Sunday on R4 about 20 mins in

[lovelyweathertoday]

Discussion on trans conversion therapy and whether a person can actually change sex. Raised issue that teenage girls shouldn't be immediately affirmed.

First bloke pretty sensible.

I get confused by people objecting (or as the presenter says, being ‘deeply hurt and offended’ by) by the idea that God wouldn’t ‘agree’ with transition.

Faith isn’t about guessing what God might want. If you’re a Christian, you follow the teachings of Christ, or the Bible, or the Church. Nobody is forced to do that anymore, which is as it should be. But criticising priests or ministers for teaching Christianity, or for not changing their faith based on what people say they want to do, seems misguided. God either exists or doesn’t. If he does, he gets to set the rules, not you.

The second minister (Sarah, who I think is trans) seemed to be criticising faith leaders for having an ‘a priori sense of right and wrong’ rather than making judgments according to what lawyers say. Eh? Isn’t that what religions do? This is what you’re meant to do, this is what you’re not meant to do - sign up to the faith or not. Sarah seemed to care more about lawyers than about God.

I think the CoE is letting down its members when ministers start throwing around the idea that morality is personally subjective and nothing to do with the teachings of their faith.

I though is always interesting when people rely on the argument ' it's not up to me to define conversion therapy, that's a question for the lawyers. But I do know it should be illegal'

Surely it is the crucial part, to identify where we are drawing a line, what would be illegal, and what is merely mean behaviour! I can't imagine advocating for something to be banned that I can't even explain what it is.

The second person seemed to be defining any conversation that isn't 100% positive as conversion therapy, by which definition quoting particular passages of the Bible would be classified as conversion therapy?
(And therefore illegal under proposed laws at that would be gay conversion therapy...)

It was interesting to hear a discussion touching on:
What does Conversion Therapy mean for trans (without the diversion into "the same as CT for sexuality")?
How can you legislate in this area without interfering with reasonable therapeutic practices?

There has been significant effort made by trans activists over the past few years to ensure that these two questions in particular do not get debated in the public domain.

The second speaker was Reverend Sarah Jones who is trans.

‘The second person seemed to be defining any conversation that isn't 100% positive as conversion therapy, by which definition quoting particular passages of the Bible would be classified as conversion therapy?’

The so-called ‘evangelical’ churches are right in their concerns, then? The CoE has renounced its faith and is now campaigning with those who would legally prevent others from ministering in their faith?

I say this purely from a position of pluralism: isn’t that intolerance of faith? I don’t think anyone should be forced to listen to a religious perspective on why or whether they should or should not transition. But if you go along to a church and ask them for the religious view, shouldn’t you expect to hear what they believe God would want?

But if you go along to a church and ask them for the religious view, shouldn’t you expect to hear what they believe God would want?

That's what I would have thought.

Agree it's good to hear the trans conversion therapy discussed separately from gay conversion therapy. They are very different issues.

I can't see that transness is much different to any religious faith. They are both beliefs in things which are unprovable, and that depend upon recognising an existence that is independent of the physical world.

If 'conversion therapy' is banned for one faith position, what's to stop it being banned for any other faith position? Would the actions of evangelical churches seeking converts become illegal? If you are not allowed to explore the reasons for an individual's faith position, what does that mean for people who wish to join a religion? What does it mean for inter-faith dialogue - which is a proven method for strengthening peaceful ties between different faith communities?