Those Pesky Scientists Just Keep Closing Those Gaps

[hblask 1]

Alcoholism is a disease. Ask the scientists.

I don't think that's really a scientific position, it's just something people say to make it sound serious. There is a genetic component to alcoholism, but not to the extent that it qualifies as a disease in any traditional sense of the word.

[hblask 1]

How many leave the country and go where it's more easily attainable? Not to mention that it doesn't account for those who just became better at not being caught. This isn't a thief or a drug addict, these guys are generally gregarious, move about easily in society, etc. I would imagine that the numbers of those who just upped there game is off the charts.

If you have some data backing this position I'd be interested in hearing it. I could just as easily make up arguments about why pedophiles are more *frequently* caught.

[hblask 1]

<br />If humanity is not born in sin, wouldn't we expect there to be some people who have "beaten the odds" and never sinned?

<raises hand>

[LongLiveYorke 38]

The number of convicted child pedophiles that serve time and then molest again is 80%.So they must be 'naturally' attracked to children.Should we re-evaluate the act of molestation because it's not a choice for them?

Thus the slippery slope.

These posts miss the point. I really don't care that much whether homosexuality is genetic or not (well, I do care, but for the sake of my current point, it's irrelevant).The validity of an act shouldn't be judged based on whether or not it is a choice or not (whatever that means since the line between the brain's chemical and physical makeup and our abilities to think and make decisions are is as blurred as it gets).What matters is whether or not the action is harmful to society. Clearly homosexuality in no way hurts a member of the general public or in any way limits his rights. So, who cares if it's a choice or not.(Of course, as HBlask was trying to point out, this is the religion thread, so the idea of it being a choice or not could be related to how god would view a homosexual as a sinner. But, personally, I couldn't care less about this aspect of the argument. If you do, then feel free to ignore my post).

[LongLiveYorke 38]

I don't think that's really a scientific position, it's just something people say to make it sound serious. There is a genetic component to alcoholism, but not to the extent that it qualifies as a disease in any traditional sense of the word.

I disagree. The body of an alcoholic processes alcohol in a different way and it effects his brain differently than that of a normal person. He's cursed to both lust after something and at the same time have that thing be the cause of his own demise. It's very Greek Tragedy in a way. Of course, anyone with enough willpower can choose to do whatever he wants, so that aspect of it exists as well. Monks can choose to remain still and silent when burning themselves alive. It all depends on how much "choice" you think a person needs to have in order to be blamed. And there's really no way to quantify that.

[hblask 1]

I disagree. The body of an alcoholic processes alcohol in a different way and it effects his brain differently than that of a normal person. He's cursed to both lust after something and at the same time have that thing be the cause of his own demise. It's very Greek Tragedy in a way.

This is the interesting part of it. It sits right on that border of the definition between behavior and disease. A big part of the problem is that "alcoholism", the genetic condition, is only a disease if the person allows it to wreck their life. I know someone who comes from a family of alcoholics and is predisposed to it herself. She drinks daily, she drinks alone, she drinks to relieve stress... she's got all the signs. Except for one thing. She doesn't let it harm her life. So what's the difference between that person and someone who drinks a glass or two of red wine each day because of its health benefits?It's further complicated by the fact that it's not a toggle switch -- yes, you have this gene and are alcoholic, or you don't. It's a broad continuum of a combination of how the body processes alcohol, how the mind craves alcohol, the person's willpower to not ruin their life, and the environment they live in. All of these can be weak or strong factors or anywhere in between, and they combine in a way, so that, for each individual, it's hard to know whether it's genetically irresistible or just a choice they made.Based on all that, I personally conclude that it's not a disease as much as a predispostion of varying strength. I don't think science has the ultimate answer to this question yet. The "alcoholism as disease" model mainly comes from psychology, which is not exactly medical science (the type of science I'm talking about). It's useful as a therapeutic model.So yeah, I can't say I'm strongly on one side or the other of this, I just think that a big part of the success of the alcoholism-as-disease model is as an excuse for lack of discipline. Yes, it's harder for people with a certain genetic condition, but that doesn't excuse wrecking lives.

[Loismustdie 0]

The bolded is very ironic coming from a guy that professes to know the truth and yet rejects it. By your our admission you said that you do not currently have the Holy Spirit in you (I don't agree but whatever). If the Holy Spirit isn't in you and you aren't even saved currently, where are you getting your sound judgment about scripture? Because it's not God, and the things you say are (rightfully) not given the time of day. (by me) When you decide that God is important enough to even put the slightest amount of energy into caring about, let me know. I'll start caring about what you're saying again.Also, I never said that your kid should burn. You are just using propaganda to try to win your argument since you have no Biblical basis for your thoughts. I know that God is gracious and that he is just. That alone is enough for me to not worry about it.You're attitude of thinking that you know the absolute truth about God without Biblical validation is like you saying that you know everything there is to know about money. (I know that was tongue in cheek, but you get the point) You are being foolish to think that your insight is valuable when your insight isn't coming from the Holy Spirit.

Who said I didn't have the Holy Spirit? I never said that. And, once again, it comes down to what amounts to extremely easy judgement calls on how God thinks. It is clear by the scriptures we have and the lack of scriptures we have that God did not intend for children to be worrying about there salvation. (This is that whole "where the bible is silent we are to" thing would come in. Not the opposite way. This very angle is what makes it, literally,the easiest judgement call to make by anyone who knows the bible.) So, do as you please. Like I have said before, it doesn't matter to me if you reject truth. It should matter to you, but that's your call. And, as far as using propaganda- what? I broke down your position for what it really is. That's not propaganda, that's just saying, "Hey, you realize this is what you are saying by taking this position?" and then illustrating it for you. You are just bothered by how psychotic it makes God look and have no answer for it, which is appropriate,because there is none. Your position is wrong.

[brvheart 1,752]

Who said I didn't have the Holy Spirit? I never said that. And, once again, it comes down to what amounts to extremely easy judgement calls on how God thinks. It is clear by the scriptures we have and the lack of scriptures we have that God did not intend for children to be worrying about there salvation. (This is that whole "where the bible is silent we are to" thing would come in. Not the opposite way. This very angle is what makes it, literally,the easiest judgement call to make by anyone who knows the bible.) So, do as you please. Like I have said before, it doesn't matter to me if you reject truth. It should matter to you, but that's your call. And, as far as using propaganda- what? I broke down your position for what it really is. That's not propaganda, that's just saying, "Hey, you realize this is what you are saying by taking this position?" and then illustrating it for you. You are just bothered by how psychotic it makes God look and have no answer for it, which is appropriate,because there is none. Your position is wrong.

What is my position then? Because as far as I can tell by reading my own posts, I said that God is just and gracious and that I believe kids and/or retards are heaven bound. We are talking about our sin natures, then you keep changing the subject as if I'm saying that kids should burn. I've never said that, in fact, I've said and believe just the opposite."Acts 16:31 Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved, you and your household."Also another one of your "extremely easy judgment calls" about baptism saving you is another thing that basically every Biblical scholar on Earth disagrees with. I had a class with an atheist teacher who broke down the language throughout the New Testament and showed why isn't ridiculous that people would believe that. But you won't listen, because there is no way youre wrong... even if you are.

[Loismustdie 0]

What is my position then? Because as far as I can tell by reading my own posts, I said that God is just and gracious and that I believe kids and/or retards are heaven bound. We are talking about our sin natures, then you keep changing the subject as if I'm saying that kids should burn. I've never said that, in fact, I've said and believe just the opposite."Acts 16:31 Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved, you and your household."Also another one of your "extremely easy judgment calls" about baptism saving you is another thing that basically every Biblical scholar on Earth disagrees with. I had a class with an atheist teacher who broke down the language throughout the New Testament and showed why isn't ridiculous that people would believe that. But you won't listen, because there is no way youre wrong... even if you are.

Lol... so, the atheist teacher disagrees. Classic. Officially done with you as of today. My time is much more valuable.

[brvheart 1,752]

These posts miss the point. I really don't care that much whether homosexuality is genetic or not (well, I do care, but for the sake of my current point, it's irrelevant).The validity of an act shouldn't be judged based on whether or not it is a choice or not (whatever that means since the line between the brain's chemical and physical makeup and our abilities to think and make decisions are is as blurred as it gets).

I totally agree with this.

Who said I didn't have the Holy Spirit? I never said that.

Your church gets weirder to me with every post you make. How can you say you DO have the Holy Spirit living in you and that you are unsaved and hell bound at the same time? That makes zero sense. Please explain.

[brvheart 1,752]

Lol... so, the atheist teacher disagrees. Classic. Officially done with you as of today. My time is much more valuable.

That's fine, I won the argument anyway. How is an atheist who studies the Bible every day in the original language a worse source of information than a guy that God wants to spit out of his mouth?"Rev 3:15-16I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either one or the other! 16So, because you are lukewarm—neither hot nor cold—I am about to spit you out of my mouth. "I think it's terribly unwise to close your mind to any insight you can gain from any source. All you have to do is check what you've heard with the Bible. Easy-Peasy, Lemon-Squeasy.

[brvheart 1,752]

Lol... so, the atheist teacher disagrees. Classic. Officially done with you as of today. My time is much more valuable.

What's my end game here? If I quote theologians you say that they don't understand the Bible. If I say an atheist Religious Studies professor, you say he's atheist. If I say what I think, you say I read the wrong books and go to the wrong church (even if I'm just quoting a Bible verse). The only comments you accept are things you say or things that one particular pastor in your particular church says. Everything else on Earth is garbage to you. It doesn't matter to you if the Bible says it. If your church doesn't say it then it doesn't matter. It doesn't matter to you that in John 3 Jesus explains salvation so easy that a child could understand it and yet doesn't even mention baptism. You still think that baptism is required. It doesn't matter to you that Jesus says that the robber on the cross will be in heaven, even though he obviously couldn't be baptized. You are blinded by your ego. If you can't have a conversation with someone without throwing a temper tantrum and saying, "I'm not talking to you anymore"... then whatever. I'll be here when you stop throwing your fit, ready to talk.

[Ron_Mexico 4,219]

Mexico brought up a good point- he has never seen a retarded homosexual. Me either. Now, I do see retarded straights getting frisky at Subway. Makes me wonder if maybe even the handicapped mind knows that a normal relationship would consist of the one that perpetuates the species. I don't have any fake science centers backing my research but I am well funded.

I was kidding. I'm sure full blown retards don't have many sexual thoughts and connections. They may mimmick something by playing touchy feely, but may or may not discern between being frisky with a guy or girl. All I know, they just like to bowl.I bowled for about 15 Saturdays in a row with a huge group of retards and they all seemed pretty indifferent to sexuality.(on a serious bit, I joking say "retards" on the web, but they are very sweet, innocent people and I do pity them and envy them. They're simple, but sometimes simple ain't so bad)

It's a sad day when not one person replys with a post that includes the word 'mirror'I suspect you are beginning to wonder why you bother...

you motherfu...HOW DARE YOU!!!!

OK, so for people who think homosexuality is a choice -- the implication of this is that you, yourself, are equally attracted to both men and women, but have just *chosen* to be attracted to the opposite sex.For me, personally, it is not a choice. I have never been attracted to men and do not have the choice to be attracted to them. I have to conclude that people who believe homosexuality is a choice are really bi-sexual, but choose to pick one side or the other. For most people, though, they are born attracted to one side or the other.

this is well said. I've never heard it put that way before.but I will blow a guy if the girl in the threesome is super hot. Wait, maybe homoness is a choice.

The Bible condemns lust, even if my neighbors wife is Anna Nalick and she is mowing her lawn naked and I think that naked women are awesome to look at.

Dude, if Anna Nalick is mowing the lawn naked and you don't lust after her, you should just kill yourself, because your life ain't worth living. I posted her singing acoustically in the sick thread the other day. I'd never really seen her before, but now I'm the president of her fan club.

no but instead of locking them up forever we might consider therapy combined with drug-induced castration.

no. Simply put, no. And for a guy that's going to law school, I hope this was a joke, even though you posted it twice. The law and the court system is far from perfect and you can't risk something like this.My mother has worked for a judge for 20 years and some of the stories are awful. One quick one. A kid, 19 I think, had a 16 year old g/f. The parents of the girl got the guy charged with statutory rape, kid had a bad Public Defender, took a plea. The judge told the kid in open court that it was a bad plea. Kid took it thinking it would be over. For the rest of that kids life, he has to register as a sex offender. It's not all black and white. You can't go around lopping balls off.

I don't think that's really a scientific position, it's just something people say to make it sound serious. There is a genetic component to alcoholism, but not to the extent that it qualifies as a disease in any traditional sense of the word.

alcoholism has never been proven to be genetic but I do think addiction might be a disease. It's tough. I could probably go the rest of my life without ever having another drink. I'd be sad about it, but I think I could do it. Buuuut, ask me to do that with red meat, I couldn't do it. Am I addicted to red meat? That's a bad example, but I don't think that there is any concrete data regarding addiction.I always said "he should just have more willpower" but who am I to talk, I'm tubby. It's hard, but chemical? Who knows?

[CaneBrain 95]

no. Simply put, no. And for a guy that's going to law school, I hope this was a joke, even though you posted it twice. The law and the court system is far from perfect and you can't risk something like this.My mother has worked for a judge for 20 years and some of the stories are awful. One quick one. A kid, 19 I think, had a 16 year old g/f. The parents of the girl got the guy charged with statutory rape, kid had a bad Public Defender, took a plea. The judge told the kid in open court that it was a bad plea. Kid took it thinking it would be over. For the rest of that kids life, he has to register as a sex offender. It's not all black and white. You can't go around lopping balls off.alcoholism has never been proven to be genetic but I do think addiction might be a disease. It's tough. I could probably go the rest of my life without ever having another drink. I'd be sad about it, but I think I could do it. Buuuut, ask me to do that with red meat, I couldn't do it. Am I addicted to red meat? That's a bad example, but I don't think that there is any concrete data regarding addiction.

I think you dont understand what I meant. chemical castration would be an absolute last resort for those who had shown that they have no control over their pedophilia. Not as a first time solution but when someone has been put away for pedophilia on several occasions.....its an interesting solution to look at. obviously, its not ideal.

[Ron_Mexico 4,219]

Ok, but only after 3 convictions and only if the person admitted guilt. But, if you do your research, I think that procedure has proven ineffective.