What Is Man?

[Doug Shaver]

No Doug I said if "we" (humans) alone make these decisions then how can you know who is objectively correct?

That was not the question you asked in post #100.

And by the way, I asked you at one point if by "we" you meant human beings. Your response, in post #151, was "No."

[NormATive]

You're better than this, Norm...

No wait, you aren't, who am I kidding? Oh well, carry on with your mischaracterization and distortion of seer and his standpoint then. Obviously you prefer doing that instead of actually engaging with his position.

I think Seer is handling himself quite well. He doesn't need Crawnus to come to the rescue.

NORM

[NormATive]

If you would learn to read what is written you would have noticed that Seer was being sarcastic. People with Downs are of worth, not because you see it, but because God made them that way. No one, least of all Seer, is claiming that Downs is sin. You trying to equate Downs with homosexuality is the only place sin comes into the picture.

This has been a very long discussion. You butting in in the middle without context doesn't help, Jedidiah. Seer was doing fine on his own.

NORM

[NormATive]

It is not speculation Norm. When I'm resurrected and give account for my deeds to God - who is that Norm? Me or someone else?

I don't know. What does the Bible say?

It doesn't matter Norm, as far as I know the Bell and Weinberg study was the most comprehensive study done on the issue. If you have a more comprehensive study please link it. And it is not "People" magazine per-se it is about the interview with Dr. Bell. And remember Bell and Weinberg were working with the Kinsey Institute - hardly a bastion for religious or cultural bias.

I read the whole thing. It was an article written by a freelance writer for People Magazine - in 1978!!!

I don't need to provide any studies. If you recall, you are the one who made the statement. YOU back it up - with something from this decade at least. For cryin' out loud - EVERYTHING was different in the 70s. Besides, that sample was 997 individuals (including gay and straight) in SAN FRANSCISCO. C'mon Seer!! You can surely do better than that. There have to be contemporary bigots you could find. Don't be so lazy.

I have know personally a number of gay women who were in committed relationships (life long). Actually family members. Two of them were baby sitting my granddaughter just last week end. And have been to my house many times. This has not been the case for most of the gay guys I have known - most of them were rather promiscuous.

Given what you have said in this thread about homosexuals, how can you in all good conscious leave your children with those monsters? So, the problem in your mind is with men only? Hmmm. How does that work given your Biblical bias against homosexuality? I wasn't aware that it said only homsexual sin between males was an abomination.

Well you are obviously irrational. Not sure what caused it though - perhaps the fact that you turned your back on your Creator. Sin will have that effect.

I'm hardly irrational, Seer. You are just grasping at straws.

You are the one who said it is what we DO that make us worthy. So now you are changing your tune. And BTW Norm I worked with the mentally handicapped (including those with Downs) for ten years as a Group Home manager. So spare me your sanctimonious outrage. Talk about feeling superior! You are guilty of the very same thing you accused me of.

What is it about Downs Syndrome people that makes them less worthy in your mind? YOU are the one who brought that up. My worldview would NEVER call that sin, as Christianity and Judaism once did. It's just another kind of human condition.

That was a real cheap shot, Seer. I'm very disappointed in you. I thought you were better than that.

NORM

[Tassman]

It is not speculation Norm. When I'm resurrected and give account for my deeds to God - who is that Norm? Me or someone else?

Your delusional ideation about a deity existing and corpses reviving is speculation based upon legend; you have no credible evidence to argue otherwise.

It doesn't matter Norm, as far as I know the Bell and Weinberg study was the most comprehensive study done on the issue. If you have a more comprehensive study please link it. And it is not "People" magazine per-se it is about the interview with Dr. Bell. And remember Bell and Weinberg were working with the Kinsey Institute - hardly a bastion for religious or cultural bias.

officially

Really Norm? I have know personally a number of gay women who were in committed relationships (life long). Actually family members. Two of them were baby sitting my granddaughter just last week end. And have been to my house many times. This has not been the case for most of the gay guys I have known - most of them were rather promiscuous.

Oh really! Well I was fairly promiscuous before settling down into marriage. Most young people are promiscuous - as seen by the high rate of births out of wedlock. Are gays any different? Why are they pressing for the right to marry if promiscuity is their preferred lifestyle?

Well you are obviously irrational. Not sure what caused it though - perhaps the fact that you turned your back on your Creator. Sin will have that effect.

By and not your right to judge other citizens of a secular, multicultural society and demand that they conform to your personal religious values.

Come on Norm. You are the one who said it is what we DO that make us worthy. So now you are changing your tune. And BTW Norm I worked with the mentally handicapped (including those with Downs) for ten years as a Group Home manager. So spare me your sanctimonious outrage. Talk about feeling superior! You are guilty of the very same thing you accused me of.

But you do

[JonathanL]

I think Seer is handling himself quite well. He doesn't need Crawnus to come to the rescue.

NORM

You're correct, seer doesn't need me to come to the rescue, which is why I'm not doing that. That doesn't mean I can't call you out on your distortion of seer's position though.

[JonathanL]

What is it about Downs Syndrome people that makes them less worthy in your mind? YOU are the one who brought that up. My worldview would NEVER call that sin, as Christianity and Judaism once did. It's just another kind of human condition.

That was a real cheap shot, Seer. I'm very disappointed in you. I thought you were better than that.

NORM

Is it irony when someone takes a cheap shot at someone while simultaneously accusing them of taking a cheap shot, or is it just hypocrisy?

[seer]

I don't know. What does the Bible say?

The bible says that we, you, me, I, give an account to God for our deeds after we, you, me, I, are resurrected. I am not giving an account for what you did Norm, nor are you responsible for what I did. I am me, and you are you.

I don't need to provide any studies. If you recall, you are the one who made the statement. YOU back it up - with something from this decade at least. For cryin' out loud - EVERYTHING was different in the 70s. Besides, that sample was 997 individuals (including gay and straight) in SAN FRANSCISCO. C'mon Seer!! You can surely do better than that. There have to be contemporary bigots you could find. Don't be so lazy.

Like I said if you have have a more comprehensive study please link it. Oh wait - perhaps there isn't one. Do you really think male homosexual behavior has changed that much since the study? Why would it?

Given what you have said in this thread about homosexuals, how can you in all good conscious leave your children with those monsters? So, the problem in your mind is with men only? Hmmm. How does that work given your Biblical bias against homosexuality? I wasn't aware that it said only homsexual sin between males was an abomination.

Are you completely ignorant Norm? We are all sinners, and I am called to love all men. To be gracious and kind, the best I can, by God's grace. And at bottom all sin is an abomination - including and especially my own. No, I do not agree with their life style, nor gay marriage but J+L understand that, but that doesn't prevent us from having a warm and genuine relationship. And I trust them.

I'm hardly irrational, Seer. You are just grasping at straws.

No, actually you are Norm. This is what happens when you turn your back on the source of all wisdom and rationality - The God of scripture, and His Son, Christ Jesus.

What is it about Downs Syndrome people that makes them less worthy in your mind? YOU are the one who brought that up. My worldview would NEVER call that sin, as Christianity and Judaism once did. It's just another kind of human condition.

That was a real cheap shot, Seer. I'm very disappointed in you. I thought you were better than that.

NORM

See Norm you are irrational. I said no such thing. Just the opposite. All men are created in the image of God, and loved by God. No matter the physical or mental defects. We all carry that divine stamp, and are therefore equal on that basis. You are the one who said that what makes a man worthy is what HE DOES - if that is the case then those who are born with such defects have little chance of becoming worthy in your world.

BTW - where does scripture say that all such defects are sin?

[seer]

That was not the question you asked in post #100.

And by the way, I asked you at one point if by "we" you meant human beings. Your response, in post #151, was "No."

Wrong again Doug. In the context it was we as human beings. But that can't be the final word since it is completely subjective. One opinion is no more correct or valid than its opposite. That is why I said that for an objective source for human worth we must appeal to God. That explains the distinction in the two posts you linked. But Doug, I suspect that you already knew that - and you again are just stalling. Why don't you stop playing games.

[seer]

Nonsense Tass, if their "pariah status" caused gay men to be more promiscuous then why in the same study didn't it cause gay women to be more promiscuous? They generally had the same number of partners as heterosexuals, and had committed long term relationships. Your logic is faulty.

And here is a study published in 1997

http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.230...21104105231097

"In their study of the sexual profiles of 2,583 older homosexuals published in Journal of Sex Research, Paul Van de Ven et al., found that only 2.7 percent claimed to have had sex with one partner only. The most common response, given by 21.6 percent of the respondents, was of having a hundred-one to five hundred lifetime sex partners."

Paul Van de Ven et al., "A Comparative Demographic and Sexual Profile of Older Homosexually Active Men," Journal of Sex Research 34 (1997)

BTW Tass, in your world what is wrong with gay bashing? It is just natural reaction - correct?

[NormATive]

The bible says that we, you, me, I, give an account to God for our deeds after we, you, me, I, are resurrected. I am not giving an account for what you did Norm, nor are you responsible for what I did. I am me, and you are you.

You are still not addressing the original question. How do you know that you will recognize your wife and family members based on scripture?

Like I said if you have have a more comprehensive study please link it. Oh wait - perhaps there isn't one. Do you really think male homosexual behavior has changed that much since the study? Why would it?

I did not make the claim. You did. So, you have to prove your claim. You tried to using an article you pulled (probably the first one you Googled) that turned out to be from People Magazine in 1978.

There was this little thing called AIDS (maybe you've heard of it?) that changed the sexual habits of EVERYONE. So, yes; you need to find some bigoted statements from this decade Seer. Quit trying to make me do your work for you. Are you this lazy at work?

Are you completely ignorant Norm? We are all sinners,

That's a matter of opinion, not objective thought.

And at bottom all sin is an abomination - including and especially my own. No, I do not agree with their life style, nor gay marriage but J+L understand that, but that doesn't prevent us from having a warm and genuine relationship. And I trust them.

How do they feel watching your children knowing that you hate who they are?

Homosexuality (as your referenced academic, Dr. Bell from 1978, maintains) is not a choice. It is how one is born, i.e.; created by G-d. You believe that G-d either screwed up or created evil people whom he would have to condemn?

This is what happens when you turn your back on the source of all wisdom and rationality - The God of scripture, and His Son, Christ Jesus.

That's your ONLY source for wisdom and rationality.

My source for wisdom is the G-d of the Tanakh, the Talmud, and many philosophers, poets, musicians, writers and loved ones and mentors.

See Norm you are irrational. I said no such thing. Just the opposite. All men are created in the image of God, and loved by God. No matter the physical or mental defects. We all carry that divine stamp, and are therefore equal on that basis. You are the one who said that what makes a man worthy is what HE DOES - if that is the case then those who are born with such defects have little chance of becoming worthy in your world.

I'm trying real hard not to trade insults, Seer. No need to characterize me as irrational just because I disagree with you.

I don't determine the worth of a human being by what they do or can't do according to some chart of normalcy (as does your book by separating mankind into sinners and saints). I never said that. You only interpreted it that way. Go back and reread it. As much as you claim to believe you think all men are created equal, as soon as they draw breath, they become sheeps and goats in your view.

I don't see it that way. I think that each one of us determines our own worth. Therefore, to the Downs Syndrome person; they define their own worth. It is up to us to accept them as they are (even though our religions have taught us in the past that people who are different are sinful or cursed).

NORM

[NormATive]

Nonsense Tass, if their "pariah status" caused gay men to be more promiscuous then why in the same study didn't it cause gay women to be more promiscuous? They generally had the same number of partners as heterosexuals, and had committed long term relationships. Your logic is faulty.

And here is a study published in 1997

http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.230...21104105231097



Paul Van de Ven et al., "A Comparative Demographic and Sexual Profile of Older Homosexually Active Men," Journal of Sex Research 34 (1997)

Nice try, Seer. You are at least moving up a couple of decades.

However, if you look closely at the documents you are referencing, they are interviewing OLDER men (in their 50s and older) thus, the same demographic in the 1978 study.

In 1978 I was 19. I am now 55.

When I was 19, I was far more sexually active with multiple partners. It was "the NORM" at that time (chuckle!).

If you keep reading, you will discover that YOUNGER homosexual males have drastically changed their sexual habits due to AIDS education and changing social norms.

Try again!

NORM

[Doug Shaver]

Why don't you stop playing games.

I don't believe I'm the one playing games. It does seem, though, that we should terminate this one. We'd both be wasting our time continuing it.

[Tassman]

Nonsense Tass, if their "pariah status" caused gay men to be more promiscuous then why in the same study didn't it cause gay women to be more promiscuous? They generally had the same number of partners as heterosexuals, and had committed long term relationships. Your logic is faulty.

And here is a study published in 1997

http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.230...21104105231097



Paul Van de Ven et al., "A Comparative Demographic and Sexual Profile of Older Homosexually Active Men," Journal of Sex Research 34 (1997)

BTW Tass, in your world what is wrong with gay bashing? It is just natural reaction - correct?

You mean actual

[firstfloor]

This seems relevant. He is talking about the Matt Slick/Matt Dillahunty debate. Minds and Jet Engines
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rk1d7...CDF2E1&index=7