Est.2007

Barbados Underground

Bringing News and Opinions to the People

Banner promoting anonymous crime reporting with a phone and contact number 1 800 TIPS (8477), featuring the Crime Stoppers logo and a QR code for submitting tips.

The Homosexual Debate Continues to Simmer In Barbados

← Back

Your message to the BLOGMASTER was sent

CONTACT THE BLOGMASTER ONLY

joel_palefsky
HPV PREVENTION. Dr Joel Palefsky, an infectious disease expert from the University of San Francisco (left with Dr Mark Gilbert and Dr Natasha Press), told the gay men's health summit in Vancouver that all boys should be vaccinated against HPV. (Nathaniel Christopher photo)

The next general election is over two years away if held when constitutionally due. The health of the economy, freedom of information, integrity legislation and immigration issues we suspect will feature prominently on the next general election platform. Another issue we suspect will be on the list is one of morality, specifically homosexuality.

The members of the BU family who have been with us from our early days know the interest we have shown in homosexuality (do a search of BU using ‘homosexuality’ keyword). It is one of the pillar issues we feature from time to time even if of late it has not featured on the BU rotation with the same early frequency. Interestingly the subject of homosexuality is one which a high level of hypocrisy can be levelled in Barbados. Whether we like the Jamaican approach Prime Minister Bruce Golding has echoed the position of most Jamaicans, zero tolerance to batty men in his cabinet because he feels it does not reflect the public position. Jamaicans appear to wear the label of homophobic like a boy scout would wear a badge of honour.

In Barbados we have a long way to go regarding how as a country we want to deal with the issue of homosexuality. BU remembers very well prior to the last election listening to representatives of  the Democratic Labour Party (Dr. Byer-Suckoo) and the Barbados Labour Party (Reverend Joseph Atherley) dipsy-doodle around the homosexuality issue. In contrast Jamaicans are sending a clear message. Some Jamaican homosexuals are not being deterred and have started underground churches. The venom of Jamaicans directed towards homosexuals have forced many homosexuals in Jamaica to go underground. Stories of Jamaicans suspected of the homosexual lifestyle being publicly beaten by fellow Jamaicans are a matter of record.

The lobby by homosexuals to promote greater tolerance in our predominantly heterosexual and Christian driven societies is gathering momentum. This issue is not going away. The fact many believe homosexuality to be a deviant behaviour does not remove the fact that homosexuality has now become a civil rights mater. The reality that our societies are built on Christian values and by extension the socialization of our people will continue to build tension in the minds of the average Barbadian when confronted with the homosexual issue.

In a related matter we read with interest that  the prevalence of human papillomavirus (HPV) among gay men, especially those already infected with HIV. When you are HIV-positive virtually everyone has HPV,” Palefsky says. And gay men who are HIV-negative are still at high risk. This information was circulated at the Fifth Men’s Gay Summit held last week. The local medical and homosexual community should note the recommendation by Dr. Palefsky who is an infectious disease expert: Palefsky believes that all boys should receive a universal HPV vaccine before they are sexually active “because there’s no way to know who is going to be gay.

Alluded to above Barbadians need to start discussing the matter of homosexuality and how we intend to make the societal changes to accept this group of people who continue to be marginalized.  It would be unfortunate for some if we wait until the next general election to do so. To discuss the matter driven by political considerations will be unfortunate.

Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

350 responses to “The Homosexual Debate Continues to Simmer In Barbados”

  1. Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados) Avatar
    Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados)

    @Zoe, “DJ, you simple cannot deal with the cogent, well-founded, well-gounded, telling points of argument, so coherently presented” [If this is an example, I rest my case on the matter that little coherent material has been presented. A lot of words, often without too much real content. Thinking is what we are encourged to do as adults, not constantly needing to verbalise. Try to spend a few hours in a library and you’ll find a lot of quiet and profound thought going on. I’m happy to think more and write less.]

  2. Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados) Avatar
    Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados)

    @ Dictionary // December 2, 2009 at 11:48 AM “You will note on global push of dechristianisation that the Christian faith and the civilisation that it has shaped over 2000 years is the most widespread in the world, and the most influential.” [Utterly untrue, and if you want to cast aside the world that existed more than 2000 years ago, feel free. Many religions that had their bases 1000-3000 years before Christ are still going strong and are extremely influential. I suggest you widen your religious studies.]

  3. Dictionary Avatar
    Dictionary

    DJ

    Sigh.

    You are again twisting my words, to the point where your seriousness or comprehension are in doubt.

    You are sufficiently educated that you know, or should know better than you argue.

    Surely, you can do better than this.

    Onlookers, observe that DJ has simply failed to address the context, substance and implications of dechristianisation based on radical relativist evolutionary materialist secular humanism and associated movements in our civilisation.

    That civilisation, in turn, is both beyond reasonable dispute the dominant force in our world today, and is strongly shaped by the Judaeo-Christian tradition. [Indeed Western Culture as we know it today was a synthesis of the heritage of Jerusalem, Athens and Rome made by a certain tent-making rabbi from Tarsus in Cilicia.]

    Moreover, the attack on the moral core for our civilisation that has historically been provided by Judaeo-Christian theism over much of the past 2,000 years, will if successful replace a worldview that grounds morality in the only IS that can ground oughts — cf. my above remarks and links on the Euthryphro dilemma and on evolutionary materialism [notice how studiously such substantial issues are being ducked in the attempt to play at points-scoring distractive and dismissive rhetoric] — with amorality.

    That experiment was tried before, 2,400 years ago in Athens. The key individual concerned was a certain Alcibiades. Plato’s the laws, Book X, highlights the result; which was disastrous.

    And so, we must understand the fire the homosexual-ISTS — note my emphasis on an “ISM” — are playing with as they seek to de-moralise our civilisation through distorting or destroying marriage, family and the undergirding historic underpinnings for such institutions; to create a comfort zone for their addictive — and unhealthy — sexual preferences and habits. (And, I hasten to add, that I here distinguish people who may have and may struggle with same sex attractions and behaviours, from those who have turned this into a worldview and associated, patently destructive socio-cultural and policy agenda.)

    Of course this is but one prong among a great many in a broad-scale assault on the foundations of our civilisation; it is not even the most insidiously destructive prong.

    (That “honour” is reserved for the wrenching of science through the injection of evolutionary materialism, which is the root of a radical secular humanist, utterly and inherently amoral agenda.)

    But the homosexualist agenda is one of the prongs we must understand and take the measure of, and defend ourselves from, if our region is to be saved.

    It is no secret that I think the issue is in doubt [if we are lucky . . . ], and that I am very pessimistic for our civilisation at large.

    For our region, we just might have a chance.

    Might . . .

    But, will we take the strenuous and exceedingly painful and costly actions that will be required if we are to survive the rough ride ahead?

    That, sirs, is the question.

    On that, I have severe doubts, but not as severe as for the wider civilisation.

    G’day again

    Dictionary

    PS: I will make this prediction. If our civilisation survives the next 50 years, China wins. But, it is a China that is Prester John II, i.e. by then it will have passed the critical 25% Christian threshold — it is already at about 10% and growing fast — and that will make it oddly the new standard bearer of “our” civilisation. My bet — and it is a hunch not a certainty — though, is that well within that time, we will see the culmination of the vision of the statue in Daniel 2 as the stone cut out without human hands strikes and shatters the proud image of man’s kingdoms, and becomes a mountain filling the whole earth. Psalm 2 will therefore hold with double force, so let us learn to kiss the Eternal Son of the Ancient of Days!

  4. Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados) Avatar
    Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados)

    @Dictionary // December 2, 2009 at 2:32 PM “Surely, you can do better than this.” [I’m not sure. But what would it change if I did better? You do not give me the impression that I will change your views, and I can tell you clearly that your arguments wont change mine. That does not stop me pointing out flaws in what I see in your comments. It’s not a debating contest from which one will be declared ‘winner’. But I do find a need to not let what I see as a series of wrong or misleading statements just run. You obviously feel the same. So, we try to improve.]

    I try to read carefully, so bear with me if I get lost. For example, you write: “I will make this prediction”. Then in the same paragraph you add “My bet — and it is a hunch not a certainty”. Predictions, bets, and hunches are not all the same thing. So, I really have no clear idea what you are telling me. If I were a betting person, I would not know how to wager with you.

    I’ve no need for a reply.

  5. Zoe Avatar
    Zoe

    @Dennis Jones, I can safely say, that regarding the posts of Dictionary, you obviously don’t have a ‘clue’ what is going on, (knowledge) wise, on all of the subject matter, that he has briefly but competently posted, which is just one side of the coin, the other, IS, that you don’t understand the meaning of what constitutes ‘coherence’ ‘congruence’ nor logic in a well presented, factual case.

    The major problem with you, clearly, is that your are a ‘natural man’, [pseuchikos de anthropos] which the Word of God, states, (does not, rejects, refuses to accept) the things of the Spirit of God. Why is this so? Because, they are *foolishness* to him, nor can he know (understand) them, (Why not?) because they are spiritually discerned. (I Cor. 2:14).

    The ‘forces’ behind all that Dictionary has so ably and capably articulated, are in opposition to the Kingdom of God, in Christ, through His Gospel, forces that utterly hate the Truth and Light of God’s Word, and will blind men, even the intelligentsia are woefully ignorant to what is, in reality, transpiring, who sneer at Christ and Christianity in their own blinded ignorance, because they cannot know (ou dunatai gnonai), they are not able to get knowledge. Their helpness condition calls for pity in place of impatience on our part (Christians) though such a one usually poses as a paragon of wisdom, and commiserates the deluded followers of Christ, men of intellectual gifts who are ignorant of the things of Christ, talk learnedly and pratronisingly about the things of which they are grossly ignorant.

    The spiritually regenerated man, is on an entirely different level of knowledge, regarding these matters.

    But, we are warned by our Saviour and Lord, Jesus Christ, where there are numerous references to the *enmity* *hostility* and *opposition* which the secular world displays towards Christ, believers, and the Church, Jesus said:

    “The world…hates Me because I testify of it, that its works are EVIL” (John 7:7). He also made it clear that the world *hates* His disciples, because they are not of it (John 15: 18-19). The same theme is repeated in Jesus’ high-priestly prayer (John 17:14).

    The reason for the different understandings, IS that different *spirits* are involved. To the Spiritually regenerated man we are told:

    “Now we have not received the *spirit* of this world (system) BUT, the Spirit which is from God, that we might understand (comprehend, know) the gifts bestowed on us by God.” ( I Cor. 2:12)

    The clear unmistakable message which God here gives to those who are His, through Christ Jesus, and the indwelling power of the Holy Spirit, involves a mindset, a frame of reference, completely different, foriegn, from the world’s way of viewing and perceiving reality!

    It is just not a battle of the intellect, it goes way beyond this, it is a war that rages on in the realm of the ‘spirit’.

    “For we wrestle NOT *against* flesh and blood, BUT *against* principalities, *against* powers, *against* rulers of the DARKNESS of this age, *against* spiritual hosts of *wickedness* in the heavenly places.” (Eph. 6: 12) emphasis added.

    Note the preposition (pros) AGAINST these evil forces is used five times in this verse. ‘The world-rulers of this darkness (tous kosmokratoras tou kosmou toutou). This phrase occurs here alone. In John 13:30 Satan is called “the ruler of this world” (system) (ho archon tou kosmou toutou). In II Cor. 4:4 he is termed “the god of this age” (ho theos tou aionos toutou). These “world rulers” are limited to “this darkness” here on earth. “In heavenly places” (en tois epouraniois). Clearly so here. Our “wrestling” is with *foes* of evil natural and supernatural.

    Naturally, the ‘natural’ man, will scoff at this, mock it, for he cannot discern, comprehend it!

  6. Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados) Avatar
    Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados)

    @Zoe, I bow to your superiority in all things. I humbly hope that you will offer a course onto which I can enrol. I especially look forward to the course in concise writing, and hope that I can complete it painlessly. I would prefer if it were online to allow me to get on with my other activities. Looking forward to some proposed dates.

  7. Dictionary Avatar
    Dictionary

    Onlookers:

    It is sadly clear that no reasonable dialogue with DJ will be possible under the terms he has now so plainly set out. This is sad, but is ever so typical of our civiilisation’s current unhealthy status, where rhetoric ever more supplants serious discussion on the merits of the facts and logic of issues; towards the truth.

    We need to understand our times, and know what we of the Caribbean need to do.

    So, with a particular eye to the homosexualist agenda and associated issues and concerns, I note on some points:

    1 –> The rise of incidence and prominence of homosexuality and the associated homosexualist attempts to redefine marriage and family values are a part of a much broader de-moralisation and ongoing disintegration of our civilisation. in the broader context, this brings to mind the Apostle Paul’s warning tot he church in Ephesus:

    Eph 4:17 . . . I tell you this, and insist on it in the Lord, that you must no longer live as the Gentiles do, in the futility of their thinking. 18They are darkened in their understanding and separated from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them due to the hardening of their hearts. 19Having lost all sensitivity, they have given themselves over to sensuality so as to indulge in every kind of impurity, with a continual lust for more.

    20You, however, did not come to know Christ that way. 21Surely you heard of him and were taught in him in accordance with the truth that is in Jesus. 22You were taught, with regard to your former way of life, to put off your old self, which is being corrupted by its deceitful desires; 23to be made new in the attitude of your minds; 24and to put on the new self, created to be like God in true righteousness and holiness.

    2 –> In the narrower context, we must understand that the accelerating breakdown of morality, especially sexual morality in BOTH heterosexual and homosexual forms [and all sorts of other things are in train, e.g. bestiality . . . ] is a sign of how our culture has become morally benumbed and intellectually en-darkened.

    3 –> In slightly broader terms, as the senses of ever so many have increasingly been benumbed by a progressively deadened conscience and ever more jaded appetites, there is a trend to addiction to ever more bizarre forms of sensualist behaviour, in part to compensate for that loss of sensitivity.

    4 –> The result of such patterns is evident all around us, and is personally, familially, institutionally and socially destructive. So, we have to come to our senses and stop the madness before the march of folly utterly destroys our civilisation.

    5 –> On the principle of planks and sawdust in eyes, that starts with each of us. Let us look honestly at ourselves, starting with Internet, TV, magazine etc viewing habits and associated indulgences in sexual fantasies & self-stimulation and hankering for novel and increasingly bizarre sex. (E.g., I gather pornography is the no 1 single use of the Internet; which directly feeds the lust addictions.)

    6 –> Then, let us repent and seek counselling support, renewal of life and step by step reformation; with that empathy that understands what it is like to be trapped in sinful, addictive behaviours, and destructive habits.

    7 –> Circles of trusted accountability and mutual honesty will help; as has now become a more or less standard practice for recovery groups.

    8 –> Then, we can see how to work on reformation of the wider community, to slow down and if possible stop the rush over the cliff of amorality. We will also have built up considerable expertise and capacity to help the wider community.

    9 –> That starts with recognising how even in families, sexual chaos is propagated.

    10 –> For instance, years ago, I remember being near Collymore Rock and hearing a 12-YO girl explain why the porn magazine I had just confiscated from an 8 YO boy and destroyed was no big thing: “Some Fathers does make their sons watch to see how you does burse . . . mary jane.” [I got the distinct impression she was the girl who provided the hymen used for the “demonstration” in question. And, years later, when I spoke to a professional counsellor on the incident, he said that such behaviour was so out of the ordinary that it suggested that a real onward intent on the part of the man in question was to “do” the boys; having desensitised them to sexual behaviour (and to doing such things before an audience . . . could this be one of the sources for that rash of home-grown porno videos, including the “legendary” “snuff” ones? I shudder to think of what use was made of “anatomically correct” lollipops brought to my attention). God, have mercy on the victims of such abuse!]

    11 –> In short, bizarre and abusive sexual behaviour tends to come in clusters, and to propagate though abuse and exploitation of those whom one has in his power or can draw in through morally desensitising materials and behaviour. (I think this issue is still primarily one of men.)

    12 –> So, the key to the wider problem is to break the chain of propagation, starting with discouraging access to morally benumbing materials and helping those at risk. in this, our churches should become centres of compassion, refuge, renewal, liberation and rescue — which will be a natural result of dealing with the planks in our own eyes first. And, that includes those enmeshed in homosexual and other sexual sins and patterns of abuse.

    +++++++++++

    So, we all face a sobering challenge.

    But, with a whole civilisation at risk, we have little choice but to rise to meet it.

    Dictionary

    PS: I note, too, that P has not come back to us on the issue of circularity in the context of how the reality of God and the experience of supernatural, transforming encounter with him in the face of Jesus on the promises in the Scriptures makes the said scriptures self-authenticating to those who will reach out to the Eternal Fount of blessing. Millions over the ages and today — including many leading lives in our civilisation — have thus met the Living, Loving, but Holy God in the face of Christ. thus the chain of alleged fallacies P put forth collapses, and indeed turns in on itself. [For, it is not hard to find many shining examples of such transformed lives through encounter with the living God in the face of Jesus here in the Caribbean.]

  8. Dictionary Avatar
    Dictionary

    PPS: On Predictions and expression. DJ, observe I made a conditional prediction IF . . . THEN . . . . After that, I put up where my thoughts are on the trend breaker; that is I am betting the trend will not hold long enough for China to emerge in that role. But, if the breaker does not happen, China will be the leading power in the world in 50 years, but will be significantly diverse from our popular images due to the strong growth of Christianity in China; hence Prester John II. And, providing one understands conditionality in logic, and the issue of trends and trend breakers, that should be clear enough.

    PPPS: On the issue of “length” — hence the fallacious appeal to brevity as a criterion of implied soundness or being worthy of attention — complaints, I think we need to think about the issue of being long enough to be responsible in addressing an issue on the merits instead of emotional manipulation and ill-founded appeals to adherence to particular parties. One of the ironies of semi-popular discussions is that he soundest arguments are usually the least persuasive ones; because emotional appeals are both very persuasive and have no better warrant than the underlying logic and facts provide — which is precisely what is NOT being stressed in such an appeal. As Plato wrote in the laws, Book 10, on this, in the voice of Cleinas:

    . . . how often have we repeated already that on the present occasion there is no reason why brevity should be preferred to length; who is “at our heels”?-as the saying goes, and it would be paltry and ridiculous to prefer the shorter to the better.

  9. Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados) Avatar
    Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados)

    @Zoe and Dictionary, I like to fuel good discussion, and as I said, I am not fixated. You may want to read the following articles and think about how, if at all, they may affect your thinking.

    The NY Senate votes down legislation on same sex marriages, http://edition.cnn.com/2009/US/12/02/new.york.same.sex.marriage/index.html

    Actress Meredith Baxter confirms she is a lesbian, http://edition.cnn.com/2009/SHOWBIZ/TV/12/02/meredith.baxter.lesbian.mom/index.html

    What do we do about mice with 2 mothers? http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn18229-do-mice-with-two-mothers-spell-the-end-for-men.html?DCMP=OTC-rss&nsref=online-news

    In general, I would appreciate it if you did not treat things that you do not like as fallacies. Brevity and clarity are important in bringing along more people in a debate. Not everyone can deal with extremely long and convoluted arguments. I can, but I think of the broader body of readers and commentators.

  10. kiki Avatar
    kiki

    My pooter seems to have a MIND OF IT’S OWN…
    i get some weird biblical end of the world prophecy sayings it’s 11.55pm on the doomsday clock and we have 5 minutes left till the rapture and tribulation
    • Will there be a one-world system or global economy? Yes.
    • Will diseases increase such as AIDS & new ones appear? Yes.
    • Will alternate life styles increase, prosper & become accepted? Yes

    THE TRIBULATION is the worst time in history since man has been on the earth. Immediately following the Rapture, the man of sin (called the Antichrist) comes forth. It appears he assumes control of the EU. He can be expected to be very charismatic and brilliant. He confirms a treaty with Israel and others, which begins the Tribulation-ref. Dan 9:27.

  11. Dictionary Avatar
    Dictionary

    Mr Jones:

    When I have had reason to identify a flawed argument as fallacious, I have in each case taken time to show why. [But then, when I have done that you now reverted to accusing me of failing to be brief. Heads DJ wins tails Dictionary loses, nuh?]

    It is not merely a labelling of what I disagree with as a fallacy.

    My addressing of the circularity of P’s first argument above, is a case in point. So have been several of my responses to claims you have made.

    I would appreciate it if you would refrain form making further false accusations and strawmanised distortions.

    Good day

    D

  12. michael Avatar
    michael

    @ dennis jones
    “Your argument suggests that a minority group is being voted in repeatedly by a majority that opposes them. I cannot fathom that. If not then you’re saying that the electorate and the population is just a bunch of idiots who have no clue what they are doing.] ”
    IDIOTS
    when one is lazy and a person come to one and say I too share your concerns,I am running as a representative for,…what ever party….,will you vote for me? one say yes with out checking their back ground after these people are elected to government you find that they are also representative of another pressure group pushing an alternative agenda,
    I could not put this as good as Dictionary has put it,what i will say,it looks to me that Dennis has missed the point on legal precedent in law no one country or jurisdiction is an island to it self what happens in Anguilla today will be in Barbados Jamaica or even Australia tomorrow, but most of the time these precedents come from the larger countries

  13. Zoe Avatar
    Zoe

    “Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something.”
    -Plato

  14. Dictionary Avatar
    Dictionary

    A footnote:

    DJ has indirectly — he linked a speculative article on how cloned mice with two mothers live longer and so NS leads with: “If you believe some reports, the future of humanity is a super race of genetically-engineered women who can reproduce without men.” — invited us to address the logical breakdown inviolved in trying to infer from ISES of animal behaviour to the OUGHTS of human behaviour.

    To help us see the destructively amoral implications of the underlying logically incoherent and morally empty evolutionary materialist thought [and new Scientist is too often an advocacy rag for precisely this worldview, in the name of science], I will cite from Hitler’s Mein Kampf, Bk 1 Ch X:

    Any crossing of two beings not at exactly the same level produces a medium between the level of the two parents . . . Consequently, it will later succumb in the struggle against the higher level. Such mating is contrary to the will of Nature for a higher breeding of all life . . . The stronger must dominate and not blend with the weaker, thus sacrificing his own greatness. Only the born weakling can view this as cruel, but he after all is only a weak and limited man; for if this law did not prevail, any conceivable higher development of organic living beings would be unthinkable.

    The consequence of this racial purity, universally valid in Nature, is not only the sharp outward delimitation of the various races, but their uniform character in themselves. The fox is always a fox, the goose a goose, the tiger a tiger, etc., and the difference can lie at most in the varying measure of force, strength, intelligence, dexterity, endurance, etc., of the individual specimens. But you will never find a fox who in his inner attitude might, for example, show humanitarian tendencies toward geese, as similarly there is no cat with a friendly inclination toward mice . . . .

    In short, we cannot properly infer from the ises of hormonally imbalanced or otherwise defective or lab manipulated mice, to human moral standards of behaviour; for ises do not ground oughts, save in the case where the God of Creation is inherently good in character and creates a world which therefore reflects that moral principle.

    As to citing how some misled American politicians are seeking to redefine marriage without understanding the consequences [or worse, in some cases perhaps BECAUSE they understand and desire some of the consequences . . . ], or citing how yet another Hollywood star turns out to be a homosexual, that only underscores the pattern of the surging tidal wave of dechristianisation and de-moralisation penetrating our region from the north. [That is why in part I now refuse to pay EC$ 100+ per month for Cable TV moral filth. And, I refuse to watch CNN news anymore. We should, BTW, be aware that he lead host of 360, Mr Cooper, is a homosexualist advocate.]

    but, on the latter case on Ms Baxter, let us observe an point of contact with our region:

    . . . The National Enquirer recently ran a story about Baxter being spotted on a lesbian cruise through the Caribbean with a “female friend,” which was then picked up by celebrity blogs . . . .

    In short our tourist industry is one of he means by which our moral foundations are being corrupted from the North. (I recall a wave of threats of economic boycott, on cases such as in Nevis, where a shipload of 110 naked homosexual men were refused admission to port as a violation of public morality.)

    In short, we see yet another set of illustrations of the underlying problem. So, let us look at ways we can address it, starting with taking the planks out of our own eyes. [Cf my earlier comment today as one suggestion for a way forward.]

    D

  15. Dictionary Avatar
    Dictionary

    Footnote: response in moderation, perhaps because of a reference to herr Schicklegruber’s thought patterns.

  16. Avatar
    Anonymous

    The battle of the egos here.

    DJ vs Dictionary +Zoe

    Bets anyone?

  17. Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados) Avatar
    Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados)

    @Anonymous // December 3, 2009 at 9:49 AM “Bets anyone?”[Take my name out. I have already bowed to Zoe, and looking at Dictionary’s latest reply, I see that topsy can grow from anything. I merely suggested ‘You may want to read the following articles and think about how, if at all, they may affect your thinking.’ but got in response ‘DJ has indirectly — he linked a speculative article on how cloned mice with two mothers live longer and so NS leads with: “If you believe some reports, the future of humanity is a super race of genetically-engineered women who can reproduce without men.” — invited us to address the logical breakdown inviolved in trying to infer from ISES of animal behaviour to the OUGHTS of human behaviour.’

    I will watch the two person Zoe-Dictionary race to the end, if I am around.]

  18. Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados) Avatar
    Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados)

    @ Dictionary // December 3, 2009 at 8:07 AM Thanks for ‘A footnote:’ [I’m now truly speechless.]

  19. Dictionary Avatar
    Dictionary

    Onlookers:

    Observe that the onward responses above do not address substance substantially; now, as — sadly — expected.

    Motive mongering and strawmannish dismissive rhetoric, but no real addressing of issues on the merits.

    On the subject chosen for the dismissive remarks above, perhaps we should observe that:

    (i) what is — and can reasonably and freely be — done with MICE in a lab is not at all comparable to what ought to be done with people (unless some really serious moral questions have been seriously weighed and decisively answered).

    (ii) The elimination of an entire sex of humanity — what the NS article speculates about when it opens: “If you believe some reports, the future of humanity is a super race of genetically-engineered women who can reproduce without men” — not only:

    (a) raises the implication that the remainder of the race would of necessity be reduced to lesbianism [the other type of homosexuality], but

    (b) also raises very troubling issues on a type of genocide (wiping out half of humanity); and,

    (c) entails imposition of a ruthless tyranny to enforce it.

    Thus, again we can see through the exchange in this thread the need for a very serious rethink on how evolutionary materialist secular humanism, often in a lab coat, undercuts, dismisses and sometimes is simply hopelessly blind to serious moral issues.

    Which is also precisely the underlying issue on the ongoing attempt to homosexualise our civilisation, often under the false colours of the findings of “science.”

    In other words, some very serious reflections on morality, science and public policy need to be done, if our region is to effectively respond tot he homosexualist prong of the deChristianising tidal wave from the north.

    G’day

    D

  20. Dictionary Avatar
    Dictionary

    PS: And that is before we address fairly serioustechnical issues on the validity of suggested findings for mice. E.g. :

    “There were only 13 mice in each group, which were all relatively short-lived. In other experiments, females from the same strain have lived for an average of around 860 days – longer than both groups in the experiment. “This makes it trickier to interpret the claim that the bi-maternal mice are unusually long-lived,” says Richard Miller, who studies the genetics of ageing at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor.”

    [Junk science in pursuit of politically correct junk policy and duly propagated by the media spin machine, anyone? Sounds familiar? It should, indeed it should.]

  21. Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados) Avatar
    Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados)

    @Dictionary, when I mentioned fixation before you probably did not understand clearly what I meant…not least because we do not think the same. Fixation means that you tend to see what you are looking for in whatever you regard. To me, the danger is that you miss other things.

    When I spoke about brevity my mind was reflecting on what research shows happens when people read material online. Jakob Nielsen, a web-usability expert, says that “the online medium lends itself to a more superficial processing of information”. People surf and do not get deep learning from long online text. Nielsen noted that our focus moves around the screen in an F pattern. We start scanning horizontally, but soon drop down to see what else is there. By the time we are half way down a web page, we are tuning out. This is worse for things like blog comment fields.

    So, my point was simply that by offering very long expositions you were probably losing most of your readers, irrespective of what sense you felt you had to offer.

    Nada mas.

  22. Dictionary Avatar
    Dictionary

    Mr Jones:

    Whether or not many people skim rather than survey or even scan properly, the issues do need to be addressed responsibly on the merits.

    For, only soundly based decisions are safe. (And, in the real world, that often boils down to making sure the decisions are robust – or at least minimising of regret — across optimistic, pessimistic and moderate scenarios.)

    That is what I have set out to do.

    I find your switch of subjects just now interesting, now that I came back and addressed the specific application of the is-ought issue I had in mind in more details, given your evident failure to see the connexions.

    I trust we can get back to the substantial issue.

    G’day

    D

  23. Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados) Avatar
    Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados)

    @Dictionary, “only soundly based decisions are safe”? If you take only soundly based decisions you will be dead because they take too much time to process. Impulse and instinct are very important in ensuring safety and survival.

    “I trust we can get back to the substantial issue.” You cannot define for anyone other than yourself what a substantial (sic) or substantive issue is. We argue as we see issues, and that is quite varied.

    Time to figure out if there is another military coup in Guinea. That’s a substantive issue for me.

  24. Zoe Avatar
    Zoe

    @Dennis Jones, Your last post continues to exemplify the depth of your shallowness, and trivial disregard for serious matters, such as Dictionary continues to address, which you have NOT ONCE being able to offer any reasonable, cogent, valid objective argument against, BUT, rather, continue, as Dictionary correctly points out:

    “Motive mongering and *strawmannish* dismissive rhetoric, but no real addressing of issues on the merits.”

    DJ, seriously, any child could make the empty, barren, voidless, rhetorical dismissive remarks that you make; for it takes no effort of intellect to be so inconsonant, incongruous!

    And, this is again loudly confirmed by yet, another of your inept remarks.

    To Dictionary’s “…only soundly based decisions are safe” Your empty rhetoric was, “If you take only soundly based decisions you will be dead because they take too much time to process. Impulse and instinct are very important in ensuring safety and survival.”

    Man, this is precisely why so many are in such a state of delusion, deception, and folly, heading for the precipice of destruction, one way or the other, ignorant of so much that IS already on its way to overthrow their freedoms, in many areas of life that have been taken for granted.

    The encyclopedic mind of Dictionary, a man tremendously blessed of God with an incredible reservoir of knowledge and accurate, valid information, that we in the Caribbean should be grateful for, one of our ‘brothers’ a scholar ‘par excellence’ not only in Physics, but in many other disciplines, i.e., History, Philosophy, Logic, Theology, among others, a man who DOES NOT speak off the top of his head, but knows, understands, grasp, and is able to articulate any of his subject points, with amazing logic, objectivity, coherence, congruence, and, instead of being thankful and greatful for such an intellectual giant among us, what do we find here on BU, nothing but utter disdain, scorn and contempt, from the likes of DJ and others, a shameful and disguisting lack of common sense, in not being able to perceive truth and facts when presented by one like Dictionary.

    No wonder DJ et al, are unable to discern what really constitiutes *substantials* issues of our day, in light of what is so obviously well planned, for the social and family destruction of our civilization, and IS well under way, but, stupidly says:

    “You cannot define for anyone other than yourself what is substantial (sic) or substantive issues. We argue as we see issues, and that is quite varied.”

    Logic directs us how we ought to think, critically, pointing us away from faulty premises and erroneous conclusions.

    History IS replete with this attitude of humanity toward critical, objective, analysis of facts, evidence, and truth.

    Sadly, when most realize what IS in fact transpiring, IT will be too late to heed the warnings, that men like Dictionary , who are sounding the trumpet, are doing.

    Just like it WAS in the days of Noah, they all laughed and scoffed at this man of God, who WARNED the masses, NO one heeded his call to repent….BUT, it was too late when they saw what was happening, ….. it was TOO LATE!

  25. Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados) Avatar
    Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados)

    @Zoe, I already bowed your superiority. I am going to spend the evening trying to understand what ‘depth of your shallowness’ means.

    I will then turn to understanding ’empty, barren, voidless’, and if time allows try to tackle ‘it takes no effort of intellect to be so inconsonant, incongruous!’

    I cannot understand how my ‘inept remarks’ generate so much by way of response.

    But I will gladly sign up for teaching by ‘The encyclopedic mind of Dictionary’. I have time free coming so dates should not be a problem. I would prefer if I could do that in Barbados rather than have to travel to another island.

  26. Crusoe Avatar
    Crusoe

    Errr..should I say ‘Onlookers’?

    Blogger Dictionary above refers to ‘For, only soundly based decisions are safe. (And, in the real world, that often boils down to making sure the decisions are robust – or at least minimising of regret — across optimistic, pessimistic and moderate scenarios.)’

    But, then the same blogger uses as one basis of his argument, Hitler’s writings as ‘authority’?

    Bizarre! Not only in source of authority but in the paragraph chosen, which in itself is rooted in subjective thought.

    I am usually the last to use a criticism against the person, rather the argument, but must say, as a necessary exception, that here is surely one of those posts that exemplifies why the internet comes with a caveat, to filter what one reads because some of it (or much) comes from nutjobs.

    Totally bizarre really.

  27. Crusoe Avatar
    Crusoe

    Above ‘ is under ideological manipulation by radical and powerful homosexual-ISTS. People who have — for decades, back to at least the 60’s in sources I have seen — openly declared intent to undermine or even destroy the family itself ‘

    But, ‘marriage’ has never been that ‘big’ in Barbados per se, except for the Middle Class, surely?

    How many families have brothers and sisters from various couplings?

    Can we really rely on a statement that displays marriage as a cornerstone for the society when it never was?

    Surely the real cornerstone of Barbadian society has been matriarchal i.e. the mother and her sisters bringing up the children, while the fathers bring in money, but the mothers effectively run the homes?

    Bit of a devil’s adovate here, but surely this bears considering?

  28. kiki Avatar
    kiki

    sorry for not being totally p.c.
    just wanted to kill this blog fe dead
    Boom Bye Bye

  29. Dictionary Avatar
    Dictionary

    Crusoe:

    Pardon but you plainly have not read with due care and attention; to the point of utter twisting of what I had to say above on Herr H’s views.

    And, since I made it utterly clear that I was citing Herr H as a case of what NOT to do, your rhetoric is at best inexcusably careless of truth and fairness; at worst, it is downright dishonest.

    Cho man, do betta dan dat!

    I think if you would take a moment to look back above you will see I cite herr Schicklegruber — and BTW, how do I know to use that particular “real” family name? — as an example to AVOID of what goes wrong if:

    1 –> You adopt a mindset shaped by avant garde evolutionary materialist thought [ever since Alcibiades c 400 – 430 BC, if Plato is any guide!], including as packaged under the false colours of “science” and even if presented by credentialled scientists. (Cf the above linked cases on how some of the scientific, public relations and educational malpractices of today are beginning to unravel, e.g. the presently unfolding data cooking, journal publication rigging and IPCC manipulation scandal at the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit.)

    2 –> Thus, even if repackaged in neo-pagan terms [in the case of Schicklegruber, Aryan Man mythology as championed by Madame Blavatsky and co, e.g. that is why a certain crooked broken cross — guess who loves to play with broken crosses . . . ? — was used . . . ], the amorality of the worldview of evolutionary materialism dominates, leading to nihilistic law-unto-oneself attitudes and behaviour

    3 –> In particular, Schicklegruber claimed to be “scientifically” grounding his racism and aggression in observations of natural behaviour: animals kept their “races” pure and cats take no pity on mice, etc. (H G Wells actually gave a thinly veiled warning on this in the opening remarks in his War of the Worlds novel in 1897-8, as he saw the implications of such amoral evolutionary materialism only too well. Heine, at academic level, warned on what the implications for the world of Germany following avant garde thought and turning its back on the restraints of the Christian faith would be . . . in 1831 or so! We can hardly say we were not warned in public generations before events played out to a bloody end. )

    4 –> Thus lies revealed the gross error of trying to infer to the ought of moral behaviour on the facts of animal behaviour or what can be done to animals as we breed them etc.

    We all know the consequences, at the cost of 40 millions dead and a devastated continent.

    This is the context in which I again point out that he only way to close the IS-OUGHT GAP is to recognise the reality of the grounding IS Who, as the loving, Holy Creator, made a cosmos that builds in principles of morality, mercy and justice.

    Thus, applying back to the homosexuality debate, the notion that one is genetically programmed to be homosexual — thus has no real CHOICE — leads right to the sort of determinism that utterly undermines all moral responsibility and accountability. But of course, then, the rapist has no real choice, it is just his hormones and programming in action. the adulterer has an excuse for why he broke his marital vows. And, if she looks good and you can seduce her, why not tumble her into bed? You are just following the way of nature, right?

    But of course, sound civilisation is based on moral restraint and associated principles of virtue and honour.

    Break those down, and chaos follows as night follows day.

    For that matter, the evolutionary materialist worldview disintegrates into self-contradiction, as we can see that if brains, hormones and onward behaviour are all genetically and/or socially determined in light of accidents of inheritance [including macro-evolution] and history, then that includes the behaviours we commonly think of as logical reasoning or scientific observation and theorising. In other words, evolutionary materialism undermines the very credibility of thought, reasoning and intelligent choice.

    This lends itself admirably to irrational impulsiveness on making personal, institutional and social decisions. It alsogives a handy excuse/ rationalisation for those hidden manipulators who put up the shadow shows that would lead us where THEY would have us go.

    Including of course, many homosexualists.

    But in either case all that is revealed is the utter intellectual and moral bankruptcy of the underlying worldview that now dominates the halls of influence and power in our wider civilisation.

    Namely, evolutionary materialism.

    So, we need to wake up, break out of the stocks, look around, see the apparatus of manipulation that has put up the shadow-shows that are leading us astray, and break free of the programming of the various manipulators.

    Dictionary.

    PS: Indeed, as a result of our sad — and as yet unfinished — social history, family stability is a major challenge in Barbados and the wider region. In former days, with a strong Christian consensus notwithstanding [!!!], and with a village based population where every adult was Uncle or Auntie [whether actual blood relative or simply neighbour . . . ] we had a de facto extended family pattern that held some of the destructive tendencies in check. But, with urbanisation, atomisation of the individual, evolutionary materialism dominated globalisation and associated radical relativist nihilism and cynical manipulation on the prowl, we can no longer hope to get away with that. regardless of what profs over at whatever campus is avant garde in your neighbourhood and others who soak in their views may imagine. (There is a BIG difference between immorality [“I know I should do better, but . . . “] and amorality [“A nuh nutten . . . ” (a phrase I once heard as two youths walking just in front of me casually described how one of their friends “cut a gal throat . . . “)], a difference that has horrible potential consequences. We have been warned.)

  30. Amused Avatar
    Amused

    @David // December 1, 2009 at 7:05 AM. I have to agree with your principal in abstract terms. In this case, I, of course, have other views. As you say, economics will probably prevail and every so often economics and social justice do pull in the same direction. At least that is my view.

  31. Dictionary Avatar
    Dictionary

    Footnote: I think the people at the Courage International apostolate have a lot to teach us on the dignity of sustained courageous moral choice in the teeth of destructive and distorted, objectively disordered attractions or feelings and inclinations — and not just those of same sex attractions or even of sexual impurity in general either . . . think: fraud, embezzlement, lying and misrepresentations, out of control anger leading to abuse in families, workplaces etc etc etc. I think their FAQs are a model of civil, carefully balanced thought on a major hot-button issue. (And, Zoe, yes, Courage is a Roman Catholic initiative. The Catholics — whatever problems one may have with the history and various points of theology etc — have a lot to teach us all.) I also strongly recommend a look at the NARTH web site [therapy approaches to restore better ordered sexual feelings and patterns of behaviour], and the Exodus International web site. Dr James Dobson’s article here is worth the read too. NARTH’s discussion on the APA shift to a bio- psycho- social model on homosexuality is also well worth a read.

    Putting some informed perspectives into play . . .

  32. Crusoe Avatar
    Crusoe

    Dictionary,

    Mea Culpa, that I did not read the thread fully, apologies then for that.

    Sometimes we are in too much rush admittedly.

    I take your point on boundaries i.e. rapist, adulterer etc.

    But, everything is about balance.

    While we look for shadows we miss the issue that reasonableness and tolerance still have a place.

    Supposedly we have a girl, plainly from young liking other girls.

    Are you really going to crucify her, because she grows up to live with, in all respects, another woman?

    Sorry, I cannot live with that and I think that we have no such right, to hurt someone that way.

    Such a contract to life is between that girl (example) and the Almighty.

    Who are we to judge?

  33. Dictionary Avatar
    Dictionary

    Further footnote: tracked down a linked summary of 100 years of experience and research on homosexuality, by NARTH. A sober and sobering corrective to many common ideas, assertions and claims.

  34. Crusoe Avatar
    Crusoe

    By the way, maybe I may seem too accepting to some of you, but in person to person contact over time, I have seen a few real hypocrites, who are certainly no angels themselves, criticising the ways of life of others.

    Although such turns me off in a big way (I am intolerant of intolerance lol), I must thank such people for being a beacon of ‘what not to do’ as you say.

    Sometimes seeing something abhorrent displayed in reality by a person is a great learning tool.

    Ah well, we shall not solve the world’s problems in a day.

    But, we can live as we believe is right.

    That’s all.

  35. 555dubstreet Avatar
    555dubstreet

    The Gaysetters – One Look

  36. Dictionary Avatar
    Dictionary

    Crusoe:

    Apology accepted.

    Please, read carefully the linked materials. I am NOT advocating for hatred towards those afflicted by homosexual temptation. When I look into my own heart, I see too much vulnerability to temptations to think that just because someone suffers that one, s/he is particularly evil and to be eradicated like an insect plague. We are all subject to the lure of evil, and too often give in.

    We must deal with the planks in our eyes, then we will see clearly to help others with the sawdust in their eyes. (But this is no excuse for leaving sawdust and planks in eyes!)

    And if you will look at my remarks yesterday at December 3, 2009 at 3:11 AM, you will see that that is precisely what I have argued for, in step by step details.

    G’day.

    D

  37. Dictionary Avatar
    Dictionary

    PS: Further find: a symposium report of APA on religiously mediated changes in homosexuality. For instance the findings of the Jones and Yarhouse study bear pondering:

    They found that some people had changed- but not all- and that for some, successful change meant both a significant decrease in homosexual attractions and behaviors (SSA), while for other persons in the study, successful change meant experiencing only a significant decrease in SSA, which led them to live a satisfactory “chaste celibate” life.
    Other subjects reported no significant change while continuing to try, and still others no change and a satisfactory (re-) adoption of a “gay” identity and lifestyle.

    Contrary to prior criticisms of sexual orientation change efforts- and the recent APA Task Force Report- Jones and Yarhouse found that some subjects showed changes not only in sexual orientation “identity” (i.e., self-labeling) but also in sexual orientation (i.e., patterns of actual arousal to same and object sex persons). Also, the researchers found
    that as a group, the average participant reported improved- not worsened- social and emotional functioning.

    Jones and Yarhouse also were clear about what they did not find. For example, the study did not show that “anyone can change,” that “conversion (i.e., change in orientation) is
    uncomplicated and unequivocal,” or that “reorientation” or “conversion” psychotherapie facilitate change. While the sample’s nature and size were adequate to rebut the claim
    that change is impossible, the sample was not adequate to make precise predictions of likelihood of change nor to yield information on possible change mechanisms or processes. Also, while as a group, participants- regardless of reorientation outcome-
    reported actually improving, this does not mean that a given participant did not feel harmed while attempting to change.

    Note the sobering results, and how difficult it is to break through the patterns of habituation, thought, feelings and views one finds oneself in after engaging in this disordered, addictive form of sexuality.

    Far better is it to avoid than to try to get out.

  38. Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados) Avatar
    Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados)

    @ Dictionary // December 4, 2009 at 5:14 AM, recalling what I wrote about fixation. Is not the conclusion of the study proof to the adage ‘old habits are hard to break’, rather than your pointed “how difficult it is to break through the patterns of habituation, thought, feelings and views one finds oneself in after engaging in this disordered, addictive form of sexuality.”?

    Whatever form of habitual activity people engage in is hard to change. We’re all ‘guilty’ of that.

  39. Dictionary Avatar
    Dictionary

    Mr Jones:

    You may think the comparison is a mere matter of simplicity vs complexity of language.

    It is not. In the case of the sexual practices in view, we are talking about seriously objectively disordered, life dominating decisions, habits and associated feelings. So, I identified a cluster of key components that are distinguished in the literature. e.g. cf the excerpt from the symposium cited above.

    The challenge involved — though related to — is far more demanding and involved than trying to cure oneself of nail biting or thumb sucking or habitually mis-typing a word; hard though these annoying little bad habits sometimes are. (Just check the NARTH literature to see what I mean.)

    The deeper point is, since such deliverance and liberation are possible, it has direct implications that homosexual involvement is — on repeated empirical demonstration, clinically or scientifically recorded for 100+ years — not irreversible or uncontrollable.

    That is, it is subject to moral decision and control, with a major sustained effort, especially one guided by spiritual mentorship and supported by a group of mutual understanding and honest support.

    That is good — though challenging –news for those enmeshed.

    So also, it tells those of us subjected to the homosexualist claims and agenda on the nature of homosexual conduct, something about the need to correct such talking points and agendas.

    D

  40. Dictionary Avatar
    Dictionary

    In courts and classrooms in California . . .

  41. Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados) Avatar
    Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados)

    @ Dictionary // December 4, 2009 at 6:50 AM You’re clearly doing a ton of background work. On the NARTH study, I find it odd that the report would look at what it regards as a deviant behaviour (pathologies to use a single term) and then cite comparisons with the general population. To my mind, one ought to look at like and like, ie how the sexually deviant stack up against other deviants, eg criminals, drug users, etc. We know they are far from normal so why refer back to the norm?

  42. Dictionary Avatar
    Dictionary

    Mr Jones:

    It should be clear that deviation is — per basic meaning of the term — relative to the norm.

    D

  43. Dictionary Avatar
    Dictionary

    PS: Perhaps, this from Courage, is helpful:

    Q. Why are homosexual attractions considered “objectively disordered”? Isn’t that a harsh term?

    A. The term “objective disorder” is a philosophical term. It is used to describe homosexual attractions because such attractions can never lead to a morally good sexual act. It is objected that if a man lusts for a woman or vice versa, this too is an objective disorder. This latter example is not an objective disorder, because, if the man or woman learns to control their heterosexual attraction, and wills to express it in the natural state of marriage, it is a good thing.

    The term “objective disorder” may strike some of us with same-sex attractions as being harsh, because we feel that we never asked to have homosexual attractions and we fear that this term is in some way condemnatory or derogatory. It is important to remember that “objective disorder” is a philosophical term which describes a particular inclination – it does not diminish our value and worth in the eyes of God.

    It is psychologically understandable that certain people struggle with homosexual attractions. The Church recognizes this and does not condemn people for simply having these attractions; however, the Church also teaches that homosexual acts are always immoral, and therefore, one must also accept that the inclination to engage in such acts is, philosophically speaking, objectively disordered.

    Above all, we must keep in mind that homosexual inclinations do not make up our true identity as rational or Christian persons. We are first and foremost men and women created in the image of God – we are exceedingly precious in God’s sight and we have been given the gifts of intelligence and free-will. We can live a life of union with Christ, through prayer, and we can know the peace of interior chastity. This is God’s desire for us, and He continually gives us the grace to live it.

  44. Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados) Avatar
    Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados)

    @Dictionary, “It should be clear that deviation is — per basic meaning of the term — relative to the norm.” Precisely, so the report’s saying ‘There is significantly greater medical, psychological, and relational pathology in the homosexual population than the general population.’ is a tautology. It would be more profound if it said whether relative to see where the homosexual population rated relative to other deviant population. That might tell us that homosexuals are less or more pathological, and that is not trivial information in terms of our expectations of change.

  45. Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados) Avatar
    Dennis Jones (aka Living in Barbados)

    @Dictionary CORRECTION ‘It would be more profound if it said where the homosexual population rated relative to other deviant population.’

  46. Dictionary Avatar
    Dictionary

    Mr Jones:

    Pardon, but this is sounding like another strawmanistic side track.

    If homosexuality were simply a beneficial variation of sexuality [as many in the homosexualist movement and in the wider supportive community argue — cf the judge in CA just linked and the curricula and textbooks being promoted through it], it would not have a key characteristic of delusional or disordered tendencies: they are disintegrative in impact on person, family and community.

    There is a major, well documented, well researched issue on the table.

    Let us deal with it, instead of sliding off on repeated side-tracks on minor issues and points that a moment’s serious reflection would suffice to correct.

    There is a rampaging bull in the china shop.

    Let’s deal with it.

    D

  47. Dictionary Avatar
    Dictionary

    Footnote:

    On the inherent, inescapable incoherence and radical relativist amorality of evolutionary materialism. (Recall, this is the underlying context that has given the framework in which homosexualism and other prongs of the dechristianising agenda can hide behind the false colours of “science.” So, if we are to soundly address this prong and the wider tidal wave, we have to deal with it solidly.)

    This, from briefing notes in one form or another dating back over the past 20+ years:

    ___________

    (i) Evolutionary materialism (which is often equated to “science,” especially on origins) — as the Nobel Prize-winner Jacques Monod famously argued in his 1970 Chance and Necessity — asserts or assumes that the observed cosmos is the product of undirected, chance interactions of matter and energy, within the constraint of the laws and blind forces of nature:

    (ii) This, through cosmological, then planetary system, then chemical, then biological and finally socio-cultural evolution.  That is, the decisive issues and chains of reasoning are origins science issues, with all the limitations on possible degree of warrant that are imposed by trying to reconstruct a remote, unobserved, unrecorded past.

    (iii) Therefore, on this paradigm, all phenomena in the universe (without residue) are determined by the working of purposeless, undirected laws acting on material objects, under the direct or indirect control of chance.

    (iv) But human thought in its context of consciousness, reasoning and qualia — clearly, a cluster of phenomena in the universe — must now fit into this picture.  

    (v) Thus, what we subjectively experience, and especially what we hold to be “thoughts,” “reasonings” and “conclusions” can only be understood materialistically as unintended by-products of the natural forces which cause and control the electro-chemical events going on in neural networks in our brains. 
     
    (vi) These forces are viewed as in effect ultimately physical, but are taken to be partly mediated through a complex pattern of genetic inheritance [“nature”] and psycho-social conditioning [“nurture”], within the framework of human culture [i.e. socio-cultural conditioning and resulting/associated relativism].

    (vii) But, an unexpected result follows. For, if materialism is true, the “thoughts” we have, then the “reasonings” we carry out and the “conclusions” we reach — without residue — are produced and controlled by forces that are (as Liebnitz’s mill illustrates) irrelevant to purpose, truth, or validity.
      
    (viii) Of course, the thinking-reasoning process, its underlying symbolic information and its conclusions may still happen to be true, by lucky coincidence — but we have no rational grounds for relying on the “reasoning” that has led us to feel that we have “proved” them. 
      
    (ix) And, if our materialists then say: “But, we can always apply scientific tests, through observation, experiment and measurement,” then we must note that to demonstrate that such tests provide empirical support to their theories requires the use of the very process of reasoning which they have discredited!

    (x) Thus, as Plantinga has argued at length, it is hard to escape the conclusion that evolutionary materialism reduces reason itself to the status of illusion.  

    (xi) But, immediately, that includes “Materialism.”  For instance, Marxists commonly deride opponents for their “bourgeois class conditioning” — but what of the effect of their own class origins? Freudians frequently dismiss qualms about their loosening of moral restraints by alluding to the impact of strict potty training on their “up-tight” critics — but doesn’t this cut both ways? Crick, were he to actually preface his books with “my opinions and my science, and even the thoughts expressed in this book, consist of nothing more than the behavior of a vast assembly of nerve cells and their associated molecules,” would very properly be simply laughed out of court.  And, should we not simply ask a Behaviourist whether s/he is simply another operantly conditioned rat trapped in the cosmic maze?

    (xii) In the end — though one may dismiss such an argument or baldly assert that per brute fact conscious rational minds “must” have emerged from brains by hitherto unknown evolutionary transformational processes —  it is hard to escape the conclusion that evolutionary materialism is based on self-defeating, self-refuting premises. . . 

    (xiii) We may now consider Will Hawthorne’s remark:

    >>Assume (per impossibile) that atheistic naturalism [= evolutionary materialism] is true. Assume, furthermore, that one can’t infer an ‘ought’ from an ‘is’ [the ‘is’ being in this context physicalist: matter-energy, space- time, chance and mechanical forces].  (Richard Dawkins and many other atheists should grant both of these assumptions.) Given our second assumption, there is no description of anything in the natural world from which we can infer an ‘ought’. And given our first assumption, there is nothing that exists over and above the natural world; the natural world is all that there is. It follows logically that, for any action you care to pick, there’s no description of anything in the natural world from which we can infer that one ought to refrain from performing that action. Add a further uncontroversial assumption: an action is permissible if and only if it’s not the case that one ought to refrain from performing that action. (This is just the standard inferential scheme for formal deontic logic.) We’ve conformed to standard principles and inference rules of logic and we’ve started out with assumptions that atheists have conceded in print. And yet we reach the absurd conclusion: therefore, for any action you care to pick, it’s permissible to perform that action. If you’d like, you can take this as the meat behind the slogan ‘if atheism is true, all things are permitted’. For example if atheism is true, every action Hitler performed was permissible. Many atheists don’t like this consequence of their worldview. But they cannot escape it and insist that they are being logical at the same time.

    Now, we all know that at least some actions are really not permissible (for example, racist actions). Since the conclusion of the argument denies this, there must be a problem somewhere in the argument. Could the argument be invalid? No. The argument has not violated a single rule of logic and all inferences were made explicit. Thus we are forced to deny the truth of one of the assumptions we started out with. That means we either deny atheistic naturalism or (the more intuitively appealing) principle that one can’t infer ‘ought’ from ‘is’. >>

    (xiv) The first key premise here is the existence of an is-ought gap. In effect, from what merely is, one cannot derive what ought to be, unless — as Elizabeth Anscombe footnoted Hume — the “is” already embeds “oughtness” in its essence. 

    (xv) Thus, one’s concept of what is in our cosmic order is already implicitly freighted with moral import. And so, in a worldview that — as evolutionary materialism does — confines the is to the physical and its interactions, one has no inherent grounds for oughtness, the heart of morality. 
    _____________

    Those who would impose evolutionary materialism in the name of “science” should be challenged to address the self referential incoherence and to address the lognstanding problem of amorality rooted in the is-ought gap. [And, as has already been addressed and linked on, they should not be allowed to get away with trying to use the Euthyphro dilemma as a way of suggesting that no-one else has a better answer.)

    Remember, much of the homosexualist agenda gains force from the atmosphere of radical moral relativism that has been created through the dominance of evolutionary materialism in the academy and spreading from that to the educated classes.

    So, we see here that the evolutionary materialist worldview (and associated scientific research programmes) and the neo-paganisms that have grown up as weeds in its shadow, face a major — indeed, crippling and probably mortal — difficulty.

    And, we should realise too that the very fact that we find ourselves morally accountable and bound (and that his binding is linked to personal and community well-being) — the very fact that we have rights directly entails this [“You unfair me!” we quarrel] — is in itself strong evidence pointing to a grounding IS for the cosmos that inherently provides the OUGHT.

    That is, the moral order of creation points to the Creator of that order.

    And, in that context, homosexual conduct is objectively disordered.

    Without this foundation in a loving-Holy Creator who makes a morally ordered cosmos, we will have very little strength to resist the strong tidal wave of dechristinisation that is now pounding on our shores from the north.

    And those who seek to promote such dechristianisation know that. That is why they are so desperate — as a rule on pretty poor substance — to deride and discredit the church, the Bible, the gospel, and Christians who dare to stand up on key issues like this.

    Okay, more anon, DV.

  48. michael Avatar
    michael

    Brother you have blown me away but i think i can see where you are coming from

  49. Zoe Avatar
    Zoe

    @Dictionary Dec 4, @ 4:45AM,

    “(And, Zoe, yes, Courage is a Roman Catholic initiative. The Catholics – whatever problem one may have with their history and various points of theology etc , have a lot to teach us all).”

    Bro’ D, sorry man, but I strongly disagree with you here! Why so?

    Well, I just had a look at this Catholic web site ‘Courage’ and I read the few testimonies posted there, so very typical of this Catholic jargon, yes, nice things said about Jesus and Father God, BUT, laced, as usual with, ‘Praying the Rosary’, going to ‘Confession’ and spending time before the so-called ‘real’ presence of Jesus in the so-called sacrament of His real body, ‘Transubstantiation’ all totally unbibical ‘false’ doctrine!

    I WAS deeply involved with the Catholic church, I know them well, lovely people, so warm and caring, a very subtle veneer of what appears to be the ‘fruit’ of the Holy Spirit, extremely enticing and very seductive, NO lie is of the TRUTH, whenever you mix down right heresy with God’s Word, as Catholocism et al have done, the absolute truth of His Word is invalidated!

    In Paul’s stinging polemic to the young Galatians, he could not have said it any plainer.

    “I marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a *different* Gospel, which is NOT another, but some who trouble you and want to *pervert* the gospel of Christ” ( Gal. 1: 6,7).

    To drive home the point Paul was making, he then emphasizes:

    “But even if we, or an angel from heaven (purports to be an angel from heaven), preach ANY OF GOSPEL to you than WHAT WE HAVE PREACHED to you, LET HIM BE ACCURSED.” (v. 8) emphasis added.

    I have seen this kind of testimony before from Catholics, it IS a deception fostered on them by none other than the ‘father’ of all lies, Satan.

    What the arch-deceiver does, is to appearently give some degree of release from these men struggling with Homosexuality, all the while taking them deeper and deeper into the maze of Catholic false doctrine, very, very subtle.

    Satan will get you one way or the other, unless one trust JESUS and Him alone, not Jesus + Mary + Confession + all the other heresy taught by Catholicism, one will never be free in Christ, for whom soever the Son sets FREE is free indeed!

    Augustine, fell for this heretical nonsense, one of his prayers to Mary, “Take our prayers into the sanctuary of heaven and enable them to bring about our peace with God…may the sins we penitently bring before Almighty God *through* you (Mary) be pardoned…obtain pardon for what we fear, FOR YOU (Mary) ARE THE ONLY HOPE OF SINNERS. We hope to obtain the forgiveness of our sins THROUGH YOU, Blessed Lady, in you is our HOPE of reward.” (Saint Augustine (d. 430) Dictionary of Mary (Catholic Publishing Co.: New Jersey, 1997, 1985, p. 532) emphasis added.

    The above is blatant false doctrine and heresy.

    Hear God Word, not Catholicism:

    “Jesus saith unto him. I AM THE WAY, THE TRUTH, and THE LIFE, NO mam cometh unto the Father but by ME” ( John 14:6) emphasis added.

    Hear God’s Word again:

    “For there IS ONE GOD, and ONE mediator between (who and where? God (in heaven) and men (0n earth) the Man Christ Jesus” ( I Tim. 2:5) emphasis added.

    “For through Him (Jesus) we both have ACCESS ( By how many spirits?) ONE Spirit (The Holy Spirit) unto the Father” ( Eph. 2:18) emphasis added.

    “But He (Jesus) because He continues forever, has an unchangeable priesthood. Therefore, He is also able to (do what?) SAVE (to what extent?) TO THE UTTERMOST those who (first go to Mary, NO!) Who come to God (directly) through HIM, (Why?) since He (Jesus) always lives (to do what?) To make intercession for them” (Heb. 7:24) emphasis added.

    These men struggling with Homosexuality find comfort in the warm, caring atmosphere of Catholicism, I understand this, and they deceptively feel that they are being helped, but only at a ‘soulish’ level, for where there IS such admixture of ‘some’ biblical truth, then laced with all of this false doctrine, takes them from one state of deception, into another state of even more deception.

    Sorry, D, but this is not right, it IS not biblical!

  50. Dictionary Avatar
    Dictionary

    Michael:

    Sorry to have presented in effect a college level lesson as a chunk. (I thought it necessary to draw a baseline for the further discussion of the topic.)

    Before building on a baseline, here is a somewhat slower step by step take:

    1 –> Evolutionary materialism usually sees itself as “science” and so tries to reserve to itself the status of being the only truly credible and “rational” view of the world [cf here!]

    2 –> But, it is forced to reduce everything in our observed world to matter and energy that has somehow evolved into the things we see around us.

    3 –> In particular, it is forced to try to reduce mind to brains, neurons and the electrochemical signals firing away across synapses, shaped by genetics, accidents of conditioning and the like.

    4 –> But, nerve signals are in millivolts, not right and wrong, true and false, ground and logically correct consequent.

    5 –> That is, there is a RADICAL difference between the electrical and chemical workings of nerves in brains and the essential features of conscious, logical mind in action.

    6 –> So radical that if you try to reduce mind to evolving and “emerging” properties of matter, you end up in the problem Leibnitz identified when he discussed a mill in action: gears merely grind away at one another based on the organisation they happen to have and the forces that drive from the water wheel outside and from shaft to gear and gear to gear.

    7 –> But at no point have we moved beyond blind, non-intentional forces so long as we look at the physical interaction only. (It is the designer who gives the mill the organisation that makes it work as a mill towards a purpose . . . by an intelligent intervention that is beyond the world of mere physical interaction.)

    8 –> Just so, o if one insists on materialistic reduction of mind to brain that purposelessly evolved from blind forces of chance and necessity across the aeons, one cannot explain the organisation of the brain that allows it to credibly carry out purposeful acts of reasoning, knowing and deciding.

    9 –> For, blind chance and necessity and mere voltages and ion flows in neurons etc are — just like the gears in the mill — in themselves irrelevant to purpose, truth and logical validity.

    10 –> That is why a Freudian dismissing you on over-strict potty training is subject to being accused of over-loose potty training; it is why a Skinnerian calling you a jumped up lab rat in a maze looking for a food pellet is likewise just another rat in the maze, it is why a marxist dismissing your bourgeois class conditioning is just as much a prisoner of his own class conditioning; and it is why Crick, to be consistent, should have labelled his own writings as nothing but the fizzling off of neurons in networks in his central nervous system. For, in his 1994 The Astonishing Hypothesis, he had written:

    . . . that “You”, your joys and your sorrows, your memories and your ambitions, your sense of personal identity and free will, are in fact no more than the behaviour of a vast assembly of nerve cells and their associated molecules. As Lewis Carroll’s Alice might have phrased: “You’re nothing but a pack of neurons.” This hypothesis is so alien to the ideas of most people today that it can truly be called astonishing.

    11 –> As a result, the appeal to “emergence” of mind from something like self-programmed/ organised loops of networks in the brain (with a boost from “evolution”) boils down to “poof . . . magic . . . voila!” [For, since there are effectively an almost infinite range of possible organisations, the needle in a haystack search to find the just-right configuration to function is hopeless on the scope of our observed cosmos. BTW, this holds all the way back to the challenge of forming the DNA code for life in the first instance, and it holds onward to get tot he DNA coding of the regulation of the growth of the neuronal networks in the brain and CNS. Just 1,000 bits . . . 500 4-state DNA bases . . . worth of information would implicate over ten times the square of the possible number of configurations the ~ 10^80 atoms of the observed cosmos can take up over its lifespan. Our DNA is about 3 BILLION bases long, i.e. 3 million times that threshold.)

    12 –> In short, we have good reason to infer that intelligent, conscious, reasoning, purposeful mind — the central fact of our existence, experience and observation, through which we access all other facts, experiences and observations — is a distinct order of being from atoms in action in brains or otherwise.

    13 –> We have further reason to believe that our minds and bodies — once the role of DNA and associated digital processing machinery is appreciated from the first living cells on — are (like the mill) the product of mind, and are thus not simply reducible to blind chance and necessity acting on patterns of atoms that just happen to be there in a configuration that could just as easily have been otherwise.

    14 –> Similarly, we observe that atoms, energy, neurons and action potentials have utterly no inherent correlation to right and wrong.

    15 –> That is, materialism runs straight into the infamous IS-OUGHT gap, and so radically relativises morality to the result of accidents and power plays across time; ending up as an a-moral system that struggles at best to avoid falling into the nihilism of “might makes right.” (This is of course precisely the premise of men like herr Schicklegruber, Stalin and Mao.)

    [ . . . ]

The blogmaster invites you to join the discussion.

Trending

Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading