Physical Address
304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124
From the beginning of creation, the testimony of life has been binary in its reproductive foundation. Male and female, sperm and ovum, hardware and firmware aligned in the covenantal witness of biology. Across the vast expanse of species, this binary is the rule, with rare exceptions where reproduction occurs without pairing, through fission, budding, fragmentation, or parthenogenesis. By rare we mean one percent. These exceptions do not create new genders; they are alternative reproductive strategies. The witness of creation is clear: sex is biological, reproductive, and stable. The testimony of the inhabited world confirms this foundation.
Yet within humanity (only), there emerges a distinction between hardware and firmware. Hardware is the biological substrate: chromosomes, gonads, hormones, gametes, and anatomy. Firmware is the psychological and cognitive layer: perception, attraction, identity, and narrative self-concept. When firmware aligns with hardware, as in heterosexuality or innate biological same-sex attraction, it is discovered, not chosen. Attraction emerges naturally, coherently, and without voluntary selection. This is the testimony of orientation, biologically rooted and consistent with embodied existence. The firmware fits the hardware.
When firmware does not align with hardware, as in “gender identity” (psychological gender) incongruence, the phenomenon is psychological. It is uniquely human, arising from symbolic cognition, language, and culture. No chromosome makes a person think they are another sex. No hormone exposure has been proven to cause a man to conclude he is a woman. Correlations in brain structure do not establish causation. The origin is psychological, not biological. The firmware does not fit the hardware. This incongruence is not observed in other species. It is a human phenomenon, born of cognition and culture, not biology.
The distinction is clear. Sex is hardware, biological and binary. Orientation is firmware aligned, innate and discovered. Identity incongruence is firmware mismatch, psychological and uniquely human. Chromosomes and hormones do not cause identity incongruence. Neurological correlates remain speculative. The origin is psychological. This is the forensic verdict.
Mental illness is defined by dysfunction, danger to self or others, or inability to function. Many individuals with identity incongruence live stable lives, sustaining jobs, relationships, and responsibilities. They are not inherently pathological. Distress may exist (from the “world” we live in), but pathology is not presumed. Clinical frameworks now separate identity incongruence from disorder, addressing distress without redefining sex. Functionality disconfirms broad-stroke labels of illness. The phenomenon is psychological, but not pathological.
The analogy of race exposes inconsistency. If a person identifies as a race they are not, society calls it delusion. If a person identifies as a sex they are not, society calls it identity. Skin phenotype is biological, not social. Treating sex differently from race exposes logical inconsistency. The analogy reinforces sex as biological substrate, not negotiable identity. It is a stress test that reveals the weakness of euphemistic arguments and delusions of “political correctness.”
Species witness confirms the verdict. Across creation, sex is binary, orientation varies, behaviors differ, but identity incongruence is absent. Only humans exhibit the psychological phenomenon of believing themselves to be another sex. This uniqueness points to psychological and cultural origins. Biology sets hardware constraints: culture and cognition sculpt firmware variability. The testimony of creation is consistent: sex is biological, orientation is innate, identity incongruence is psychological.
Scripture confirms the foundation. In Bereshit (Beh-ray-sheet) — Genesis, it is written: Original: בָּרָא אֱלֹהִים אֶת־הָאָדָם זָכָר וּנְקֵבָה Transliteration: bara Elohim et-ha’adam zakhar u’neqevah Literal Meaning: created Elohim the human male and female
The covenantal witness is binary. Male and female, zakhar and neqevah, hardware aligned with firmware in creation’s testimony. Orientation emerges within this framework, discovered not chosen. Identity incongruence is psychological, not biological. The forensic clarity is preserved.
With that said, the staggering prevalence of individuals who identify with a gender incongruent to their biological sex demands serious consideration. Estimates place the number in the millions worldwide, with more than two million in the United States alone. Among younger generations, the percentage rises even higher, with nearly five percent of young adults identifying as transgender or nonbinary. When a phenomenon reaches this scale, it cannot be dismissed as a rare disorder. Rare pathologies do not scale to millions; recurring human realities do. The sheer numbers themselves testify that identity incongruence is not an isolated delusion but a widespread psychological reality woven into the fabric of society.
The definition of pathology requires dysfunction, danger to self or others, or inability to function. Yet the majority of these individuals live functional lives. They sustain employment, pay bills, form relationships, and contribute to their communities. This functionality disqualifies the blanket label of mental disorder. While distress may exist in some cases, pathology is not inherent to the condition. The prevalence combined with functionality points to identity incongruence as a psychological category rather than a pathological one. It is a reality of human cognition, not a disease outbreak.
The uniqueness of humanity lies in symbolic reasoning, narrative identity, and cultural frameworks. These capacities allow firmware—the psychological layer—to diverge from hardware—the biological substrate. The staggering numbers demonstrate the power of psychology to shape lived reality. Even when firmware does not fit the hardware, it can still drive behavior, self-concept, and social belonging. Culture amplifies visibility, but culture does not create the phenomenon. In societies where identity categories are recognized, more individuals articulate their incongruence. In societies where they are suppressed, the experience remains hidden but not absent. The prevalence shows that identity incongruence is not a cultural invention but a recurring human cognitive pattern.
The forensic verdict is clear. Millions of people cannot all be suffering the same rare pathology. The prevalence itself is evidence that identity incongruence is a recurring psychological reality unique to human cognition. The firmware may not fit the hardware, but the human being remains sacred. The staggering numbers demand compassion, for they testify that this phenomenon is not an aberration to be dismissed but a reality to be understood.
The conclusion must be proclaimed with compassion and truth. Regardless of how a person thinks of themselves, they are human beings and deserve to be treated as such. Individuals of psychological gender have basic human rights. At the least, they are entitled to dignity; at the most, they are our mothers, fathers, sons, daughters, brothers, sisters, friends, and fellow citizens. They are people and deserve to be treated as such. They do not pose a danger to themselves or to society. They simply want to live as they identify. Ignorance fears what it does not understand, and what is not understood will never be understood if no attempt is made. Whether one agrees with the concept of gender identity or not, it remains a reality to the individual who feels the firmware does not fit the hardware.
Two worlds cannot be forced upon one another. They cannot compel each other to live within the same framework. Yet they can live side by side respectfully. Standing on beliefs does not prevent standing together. Religion does not condemn them; Scripture does not speak of them. Ignorance condemns itself. The world and its inhabitants are unique. That uniqueness is an understatement. Within the vastness of creation, diversity is woven into the fabric of existence. The binary of sex is foundational, the nuance of orientation is real, and the psychological phenomenon of identity incongruence is uniquely human. Yet all are human beings, deserving of dignity, compassion, and respect.
The closing proclamation is this: The firmware may not always fit the hardware, but the human being remains sacred. The testimony of creation is binary, the nuance of biology is dynamic, and the uniqueness of humanity is profound. Worlds may differ, but they can stand side by side. Beliefs may diverge, but people can stand together. The covenant does not condemn them, ignorance condemns itself. The world is vast, its inhabitants are unique, and that uniqueness demands compassion.
