I debated whether I would say anything at all about this and just decided that I must. St. Paul makes a rather paradoxical statement in regard to the discussion among Christians of the sin of impurity:
But fornication and all impurity or covetousness must not even be named among you, as is fitting among saints. . . . Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them. For it is a shame even to speak of the things that they do in secret; but when anything is exposed by the light it becomes visible, for anything that becomes visible is light (Ephes. 5:3, 11-13).
Several times in this passage he says not to even name or mention the shameful deeds of impurity, but on the other hand he also commands the followers of Jesus to expose such deeds to the light. Perhaps the explanation is this: when such sins are committed in secret, we should not bring the scandal to light, but when they flagrantly committed before all to see, then it is necessary to overcome the scandal already given. Thus this post.
When I heard about the “pregnant man” my inclination was to leave well enough alone. But since the issue has been “Oprahfied,” and spread to the four winds, I figure its time to say something. It is also an issue appropos to this blog, as gender identity must be presumed if it is at all possible to speak of masculinity and femininity.
As followers of Christ we are in the ironic position of becoming the villains every time we open our mouths about morality and the necessity to protect the common good. We are at the point now that the media generally assumes the normality of transgenderism and even will flip pronouns to suite whoever might find themselves identifying with the opposite sex. We are at the point where “he” and “she” don’t mean anything at all. I am struck by the absurdity of all this as I try to write this paragraph. How is one to refer to someone with the pronoun of the opposite sex, when they claim that they are a member of the opposite sex? I know, I know, in the cases of transgender individuals their bodies and minds don’t match, so we are told.
When Oprah gets a hold of something we should all be frightened that the rat poison, duly marked with red skull and crossbones on white label, will go down like sugar because she has administered it. Take The Secret, for example. Nothing could be more absurd and factually contrary to science, but once The Secret was Oprahfied, the charlatans who came up with the farce, instead of being tarred and feathered as they should have been, all became millionaires.
It is simply a flagrant and conscienceless abuse of language to call this transgender person a “pregnant man.” This “man” is a woman who has had her body surgically modified without going to whole way and who takes male hormones to maintain her masculine look. It’s a she that is pregnant, not a he.
The effect of Oprahfication is to modify the social acceptability of the absurd, strange and immoral. Modify is too weak a word. Oprah turns the truth on its head. Those who treat transgenderism as an anomaly are ipso facto branded as uncharitable and close minded. If Oprah says, as she did say relative to The Secret, that all we have to do is believe that anything is possible in order for the impossible to happen, and if the crowd cheers and Oprah’s ratings go up, then who the hell is anyone else to contradict her. The Secret and the “pregnant man” are cut from the same cloth.
This is intellectual, moral and cultural suicide.
The “pregnant man” said to Oprah:
I feel it’s not a male or female desire to have a child. It’s a human need. I’m a person and I have the right to have a biological child.
The “human need” business is beyond muddled.
As for the “right to a child” assertion, here is some common sense:
A child is not something owed to one, but is a gift. The “supreme gift of marriage” is a human person. A child may not be considered a piece of property, an idea to which an alleged “right to a child” would lead. In this area, only the child possesses genuine rights: the right “to be the fruit of the specific act of the conjugal love of his parents,” and “the right to be respected as a person from the moment of his conception (CCC 2378).
A child has a right to a mom and a dad. A child has a right to the truth about his or her own identity. A child has a right to the truth. Period.