True.

Also true, and I can see how that could cause offense if I'm wrong about it. But keep in mind I just meant 'dogmatic' as a description of what one's position is based on - as in, any position that is based primarily or entirely on religious doctrine. (Wiktionary tells me that dogmatic can also mean 'Asserting dogmas or beliefs in a superior or arrogant way' - that I certainly didn't intend to say).

Okay, I will rephrase that by adding one word: 'gender reassignment surgery and Christianity is not necessarily an either/or deal'. Obviously I can see that for many people it would be.

You didn't say it, but I did see that implication, must have been a misunderstanding then. This was based on your paragraph regarding 'do what makes you happy', which you were arguing is a dangerous attitude because emotions shift from one day to the next. Given the context of what we were discussing, that sounded to me like you were suggesting some people did it, or wanted to do it, on a whim.

Harm in the sense of an invasive physical surgery - yes, that's the price to pay, which they wouldn't do if they didn't consider it worth it. Harm to others, to a degree that it would be a serious factor in the balance, I don't see except in very specific circumstances.

But yes, this is what the whole debate boils down to - arguably we could've skipped all the preceding steps and immediately jumped to the question whether gender reassignment is a good thing, for those longing for it, or not.

Having read an implication that you didn't intend before, I will ask it point blank before assuming anything this time: is it your intention to imply that, as a rule, gender dysphoria is 'a lie' and that transgenders' feelings about gender reassignment are inherently 'in error'? If not, maybe you should rephrase a few things there.

If yes, then I don't really think there's any point in continuing this discussion, do you?