Estiar

I don't think that's the case

Matthew 19:12 NRSV [12] For there are eunuchs who have been so from birth, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Let anyone accept this who can.”

Jesus mentions two types of eunuchs here. Those who are made, and those who are born as eunuchs. The latter, those who are born as eunuchs are what we today call intersex people.

Intersex people have ambiguous sex characteristics and are born that way. Intersex people make up around 1.7% of the population, around the same amount as people who have red hair. They are pretty distinct. Sometimes they can have male genitalia and female sex hormones, while still others can have ambiguous genitalia. Others still have male chromosomes when being phenotypically female.

Not every one of these was included in the term Eunuch, as they aren't always visible traits. But many of these traits were visible so they were seen as distinct from men. Oftentimes they're born that way.

(An aside while it's on my mind, Jesus tells us that marriage is overrated in this passage. I think we neglect our single church members a lot, seeing as there doesn't seem to be much space for them outside of the context of marriage. And this passage says that marriage isn't for everyone)

Acts 8:27-28 NRSV [27] So [Phillip] got up and went. Now there was an Ethiopian eunuch, a court official of the Candace, queen of the Ethiopians, in charge of her entire treasury. He had come to Jerusalem to worship [28] and was returning home; seated in his chariot, he was reading the prophet Isaiah.

Here's a story about a eunuch returning home from Jerusalem. Eunuchs back then were seen as 'between' male and female. They were able to go between the men's Chambers in the women's Chambers freely, and so they were very useful in courts. Not all Eunuchs were in the courts though.

According to church tradition this very Eunuch founded the Ethiopian Church. And so it is very possible for non-binary people to be followers of Christ.

Of course we can't fall into the pitfall of applying modern sexuality and gender theory on ancient cultures, as they have a very different set of social institutions.

Some theologians of years past have suggested that the passage which is alluded to in Genesis might have a different meaning.

Genesis 2:23 NRSV [23] Then the man said, “This at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; this one shall be called Woman, for out of Man this one was taken.”

This taken in conjunction with the passage that you quoted, can be interpreted very differently. Woman was taken out of man, meaning that Man was once both male and female at the same time, and yet perfect as all of God's creation was.

Jesus never explicitly condemns Eunuchs or other groups of gender non-conforming people. I would not take this passage to exclude everything else from the life giving blood shed for us on the cross

I'm a Christian! Did you know that the church in Ethiopia was started by a non-binary person? Gender and sexuality used to be very different social constructs in biblical times and modern views on gender and sexuality didn't come around in full force until around 300 years ago.

It's a real shame that the church in general tends to reject the LGBT community. Science has shown over and over again that sexual identity and gender identity are inherent parts of people, and it makes no sense to me how God can hate something that he designed.

"biological male" is if anything bad description of reality. A trans woman who has been on hormone therapy for a couple of years is biologically closer to cisgender women than cisgender men. And even more so if they've had surgeries. But usually people who use that term don't care and lump everyone who was assigned male at birth into that category.

I could attribute this term to ignorance because it sounds reasonable, but it's far too often used to exclude trans women from spaces that other women belong

Yo. I don't blame you. Border crossings are twice as hazardous and the US Government is hostile to foreigners. If I weren't American, I would think that too. As is, I kinda want to flee to Scotland

My unit was probably a 70-30 split favoring liberals, but it probably varies. My unit was on the more techy, college educated side. Different jobs attract different people

The maine Governor is pretty based. She's currently in defiance against Trump's executive orders targeting civil rights for some citizens and is fighting them in court

These planes aren't used often. They're strategic bombers and the most expensive of America's bombers too. Both in per flight hour cost and absolute cost

The B2 spirit is primarily made for the nuclear deterrence and warfare role. They are designed to penetrate air defense systems by being stealthy, A concept that was proved by the f-117 Nighthawk.

But since they have a heavy payload they're also used to drop conventional bombs occasionally. When you have to service a large amount of targets or use really big bombs, A strategic bomber is the go-to solution. They used B2 in this case for what my guess is these reasons

• stealthy means they can get past radar systems and they can shrink any warning time
• The B2 is the only plane rated to carry the gbu-57 bunker busting bomb. The facilities they were trying to destroy were fortified, so most other bombs wouldn't work.

They're being ordered to do these things? No National guardsman wants to do domestic stuff. It's not like this is a disaster relief operation. They're being used as pawns in domestic politics. Something that they are trained to stay out of.

Honestly wearing a black wedding dress would be fucking awesome. I'm having a lesbian wedding anyway, so I could add some spice.

I thought that the Russians liked genocide. They have been pursuing policies of russification for centuries

The pictures literally date back to then. That's so much denial.