When Adam is Eve

Throughout human history, people have tried to philosophize and legislate philosophies concerning the acceptable behavior of these two genders.

Most recently in the United States a bill was presented to create an amendment to the Constitution, which is a document that supersedes all American laws, and is the fundamental basis of the rights of all American citizens on which these laws were established. This amendment was to define marriage as the union between one man and one woman, with no other union or partnership to be recognized or afforded the same rights or privileges.

When that attempt failed, the State of Florida at the behest of John Stemberger, an accident attorney who lives in Orlando, proposed "Amendment 2," on the 2008 ballot.

Amendment 2 would define "Marriage," as "The union between one man and one woman and that no other union or partnership would be legally recognized or afforded the same rights and privileges."

There are many arguments to be made on either side of this issue. Some of them are good arguments, some not so good, and some down right hateful.

The Christian religious arguments come from a few Bible passages:

Leviticus 20:13 (New International Version)
13 " 'If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.
1 Corinthians 6:9-10 (New International Version)
9Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders 10nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.
And of course the infamous story of Sodom and Gomorrah in Genesis chapters 18 and 19.

But does the government, or even the people, have the right to create laws based solely on religious beliefs? And if so, then what happens when those of us who would insert our beliefs into laws are no longer in the majority faith? What would have happened if the Davidians or any number of other cults were in the majority? Would we still believe that the majority vote has the right to force their beliefs into laws and even alter the constitution to do so? Isn't that how women ended up wearing Berkas in Afghanistan when the Taliban was in power? After all, that was their religious belief and it was forced into the function of law by those in power.

This is an intense debate that has been going on since the beginning of governments, and I don't see that it will end before the entire human race lives in little pods far enough away from one another for there to no longer be a need for human laws.

Amendment 2 comes at a time when the United States is already in healthcare crises. This amendment is designed to deny domestic partners the right to have joint healthcare policies through the work place. Yet, the same people who are disparaging about unpaid medical bills leaving a heavy toll on society at large are supporters of such legislation that would only make the situation worse in the end.

Then there are the lies associated with Amendment 2. Such as the outright lie that hospital visitation and property rights would not be adversely affected. The proponents of this bill suggest that individuals who wish to enter into a domestic partnership write and legalize contractual documents stating their wishes. This would be impossible due to the wording of the amendment, "No other union or partnership shall be legally recognized or afforded the same rights or privileges as marriage." This wording would give anyone the right to contest the legality of the documents signed by 2 consenting adults.

I'm sure that by now everyone has heard the comment, "God created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve."

But what happens when Adam IS Eve?

If this amendment is written into the constitution of the State of Florida or any other state or even into our national order, we will be depriving an entire group of anatomically correct THIRD GENDER people of their God given rights.

This is not simply about a gay vs. straight issue. The silent ones more closely affected are the Hermaphrodites who would not fit into either category of this constitutional amendment.

The closest thing mentioned in the Bible about Hermaphrodites are eunuchs. If God created all people, male and female, and that is all he created, then who created Hermaphrodites?

And if God created Male, female and hermaphrodite, then how does the third gender population fit into God's supposed laws concerning marriage, sexuality and homosexuality?

In order to understand the phenomena of genders, I went into extensive research to discover how many genders there are and the causes of these anatomically correct genders. I also studied the theories of human as well as animal sexuality.

Interestingly enough, there are over 1500 documented species that engage in homosexuality ranging from the great apes, to birds and even insects.

Yet this particular article is not necessarily about homosexuality. This article is about Hermaphrodites, the third, fourth and even fifth anatomically correct genders of human beings.

People want to put things into neat little boxes that they don't have to think about. If it looks like a duck and it quacks like a duck- it must be a duck.

But what happens when someone has mammary glands, chest and facial hair, a penis AND a vagina? This person is often shoved under the carpet of medical science, and at least in this case, legislation as well. Yet it is estimated that as many as 7 out of 1000 people have AIS to some degree or another.

7 out of 1000! Wow, that's a pretty big number of people. That would be 70 out of 10,000; 700 out of 100,000; 7000 out of 1,000,000 and so on......

How has it been that society has ignored the third gender for so long and even presumes to pass laws that would specifically exclude them from the right of marriage through no fault of their own?

Medical studies have been conducted on volunteer and involuntary patients who were often humiliated and exploited against their will, which ultimately only served to push this gender even further into the closet.

In spite of the ignorance involved with scientist displaying these people in proverbial human "Zoos," there have been several causative factors uncovered for this gender.

Everyone is familiar with the "XX = girl, XY = boy" chromosome.

People who have genitalia and characteristics of both sexes have super-numeral chromosomes, meaning that rather than "XX," they have one of several other combinations: XXX, XXY, XYY, 47XY and a variety of other combinations.

There are also people with these chromosomal variations that do not display any physical characteristics different than the two primary genders.

Assuming that we agree that these chromosomal characteristics are somehow a deviant {which I would argue that it isn't}, the term for this condition is called "AIS," Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome. There are also the terms, "PAIS" or "Partial Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome," and "Klinefelter's Syndrome."

People with AIS are often reluctant to come forward because mainstream tends to stigmatize anything that can be denigrated. Many of these people live in secrecy and have reported feeling shame because of the physical characteristics of their own bodies. Seeing how the medical community, the scientific community, the people who were supposed to be above this type of thinking more-so than anyone else has treated them during these rare opportunities of study, who could possibly blame them for not telling narrow minded mainstream about the exciting news of the Third Gender?

Many of these people are physically altered at birth by doctors, with and sometimes without, the knowledge and permission of the parents.

Case studies have shown that many of those who were assigned a gender specific, were actually assigned the wrong gender identity. In other words, if the doctor made the determination that the child should be raised as a boy, the child ends up identifying more closely with girls and vice versa.

This brings about a whole other area of law debate as well: Does the mother or father of a child have the right to change the sex of a child at birth?

If this child were born an anatomically correct male, every mother in America would start waving her flag and calling the cops if the parents asked the doctors to remove his penis and form him a vagina instead, or vice versa.

So, how then, is it not only legal- but promoted and commonly practiced that parents and doctors alter the sex of a third gender baby so that it will fit into their own narrow views of dualistic sexuality?

I will be writing more on this topic in the near future, but I wanted to get this introduction out in time for people to consider before they cast their votes on November 4th concerning Amendment 2.
As always- thanks for reading. Feel free to post your comments and please keep it clean.