Susan's Place Transgender Resources

It makes no sense I mean God created intersex bodies that way and it doesn't seem fair that intersex people "sin by just existing." Is it like God doesn't love them? just for existing and some fundys get on my nerves. I used to be a fundy until I came out as trans then I left my church knowing the people there would FLAY me if they found out the truth about me. Also when I was in church, I used to think Jesus was a girl on so many levels. I had to iterate that "HE was a SON" over and over and over because I could see a girl in Jesus and how come some fundys can't accept feminine men if Jesus (as a man as believed by most, has feminine attributes and they don't chuck it out?)

How is being born intersex a sin? 

To some anything that is different is a sin, some faiths are just now accpeting and admitting that intersex people do exsist.

Matthew 19:12: Jesus said:
  For their some enunchs that are born of their mother's womb: and there some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.

  A lot of christian faiths are recognizing the role that these intersex people are in our society and they are speaking out.  These intersexed people are mentioned in the first part of this passage, transgender people the third part. 
Joelene

I've not seen anyone say being intersex is a sin.

I have seen them say crossdressing is a sin.  I've seen them say SRS is a sin.  I've seen them say identifying as something other than your sex organs is a sin.  Essentially they believe being transsexual is a choice to sin and it's somehow related to homosexuality.

I also have seen them essentially say intersexed people should not have a romantic relationships.  Focus on the Family is big on that - their intersex web pages essentially say "Intersexed people have a hard walk and should live celibate and as singles."  I also suspect some in the Catholic church would say similar things.

As for Jesus not being a man, I'm not quite ready to go that far, although I would be willing to say that for the Father and the Holy Spirit, and even Adam prior to Eve.  That said, if Jesus was intersexed or otherwise, that wouldn't cause me any great crisis of faith.

Quote from: Slanan on April 27, 2012, 12:11:43 AM
I've not seen anyone say being intersex is a sin.

I have seen them say crossdressing is a sin.  I've seen them say SRS is a sin.  I've seen them say identifying as something other than your sex organs is a sin.  Essentially they believe being transsexual is a choice to sin and it's somehow related to homosexuality.

I also have seen them essentially say intersexed people should not have a romantic relationships.  Focus on the Family is big on that - their intersex web pages essentially say "Intersexed people have a hard walk and should live celibate and as singles."  I also suspect some in the Catholic church would say similar things.

As for Jesus not being a man, I'm not quite ready to go that far, although I would be willing to say that for the Father and the Holy Spirit, and even Adam prior to Eve.  That said, if Jesus was intersexed or otherwise, that wouldn't cause me any great crisis of faith.

And why should we live single and lonely just because god made us different?

Quote from: ~~BebeLyss~~ on April 26, 2012, 09:10:11 PM
It makes no sense I mean God created intersex bodies that way and it doesn't seem fair that intersex people "sin by just existing."

You should feel lucky that you require a condition to sin.  Some fundies believe that everyone is sinful by the very nature of being human.

Hi,

Im 64  and intersexed so whats the big deal . well to some they dont accept anything that is looks or seems different. why , because of teaching that is way off the mark . & because they dont understand why we are the way we are so they dont .....wont ..... to accept us .

Oh well they miss out dont they on the beauty that is there in us as people,

Does not nature teach us there are so many differences about us , well yes the fact is they are blind & the blind lead them .

Get down & look at worms or some fish to name two then ask them the ? of why are they intersexed, see what they then say......oh oh thats different .  yea right, because it does not suit them to accept all of creation .& we are not a part of that as well...dont waste your time with them.....

...noeleena...

Quote from: Hell_Girl on April 30, 2012, 04:32:30 PM
This is because the mind of the average fundamentalist is a mess of contridictions held together with the sticky tape of blind unquestioning faith.

Best bet is to ignore them unless they start running for government...then it's custard pie in the face time

Strawman argument.

Cite a single source condemning a congenital birth condition as "sinful."

I don't know of any Christian who says Intersexed is a sin.  Where have you heard that?

Quote from: Hell_Girl on April 30, 2012, 04:57:07 PM
There aren't any...that's my entire point.

I'm sure I could explain it more if you'd like, possibly using easy to understand crayon drawings, but as we're all intelligent people here that would be far too condescending and rude of me.

If, as you claim, "... the average fundamentalist is a mess of contridictions held together with the sticky tape of blind unquestioning faith," but no doctrinal basis exists for this supposed tenet of faith, why is this an issue?

We in the trans community often complain about anti-trans bigotry.  How is this swipe against people of faith not bigotry in its own tight?

Close enough? http://rabble.ca/babble/lgbtq/national-post-runs-full-page-anti-gay-anti-transgender-ad (http://rabble.ca/babble/lgbtq/national-post-runs-full-page-anti-gay-anti-transgender-ad)

They don't use the word "sinful," opting for the euphemism "confused," but the meaning is still pretty clear (especially with "StopCorruptingChildren.com" at the bottom). Cool how people with enough money to run a full page ad in a national newspaper can still lack an understanding of basic human biology and/or the English language.

This has been a very confusing thread for me, perhaps due to a misunderstanding of the vocabulary. I have come to understand intersex to refer to a physical state of the genitals or other sexual or secondary sex characteristics falling somewhere in between male & female. I'm basing this understanding on articles I've read that were linked from here at Susan's. It seems like people are using the term to describe some other things. Maybe it has broader use than I realized?

I guess I am using Intersexed as the condition my sibling had, birth certificate says Female, death certificate says Male.  It was a birth defect, they only lived a short time.

Not a "two spirit" issue.

Until we come to agreement what the term intersexed means, we can not have a reasonable discussion.

Quote from: dalebert on April 30, 2012, 05:34:18 PM
This has been a very confusing thread for me, perhaps due to a misunderstanding of the vocabulary. I have come to understand intersex to refer to a physical state of the genitals or other sexual or secondary sex characteristics falling somewhere in between male & female. I'm basing this understanding on articles I've read that were linked from here at Susan's. It seems like people are using the term to describe some other things. Maybe it has broader use than I realized?

Or unusual genetics like XXY or whatvs. But no, it doesn't have a broader use. See: "lack an understanding of basic human biology and/or the English language."

Quote from: dalebert on April 30, 2012, 05:34:18 PM
This has been a very confusing thread for me, perhaps due to a misunderstanding of the vocabulary. I have come to understand intersex to refer to a physical state of the genitals or other sexual or secondary sex characteristics falling somewhere in between male & female. I'm basing this understanding on articles I've read that were linked from here at Susan's. It seems like people are using the term to describe some other things. Maybe it has broader use than I realized?

I agree with your understanding.  "Intersex" relates to ambiguous genitalia and/or other genetic variations.

Old Testament (Hebrew Bible) reference to intersex conditions are more clearly against intersex people, mostly in what sorts of bodies are fit for service in the Temple. But the New Testament has a different theology of bodies, and in the "eunuchs for the Kingdom" comment, as well as Acts ch 8, there seems to be a real change from the Levitical code (which doesn't apply to Christians).

By the way - categorically assigning lack of intelligence to people based on their religious convictions - not cool. That does, however, indicate a lot about the person who trots out that sort of bigotry.

I'm not convinced old testiment was against intersexed.  In fact, I'd say one telling of the creation story would make me think Adam was intersexed.  As for temple service, there were a ton of disqualifications (including being born in the wrong family).

Why was there restrictions on temple service?  I have no idea truthfully.

(As for why intersexed people should live single - I don't think they should unless they want to. I definitely don't agree with Focus on the Family)

@Hell_Girl - smart move.

Quote from: ~~BebeLyss~~ on April 26, 2012, 09:10:11 PM
It makes no sense I mean God created intersex bodies that way and it doesn't seem fair that intersex people "sin by just existing." Is it like God doesn't love them? just for existing and some fundys get on my nerves. I used to be a fundy until I came out as trans then I left my church knowing the people there would FLAY me if they found out the truth about me. Also when I was in church, I used to think Jesus was a girl on so many levels. I had to iterate that "HE was a SON" over and over and over because I could see a girl in Jesus and how come some fundys can't accept feminine men if Jesus (as a man as believed by most, has feminine attributes and they don't chuck it out?)

How is being born intersex a sin?

I have never heard a fundamentalist call intersex people a sin.

I even emailed the most fundamentalist groups such as Focus on the Family and other anti LGBT groups. None of them have declared being born intersex as sinful.

Be careful to stereotype even those you disagree with lest you fall for their own semantics.

And when I use the word "intersex" I mean the actual meaning of the word. Not what other transgender people will say because their brain are female and their body is male so they are intersex. So when I use the word "intersex" I am meaning the current medical definition of intersex. Not two spirited or transgender or transsexual.

I have never seen, even among the most oppressive fundamentalist institutions, intersexuality listed as a sin. However, intersexuality is often conflated with ->-bleeped-<- by people who do not understand. A child is born with "ambiguous genitalia" and based upon a completely arbitrary determination of where "hypertrophied clitoris" ends and "male sex organs" begin, they are assigned either the gender of boy or girl. The "boy" or "girl" hits puberity and surprise! they identify as either the opposite gender they were assigned or neither gender. To the community the child grows up in, it appears that this child is transexual, even though the initial designation was completely arbitrary. Therefore, society tends to lump us all into the same category as being trans, even though there is a huge distinction between intersex and transgender, and therefore discrimination against one group often times leads to discrimination of the other.

Not a sin, but a "gift" of singleness:

"Recall that in this passage Jesus is discussing eunuchs who were "born" that way, "made that way" by men, or have "renounced marriage because of the kingdom of heaven." While the context of this statement by Jesus is clearly centered on the questions of divorce, marriage, and God's created intent for human sexual expression, it's comforting to note that Jesus frames both the beginning and end of his comments here with an acknowledgment that not all can accept this word – indicating deep compassion on His part with those who find themselves in circumstances whereby they are unable to enter into the "one-flesh union" of marriage, whether by design, mutilation or personal decision. Moreover, Jesus indicates that this calling is given to only a few – implying that abundant grace is afforded to those who, for whatever reason, are to bear what Paul refers to as the gift of singleness (1 Cor. 7)."  -- Focus on the Family on Intersexuality

In other words, if they aren't typically male or female, or if they can't have typical sex, then, according to some, marriage is out as an option.  I find that view quite offensive.  But it's how Focus wants to deal with it, as it keeps their black-and-white world simple.  I doubt they are unique in these views.

So not a sin..at least until you have sex or get married...

Quote from: Slanan on May 07, 2012, 08:55:40 AM
Not a sin, but a "gift" of singleness:

"Recall that in this passage Jesus is discussing eunuchs who were "born" that way, "made that way" by men, or have "renounced marriage because of the kingdom of heaven." While the context of this statement by Jesus is clearly centered on the questions of divorce, marriage, and God's created intent for human sexual expression, it's comforting to note that Jesus frames both the beginning and end of his comments here with an acknowledgment that not all can accept this word – indicating deep compassion on His part with those who find themselves in circumstances whereby they are unable to enter into the "one-flesh union" of marriage, whether by design, mutilation or personal decision. Moreover, Jesus indicates that this calling is given to only a few – implying that abundant grace is afforded to those who, for whatever reason, are to bear what Paul refers to as the gift of singleness (1 Cor. 7)."  -- Focus on the Family on Intersexuality

In other words, if they aren't typically male or female, or if they can't have typical sex, then, according to some, marriage is out as an option.  I find that view quite offensive.  But it's how Focus wants to deal with it, as it keeps their black-and-white world simple.  I doubt they are unique in these views.

So not a sin..at least until you have sex or get married...

Well um guess i'm going to go have one big F***ing party in hell...anyone want to join me? lol  :icon_censored:

who cares? they aren't important.

Quote from: FullMoon19 on May 09, 2012, 09:08:47 PM
who cares? they aren't important.

They are important enough to make North Carolina place in their amendment that same sex marriage is illegal.

Quote from: Annah on May 10, 2012, 07:13:31 AM
They are important enough to make North Carolina place in their amendment that same sex marriage is illegal.

Which they did so we (I live in NC) couldn't pass a bill saying that it could be legalized. But the retards that wrote it also messed up a lot of other things so LGBTs are going to be scapegoats for a lot of hate and crime in this state now. I have a feeling its going to get real ugly real fast.

Quote from: JayKyle on May 10, 2012, 10:00:23 AM
Which they did so we (I live in NC) couldn't pass a bill saying that it could be legalized. But the retards that wrote it also messed up a lot of other things so LGBTs are going to be scapegoats for a lot of hate and crime in this state now. I have a feeling its going to get real ugly real fast.

You can count on that my friend.

Quote from: JayKyle on May 10, 2012, 10:00:23 AM
Which they did so we (I live in NC) couldn't pass a bill saying that it could be legalized. But the retards that wrote it also messed up a lot of other things so LGBTs are going to be scapegoats for a lot of hate and crime in this state now. I have a feeling its going to get real ugly real fast.

They set it up for the primary so that it had a better chance of passing.  I live on the coast, things aren't so bad for our ilk here, at least in my experience. 

It doesn't matter which way the vote goes.  Either way, LGBT people are going to be scape goats.

Typically, with other minorities, we've seen anger directed towards the minority increase substantually as the minority gains visibility and gains rights.  There is also almost always legislation enacted as people get rights, to prevent those people from getting rights.

Why didn't NC have an anti-gay ammendment for the last 200 years?  It's simple - gays were hidden and had no rights, so there was no "need" to "protect" marriage.  Now they are scared, so they are trying to pass laws.

Historically however, these anti-equality laws are the last attempts to hold ground before the bigots lose.

exactly....take into account the last time North Carolina amended their marriage laws. It was to "ban negros from marrying whites and this action will be enforced forever."

Well...forever wasn't as long as they had hoped for.

Quote from: Annah on May 10, 2012, 10:24:01 AM
exactly....take into account the last time North Carolina amended their marriage laws. It was to "ban negros from marrying whites and this action will be enforced forever."

Well...forever wasn't as long as they had hoped for.

True but I'm still not happy about it nor the problems its going to cause.

Quote from: Annah on May 10, 2012, 07:13:31 AM
They are important enough to make North Carolina place in their amendment that same sex marriage is illegal.

they still aren't important. whatever happens with same sex marriage will happen. whatever their opinions are on intersex don't mean a thing. same sex marriage will become legal inevitably. "fundy's" will be a thing of history. btw, politics aren't important either.

Quote from: FullMoon19 on May 11, 2012, 12:27:45 AM
they still aren't important. whatever happens with same sex marriage will happen. whatever their opinions are on intersex don't mean a thing. same sex marriage will become legal inevitably. "fundy's" will be a thing of history. btw, politics aren't important either.

this isn't the future. This is the present, and right now fundamentalist has power to sway votes at the polling stations. The greatest disadvantage we may put ourselves through is by assuming they aren't important. Trust me...at this present time...they are. In the future, we will have fundamentalist too...it may not be in the form of gay rights but they will always be here.

Quote from: Annah on May 11, 2012, 12:53:57 AM
this isn't the future. This is the present, and right now fundamentalist has power to sway votes at the polling stations. The greatest disadvantage we may put ourselves through is by assuming they aren't important. Trust me...at this present time...they are. In the future, we will have fundamentalist too...it may not be in the form of gay rights but they will always be here.

fair enough. i'll let you victimize yourself to someone with "power." power is only given to those who can victimize people with power.

FullMoon: I really don't see how you can accuse Annah of victimizing herself. Power is defined as the ability to cause change. As absurd as it is, our rights are things on the political bargaining table. I'm not talking about rights in an abstract sense, but in a very real sense: the ability to acquire and keep a job regardless of gender identity, the right to marry who you want to, crimes of violence against trans and intersex persons being considered hate crimes like with any other minority group, the most basic right of guarantee of protection by police against violence and (even more sadly) protection against violence by police. You can hide your head in the sand all you want, but politics has very real effects on the most basic ability of trans and intersex people to live a life with the most basic ability to subsist along with freedom from fear of physical violence   

eh its ok

She can say I'm victimizing myself all she wants but she doesn't know what I do everyday and the things I have accomplished for myself. She speaks out of pure ignorance about that.

So I just blow it off and not take it seriously.

Just one last comment on the subject: truly victimizing yourself is when you are being abused and do nothing about it. I, for one, will always be found on the front lines giving them hell.

Quote from: Annah on May 15, 2012, 11:29:02 PM
eh its ok

She can say I'm victimizing myself all she wants but she doesn't know what I do everyday and the things I have accomplished for myself. She speaks out of pure ignorance about that.

So I just blow it off and not take it seriously.

what do you do everyday and accomplish for yourself? please enlighten me. i simply said they aren't important. they're not important to me, so i don't need to worry about it, but apparently you do, which is fine. i don't need to be told what is important and what isn't by someone who doesn't know me likewise. we have two different scopes on the subject, which i though you could have respected, but i guess not.

Quote from: Anthropos on May 15, 2012, 10:53:54 PM
FullMoon: I really don't see how you can accuse Annah of victimizing herself. Power is defined as the ability to cause change. As absurd as it is, our rights are things on the political bargaining table. I'm not talking about rights in an abstract sense, but in a very real sense: the ability to acquire and keep a job regardless of gender identity, the right to marry who you want to, crimes of violence against trans and intersex persons being considered hate crimes like with any other minority group, the most basic right of guarantee of protection by police against violence and (even more sadly) protection against violence by police. You can hide your head in the sand all you want, but politics has very real effects on the most basic ability of trans and intersex people to live a life with the most basic ability to subsist along with freedom from fear of physical violence   

i do not have my head in the sand. maybe you do? idk, like i said, i don't lose sleep at night over this stuff that i can't change. fortunately, i do know that it's all going to be some thing of history, and blaming my life on this kind of garbage isn't going to better me in anyway. i don't think black people gained their rights to abolish segregation by sitting around on their computers telling everyone their life sucks, did they? lots of them got beaten and murdered for what they've done, so it goes. i don't need a lesson on this anyway. i'm well aware of what the illusion that is says can be done and can't be done.

You know very well I was addressing your comment that politics don't matter, please do not twist my words. African-Americans received Civil Rights by realizing that politics do matter and fighting tooth and nail for them. History does not change because it is inevitable, history changes by mass political action. Your entire previous post read like a trip down the rabbit hole.

 :police:

Hi friends

That's enough idle bickering

Stay on topic and keep the conversation civil or this topic will be locked

Thank you

V M

Most fundamentalists Christians I've met don't actually say very much at all on intersex issues even when I bring it up. Often I will explain the phenomenon explaining how CAH, AIS, Klinefelters syndrome works and they don't understand anything I just told them.

Two possibilities exist for this gap.
1: They are too simple and mentally degenerate to comprehend what I'm saying to them.
2: They are intentionally ignoring me because to hear me violates the purity of there bigoted mantra of bible verses.

You get a similar reaction when you discuss evidence for evolution or biological origins for sexual instinctive behaviour in mammals.

as such when I very simplistically explain the terms point blank they respond emotively.
"THEN GOD WANTS THEM TO BE CELIBATE!" ignoring that they have sex drives.
Or "THEY MUST CHOOSE TO BE ONE OR THE OTHER" Or have that choice made for them early on. ignoring there own putrid lies about "god doesn't make mistakes"

Quote from: pebbles on May 16, 2012, 06:45:58 PM
Or have that choice made for them early on. ignoring there own putrid lies about "god doesn't make mistakes"

I'm not going to debate beliefs about God, but I will say that I've heard the "intersex is a result of the curse", which is not incompatible with "God doesn't make mistakes."  I don't believe that it's a result of the curse, but some people do.  It's essentially sin in flesh form.  It's *slightly* nuanced and distinct from "being intersexed is a sin", but only slightly so.

I don't believe God controls our every movement, the way the wind blows throughout the SE United States in May or the way natural disasters occur.

When it comes to intersex I don't see it as a God based curse (it may be a curse in the sense of the word where the person wishes he or she was not intersex).

When people believe that God is behind every business transaction, every mundane decision, every way a birth occurs, every way a death occurs, then people can easily fall into a trap of blaming God on everything.

It all goes back to our fundamental inability to understand G-d completely. As Aquinas wrote of Anslem's proof for G-d, it is indeed true that G-d is the most intelligible entity, so intelligible that it is impossible to know G-d fully via human consciousness (my not using pronouns to avoid gendering G-d may come off as a bit clunky, but just so you know that is my express intent). G-d is everywhere, and yet we cannot no G-d completely by observing the world, but rather my engaging in what saints and mystics call the "long dark night of the soul" that is beyond both words and memory.

You know some fundies say: "A new born baby is in sin - the sin of the parents..." the sin of who so ever... and unless being christened right away it be going to hell if it dies.

To be "in sin" is a bit like being indicted, - and as the saying goes: "one can indict a ham-sandwich..."

Does one need say more? No, not really

Axélle

Quote from: Annah on May 19, 2012, 12:35:55 PM
I don't believe God controls our every movement, the way the wind blows throughout the SE United States in May or the way natural disasters occur.

When it comes to intersex I don't see it as a God based curse (it may be a curse in the sense of the word where the person wishes he or she was not intersex).

When people believe that God is behind every business transaction, every mundane decision, every way a birth occurs, every way a death occurs, then people can easily fall into a trap of blaming God on everything.

it sounds like you're saying "yes, god exists, but only when i want." this is what i do not get about "religion." people use this tool as a means of telling people if they do not follow these words, they are going to hell, yet they conveniently alterate the interpretations to whatever the hell they choose. just like the "fundys" it's another example of using religion as the poison it is, in trying to brainwash people into believing something that is neither here nor there, but just because the word god is put into it, it must be correct.

God is love
Love is God
so we make a resting place
in our hearts
for Love/God

Three pages of comments, and I have yet to see anyone factually support the original premise that an intersex condition is sinful.

I'd rather not see this thread degenerate into anti-religious bigotry and bickering.

The valid discussion of religious fundamentalism and how it effects the GLBT community should be held in the Religion forums.

Quote from: Jamie D on May 20, 2012, 05:31:23 PM
Three pages of comments, and I have yet to see anyone factually support the original premise that an intersex condition is sinful.

I'd rather not see this thread degenerate into anti-religious bigotry and bickering.

The valid discussion of religious fundamentalism and how it effects the GLBT community should be held in the Religion forums.

that's because being intersex is not a "sin." there is no facts or proof needed. the only bigotry is that of the "fundys." really, i don't even know why i'm posting here, but it makes me question why on a transgender support site, people would imply that those people who are hateful of intersex people are possibly right for any reason at all.

I think the case has been made here that the premise of the original post has gone unsupported. Indeed, no one has even cited a single time where that contention has been made.  Nor has anyone supported "fundamentalists" in that point of view, if such a point of view exists.

The Site Terms of Service and Rules:

16. Please limit religious discussions to the spirituality forum. If a thread in another forum turns into a religious discussion please move the thread to the spirituality forum. Our moderators will assist in this process if necessary.

Is this thread any longer about the subject of intersexuality?

Quote from: CosmicJoke on May 20, 2012, 02:39:38 PM
it sounds like you're saying "yes, god exists, but only when i want." this is what i do not get about "religion."

I say God exist but I do not believe God is not as involved in our personal lives.

That does not mean God exists only when I want.

Quote from: Jamie D on May 20, 2012, 06:15:01 PM
[clipped]
Is this thread any longer about the subject of intersexuality?

Jamie,
I think it is, because it is not just the word INTERSEX but the OP is also saying FUNDYS and SIN - right?

Now which 'fundies' are talking about sin? Please go tell?

Lawyers, doctors, ... - the butcher the baker and the candle-stick maker...?

That is why the subject inevitably looks at sin and the fundies that proclaim what sin is -
and sin, as I said, is nothing other then some sort of indictment.
Is -sin- a religious term? You bet.
Amen :)

Axélle

Quote from: Axélle on May 20, 2012, 11:50:08 PM
Jamie,
I think it is, because it is not just the word INTERSEX but the OP is also saying FUNDYS and SIN - right?

Now which 'fundies' are talking about sin? Please go tell?

Lawyers, doctors, ... - the butcher the baker and the candle-stick maker...?

That is why the subject inevitably looks at sin and the fundies that proclaim what sin is -
and sin, as I said, is nothing other then some sort of indictment.
Is -sin- a religious term? You bet.
Amen :)

Axélle

I would go with ... the candlestick maker  ;)

I stated in an early post on this thread that the OP's premise was a "strawman."  That is to say, a fallacy based on a misrepresentation of the opponent's position.

Trust me here, I'm not defending religious fundamentalists.  But there is nothing to be gained from beating the strawman with a stick.

Trust me here, I'm not defending religious fundamentalists.  But there is nothing to be gained from beating the strawman with a stick.

Sure there is, look at the great fun the flying monkeys had...

Flying Monkeys attack (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SESI19h4wDo#)

Sorry, I'm terrible  :laugh: >:-) :laugh:

The Flying Monkeys scared the living daylights out of me.

I think I can shed a little light on this.
As a child, my mom was part in a church called, "Church of Christ" (not to be confused with CoCLDS).
The way they saw it, if your child was not born "normal", then it went that the parents where sinnfull.
So by that thinking, just the fact I have Albinism, my parents where " sinners".  As far as being Intersexed, I have no idea and stay away from churches.