Some Schmo wrote:For 50 dollars, can you name an intended genetic condition?
Yeah. A heartbeat. And about a billion other things. In your mind does anything significant hang on the question of whether or not there is such a thing?
Really? A heartbeat, huh? And who's intention was that, exactly? Oh, that's right... the genetics'.
I guess genetics are little gnomes sitting around in a room planning their next mutation.
God belief is for people who don't want to live life on the universe's terms.
maklelan wrote:In your mind does anything significant hang on the question of whether or not there is such a thing?
Man, I can't stop laughing at this question. It's as though mak has been completely absent for the entire intelligent design/god-guided evolution debate.
You can't buy organic laughs like that.
God belief is for people who don't want to live life on the universe's terms.
Some Schmo wrote:Man, I can't stop laughing at this question. It's as though mak has been completely absent for the entire intelligent design/god-guided evolution debate.
You can't buy organic laughs like that.
That's lovely, but you're not answering my question, you're just trying to deflect it with more juvenile rhetoric. I am always willing to respond to others' direct questions. I would appreciate it if you could at the very least show me that same basic courtesy.
Some Schmo wrote:Man, I can't stop laughing at this question. It's as though mak has been completely absent for the entire intelligent design/god-guided evolution debate.
You can't buy organic laughs like that.
That's lovely, but you're not answering my question, you're just trying to deflect it with more juvenile rhetoric. I am always willing to respond to others' direct questions. I would appreciate it if you could at the very least show me that same basic courtesy.
And I would appreciate if you got a GED so you at least have shot at knowing when someone's answered your question, young'un.
God belief is for people who don't want to live life on the universe's terms.
Some Schmo wrote:Really? A heartbeat, huh? And who's intention was that, exactly? Oh, that's right... the genetics'.
I guess genetics are little gnomes sitting around in a room planning their next mutation.
Not conscious intention. Human genes contain data that exist in order to effect rections and mechanisms that contribute to the homeostasis and propagation of a human. Genetic code has an intended product, result, or outcome. It has intention. Do you wish to contend this point?
Some Schmo wrote:And I would appreciate if you got a GED so you at least have shot at knowing when someone's answered your question, young'un.
I'm sorry my education is not up to your standards, but just rhetorically insisting you answered my question when you demonstrably did not does not really back up your pretended condescension. I asked a direct question, and you've avoided answering it three times now in the interest of just rhetorically blowing raspberries. Is this really how you hope to show that you have the moral and intellectual high road, here?
Some Schmo wrote:Really? A heartbeat, huh? And who's intention was that, exactly? Oh, that's right... the genetics'.
I guess genetics are little gnomes sitting around in a room planning their next mutation.
Not conscious intention. Human genes contain data that exist in order to effect rections and mechanisms that contribute to the homeostasis and propagation of a human. Genetic code has an intended product, result, or outcome. It has intention. Do you wish to contend this point?
I think you are going to have to do some serious philosophical work on intention to get out of this one.
Perhaps you could start with a fuller explanation of unconscious intention by an item that has no cognition.
And I'm thinking you're ABD, not GED
"And the human knew the source of life, the woman of him, and she conceived and bore Cain, and said, 'I have procreated a man with Yahweh.'" Gen. 4:1, interior quote translated by D. Bokovoy.
maklelan wrote:I'm sorry my education is not up to your standards, but just rhetorically insisting you answered my question when you demonstrably did not does not really back up your pretended condescension.
"Demonstrably did not answer it?" Really.
Well please, by all means, let's see that demonstration.
God belief is for people who don't want to live life on the universe's terms.
maklelan wrote:Not conscious intention. Human genes contain data that exist in order to effect rections and mechanisms that contribute to the homeostasis and propagation of a human. Genetic code has an intended product, result, or outcome. It has intention. Do you wish to contend this point?
So by this definition, I suppose data sitting in a database intends to be queried. Is that it?
(Hey look everyone! It's an "intention" apologetic. How about that!)
God belief is for people who don't want to live life on the universe's terms.
bcspace wrote:Around 30% of sexual abuse is homosexual. Far out of proportion to the percentage of their numbers in society.
By all means, point me to the studies that bear this statistic out. And I hope you aren't conflating pederasty and homosexuality (in the sense predominantly used contemporaneously) in this number, wherever it came from. That's a separate psychological issue.
I am also interested in where this statistic came from.
However, beyond the statistic, my point was that the article portrayed ALL men in a horrible light as far as being able to "keep it in their pants" when they are in a leadership role with kids!
