thoughts and principles on responding to transgenderism

Transgender questions (from Chris): Is it genuine? Should they pursue care? Is it a function of sin nature? Puberty blockers, etc. before age 18? 

Short answers: 

Is it “genuine”: I think most of it is genuine (at least in its perception), but especially for adults (and especially before the recent social push). 

Should they pursue “care”? I can’t recommend it (especially if more intrusive/permanent), but I’m not terribly opposed. 

Should they be allowed to pursue care? Yes. 

Is it a function of sin nature? Well, yes, everything is influenced by sin nature. Putting it differently and borrowing from Kyle: we’re all broken sexually (and in other ways too). As always, a failure to understand this is going to lead to all sorts of different (and often unfortunate) inferences and choices. 

Treatment before 18? Probably, with parental consent (especially if the science indicates little/no long-term harm from reversing course later). 

Key principles in play for me: 

-Our temptations and sinful responses always come from some combination of Sin Nature, the World (system), and the Devil. In this realm, the Devil has been happy/gleeful to use recent changes in the World to interact with Sin Nature. 

-Is it sin nature and/or biology, etc.? Yes. As always, it’s *much* more important to consider what is done with various “orientations” (from biology, environment, etc.) than having the orientations. 

-Identity is a crucial issue in Christianity. The top priority for a Christian is to have one’s identity “in Christ”. Other aspects of identity are important, including race, sex, gender, and class (e.g., Gal 3:28, Rev 5:9). But if they occupy the top position (or too high of a priority), then this is idolatry, is damaging to the human person and others, etc. If my top identity is anything else, I’m not in the Kingdom (I Cor 6:9-11) or struggling with idolatry and not comfortable in the goodness of God’s Kingdom. 

-Similarly, our bodies and our feelings matter, but can be emphasized too little or too much. 

-We identify with Jesus, in part, through sufferings. We follow Jesus, in large part, through self-denial, sacrifice, putting others first, taking up our cross, etc. Any behaviors or worldviews that reject this out of hand– or de-emphasize it too much– are not consistent with following Jesus. 

-Throughout Scripture, there is an emphasis on character over circumstance, finding blessing and contentedness where we are vs. where we imagine we want to be, joy over happiness, staying in circumstances vs. escapism, etc. I Cor 7 is strong on this. My favorite passage/story on this is Dan 3:16-18. There is a time to leave, to change, to flee, etc. (Eccl 3), but we have an unfortunate (albeit understandable) bent toward escapism, grass is greener, utopianism. 

-Likewise, if someone does pursue treatment, then the ideal response going forward is the same: do the best you can with where you are now. 

-In terms of public policy, we draw big distinctions between adults and “children” at various ages– and we also (almost always) defer to parents over other authorities in raising children. I’m reasonably happy with those policy decisions. That said, the ages are somewhat arbitrary; there are differences in the extent to which science is invoked; good people can disagree on such things; and so on. So, I’m open to various conceptions of where to draw these lines– as long as people are reasonably consistent. For example, it seems asinine to allow surgeries but to ban conversion therapy– or vice versa. And it seems ridiculous to allow children full discretion here (especially going around parents), when we don’t allow this in many/any other realms. 

-This lines up with Shrier who is fine with transgenderism in adults, but quite worried about it in teen girls. 

Source: http://schansblog.blogspot.com/2024/08/thoughts-and-principles-on-responding.html