Most everyone, it seems, judges and journalists included, shares a delusion that there are only two genders, and that those genders must pair to produce offspring. Anything else is "unnatural."

Dispelling this delusion will take more than a few column inches in a Slate comment. But I can offer a few "for instances" to whet reader's appetites.

Human genders are not binary. Genders exist on a very broad continuum from very male to very female, varying by genetic and environmental factors. There are lots of people with other than the usual XX or XY chromosomal pairings: XXY and XYY, for example, to whom gender is often an open question. There are people with unusual, but not exactly rare, genital configurations which defy binary categorization. The slush of hormones which defines gender, influenced by both genetics and environment, varies tremendously across the population, too, and that variance delivers a multitude of appearances and behaviors.

There are millions of mildly, and some not-so-mildly, feminized males, the result of ubiquitous exposure to industrially-produced estrogen-mimicking chemicals. There are men choosing to use medical science to become pregnant and bear children. There are people treating themselves with hormones and obtaining surgeries to alter their primary and secondary gender characteristics in every direction, amplifying their gender or even reversing it. There is a whole smorgasbord of sexual preferences among all of these varied people - and they all pretty much believe it would be irrational and unreasonable for society to require them to ignore their powerful feelings of attraction and marry someone who does not appeal to them, or refrain from marrying at all.

Are children harmed by being raised in a nontraditional pairing? No study that I've heard about has found that being raised in a nontraditional pairing increases the likelihood of a nontraditional gender identity, nor that the children in such unions are harmed by them more than in traditional marriages (some say less). Against that backdrop, why don't we just throw up our hands and say, if two adults want to form a stable, loving relationship within which to raise children, let them?

Is it asking too much of journalism, do you suppose, to acknowledge gender identity as more than a merely binary matter, and to slam those foolish enough to insist otherwise, be they on the bench or elsewhere? A healthy dose of biological reality would help to dispel the binary gender delusion that grips our foolish nation and propels an unnecessary, and utterly ludicrous, debate.

Science does not and cannot explain all things so lets get that out first. Mental illness, deformaties, disease, addictions and ugly sin in general are all part of our society and make up but does not make them acceptable or morally correct. We would make them all dissapear, well those of us in our right minds anyway if there were anyway possible but we can't so we deal with them as humanly as possible and help those who want help. Homosexuality is in the same category whether we like it or not and all your scientific mumbo jumbo does not change that fact. And also there is no scientific proof that homosexuality is inborn which you also failed to mention which would have been proven by now if it were true. It is a road we will all regret going down. And down is the direction we are headed if we don't remember where we came from and our purpose here.

Human biology does NOT, as Urgelt slyly claimed, support the claim of multiple biologically established sexual structures.

Human anatomy and physiology recognize only 2: male and female.

Hermaphroditism, the presence of both sexual, or partialities of both sexual structures, is NOT a separate sexual structure. Rather, it is abnormal combination of the two, usually with one dominating the other.

No MAN has ever been pregnant. The recent occurence of a person born and developed as a woman with female anatomy and physiology became pregnant. However, she took hormone treatment in anticipation of transgender surgery, so she had the facial upper body appearance of a male. It is slyly deceptive to claim she was a HE simply by facial appearance.

Western societies have led the world, encouraging the cultural development of acceptance of multiple sexual 'identities' being biologically based. But biology and culture are quite different eventhough pop psychology, anthropology and other social sciences have tried to bridge this gap.

Anyone can be anything anymore. They'll be transplanting cat eyes, horse tails and extra arms soon i bet. And just because something is possible (thru mistakes in nature or scientists messing with nature) doesn't make it ok or normal. Some animals are born with extra heads or legs, or arms. Humans even. Usually they like a lesser quality of life though, if they don't die. Doesn't make them normal, it's a mistake somewhere. Just like people born with male and female parts, doesn't make it normal, any thinking person would say no, that is abnormal.

Everyone is confused these days it seems, noone can figure out what gender they are, or they have a mishmash of male and female characteristics/body parts, the men act like women or the women act like men.... I know a guy who thinks he's a bunny rabbit!! For God's sake! It's getting ridiculous.