How Leelah's likely suicide muddies the waters of sexual identity

Sexuality confusion

Religion and ethics profess at their core the need to embrace the good in life and in others. However, faith groups, in rejecting science, also dismiss the essence of what scientists view as creation and what makes everyone unique. The scientific view of human behaviors and how they develop includes those with sexual differences, like Leelah Acorn, a transgender teen, who apparently committed suicide rather than face a world in which stereotypes were used to condemn her.

Acorn's parents belong to a segment of Christianity that opposes anything other than male-female sexual relationships, believing also that the way one physically appears at birth must be maintained to fit with the Biblical view of the world, albeit one that does not accept the sciences that attest to biology and genetic principles. Those principles maintain that there are genetic differences that may impact how one interacts with others and how one perceives oneself as well.

Leelah Acorn's parents were quoted byCNN as saying concerning their daughter, born with the physical features of a boy, whom they had named Josh, saw herself as a girl and wanted to live as a female, "We don't support that, religiously," "But we told him that we loved him unconditionally. We loved him no matter what. I loved my son. People need to know that I loved him. He was a good kid, a good boy."

Often it is the Old Testament verses that are quoted in the condemnation of sexuality that is apart from what many people believe or perceive as mainstream thought and the right way to live, which is maintaining one's sexual identity to match the physical features as one is born and to form marital bonds with those of the opposite sex.

Leelah could not live in that world. She had been reminded that her views and hopes as a transgender individual were against the laws of God. However, those laws, if one examines religion in the view of God's creation as something that is not meant to be static, often conflict with science.

In a treatise called “The Biological Basis of Sexual Orientation” the writer examines the studies done on twins and studies of hormonal changes that demonstrate that biology plays a major role in how we perceive our sexuality. The article cites scientific references in concluding, “The facts presented with both the genetic and hormonal hypotheses can account for the reports of ever-present feelings of homosexuality in very young individuals, regardless of environment or choice. Such information should be considered heavily before accusing homosexuals of being uncivilized, and antagonistic, seeing as it is a natural phenomenon occurring biologically without the person having a say in the matter.”

There are, however, views that counter this reference and maintain there is scientific evidence that an individual can intentionally change their sexual orientation. Dr.Robert Spitzer's ideas are cited as the basis for determining that people who adopt a definition of themselves as homosexual or transgender can, after receiving what some devotees of the counseling style refer to as “reparative counseling.”can change.  In other words the mission is to “repair” one's perception of himself or herself to conform to the standards of what the therapists theorize is appropriate. 

Those who oppose gay marriage and sexual orientation not in line with what is deemed either the religious or social normative behaviors cite research either from the Bible or from theorists such as Spitzer to support their ideas. Those who maintain that sexual identity is developed from changes in the brain and hormonal differences rely upon scientific research as well, with the additional view that God's creation is an evolving one that allows for uniqueness. This presents the wide view that corresponds with science that man's dominion over his earth permits him to learn more about his world over time.

Religion interfered with the potential of Leelah Acorn's parents to examine both points of view and to sort out opinions that might have provided a foundation for their child born Josh to be Leelah in the way she lived her life.

But they won't ever know, and only believe, as others with similar views. They may neither read nor accept any of the scientific reasons why their child had her own view of herself and why compromising that view by disallowing her certain social relationships and requiring her to receive counseling that supported the notion that she was living a sinful life not only was a principle reason for Leelah's death, potentially suicide, but muddies the mirrors in which other young people perceive themselves.