A Different Kind of Poll on Gender and Marriage. PLEASE read the post before voting!!

First let me say that this IS NOT a joke or something to be taken lightly. It’s a real thing. If you have doubts read this first: http://www.isna.org/ and also : http://www.accordalliance.org/

In the debate on the gender requirement for marriage, there is a question that few have thought of. The issue may be much more complicated that we realize. In addition to those of us who are biologically entirely male or female, there are intersexual people. We are not talking about transgender or transsexual people here. For the most part, they are an entirely different matter. Intersexual people have the BIOLOGICAL characteristics of both male and female. The anatomical/biological features may or may not be apparent. It takes many forms and is quite complicated so I urge anyone who is not familiar with the subject to read the article below before responding.

Intersexually , or Disorders of Sexual Development (DSD) has been largely invisible. Most live as either a male or a female unbeknownst to others save those who they are the closet to. In the past, when a new born was diagnosed as an intersexual, the medical response was always to fix it, to make that child into a boy or a girl doing whatever it took including surgery. However, they didn’t always make the right choice which could lead to gender dysphoria later in life. Some people experiencing transgenderism may have been the product of such wrong choice, although, as I’ve said, they are really different matters.

More recently the approach that is more favored, at least in the US, is to hold off on any medical, surgical or hormonal treatment until at least puberty in order to allow the person to develop their own gender identity and to give them an opportunity to make a choice about medical intervention. That is not to say that they are not assigned a social gender from birth, but that door is left ajar for the time being. (Read more on the INSA and Accord Alliance websites )

That brings us to the poll. The vast majority of people with DSD chose a male or female gender identity regardless of whether or not, at some point, they submit to surgery or other medical intervention. Most but not all. Consider this:

Now folks, you might be thinking that all of this legal wrangling could be avoided if the parties involved simply presented themselves as male or female, and you would be right. However, some DSD people refuse to do that and just want to be considered gender neutral, or will even insist on being openly intersexual. For that reason, if for no other, it’s time get past this ideal of marriage being strictly between a man and a woman.

 

So at the end of the day it just revolves around the idea that a person can let be whatever gender they so choice?

 

It happens all of the time with transgender people. Why not in situations where there is an underlying biological reason. The main difference is that we now have the added twist of people who chose no gender. But this is primarily about who we allow people to marry. What would you propose.

 

I know it's probably not correct to say (I'm at a blank for words), but I have considered non-gender denominations to be part of the transgender community. So for me nothing changes. A person is free to express themselves however they want. Their bodies, their identities.

 

I suspect that you would find some gender neutral people who are not DSD and perhaps they identify as transgender. Anything is possible. It's good that you believe in free expression. How about the marriage question ?

 

Same deal, let anyone who is willing and can consent to let them marry.

 

Good . Thanks.

 

You're welcome.

 

Intersex Person?

should not even exist (my fascist opinion).

no one would marry such a person.

 

Thank you Sadam for that thoughtful, intelligent and sensitive comment on an important subject that effects real human beings. You are a wonderful person. God loves you. ( that would be the same God who created those intersexual people-go figure) Have a great evening!

 

A person of any sex or gender should be able to marry another person of any sex or gender. The State should have no say in this.

The only limitations on marriage the State should be allowed to apply are those on polygamy, incest, and marrying convicts and aliens. And quite frankly, I am on the fence about polygamy.

 

I'll go with that. It will certainly simplify things when these intersexuals start to assert themselves

Convicts? You mean like while they are still on the inside, or forever? You know, they were going to let Charles Manson get married, but the deal fell through.

Aliens? Like space aliens? That could be the next thing.

 

This isn't /b, "kill yourself" even as an implied thing can get you thrown off lots of boards.

 

To your first statement, it is too bad that biology disagrees with you. To your second, it is a good thing that some people do not.

 

While they're still inside. I think prisoners should get all of their rights back upon the completion of their sentence, and I don't believe in life sentences.

Human aliens. I think the right of the nation to determine its own standards for citizenship generally trumps the right of the citizens to marry whom they wish.

As far as space aliens... for now, until we meet some, I don't distinguish between human aliens and ET. They're both foreign entities that need to be studied and judged carefully before being allowed to join our society. I have no objection to citizens marrying ETs who can pass that test.

 

Marriage is about children and seeing they are well raised.

An exception to a norm is not logically allowed to control the norm to a degree where future generations are compromised by having to learn about the exceptions in their development.

Neither the state or the church should have any say over marriage in order to keep it naturally serving future generations. If a group of adults who are all a part of the exception, consolidate after finding others like themselves, choose to label a proposed partnership "marriage", fine. As long as children are not involved, this will have no chance of negative impacts.

No matter the implications, it is very unlikely in any situation where a partnership brings a biological child into the world, that there is a chance the child will suffer confusion about which partner is its mother

 

Consenting adults should be allowed to marry consenting adults.

 

Only an intersex person can live well, once married, with an intersex person. At least this comes from my own knowledge [I know an intersex person and it's difficult to find a "pace" to stay with such a person, I'm tempted to use "it", at least in German there is the neutral gender, in English there isn't, English should be upgraded!].

 

Well, if they're both male and female, then they can just marry themselves.

 

Really, aren't you the one who started the thread: "The solution to gay marriage isn't marriage" taking the position that gay people should not have the right to marriage?

 

we're all so happy that is your opinion and not fact.
Where's the gay gene?

 

You might want to read through this other thread that I started on children and marriage before taking it upon yourself to pontificate about what children need and who should have them. http://www.politicalforum.com/gay-l...in-fight-same-sex-marriage-adoption-gays.html That would e the appropriate place to comment about same sex parenting

Having said that, do you have anything useful to contribute to this topic?

 

Brilllllllliant !!! Spot on old sport!! Just Brilliant!

 

ah know
and just what is the definition of "intersex person?" is this a new term we need to familiarize ourselves for future reference? Is this term even real?

 

Can u read?😁