Abstract

Carol Bayley’s double-effect reasoning in defense of sex-reassignment surgery fails at the opening. The first condition of the principle is that the act in itself must be morally good or at least neutral. She says, without argument, “the surgery itself is neutral.” How so? The surgery is a direct assault on the physical integrity of a person whose sexual organs are perfectly healthy. Is it reasonable to say that a person who wants to change gender has a body that is in fact seriously deformed or diseased? Where is the evidence? If reality is defined by the mind, then the imagination may freely think of personal identity in any conceivable way. Nature is set aside and in its place is put, at best, a delusion and, at worst, an ideology that seeks to do violence to nature. Catholic hospitals should not participate in this assault upon God’s creation.