The wealthy, powerful, and sometimes very weird Pritzker cousins have set their sights on a new God-like goal: using gender ideology to remake human biology
So says Jennifer Bilek in this important Tablet article. It’s worth your time.
Here are my thoughts.
Christian Anthropology, rooted in Biblical teachings, holds that humans are created in the image of God (Imago Dei) and that this divine image encompasses the whole person, including one’s biological sex and gender. The Christian view understands gender as a binary, corresponding to biological sex, given by God as part of the created order (Genesis 1:27). Biological sex is not only a physical reality but also has spiritual and psychological significance.
The Pritzker family’s support for SSI, which promotes the concept of gender fluidity and the medical transformation of gender, contradicts Christian Anthropology in several ways:
Contrast with Biblical Creation Story
The support for SSI, which asserts a spectrum of gender identities and the possibility of changing one’s biological sex, stands in contrast to the Biblical narrative that God created humans male and female. This narrative in Genesis is foundational for the Christian understanding of gender as a given and stable aspect of human identity. An identity affirmed by Jesus.1“Have you not read that the one who made them at the beginning ‘made them male and female.'” [Matt 19:4]
The Concept of ‘Playing God’
The promotion of SSI and related medical practices should be seen as an attempt to ‘play God’ by altering the fundamental aspects of human nature. Christians believe those fundamentals were divinely ordained and reject this unethical attempt to fundamentally alter God’s Good creation, especially when it involves the core aspects of human identity.
The Role of Technology in Human Identity
The involvement of the techno-medical complex in creating new gender identities through medical interventions must be viewed from a Christian perspective as an over-reliance on technology to define and alter human identity. Christian Anthropology emphasizes the God-given nature of human identity, which is at odds with a technologically driven redefinition of this identity.
unethical Medical Practices
The promotion of surgeries and medical interventions, especially for children and adolescents, to affirm gender identities that do not correspond with their biological sex, is clearly unethical. From a Christian perspective, the physical and psychological well-being of individuals, particularly vulnerable children, is paramount, and the long-term impacts of such interventions are woefully missing in today’s discussions about gender.
Implications for Education and Social Policy
The influence of gender ideology on education and social policy, as indicated by the support for sex education programs that teach gender fluidity from a young age, is another pressing concern.
Christian Anthropology values the upbringing of children in ways that align with Biblical teachings, including the understanding of gender and sexuality. The introduction of concepts that contradict these teachings in educational settings conflict with the rights of parents and the church to guide children in accordance with their religious beliefs.
The promotion of SSI departs from Christian teachings on gender and human nature.
Many thanks to Jennifer Bilek for alerting us to the dark forces behind this movement.