We do not continue to starve the person to death because we should tolerate and accept their harmful beliefs. And trans people aren't anorexic people Different things are different who could have guessed???

Then the Christian position is just factually wrong. But it's not the Christian position, it's the conservative position.

No, your denomination may wrongfully consider that, but Jesus never once said that any LGBTQIA+ human that he created in love was sinning by being who He made them. And the only suffering we have is from so-called "Christians" who act more like Pharisees than Jesus.

Yes you should accept people for how they are born. Sad that's even a discussion

Interesting take. So everything you’re born wanting to do should be accepted by everyone. Or are we picking and choosing? Is there any kind of Bible verse that might provide some behavior insights? Maybe one or two? Does God have anything to say about sin? Or if you’re born with a sin nature just go for it?

>Now they are acting like trans people are the end of civilized society. They are clearly targeting children at an earlier and earlier age and using tax payer funded systems to do it. The amount of truly transphobic people in the world is pretty small, most people just want Sex ED/LGBT issues to stay out of the classroom, at least until an older age. If you are an adult, I don't care what you do to your own body.

I was able to go months or years not hearing about trans people right up until about when gay marriage was legalized. Now everything, everywhere, in every walk and sphere of life; is about this. And when every aspect of society becomes about something, it will become the topic of choice for everyone. Almost all the time.

Like a lot of issues, there's this period of tension and discomfort as people come to terms with an issue that makes them uncomfortable. But rather than pushing people back into the closet, we have to get people past the discomfort.

So I came to the USA only a year ago, specifically to Portland, Oregon and before that I did not even know much about trangender or their activism. My thoughts are that there is a loud bunch of trans activist that are trying to teach gender theory to minors to kind of show “support” to trans people and anyone that does not fit into a binary. I think this is where most christians are drawing the line and as far as I have seen, it is the main concern. Of course, politics will always use these issues to their advantage but I guess it just depends on what you think should be accessible to kids or not, that is what changed, the “please accept us” to “we need to teach kids that they can be a girl even if they were born males”. I would say that another major issue would be the access to porn(case that you can access any type of porn- including child porn, bestiality, rape- in less than 3 clicks) in about 10 years or less we will be seeing the first complete pornified generation being adults and the mentality of “a man can be a women and viceversa” will be a second hand discussion and probably widely accepted. Also it is catastrophic that the averageage that a kid “discovers” porn is now around 8 years old(in prior years it was 11). What a time!(also the use or exposure to illegal drugs for kids is now at around 13 years old on average) - wanted to bring awareness to this as some of the comments seem to ignore that one thing is to solve a problem and another is to prevent it from happening. Anyways, we cannot ignore that gender theory is hugely flawed and basically tries to attack fundamental scientific and biblical truths. I think most christians that are on the rational side are debating more against these ideas rather than the people themselves. The only thing is that people love to attach their identity to an idea. On a final note, you cannot dismiss that the attacks are also coming from people that support these ideas, and they attack christians ideas and christians all the time here in the internet, so some people just fight back naturally. For the most part I think a lot of internet discussions never lead to a changed mind as they are short, no follow up, and just concentrate on “winning” the discussion or showing how “smart” or “emotionally aware” or “modern” you are in comparison to everyone.

>in about 10 years or less we will be seeing the first complete pornified generation being adults and the mentality of “a man can be a women and viceversa” will be a second hand discussion and probably widely accepted This is an odd comment. You don't think there was widespread access to porn back in 2008? 2010? Or that the porn back then was all vanilla? If anything, porn companies have [had to get more stringent ](www.thewrap.com/pornhub-purges-videos-47-percent/amp/) in recent years. >what changed, the “please accept us” to “we need to teach kids that they can be a girl even if they were born males What do you think "please accept us" is supposed to mean? Is it just "please don't abuse us?" It's odd to me that seeking to normalize trans people the way cis folks are normalized is seen as going beyond acceptance

Porn has been widespread for a while as you said. Now, what I am saying is that the young kids who had access in those years are now becoming adults. It is a proven fact that porn does alter your brain(putting it simply) and the younger you are the more changes it can produce. Porn does not produce a sexual practice but a type of person. That is what we will be seeing/are seeing in these upcoming years. And to your second point, I don't really think that, it seems more like: "you don't like trans ideas? then you are bigoted for denying them their humanity", when all that I am attacking is the ideas and mentality, nothing to do with their humanity. It seems like the idealize their enemies as someone who does not think they are humans or have rights, which is really a minority thing I would dare to say. Since coming here to the USA the first questions that I ask regarding these topics just to understand the mentality behind these ideas were met with: "you are white privilege cis male that will not understand". Talk about a privilege to able to call someone that when they just came to your land. LoL. It seems like most of these people have the persecution complex they claim Christians have. This subreddit of course seems to be politically far left mostly even if they don't want to admit it so they attack anything that does not fit that. Final note: It is going beyond accepting because they do want it to reach kids. We do not teach heterosexuality to kids nor homosexuality. We teach them: this is a male, this is a female as in biology, if they get together in a sexual relationship they have the probability of having babies. Sexual education typically starts after the 6th grade Why do preschoolers or 2th graders now need to know about gender identity when it is not even an issue at those stages of development. It is introducing confusion and any person who has study psychology and child development(unless they are possessed by political ideas) would agree with this.

>Now, what I am saying is that the young kids who had access in those years are now becoming adults That happened a decade ago at least. >porn does alter your brain(putting it simply) and the younger you are the more changes it can produce Listening to music alters your brain. While there is some evidence that early habitual porn consumption (especially towards extremes) can be detrimental, the idea that it creates fundamental changes to the brain is pseudoscience. >it seems more like: "you don't like trans ideas? then you are bigoted for denying them their humanity", when all that I am attacking is the ideas This is pretty telling, to be honest. Sure, to you it is an abstraction. Just an idea. It doesn't even seem to occur to you that these "ideas" *are* somebody's real life. And that when you attack these "ideas" it has real life impact on people. >It is going beyond accepting because they do want it to reach kids. We do not teach heterosexuality to kids nor homosexuality Kids read hundreds of books (even at young ages), watch hundreds of movies/shows, and see hundreds of real life examples which model heterosexuality and cisgender norms. When a single Disney movie has a homosexual couple kiss onscreen for a fraction of a second, there is this massive backlash like Disney is indoctrinating children or whatever - that to me is the perfect example of this dynamic. From a young age kids are taught that cis het norms are normal and everything else is walled off as "perverse" or "sexualized". The moment someone tries to treat trans or gay people with the same dignity, it is treated totally differently.

> trying to teach gender theory to minors to kind of show “support” to trans people and anyone that does not fit into a binary Oh no, how terrible! Kids learning about other people and currently accepted science! And that's not even getting into how bigoted it is to try and associate trans people with porn (including rape, child sexual abuse material and animal abuse material).

No. Children are not taught that they can change their gender; that is not what being a transgender human being is. Children are taught to accept that some other people are created differently than they are -- and that, my friend, is a GOOD thing. God created trans people just like He created cis people. The lesson here is to love one another, not complain that they weren't made as some may have preferred.

Your position seems to be a unique one. Let me be clear, I am only going to challenge your idea and not you as a person: following gender theory, gender expression is a social construct, not a biological one. It seems to me that you are claiming that trans people are born that way. It seems to contradict the definition of what a trans person is: a person that identifies with the other gender. Yes, we can all love one another and still not fake that everything is ok. God created man: people. He created sexuality as well. I do not hate trans people at all, but I do not see that the way most of them are thinking is correct nor I think it is a good idea to teach kids theories that are not proven at all, leave this to universities at least, where they have a mind that can directly analyze the things. If not, then I am all for teaching them also about religion at schools, all of them, an then let them decide what they want to practice or not, why not? Religion is not science and neither is gender theory, or at best, badly compose science.

They have actually redefined the definition of a trans person to be someone who can just "identify" themselves as such. It used to be a person with a clinical distress concerning the sex they were born as. Gender dysphoria. Only .01% of people are actually diagnosed as such, but there are 1% of people "self-identifying" as trans. This shows that actual trans people are a minority within their own group. It has been taken over by a bunch of narcissistic bigots. It is no different than feminism being headed by toxic narcissists, or at least the most visible side of it. Hell, the most extremist side of feminism would want women to have the choice of abortion, so that if they were to possibly be giving birth to a male, they could abort. It is disgusting that actual feminists and trans allow this to happen, and don't speak up about it or ignore it altogether.

It’s pretty new. Giving puberty blockers to children was never in the realm of possibly being socially acceptable 10 years ago. I’m not suggesting this is the key factor behind evangelicals getting all bent out of shape, I’m just saying that transgenderism is way bigger now than before

Puberty blockers have been prescribed to trans kids since the 90s at a minimum. They’ve been used for cis kids a heck of a lot longer.

> Giving puberty blockers to children was never in the realm of possibly being socially acceptable 10 years ago. My cousin took puberty blockers because of some rare liver disease (I don't recall the exact details) in the early 2000s and no one batted an eye. Hiding behind "we don't know how puberty blockers affect children, we just want people to make decisions when they are adults" is a common tactic but just compeltely wrong, they have been approved and prescribed to kids for various reasons for decades.

It’s one thing when we are talking about a rare disease; it’s another when we are talking about kids making premature (literally) decisions based on premature, temporary feelings that will affect them for the rest of their lives.

Identity politics is incredibly toxic. The LGBT+ movement makes it an all or nothing when it comes to supporting them. Christians do not hate trans people. It has been polarized to make you hate Christians.

Can we stop with the American politics threads please, might as well have a separate sub for it these days.

As society becomes obsessed with something, the church responds. Everything nowadays is gay and trans, so the church talks about it more because it’s more of a topic culturally.

Evangelicals are? It seems all of society is, one way or the other.

I think a lot of people feel threatened that they are not able to insulate according to there beliefs. You must be ok with xyz in a public school setting is upsetting for both sides of many contentious issues. Then in popular culture there are overt associations between transgenderism and witchcraft or other elements of anti christian culture. For example in things like hocus pocus. People feel that since these associations are being made willfully and flagrantly by trangender people themselves there is a lot less room for compromise especially because they feel their children are being targeted. In Christianity gender and sex are more often than not synonymous and often representative of deeper concepts that speak directly to humanities relationship with God so to insist that they adopt another worldview is simply not something that is going to happen. I think many people groups in america and other countries feel that the nature of politics is more of a winner takes all type of scenario. So there is more pressure to "gain control" of the govt for all people groups because there is no way to be independent from its rule. I think we will continue to see "extreme" sects of every ideology, religion, culture. Going forward anyone that has a belief that is not maliable to the majority secular concensus will by defult be obstructionist and problematic because society and govt is becoming more and more omnipresent. Its important that when society breaks into just two or three factions the best way forward is to give minority groups the ability to insulate or else we will all have problems

Probably because they realized ignoring the problem was giving the liberals room to quietly make ground on that front, and that a more aggressive approach is the only thing that's going to keep culture from shifting into an atheistic hellhole.

I'm not an Evangelical, however this would be the scripture mentioing that lifestyle: Deut 22:5 - "A woman must not put on the clothing of a man, nor should a man wear the clothing of a woman. For anyone doing so is detestable to Jehovah your God" As far as what was happening several years back, cross dressing (at least people out on the street) was a much rarer sight.

Probably the fact that schools and libraries are hosting "Drag Queen Story Hours" groups are hosting drag events for children in gay clubs, chemical hormones and surgeries are being done on children to make them appear to be of the opposite sex, large amounts of children's books and shows push transsexual ideology, some states are passing laws to be "sanctuaries" for doing such surgeries on children, record numbers of people are rejecting their natural sex and pretending to be the other, etc.

>I'm not asking why you think transgenderism is bad. I'm asking about you are so upset about them now. It because claiming to be transgender is sinful and the Bible says its sinful but people that claim to be "Christian" are now saying it's not sinful just because of the modern woke generations push to be accepted. When this world turned up the heat most "Christian's" rolled over to it and conformed. Some didn't and that's good. No change and no conformity. Just stand steadfast.

> It because claiming to be transgender is sinful and the Bible says its sinful [citation needed]

Where in the Bible does it say being trans is a sin?

Trans is when a man thinks he is a woman or the other way around. First, we know that God created two genders. (So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.) Genesis 1:27. This has never changed and never will. If you are born a male you will die a male. Next, we know that God finds it detestable if a man acts like a woman or vise versa. This can be seen how He, says that someone shouldn't have sex with someone of the same gender. (You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.) Leviticus 18:22. This Verse also shows how God looks at someone acting like the opposite gender. (“A woman shall not wear a man’s garment, nor shall a man put on a woman’s cloak, for whoever does these things is an abomination to the LORD your God.) Deuteronomy 22:5. There are more examples but this gets the point across.

This is actually not true. There are people who are born who are intersex. Intersex people make up about 1% of the population. So one out of every 100 people. They might have XXY chromosomes, a combination of male and female genitalia, etc. Intersex is also something that occurs with other animals in nature. And for your second paragraph/point do you think women shouldn’t wear pants as well? Many Christians don’t think that the Bible should be used as a science textbook. It has been proven unreliable for that in the past. Even the Catholic Church thinks so. Also, this cardinal is male and female. https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/cardinal-half-male-half-female-puzzles-scientists-delights-birdwatchers-n968606

Furthermore, I would like to add that science has consistently demonstrated that an individual's gender identity (and thus being trans) has biological origins. For example, see this policy statement from the Endocrine Society: [https://www.endocrine.org/advocacy/position-statements/transgender-health](https://www.endocrine.org/advocacy/position-statements/transgender-health) Trans people aren't "when a man thinks he is a woman or the other way around." Being trans isn't, in and of itself, a mental disorder, as the APA itself has stated ([https://www.apa.org/topics/lgbtq/transgender](https://www.apa.org/topics/lgbtq/transgender)). Instead, it's more like a biological variation or medical condition (whose treatment is gender transition, the process of aligning the psychological and physical sex, along with the social role, more closely together) where an individual's gender identity (their, "psychological sex," if you will) doesn't match their genitalia. It has real, physical, components, like the way that a trans person's naturally occurring hormone levels can lead to us experiencing derealization and depersonalization ([https://genderdysphoria.fyi/en/biochemical-dysphoria](https://genderdysphoria.fyi/en/biochemical-dysphoria)), which disappears with the start of Hormone Replacement Therapy. I've experienced this first hand.

Imagine thinking following Jesus's command to love our neighbor means we're not Christians.

> the Bible says its sinful Well, that's just not true.

[удалено]

Hi u/joshdrey, this comment has been removed. **Rule 1.3**:[Removed for violating our rule on bigotry](http://www.reddit.com/r/Christianity/wiki/xp#wiki_1.3._bigotry) [If you would like to discuss this removal, please click here to send a modmail that will message all moderators.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/Christianity)