Pregnant "man" expecting 3rd baby

See previous posts here.

From People magazine, February 14:

thomas beatie third baby 1.jpg

Thomas Beatie gained worldwide attention 2 years ago when he became the 1st known transgendered man to give birth. Now Beatie and his wife, Nancy - who have a daughter and a son - are expecting baby No. 3, according to momlogic.com.

Beatie, born a woman, underwent a sex-change operation but kept his reproductive organs. He made headlines in 2007 after pictures of his pregnant belly became public. Nancy is unable to have children because of a hysterectomy.

Adds momlogic.com...

Who can forget the day Oregon native Thomas Beatie, a transgender living as a man, and his wife welcomed baby girl Susan (June 29, 2008)? Or the day Beatie gave birth to his 2nd child, a boy (June 9, 2009)?

thomas beatie third baby 2.jpg

Now, in keeping with his one-kid-per-year tradition, Beatie is pregnant with his 3rd child and is proudly showing off his baby bump.

And from Softpedia.com:

Confirmation of this does not come from Thomas and wife Nancy directly, as was the case with the 2 previous pregnancies, but the aforementioned media outlet claims the report is 100% accurate. Whether the 2 are expecting a baby boy or a girl is not known yet, as neither is the due date, but the report says Thomas is already showing and is very happy for being with child again.

To maintain consistency, liberals are going to have to stop supporting Beatie and complain about him like they do the Duggars. Liberals complain not only for the number of babies Michelle has delivered but also the frequency of her pregnancies.

But here we have Beatie on track to deliver 3 babies in about 3 years. And the 1st 2 were Irish twins, no less. Who would have thought the Duggars would receive competition from such an unlikely source?

Very cute kids.

[HT: LauraLoo]


Comments:

That is so disgusting!!!!!!! I want to vomit. How sick. What a perversion of something beautiful that God created.

Posted by: Sydney M at February 15, 2010 9:16 AM


He is a woman!

Posted by: Mary at February 15, 2010 9:21 AM


Sydney, it's twisted and depraved.
Pity the poor children.
Imagine how confusing this will be for the children to try to understand gender and sexuality as they grow older.
"Women have babies but my dad is a mother too?" :(

Of course the libertines will tells us nothing matters as long as the children are loved.....

"Love", the most abused and misunderstood word today.

Posted by: angel at February 15, 2010 9:22 AM


This girl could always get a job as the bearded lady in a freak show.

Posted by: truthseeker at February 15, 2010 9:27 AM


Hmm.. did this *man* impregnate herself?

I suppose I'd better go read up on these folks, but I really really don't want to.

Posted by: Carol at February 15, 2010 9:59 AM


This is not a man. It's a mutilated woman who wants to look like a man.

That being said, while I would not have surgery to look like the opposite gender, I really can't see how they are doing anything wrong. Maybe not to your liking or mine, but not wrong. The surgery that this woman has had makes her look different than she originally did.

If plastic surgery to make one's breasts huge or to pull one's face tight in an effort to look young isn't wrong, if excessive tattooing isn't wrong, if cosmetic amputation (read: nose job) isn't wrong, than neither is this. It's just not everybody's cup of tea.

Posted by: Suzy at February 15, 2010 10:15 AM


I watched a TV show on them. I think the transgender person ought to still be classified as a woman, since you have to get a hysterectomy in order to meet the criteria, and he obviously didn't. Seems as though the embryos are adopted, too - or, that's what I thought. That would be good.

Yeah, they are cute. And the people seem decent enough. Hope they have a good life, you know, and didn't donate embryos or have a few on ice, because then I'd have a problem with it.

Posted by: Abel at February 15, 2010 10:17 AM


Posted by: Sydney M at February 15, 2010 9:16 AM
---------

Sydney - could you pray for the salvation of Thomas and Nancy? I don't believe their transgressions are any worse than any other sinner, including myself.

The real perversion is not that they are doing this, but that someone is "helping" - and you can be guaranteed that such efforts are not 100% altruistic.

The end goal of abortion and homosexuality is a fully controlled marketplace for human beings and any mutation that is profitable. For Thomas and Nancy (and their family), I have compassion. As for the moneychangers and mutilators of the flesh...

Posted by: Chris Arsenault at February 15, 2010 10:29 AM


I don't think that they've done anything wrong. They have three beautiful children and they seem very much in love. Truly beautiful lives feel at peace with one another, and they certainly do. I think that if you pray for anything, pray for their health and that of their children.

I wish them all the best with this pregnancy (and, yes, the same for the Duggars and their children).

Baby!

Posted by: Vannah at February 15, 2010 10:41 AM


How many children is too many??

I find the situation so sad. I will pray for them, Chris.

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at February 15, 2010 10:45 AM


He's a she. God created her and she believed a pack of lies and decided she "should" have been a guy.

You've got a case in Vermont right now where a lesbian woman found Christ and agreed to dissolve her same sex civil union with her former "lover". She had conceived a daughter several years ago and is now denying a court order to allow visitation to her former partner (who has no biological or legal relationship to the girl) after she found out she was bathing with her, now 7 years old.

And some screwball, nutjob Vermont judge has ordered the mother to relinquish custody of her child to her old girlfriend!

What planet are we on???

What about the child!?!?

How long is the relationship going to last between Beatie and her girlfriend? What is going to happen to these kids when they get caught in the crossfire between two warring, sexually-confused parents?

What a mess!

Posted by: Ed at February 15, 2010 11:33 AM


OK, I am sorry biut this soooo twisted and nasty! What is happening?

Posted by: Abortion Support at February 15, 2010 11:56 AM


TBeatie is a woman.Women conceive children-men do not.

Posted by: Robyn at February 15, 2010 12:16 PM


Questions:

Why did these two lesbians decide it was so important for one to try to pretend to be a man, mutilate her body by removing her breast and to take hormones to trick her body to have a male persona triggering male secondary sexual characteristics?

Why if being lesbian is so great and so pro-woman would the second lesbian want her "partner" to pretend to be a man instead of who she is? (my observation has been that it is quite common for one lesbian to take the male persona and the other the female persona)

Why is it so common for lesbians to have heterosexual sex even after coming out of the closet? See Dr. John Diggs research paper "The Health Risk of Gay Sex" see my link posted yesterday 2-14-10 under the Sunday Funnies thread

After going to the trouble of becoming as "male" as she could why was it so important to her to not go through with the entire process, so that she could still be impregnated artificially and become a "mother"?

Why was it so important that she identify herself as a "pregnant man" instead of her true identity a lesbian with male secondary sexual characteristics who was artificially impregnated?

Why was it so important that they decided to go the news media to publicize this spectacle?

Why are marriage, family and childbearing all normal reproductive body functions under such attack?

Why is it so important to destroy and redefine the normal biological, anatomical, physiological, hormonal, emotional and spiritual meaning of MARRIAGE, family and childbearing?

Why was it so important to bring children into this whole situation?

Why was it so important to them that the whole world see them and hear their story?

Jill, Christian prolifers and those who have spritual ears and eyes I would love to hear your thoughts.

Posted by: Prolifer L at February 15, 2010 12:21 PM


She's a man, baby, yeah!

Posted by: xalisae at February 15, 2010 12:40 PM


Prolifer L, I'd like to deal with two of the issues you addressed, namely Marriage and Fatherhood. I sincerely believe that Satan purposely attacks and distorts these in an attempt to undermine our understanding of God's explanations of who He is and how He loves us.
He describes Himself as a Father, and uses the role of Marriage in explaining God wedding Himself to His chosen people, and the church as the Bride of Christ. If the only concept a person has of a "father" is an absent, negligent or abusive person who manipulates his power over you, VOILA: apply these concepts to a Heavenly Father and the result is fear, dismissive attitudes or outright belligerence towards the One that is truly good, loving, protective, all the things a Father ought to be.

The same with marriage---how many healthy examples do most people witness, so as to understand what that relationship should look like?

There's so much more here and these are important questions you bring up. I've only got time for my 2 cents.

Posted by: klynn73 at February 15, 2010 1:32 PM


Sorry, but no Xalisae she is not a man. I have helped to bring lots of babies into this world, NEVER did any sex but a biological female, a woman ever deliver a baby!! Even the lesbian mothers who delivered were biologically female with a uterus and female hormones (estrogen, progesterine and oxytocin coursing through their veins), even if she had a C-section she still was a woman. By the way a world renowned childbirth educator and doula I know (who helped deliver thousands of babies) noted in her practice how difficult it was for lesbians to naturally, vaginally deliver. Her theory that she thought should be researched- could it be not having normal sexual intercourse which delivers the prostagladins of the sperm, not having the normal levels of oxytocin (the bonding hormone) that maybe cervical ripening, effacement and dilatation is much less likely to occur. Just a theory.

God still has a perfect plan and his perfect plan is for men and women to bond, marry, have sex where there bodies marry anatomically, physically, physiologically, hormonally, emotionally and spiritually and that men and women create babies and families. Babies that were meant to live and be loved and not mutilated and murdered in their mother's womb. The womb which is meant to be the safest and most nurturing place for the unborn has became a dangerous place of torture and a death chamber for the most innocent.

Every prolifer needs to read The Theology of the Body, whether you are a Christian or not.

God help our world, our nation and God help all the disposable babies made by men and women having meaningless sexual intercourse with disposable, meaningless partners.

Posted by: Prolifer L at February 15, 2010 1:39 PM


Thanks klynn73, I appreciate your thoughts. God bless you.

Posted by: Prolifer L at February 15, 2010 1:43 PM


I was just making a joke by quoting Austin Powers. :P

I think "transgendered" individuals are quite confused, and no matter how they scrape and prod at themselves, they'll never change the biological reality that they have either 2 X chromosomes or a X and a Y. Sad, but true, and they must deal with it just as mothers who wish not to be pregnant must deal with the fact that their unborn children are also human beings just as they are and have every right to live that they do. Biological reality can be a real b-, but oh well. That's life.

Posted by: xalisae at February 15, 2010 1:50 PM


Suzy wrote:

This is not a man. It's a mutilated woman who wants to look like a man.

Spot on. Though I wonder how you can use the word "mutilated", while proceeding to say that "it's okay"...

That being said, while I would not have surgery to look like the opposite gender, I really can't see how they are doing anything wrong.

Well... as gently as I can, I need to re-emphasize: this is a prime example of why we can't just use our "feelings" to discern right from wrong... because our feelings are all over the map--they're subject to our cultural upbringing, our mood, or even what we had for breakfast this morning--and they're generally useless as indicators of "true moral north". We don't throw away "true north" simply on the pretext that "there's nothing wrong with south, east or west"!

Maybe not to your liking or mine, but not wrong.

You'll need to explain your reasoning for that one...

The surgery that this woman has had makes her look different than she originally did.

(*grimace*) That's putting it rather mildly. A guillotine could be described in like manner!

If plastic surgery to make one's breasts huge or to pull one's face tight in an effort to look young isn't wrong,

Freeze. Check your starting assumptions--for truth, as well as for direct relevance.

"Plastic surgery to make one's breasts huge" is not a moral use of surgery; it's a sad attempt to mutilate one's body in a way specifically designed to incite lust in someone else (so that they can use you as an object)... and it's wrong. A reconstruction of a distorted/damaged breast (say, because of a mastectomy) is fine, since it restores what should have been there in the first place... but let's keep a sense of proportion, here.

As for "face lifts": barring reconstructive surgery to remedy some sort of physical damage (e.g. a car accident, physical assault, etc.) or genetic/congenital defect (such as a cleft palate, etc.), I don't see how anyone could say that the typical "Hollywood-esque" face-lifts are "okay"; how does wasting money to cater to one's vanity translate into "okay"? It's a pathological flight from the natural reality of old age and death... and it's hardly healthy.

if excessive tattooing isn't wrong,

It isn't? Then why call it "excessive"?

if cosmetic amputation (read: nose job) isn't wrong,

If the surgery is meant to eliminate a deformity or grossly misproportional body part, then there's no problem. If someone takes a healthy and proportional nose and mangles it in an attempt to look like thus-and-so movie star, then it's wrong. I think that's rather self-evident.

It's just not everybody's cup of tea.

Appeals to personal tastes (such as the metaphor of "tea") are what start many of these problems; if we decide that "anything goes, so long as the relevant parties consent", then moral relativism takes over (and that's bad).

Posted by: Paladin at February 15, 2010 1:51 PM


I love the advancement of medical technology and its life-saving capacity and what it has done for mankind, but at times like this, I realize how dark and twisted the negative image of the medical field is. It's also sad the kind of disgusting harm it brings to people in crisis in the guise of "helping" them. What if all the energy and resources spent over the decades "perfecting" gender-changing procedures were spent on cancer research? What if the effort used to "perfect" abortion instead was spent on gene therapy and fetal surgery to help unborn humans in utero rather than kill them?

Posted by: xalisae at February 15, 2010 1:56 PM


"anything goes, so long as the relevant parties consent"

That's the ticket.

Posted by: Hal at February 15, 2010 1:56 PM


Frankly, Thomas Beatie's child has nothing to do with being pro-life. And there's debate over whether or not marriage has anything to do with being pro-life and certainly homosexuality doesn't.

Abortion isn't caused by people casually disposing babies- many people are married but can't afford another child. This is common, for example, in Africa. I suppose that there are some people who are so casual about abortion- that, frankly, is sick, but it's pretty rare and our resources are better spent helping those who need it rather than debating whether or not Beatie should be having children. Wagging a finger about marriage won't help- giving support in any way necessary (whether it's emotional or financial) and letting people know that we're here for them will fight abortion.

Posted by: Vannah at February 15, 2010 1:59 PM


I don't think that they've done anything wrong. They have three beautiful children and they seem very much in love. Truly beautiful lives feel at peace with one another, and they certainly do. I think that if you pray for anything, pray for their health and that of their children.

I wish them all the best with this pregnancy (and, yes, the same for the Duggars and their children).

Baby!
Posted by: Vannah at February 15, 2010 10:41 AM

wow! you don't?


Do you honestly think that there is nothing wrong with Beattie? Do you honestly believe that this woman is emotionally healthy?

Do you have no concern for Beattie, who instead of being treated for her problems, has been enabled and is herself being harmed?

Do you not think these children will be confused about gender and sexuality?

Do you think that just because they are in love, this justifies the abuse perpetrated on these children?

Because to me that is exactly what this is - pure and simple - child abuse.

very very sad :(

Posted by: angel at February 15, 2010 2:01 PM


Thanks Xalisae for clarifying that you were joking. You are a hoot. We don't agree about everything but I am so glad you are here, you are indeed a treasure Xalisae. Blessings to you and your family.

Posted by: Prolifer L at February 15, 2010 2:06 PM


whats the confusion? She is not a man. A man will not have reproductive female parts. Quite the perverted situation.

Posted by: don at February 15, 2010 2:09 PM


"Abortion isn't caused by people casually disposing babies- many people are married but can't afford another child. This is common, for example, in Africa. I suppose that there are some people who are so casual about abortion- that, frankly, is sick, but it's pretty rare..."

HA! You haven't talked to many pro-choicers lately, have you? Seriously. That idea is laughable. The reason we even have so many abortions taking place in this country on a daily basis, no less, is precisely because people are casual about abortion. They say it's not actually a live human being, that it's just tissue, and that is exactly why they can casually dispose of "it" if they feel they would like to do so. Talking to these people every day has convinced me that for MOST, this IS a "casual" situation for them. It's the same reason you will find that most abortions are for repeat customers. Quit being so naive, Vannah.

Posted by: xalisae at February 15, 2010 2:41 PM


Thanks, L. the feeling's mutual.

It's an odd day when my firm belief in biological principles has me more closely in the same camp with religious individuals than those of a more secular bent. XD

Posted by: xalisae at February 15, 2010 2:59 PM


Posted by: Hal at February 15, 2010 1:56 PM
------

So at any age Hal? And how are we to interpret consent? Is that an absolute, or relative, consent?


Perhaps it comes to this question: Is law (including morality) to be based on affect or effect?

Posted by: Chris Arsenault at February 15, 2010 3:09 PM


She's a man, baby, yeah!

Posted by: xalisae at February 15, 2010 12:40 PM
**********************

Hilarious X!

Posted by: Ed at February 15, 2010 3:22 PM


Libs will shape the argument in a way that makes the Duggars appear to have lack self-control while it was Beatie who took complete control of her fertility.

Posted by: Cranky Catholic at February 15, 2010 3:37 PM


I wonder how he/she got pregnant to begin with if she has enough testosterone to produce facial hair! And my friend is bleeding and may lose her baby and is worried it is hormonal issues.

I will pray for this family. Please will you all pray for my friend. She is having her ultrasound tomorrow to see how the baby is doing. I will be driving her as long as snow doesn't keep us in. The northeast has been pounded with two blizzards in the last week and a half!

Posted by: Sydney M. at February 15, 2010 3:44 PM


Posted by: Sydney M. at February 15, 2010 3:44 PM
----
Lifting your friend and her child in prayer, and protection during your travel.

Posted by: Chris Arsenault at February 15, 2010 3:52 PM


I second Chris's question, Hal: do you mean to say that, so long as a 5-year-old "consents" to having sex with a 40-year-old man, it's okay?

Perhaps you'd also be in favour of replacing all prescriptions of anti-depressant medications with a single .38 bullet and the free use of a revolver, if the depressed patient "consents"? Many such patients would "consent" to killing themselves--at least, until they start feeling better, and realize that the suicidal feelings were only temporary?

(*sigh*) The dangers of moral relativism...

Posted by: Paladin at February 15, 2010 4:02 PM


Whoops... replace the "?" with a ".", in my penultimate sentence, above.

Posted by: Paladin at February 15, 2010 4:16 PM


Libs will shape the argument in a way that makes the Duggars appear to have lack self-control while it was Beatie who took complete control of her fertility.
Posted by: Cranky Catholic at February 15, 2010 3:37 PM

absolutely!
Because of course as we all know, Christians are just mindless robots who believe all that god stuff and never think for themselves....

Posted by: angel at February 15, 2010 4:35 PM


"Frankly, Thomas Beatie's child has nothing to do with being pro-life."

Vannah,

All due respect, I completely disagree. This subject is quite inextricably connected to the increasing objectification of persons in our world today. When we treat our bodies as playgrounds for the plastic surgeon, we tell ourselves that our inherent worth is physical. (Ie, I am worth what my big breasts, tight butt, and long legs can achieve).

Clearly, the surgical/hormonal procedures that Beatie underwent weren't enough. Either Beatie had planned the pregnancies pre-surgery, knowing the controversy they would spark, or she got most of the way done with her transformation and realized it wasn't enough.

That doesn't say something to you? Either we're talking about a woman who intentionally mutilated her body for press (whether or not she intended on getting the sex change for personal reasons), or else she tried to find happiness by changing who she was and found herself still unfulfilled.

And now, there are three little babies learning that their bodies are only worth the worldly pleasure they offer. Because that is the ultimate lesson that Beatie's examples teach her children.

In trying to separate abortion from the objectification of our bodies, you lose focus. Treat the condition, not the symptom, Vannah. Abortion is a symptom of the dehumanization of people. It is ONE symptom of many.

Posted by: maryrose at February 15, 2010 5:11 PM


Guys, if you think having a sex-change operation or living as your non-biological sex is a sin or perverted, okay, fine, your opinion. But can we refrain from calling people freaks and being insulting? There's a difference between saying you think someone is doing something wrong or abnormal and saying that person is a freak or disgusting.

"Frankly, Thomas Beatie's child has nothing to do with being pro-life. And there's debate over whether or not marriage has anything to do with being pro-life and certainly homosexuality doesn't."

I agree. Regardless of the circumstances of conception, this isn't about dead babies, it's about living ones.

"Abortion isn't caused by people casually disposing babies- many people are married but can't afford another child. This is common, for example, in Africa. I suppose that there are some people who are so casual about abortion- that, frankly, is sick, but it's pretty rare and our resources are better spent helping those who need it rather than debating whether or not Beatie should be having children. Wagging a finger about marriage won't help- giving support in any way necessary (whether it's emotional or financial) and letting people know that we're here for them will fight abortion."

I don't know - there's this article by Naomi Wolf:

http://www.priestsforlife.org/prochoice/ourbodiesoursouls.htm

where she's talking about people she knew who had abortions for what were basically frivulous reasons:

"Of the abortions I know of, these were some of the reasons: to find out if the woman could get pregnant; to force a boy or man to take a relationship more seriously; and, again and again, to enact a rite of passage for affluent teenage girls. In my high school, the abortion drama was used to test a boyfriend's character. Seeing if he would accompany the girl to the operation or, better yet, come up with the money for the abortion could almost have been the 1970s Bay Area equivalent of the '50s fraternity pin."

I'm sure abortion is a gut-wrenching experience for most women who have abortions, but I suspect the ones who do it casually might be more common than people think.

"You've got a case in Vermont right now where a lesbian woman found Christ and agreed to dissolve her same sex civil union with her former "lover". She had conceived a daughter several years ago and is now denying a court order to allow visitation to her former partner (who has no biological or legal relationship to the girl) after she found out she was bathing with her, now 7 years old.

And some screwball, nutjob Vermont judge has ordered the mother to relinquish custody of her child to her old girlfriend!

What planet are we on???

What about the child!?!?"

When a child has been raised with a parent figure - whether they're married, unmarried, straight, gay, whatever - the courts don't like to legally sever their relationship with that person. It's traumatizing for kids to suddenly be cut off from someone they consider a parent.

In this case, the child's biological mother has gone against court rulings again and again and created an unstable life for her child. She's defying the legal system instead of appealing or taking other legal action. The child's non-biological mother has said she doesn't want to deprive the biological mother of the child.

I'm a woman and my dad took baths with me when I was a little kid. If the girl is seven now and the women broke up in 2003, the non-biological mother was bathing with her when she was a baby. That's not uncommon for the parents of babies or very young children and doesn't necessarily indicate child molestation.

"How long is the relationship going to last between Beatie and her girlfriend?"

They're not girlfriend and girlfriend or boyfriend and girlfriend; they're legally married and Beatie is legally a man.

Posted by: Marauder at February 15, 2010 5:24 PM


"This subject is quite inextricably connected to the increasing objectification of persons in our world today. When we treat our bodies as playgrounds for the plastic surgeon, we tell ourselves that our inherent worth is physical. (Ie, I am worth what my big breasts, tight butt, and long legs can achieve)."

People who undergo sex-change operations feel deeply unhappy in their bodies. They feel as though they're a man trapped in a woman's body, or a woman trapped in a man's body; what's on the outside feels disconnected to what's on the inside. Whether you think that's a treatable psychosis or a congenital condition, having a sex-change operation is not about "treating your body as a playground."

"Clearly, the surgical/hormonal procedures that Beatie underwent weren't enough. Either Beatie had planned the pregnancies pre-surgery, knowing the controversy they would spark, or she got most of the way done with her transformation and realized it wasn't enough."

Most FTM (female to male) people don't typically have their internal female reproductive organs removed. It's an invasive surgery and doctors don't like to do major invasive surgery when it isn't medically necessary. After a while, FTM people are taking enough testosterone that they don't menstruate and can pretty much ignore their internal reproductive organs.

"That doesn't say something to you? Either we're talking about a woman who intentionally mutilated her body for press (whether or not she intended on getting the sex change for personal reasons), or else she tried to find happiness by changing who she was and found herself still unfulfilled."

Neither situation applies here. The couple wanted a child that was biologically related to at least one of them, and Nancy couldn't have children.

I think you would strengthen your arguments if you did some research instead of speculating.

Posted by: Marauder at February 15, 2010 5:37 PM


I feel deeply unhappy in my body. I feel as though I am an African leopard trapped in a woman's body. What's on the outside feels disconnected to what's on the inside.

So, now I will subject myself, my body, my family, and the American medical system to repeated, costly surgeries so that the outside of my body may fully reflect the beautiful and majestic being on the inside. Nevermind the shock of my kids when they see me slowly transformed from the mother they once knew to some sort of side-show freak and then eventually to something more or less resembling a leopard but which still is no longer their mother. I WANT IT NOW! I WANT I WANT I WANT!

Posted by: xalisae at February 15, 2010 6:08 PM


I remember when TRACIE (That's HER REAL NAME) first was in the news. Backstory includes being abandoned by her father and traumatized by her mother's death (may have been suicide). That may have led to these issues of confusion.

Pray for this WOMAN, she desperately needs it.


And these children are innocent, not conceived out of LOVE, but out of greed.

Posted by: LizFromNebraska at February 15, 2010 6:30 PM


Making an informed choice to have a cosmetic procedure does not translate to letting your body be the playground for plastic surgeons. I had a mini-tummy tuck to remove excess skin and stretch marks. I'm young and have never had children. Because I have confidence in the way I look, I feel good. I'm a better person because I don't hate what I see in the mirror. It has nothing to do with being objectified.

Posted by: Nicole at February 15, 2010 7:04 PM


Calling this woman a man does great violence to the English language.

Posted by: Louise at February 15, 2010 7:17 PM


Posted by: Marauder at February 15, 2010 5:37 PM
---------

Marauder - what Thomas did - was that natural or unnatural?

Posted by: Chris Arsenault at February 15, 2010 7:18 PM


Sydney M. I will pray for your friend. Please pray for my friend who is about 23-24 weeks pregnant, Her baby has a growth in his lung that is increasing in size and pressing on his little heart. They are supposed to go to the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia to see a specialist there in the next week or so. Please pray that God will intervene and give them either medically or supernaturally a miracle. I mentioned this prayer request a while back but some of you may not have seen it. I really would appreciate your prayers.

Thank you Xalisae, Angel and Liz for your post, Angel good post at 2:01pm, Xalisae at 2:41 and 2:51pm and Liz at 6:30pm. Take care you guys.

Posted by: Prolifer L at February 15, 2010 8:09 PM


I will pray for your friends Sydney and Prolifer L.

X at 6:08pm
LOL!!!!

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at February 15, 2010 8:28 PM


Pro-lifer--I live near Philly. Do you? CHOP is the best...I will pray for your friend's unborn child!

Everyone, I will keep you posted with the results of the ultrasound tomorrow. I am praying for a miracle!

Posted by: Sydney M. at February 15, 2010 8:52 PM


No, I'm pretty sure that even if I knew a transgender person personally, I'd still think they were an insane person trying desperately to twist themselves into something they will never be. Hate them? No. Think they're wasting the valuable time of physicians who would be better served helping those who really need such services and thousands upon thousands of dollars in the process? Yes.

Posted by: xalisae at February 15, 2010 9:10 PM


Not the biggest deal in the world, in my opinion, but yeah, it's silly to call her a man.

Posted by: Doug at February 16, 2010 5:44 AM


Doug, my friend, wonderful to see you again. Hope is all is well with you. God love you, buddy.

Posted by: Bobby Bambino Author Profile Page at February 16, 2010 6:36 AM


xalisae, even if you think it's abnormal, can't you at least feel sorry for transgendered people? I believe you don't hate them. However, when it comes to "wasting the valuable time of physicians" and wasting money, no one made these doctors go into their chosen fields and the money transgendered people are spending to have operations is their money to spend.

Chris, no matter what I answer, it's not going to change your mind. Everybody's entitled to their opinion here. I just don't think it's helpful, compassionate, or productive in any way to belittle or insult transgendered people. I also don't think it's helpful to engage in wild speculation about Thomas Beatie's motives without bothering to learn anything about him and what his reasoning is.

Posted by: Marauder at February 16, 2010 8:04 AM


Marauder, I think you're missing a key point: you've already bought into the relativistic idea of "whatever anyone thinks is reality, is reality", and that's blithering nonsense. There *is* such a thing as being delusional; if I think I'm an Egg McMuffin, and even if I legally change my name to "Egg McMuffin" (which is possible), that doesn't make it so! Even if you "generously" (and with every good intention) tell others, "Stop judging Paladin! He's legally an Egg McMuffin, and we should respect his choice without ranting and raving about our dislike of his opinion!", that still wouldn't put me (or you) in the right.

Ultimately, it's no favour to anyone to enable them to escape reality... and the more profound and fundamental the flight from reality (and the more important the aspects of humanity that are twisted), the worse it is.

Posted by: Paladin at February 16, 2010 9:16 AM


Thank you, Marauder, for your thoughtful comments. You have said many things that I was thinking but didn't feel comfortable putting into words in this forum.

I was raised Catholic but left the church many years ago. For most of my adult life I have fallen into the camp of "I would never have an abortion myself, but I think it should remain legal, especially in the case of rape or when the woman's health is in danger."

I have recently gone through some heartbreaking and difficult times in my life and have felt drawn to attending church. In fact, I have made plans to attend mass for the first time in years this Sunday. I am quite nervous. But a little excited, too! I have to credit many posters on this blog with helping me really think through my feelings on the abortion issue and how I feel about the legality of abortion. I am still struggling with this issue, though, but I lean way farther toward the pro-life side than I ever have in the past.

I have to admit, though, that judgy, bitter comments about another human being, someone none of us have ever met, by such outspoken Christians, make me very sad. And unsure if I am ready to return to such a group.

"Twisted and depraved??" "Nasty?" Such bitterness and anger directed toward someone who all we know about is what we have learned through the "Mainstream Media," an organization that has been attacked on this blog almost daily.

This blog entry and entire stream of comments has made me very sad and confused. Thanks again, Marauder, for your comments. You too, Vannah!

Posted by: len at February 16, 2010 9:37 AM


I also wanted to add that I respect the opinions of those who believe that what Thomas Beatie is doing is wrong, and that he possibly has mental issues that could be helped. It is just the judgemental attitudes and self-rightous anger that is kind of shocking to me.

Posted by: len at February 16, 2010 9:41 AM


Chris, no matter what I answer, it's not going to change your mind.

Posted by: Marauder at February 16, 2010 8:04 AM
------

My mind is not the issue. Why do you say I'm insulting or belittling Thomas and Nancy? Is that related to my request for prayer for them?

Or are you addressing the general context of this thread?

Posted by: Chris Arsenault at February 16, 2010 10:08 AM


Len...I am hardly bitter about transgendered people. I don't think anyone on here is "bitter" about them either.Perhaps you don't understand what the word "bitterness" really means. I want all people to know the love and forgiveness of Christ. But that doesn't mean that I am going to pretend that perversion such as this is just okey dokey and wonderful.

Do I hope Susan Smith and Andrea Yates experience the peace of God? Yes. But I still "judge" their sin of drowning their children. Do I hope that child molesters repent of their sin and grow close to God? Yes. But that doesn't mean that I get warm and fuzzy and plaster a fake smile on my face when confronted with stories of adults sexually abusing youngsters. It is entirely biblical to call sin SIN. To pretend otherwise is to do a disservice to those caught in the sin. If you had cancer and a doctor didn't want to upset you so he said "Oh, its nothing. Its fine!" and the cancer ate away at your body you'd be pretty upset that the doc never warned you that you had cancer and offered you solutions to cure you of it. Same with sin. Of course we need to be loving towards the sinner but we don't pretend that "hey! Your sin and perversion is okay!" Its not.

God made this woman a woman. She went and mutilated her body and has perverted what God intended. Now looking like a man she tries to push the envelope by outwardly looking like a man while pregnant with a child like a woman. It is a mockery of God's design. It is a perversion. I don't hate this woman or her family but I am not going to pretend that its all just so wonderful and sweet. Its not. St. Paul talked about this very thing in the New Testament, men should look like men and women like women. Sorry if people stating that makes you not want to go to church.

church is not about people. If you take that view you will be out of church within a few months. Christianity is about a relationship with Christ Who will never disappoint. If people posting on a blog make you want to skip church you've missed the boat to begin with. I didn't go to church for 10 years because of gossipers. It took me a long time to realize my focus should be Christ and not people because people will always disappoint.

God bless you, Len.

Posted by: Sydney M at February 16, 2010 10:10 AM


Len,

I am overjoyed to read your comments! Please let me know if there is anything I can do to help you in ANY way. Feel free to email me or talk here or talk to someone else here or whatever. You are in my prayers. God love you.

Posted by: Bobby Bambino Author Profile Page at February 16, 2010 10:17 AM


Len,
I am encouraged by the part of your post that speaks to a heart change on the abortion issue. You are doing a lot of searching and I am glad to read that!
We all have our opinions, some are more out spoken than others on certain topics.
If you want to discuss abortion on a different thread with me I would be GLAD to! I have much to say on it as I regret the abortion I had almost 20 years ago.

Thank you for your comments. Please stick around.

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at February 16, 2010 10:20 AM


Sydney, if your second paragraph above is the sentiment that the posters here are trying to relay, then why couldn't they state it as you just did, without resorting to snarkiness? Judge this person all you want, if you feel justified, I just don't understand the justification for nastiness.

I have been struggling with my faith daily, and yes, something as small as the snottiness I see in the comments above is enough for me to pause these days. Especially from those who use their faith as their reason for judging this individual. Sorry.

Posted by: len at February 16, 2010 10:21 AM


Also Len, please keep in mind that when you attend mass this Sunday, I will be attending mass too, in some other part of the country, and will have you in prayer during mass.

Posted by: Bobby Bambino Author Profile Page at February 16, 2010 10:31 AM


Thank you, Bobby. That means a lot. I may attend mass on Saturday evening with a friend, instead of Sunday morning. I have lots of questions, but I'm probably going to save them for another time. Just going to mass is a big enough step for me for now!

And thank you, Carla. Your posts about your past abortion have touched me. Several years ago I had a pregnancy scare that almost certainly would have resulted in an abortion, had I actually been pregnant. Thankfully I was not.

Posted by: len at February 16, 2010 10:42 AM


You are welcome, Len.
I am praying for you! :) I am very thankful too that you did not have an abortion.
If you ever need to chat carla@jillstanek.com

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at February 16, 2010 10:55 AM


Saturday evening, it's all good. Take your time, go at your own pace. God love you.

Posted by: Bobby Bambino Author Profile Page at February 16, 2010 11:07 AM


Len...who was being snarky? Was I being snarky? I didn't mean to sound snarky. Snarkiness wasn't in my heart so if it came across that way I apologize.

Posted by: Sydney M at February 16, 2010 11:13 AM


Hi, Len,

I appreciate your comments (and the obvious soul-searching that went into them), and please be assured of my prayers as you consider a possible journey home. But I want to make sure you don't walk away with a wrong impression of many of us, here, who are appalled at the so-called "sex-change" operation and results. No hate is involved... and even some of the more strident remarks are from true emotional horror and revulsion, not hate... and not jaded contempt.

You wrote:

"Twisted and depraved??" "Nasty?" Such bitterness and anger directed toward someone who all we know about is what we have learned through the "Mainstream Media," an organization that has been attacked on this blog almost daily.

The source is rather irrelevant, here... unless you're suggesting that we've misunderstood, and that the mainstream media invented the whole story (and that that Tracie never had herself surgically/hormonally altered to resemble a man, never "married" a woman, and never became pregnant while in those conditions)? The reality of the so-called "sex-change" seems beyond dispute... and that's the core around which our objections orbit.

Posted by: Paladin at February 16, 2010 12:32 PM


That is exactly the problem I have with this entire situation, Paladin. I'm so sick of people ditching "True North" on the factual compass. Has everyone lost their bleeding minds?!

To once again quote from Zoolander, "I feel like I'm taking crazy pills!"

Posted by: xalisae at February 16, 2010 12:36 PM


Xalisae wrote:

I'm so sick of people ditching "True North" on the factual compass. Has everyone lost their bleeding minds?!

You put your finger squarely on the problem, in that last sentence!

To once again quote from Zoolander, "I feel like I'm taking crazy pills!"

:) You aren't. They are. It can have the same emotional effect, but the distinction is an important one.

Posted by: Paladin at February 16, 2010 1:53 PM


Len,

Try to think of yours and our, faith journey, as an ascent up a mountain.

Most people are in the valley. Others are beginning the climb...on and on, up and up. Every person is in a different stage of that climb. Some, like the saints, get very high up indeed. The goal of course is to reach the top, God, eternity with Him.

Every step on that mountain, every inch higher allows you to see something that you couldn't see before. The view changes with each step up. Those in the valley cannot see what a person halfway up can see. Not that they won't see. Not that they refuse to see. They simply CAN'T see. The person halfway up, can't see what the person near the top can see.

Sometimes, people higher up forget this. They look at the people below and think they're nuts for the things they do. They forget that the people below, cannot see the things that they do.

It's a journey. No matter where you are there will be stuff you cannot see.

God is constantly revealing stuff to us. Drawing us higher up and further in.

If we begin to feel smug, because we can see what others cannot, it might be because we aren't as high as we think we are.

The only way to "reach" people, is to meet them where they are. You can't stand on top, lording it over them. You have to come down to where they are.

But we forget this, and it sometimes comes across as mean, or snarky. It's really that we too, are on the journey. Perhaps we can't see. So while you are just beginning your journey, you must remember that ALL of us have more climbing to do.

Part of that journey might be that we need to practice humility. We might be stuck on some plateau, deluding ourselves that we've reached the top...

What I'm trying to say is that we shouldn't be too "hard" on these "men", but don't you be too hard on us. We're all in this together. We're all learning. None of us is at the top, with all the answers. If we were, we wouldn't be here bloggin' on Jill Staneks.

Gently, humbly, pointing out these men's sins is no different than you gently, humbly pointing out ours.

Don't give up on the journey, because others are struggling on their own journey. Don't throw out the baby with the bath water.

Seek what is right, embrace it. Recognize what is wrong, reject it. Don't compare yourself to others, compare yourself to Christ. Don't climb higher because someone else has gone before you, and don't give up the journey because someone else has fallen. This is YOUR journey. Trust me. There will be a million reasons not to take it. You'll be looking for excuses not to begin. Don't let others weaknesses be one of them.

BOBBY,

I can't believe you lured me in! ;)


Posted by: mk at February 16, 2010 2:28 PM


Everyone--update on my friend.

The baby they spotted on ultrasound two weeks ago has been miscarried. Thus the bleeding. However, the hormones continued to climb (though not in a normal way) because there were TWINS and the second baby is in her fallopian tube! It was in danger of rupturing at any moment so she is being rushed into surgery as I type this. I am on my way to the hospital to sit with her husband and hopefully sneak some food into him (he hasn't eaten ALL DAY). What can I say? My heart breaks for my friend! Pray for her health now and for her heartache that she feels.

Posted by: Sydney M. at February 16, 2010 3:17 PM


Sydney,

Sending prayers for your friend. What a difficult time she must be having!

Best wishes!

Posted by: maryrose at February 16, 2010 4:29 PM


So many sins, too little time to whine about them all.

Posted by: Joe at February 16, 2010 8:02 PM


aw, Sydney M, lifting your friend in prayer tonight.
God bless her hurting heart and her dear husband, who is so devoted and so worried...

Posted by: angel at February 16, 2010 9:38 PM


I also wanted to add that I respect the opinions of those who believe that what Thomas Beatie is doing is wrong, and that he possibly has mental issues that could be helped. It is just the judgemental attitudes and self-rightous anger that is kind of shocking to me.
Posted by: len at February 16, 2010 9:41 AM

no not bitter or self-righteous.
But definitely angry that this situation is portrayed as normal by the mainstream media and angry for the sake of the children involved.

It seems unbelievable that our society now believes that it is okay for a woman to self-mutiliate and then to turn around and portray this as a healthy, alternative lifestyle.
And what's worse, to enable her by calling her and "him" and publishing pictures of her "confusion". :(

I am glad you are rethinking the abortion issue.

I will be praying for you at Mass. :)

Posted by: angel at February 16, 2010 9:46 PM


You all disgust me. Thomas Beatie was born in a woman's body but obviously was a man mentally. How would I know this? Because my brother is transgendered also. He was born into a woman's body but was a man mentally as well. If you have anything to say about how he's a sinner and going to hell, you should be ashamed of yourself.

Posted by: Zoey at February 17, 2010 7:05 AM


Not sure why we keep referring to this as "Man" having baby number 3. If this was truly a man "he" would not be able to carry a baby. This is still a female that has taken hormones to appear as a man. Still a female. Find it funny that we talk about a "man" having baby. Not the way it works.

Posted by: L at February 17, 2010 7:58 AM


Marauder,

It's impossible to know the whole story from one article but it states that the spurned lesbian lover made no attempt to contact her former partner's child in five years. Do you actually believe a former lesbian lover should be able to come out of the woodwork after five years and claim parental rights to a child she has no biological or legal connection to? The child at 7 would have no recollection of her. You think it would be in the best interest of the child to take her away from the mother that has raised her and give her to a complete stranger?

Wow.

Posted by: Ed at February 17, 2010 8:30 AM


Hi Sydney M. no I live in the Midwest and my friend is supposed to fly out to Children's Hospital of Philadelphia either this week or next week to see their specialists who have seen this condition and treated it quite a lot (at least that is what she has been told). Thank you Syndey and other Christian prolifers for your prayers. Life is so precious and she and her husband are praying for a miracle. I pray God will intervene. I know He can do what man considers impossible and He can also use the doctors to help her baby as well.

Posted by: Prolifer L at February 17, 2010 5:16 PM