They want to evolve the definition of masculinity. Masculinity is masculinity. If you want to call the non-masculine males something else have at it. What a crock.
Printable View
They want to evolve the definition of masculinity. Masculinity is masculinity. If you want to call the non-masculine males something else have at it. What a crock.
?????
Sounds like MSNBC propaganda to me.....
AFAIK a bonobo is a small monkey.
People who want to redefine the facts of life for political ideology already have a name: doofuses.
Given the other thread, I’m am surprised you can only name one propagandist lol
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doc
perhaps its the newest gender???
a man who identifies with being a woman who is a lesbian, but trapped in a primates body
This country needs an enema 😨
How many genders are we up to now? 35? 40?Quote:
Originally Posted by Doc
Dumbasses.
Apparently it is an on line clothing manufacturer. They are now advertising evolving the definition on their website and on ESPN.Quote:
Originally Posted by CitizenBBN
To be clear, Gender specific is limited to male and female to me.
And speaking of monkeys.... Darwinism may be the greatest hoax in history.
we agree on the gender thing. Not sure if the Darwinisn/evolution was a sarcastic dig at the religious right. I hope so....but if thats what you (and they) believe then great. Everybody has right to their opinion. Its one of the few things that is yours, and something the govt hasn't taken from you yet. Wish the same approach was taken with the money I earn, the health care I purchase, the food I order, what I use to drink my soda, how I protect myself, etc....Quote:
Originally Posted by kingcat
The only thing more laughable than these guys from the commercial talking about the definition of masculinity is them trying to say they are manly in spite of not being that.
Why make that commercial.
No sarcasm here. Many things evolve, man did notQuote:
Originally Posted by Doc
OK, no problem. Im an evolutionist rather than a creationist although believe creation was directed by a higher order.Quote:
Originally Posted by kingcat
I do believe in the slow evolution of Cain's offspring into normal human form. He was marked as different from normal men at the beginning.
I also believe that by divine intervention, (likely during Noah's time) the beginning is actually much farther in the past than commonly accepted.
Side tracked but...My take is that Scripture is 100% accurate and the true Word of God. Humanity's interpretation, as our ability to live according to God's law, is flawed.
I hate to get too much into how old is the earth as some who take the Bible literally want to discuss the age of the planet. That issue is extraneous to the point that my God created Earth and human beings and everything else.
The side debate takes away from the essential message.
I also think that science and religion both are separate journeys to discover objective truth. Imagine a scientist and a person of faith each traveling through a separate maze. The path is winding--sometimes leading to a dead end.
But each maze leads to the same end point or exit. That to me is God who asks both the scientist and the person of faith, "what took you so long?'
original question: i have got no freakin idea.
evolution: accepted science. Disprove the theory of evolution or the theory of relativity, win the Nobel. Immediately. Do it. Use the scientific method to do it. Win big. Have your name in every biology book forever.
Science cant even disprove the Easter bunny. But I have my doubts.
As for evolution, I do believe it exists in nature. But man is not and has not evolved from lesser beings.
That science is only supported by claiming to know all of the facts, which man does not. There are beings which have existed similar to man. There have been giants. There have been superhuman offspring. There is time travel and time manipulation at work from the beginning to the end of biblical history.
Accounts of the dead, (Moses) the transported, (Elijah) and Diety (Christ) who lived thousands of years apart together before the Crucifixion.
Much of science operates on the premise those things do not exist. That's because if they do exist, their approach is flawed from the outset. And if that is accepted as truth another conclusion would be just as believable to those wishing to prove the unprovable.
In other words, the theory of the evolution of man only exists in the absence of truth and knowledge.
As to my point about the second man Cain, because he committed murder The Creator marked him. And I believe He marked him by making him appear less than a man. interbreeding would then explain fallacy in the science of evolution. As could any number of scenarios.
Yet ultimately we must have certain actions blotted out of our history to see God and finally know the truth.
No clue about Bonobos. If I had to guess, it would be someone crapping their pants at Bonnaroo. Nothing scientific about that guess.
For those that enjoy the creation/evolution stuff. The Creation Museum is a neat visit. They have a very literal interpretation of creation from the Bible. If that offends you and just can't get past that, then don't go. I'm not as literal as they are, but I enjoyed it there. They offer insights to both sides. Obviously, they don't believe in evolution.
"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." - Albert Einstein
"All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force... We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent Mind. This Mind is the matrix of all matter." - Max Planck
To think we think we understand all of creation by studying a tiny speck in another speck in a speck of a galaxy in one of many universes is totally ridiculous.
And the absence of being visited by life far in advance of our own many times over is a virtual impossibility, given the size and age of the universe.
And if that life doesn't immeasurably exist within our universe, the proof of Divine creation is even more obvious.