That, however, is it. When Storm was born, the couple sent an email to the rest of their friends and family that stated: 'We've decided not to share Storm's sex for now — a tribute to freedom and choice in place of limitation, a stand up to what the world could become in Storm's lifetime (a more progressive place? ...).'
Now there are plenty of aspects of the article that are troubling, but I just have to ask, "Is it really that difficult to accept how God made you?"
The couple believe they are releasing Storm from the constraints society imposes on males and females. They claim children can make meaningful decisions for themselves from a very young age.
What about the created order? Think about it for a moment. The parents of this child did something. A male and a female came together in a way that is obviously a part of the created order and produced a child. Now to ignore the obvious truth that we are not able to change that (I know about all of the technological arguments that say otherwise or the feminists who would argue strenuously but their silliness aside...) is to further suppress the truth of God in unrighteousness. This kind of thinking is just further evidence of the great lengths mankind will go in their rebellion against their Creator.
As for the children making meaningful decisions, perhaps we should ask the child if he is mature enough to think his parents are fit for parenting? I mean seriously. Anyone who has had children or was once a child, knows that this statement is completely bogus. This kind of thinking is simply trying to help people believe they live in a world of fantasy in which they may control every aspect of their own destiny in an autonomous and absolute manner. Yet it doesn't take much to look down and know if you are a boy or girl. You can't control that any more than you may wish away the fact a tsunami wiped out a bunch of Japanese people recently. You can't wish away the reality that a hundred people or more were wiped off the face of the earth Sunday by a tornado. I wonder if these parents ever look at the world around them. When they see male and female dogs come together in that sexual way, do they ever impose the obvious upon the dogs, or do they allow the dogs the freedom to live in a world to choose which one is male and female?
Why force the boundaries of boy or girl? Why not open the choice to species. Perhaps the child will choose to be a dolphin.
The article seems to say that Mr. Stocker had some kind of epiphany.
There you have it. Those who can face bullying are well adjusted. Never mind that serial killers think themselves "well adjusted". In fact, they often feel great about themselves. Consider this statement from this article.
At first it was just a thought. Then Mr Stocker found an infamous 1978 book in his school library called X: A Fabulous Child's Story, about a genderless child named X who faces bullying head on, proving that he or she is well-adjusted.
You are not held back from any of your desires by guilt or shame, and you are never confronted by others for your cold-bloodedness. The ice water in your veins is so bizarre, so completely outside of their personal experience, that they seldom even guess at your condition.
In other words, you are completely free of internal restraints, and your unhampered liberty to do just as you please, with no pangs of conscience, is conveniently invisible to the world.
You can do anything at all, and still your strange advantage over the majority of people, who are kept in line by their consciences will most likely remain undiscovered.
Now I am not saying that this child will be a psychopath. What I am saying is that simply because someone stands up to bullying does not make a person healthy. Yes, there is a such thing as false guilt. But that is not always the case.
What this kind of child rearing really does is offer a worldview in which there are no parameters or moral framework. And yet this is being done in the name of a philosophy that while saying the world is what we make of it, it also say the Christian worldview is wrong. Yet how can that be?
To put it another way, could this child freely choose to say that he embraces Jesus Christ and His moral law as absolute? Somehow I doubt the child's freedom will be allowed to be that free. This is the problem with living in a fantasy world. It will eventually come crashing down.