But animals have multiple genders

You're not an animal

In the City of God, Augustine said that the further a man runs from God, the more he becomes like the animals.

One of my favorite examples of specious reasoning in the gender debate is this one: Looking to some creature and saying that it reproduces without male/female or that some animal does not limit its sexuality to male/female mating.

Here’s the problem: we aren’t merely animals. Have you seen the gross things animals do? I won’t mention them here, but it includes eating their own refuse and even their own young. Just because animals do that (and many other discussing things), it does not follow that we must do it. From the mere fact of what an animal does, nothing follows for a human.

Unlike animals, we can and should ask “how ought I to live?” When a radical gender advocate claims that gender is a human construct and we don’t have to accept it, he is only stating that we have free will. Of course we do. But the same is true of his appeal to animal sexuality: just because an animal tries to mate with an inanimate object doesn’t mean we have to do so. We can and should ask “how ought I to life?”

Answering this question requires that we know what is good for a human. We can know for sure that living like an animal is not good for a human. The radical gender idealogy is like the first temptation: you can be as God determining good and evil for yourself. I’ll follow up on that line of thought in my next post.