It’s Logical: The Transgender Question

James Knight

It’s Logical: The Transgender Question

First, the Church faced the problem of homosexuality: a problem which has always existed, and continues to oppose the will of our creator to this day. But in more recent times, the Church has begun to face a new problem: transgenderism.In this concept, we talk not only of people ignoring the boundaries which gender imposes upon two people under God’s holy law, but we also talk of a complete disregard even for the very fact that there are two genders in the first place.

Of course, this is ridiculous: we can see quite clearly that God has created two genders, for we can see the anatomical differences in regard to those two genders. But in the 21st Century, if any logically minded person is to disprove the claims of this new concept, they must have a greater reason than this. In this day, it seems that a person must have a more convincing argument than scientific fact.

The problem lies with the fact that many transgender people make no attempt to disagree that their biological body is of the opposite gender to what they profess. Many “women” are perfectly happy to accept that they are biologically male. Rather, their reason for being transgender is that they feel that they are of the opposite sex.

So the question which the logically minded person must answer is this: are we what we feel? Is our gender determined by what we feel, or by something else?

Forgive me, for I expect that some would say I’m making (what has become) a serious topic seem simple in my forthcoming analogy. However, it is my belief that this question can be answered using something no more complicated than coffee and tea.

Let’s imagine that one of my fellow preachers here on this podcast were to call around to my house tomorrow morning for a meeting (forget about the thousands of miles between us). Naturally, I would offer him a drink: he asks for coffee. So, opting for coffee myself, I make two coffees. How do I do that? I put coffee granules into the cup (no fancy coffee machine here) along with some milk, and pour the water. After a short stir, the coffee’s ready.

Five minutes later, the coffee’s cooled, and my fellow preacher is ready to drink. Only, when he takes his first sip, he pulls a slightly strange face. He takes another sip – something’s definitely wrong.

“What’s the matter?” I ask.

“I asked for coffee,” he replies. “You gave me tea.”

Now, which one of us is right? I know that when I made my friend his drink, I made him coffee – I never even touched a tea bag. But the thing is, my friend is convinced that I’ve given him tea. So, who’s right? Essentially, the question I’m asking is this: does the fact that he thinks he’s drinking tea mean that I made him a cup of tea, or does the drink nevertheless remain to be coffee? Does his inner conviction mean that when I put coffee granules into his cup, I was actually putting a tea bag in?

The answer’s obvious, isn’t it? The answer’s logical: the fact that my friend thinks he’s drinking tea does not change the fact that I made him a cup of coffee – it cannot possibly change it, for a person’s thoughts cannot change another person’s actions, especially once the action has already occurred. In truth, whether my friend felt like he was drinking coffee or not, he was most certainly drinking coffee.

Is it any different when it comes to a person’s gender? I think not, for in this second scenario we have exactly the same process as in the first: a person was made (for the sake of this article) to be a man. He was given the parts (the equivalent of the coffee granules) in order to make him a man, thus distinguishing him from a woman (just as the coffee was distinguished from tea). But a number of years later, this man comes to feel like he was made to be a woman. So, the question is this: does the fact that the man feels like a woman mean he is a woman? No, because similar to coffee, a person’s gender is determined by what they are made of, and not what they think they are made of.

Therefore, it is a complete contradiction for a person to recognise that they are biologically male, and yet nevertheless profess that they are actually female. What we are is not determined by what we think (or feel) but rather by what is inside us. No person, surely, questions the fact that there are biological differences between a man and a woman: a man has body parts which a woman doesn’t have, and vice versa.

It’s logical. A logically minded person cannot accept the professions of the transgender movement, for it contradicts the most basic principles of human autonomy.

James Knight
James began his online ministry in June 2015, and now helps other young people do the same. James preaches every Sunday on YoungPreachers.org, following the Revised Common Lectionary.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *