Can God cure as well as kill? Should God kill or cure?

IOW, you cannot show any objective moral tenet and that made you mean spirited.

You were mad at yourself and took it out on me.

Regards
DL

 

Lol twisting and squirming

 

No sign of any kind of genetic problems I'm glad to say. But I'm no fan of Richard Dawkins and I think the 'selfish gene' hypothesis is simply incorrect - a good exmple of populist 'science' at it's worst. - like you Dawkins is mainly a polemicist, the difference is he's skilled at it, whilst your attempts all seem to fall flat.

I don't 'venerate' either.

 

Okie is a much better advert for his progressive Christianity than you are for your imaginary gnosis.

 

If it is not a selfish gene driving us to be the fittest, a catch all for reproduction and leadership, what is your correct hypothesis?

Now you play with definitions like a child. Thanks for refusing to show your position. Take your skirt off and let a child take that seat in the lifeboat.

Regards
DL

 

That was not the issue but thanks for showing hate instead of intelligence.

Regards
DL

 

Believing in a supernatural creator/force or acknowledging the possibilty doesn't include a form of veneration or worship by default.
Your 'conclusion' is unneccesary, ludicrous and insincere (as usual). Thanks for playing

 

This is priceless coming from you

 

To call a gene 'selfish' as Dawkins does, is a projection of a kind of emotion onto cellular material the function of which is simply to code for protiens. It is a kind of attempt to popularize science by 'anthropomorphizing' the genes.

You've already identified yourself as a believer in pseudo-science anyway with the notion that past life memories are somehow 'encoded in the genes'. I doubt that would get far if you ran it past Richard Dawkins.

You're just throwing these purile and ill considered insults because you are not capable of putting forward any kind of cogent argument. But it isn't going to work. Every fresh outburst just makes you look more and more silly and petulant.

I've already stated my position as a follower of yoga philosophy, and a person with a wide ranging interest in the spiritual as it has manifested in many different times and places.

 

We were not talking of God. Thanks for playing the wrong game.

Regards
DL

 

I said no such thing that I can recall. Get the quote please.

Let me repeat since you seemed to have missed this.
If it is not a selfish gene driving us to be the fittest, a catch all for reproduction and leadership, what is your correct hypothesis?

Are you talking miracles?

Regards
DL

 

Uhm, it was all coming forth from the father complex stuff which was about God. Why venerate a gender? How was BBB playing with definitions exactly there then, and on what is he exactly refusing to show his position on?
I don't know why i bother asking this. You get a lot more respect from your convo partners than you either deserve or dish out yourself

 

The only one who is playing with definitions here is GreatestIam. It's a miracle people are still reacting to your content in depth and with sincerity.

 

Think of the logic of women and children first, in the law of the sea, and you will see why women and children should be venerated above men. I think the same should be applied to the law of the land, with an exception for equality under criminal law.

Regards
DL

 

I'm not trawling through all these recent posts to find it.You said it and I commented on it. I'm pretty certain others will recall it because you were so reticent in telling us how you believed the Cathars understood reincarnation.

Just denial won't help. You think you can just chop and change as you like, but as noted, it simply makes you look more and more foolish. Or maybe you have some kind of brain dysfunction where you really can't recall what you said.

 

So why did you project the same on BBB and connect unneccesary conclusions to it? What's the use of that?

 

I opined. I did not say I believed my opinion. I do not believe guesswork.

I actually thought you were thinking of that baby experiment link that shows how our selfish gene defaults to cooperation instead of competition when we are born, which is information but not so much a map with roads as a more vague map. Think of that wording as allegory to whatever is really passed down to us in our genes.

Regards
DL

 

What unnecessary conclusion, and why the hell do I need to explain my style instead of my content?

Need I repeat, ---

Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people. Eleanor Roosevelt

If you want to get in such a low level conversation, let's do.

You three do not seem to have any form of altruistic end game to what you are doing in this site, other than wasting time and looking for a cheap win to debates.
All while I debate hard but wish to lose and actually gain something from being here. Is my impression correct?

Regards
DL

 

It's some kind of vain attampt at insulting me personally I assume . Probably that's why he told me to 'take of my skirt'. But really to my mind, that itself, as a form of insult says enough about the kind of person one is dealing with.

 

Wriggle wriggle wriggle.