"It's easy really. Female identifies as a male and starts the procedure. Decides to have a baby naturally (as natural as possible) and then will continue with his transition into a male. As a female he was sexually attracted to men. As a male he is still attracted to men which will make him gay." It's even easier than that - a woman has given birth to a child. Said...
no it isn't. what is new (or comparatively so, given the long timeframe you 've suggested) is the advances in medicine and surgery that have permitted it to become a physical bodily reality.
always a little uneasy about anything in this vein - does the fact that we are now so advanced we have the ability to play God, does it automatically make it right that we should?
Most surgery techniques are comparatively recent. So on that side of things, why should a heart transplant be regarded with no moral qualms, whereas Sex Reassignment Surgeries be seen as "playing God"?
That's a separate question from how these things are to be funded, and in any case we're straying far from the topic.
Naomi - the biggest concern is that the child will get bullied for his/hers parents lifestyle choices. If the stigma is taken away then the chances of that are lowered.
ummmm, I don't think you can assume you know what the biggest concern will be. No one seems to be looking at this from the child's potential point of view at all. It's all about what the parent wants. Extremely selfish in my opinion.
Not especially. I can see the two aren't completely the same, but if "playing God" means anything it must include the idea of saving a life that was otherwise going to end. In that regard all surgery is "playing God", or none of it is.
hang on, woman gives birth to baby? shocker! Right so a woman who started as a woman had some sort of transformation and now fancies blokes, so she was correct in the first place.
From the point of view of playing God, though, both operations count as that.
Outside that criticism I wouldn't argue with you about the lack of comparison, but what's left is a separate moral distinction. All surgery is "playing God".
I don't particularly feel sorry for the child. Being wanted, loved and looked after properly is the biggest priority. I do feel sorry for the parents, who are confused and delusional.
That sounds like a contradiction in terms (but what isn't, in this?) But there is every chance the baby will grow up happy and healthy. The parents never will be.
I do agree that any medical input could be seen as "playing God". Including saving lives, so I see your point, Jim. However, this is an unnecessary, impossible aim and taking advantage of vulnerable people. There is no excuse for that.
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.