• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

How could man be first if we came from women?

grip

grip

Slow 🅖 Hand
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 1, 2011
Messages
33,000
Reaction score
13,973
Location
FL - Daytona
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent


The creation story goes that man was created first and woman was taken from a rib. If this is true then why does science say all men start out as women in the womb? It's why men have nipples.
 
It is called gender neutral state still irrelevant what that video calls it. When the "Y" chromosome kicks in it subdues female characteristics making them male like.
 
grip said:


The creation story goes that man was created first and woman was taken from a rib. If this is true then why does science say all men start out as women in the womb? It's why men have nipples.
Click to expand...


There is no reason to believe "The Creation Story" ever occurred in history. Like the chicken and the egg, they both evolved into being at the same time with no clear demarcation between the pre-chicken and chicken.

As for the video, my life didn't begin as a female, my life began when I was born. The happenings of cells before I was born was not a beginning, but an unbroken chain of replication that goes back to the dawn of man.
 
Last edited:
Another platform for the atheists and homosexuals to attack Christianity! What a novel idea!

One must wonder if this sort of endless hatred and rage are part of the homosexual pathology.

There was a murder in my city in the early Seventies, a murder in which two lesbians murdered a pretty, young college girl that they had kidnapped. The prosecution had an expert witness, expert on homosexual crimes, testify that in all violent crimes committed by homosexuals, there was an element of torture, an element of pain, physical and emotional humiliation, a signature desire to inflict this sort of suffering, a titillation. Of course, this was prior to the nationwide total ban on stating anything negative about homosexuals, only Christians.

The problem is that there have been no actual, valid studies done of the homosexual pathology since 1973. Isn't it time for Americans and the world to actually have some knowledge about this pathology, which seems to have wide ranging characteristics involving the entire personality, not simply a different physical sexual preference.
 
Last edited:
Hmmm, sounds like the old chicken and the egg quandry. :lol:
 
Lachean said:
There is no reason to believe "The Creation Story" ever occurred in history. Like the chicken and the egg, they both evolved into being at the same time with no clear demarcation between the pre-chicken and chicken.

As for the video, my life didn't begin as a female, my life began when I was born. The happenings of cells before I was born was not a beginning, but an unbroken chain of replication that goes back to the dawn of man.
Click to expand...


Why do you have nipples?
 
Ray410 said:
Another platform for the atheists and homosexuals to attack Christianity! What a novel idea!

One must wonder if this sort of endless hatred and rage are part of the homosexual pathology.

The problem is that there have been no actual, valid studies done of the homosexual pathology since 1973. Isn't it time for Americans and the world to actually have some knowledge about this pathology, which seems to have wide ranging negative characteristics involving the entire personality, not simply a different physical sexual preference, unusual as that may be.

Why not just leave Christians alone, they are happy in their faith and don't bother you.
Click to expand...

It's because some like you are xenophobic and bigoted and also characterize homosexuals as dysfunctional in threads where homosexuality isn't even close to being part of the discussion.
 
Ray410 said:
Another platform for the atheists and homosexuals to attack Christianity! What a novel idea!

One must wonder if this sort of endless hatred and rage are part of the homosexual pathology.

The problem is that there have been no actual, valid studies done of the homosexual pathology since 1973. Isn't it time for Americans and the world to actually have some knowledge about this pathology, which seems to have wide ranging negative characteristics involving the entire personality, not simply a different physical sexual preference, unusual as that may be.
Click to expand...

Maybe someone should study YOUR pathologies,since you seem to have quite a few of them yourself.
 
Ray410 said:
Another platform for the atheists and homosexuals to attack Christianity! What a novel idea!

One must wonder if this sort of endless hatred and rage are part of the homosexual pathology.

There was a murder in my city in the early Seventies, a murder in which two lesbians murdered a pretty, young college girl that they had kidnapped. The prosecution had an expert witness, expert on homosexual crimes, testify that in all violent crimes committed by homosexuals, there was an element of torture, an element of pain, physical and emotional humiliation, a signature desire to inflict this sort of suffering, a titillation. Of course, this was prior to the nationwide total ban on stating anything negative about homosexuals, only Christians.

The problem is that there have been no actual, valid studies done of the homosexual pathology since 1973. Isn't it time for Americans and the world to actually have some knowledge about this pathology, which seems to have wide ranging characteristics involving the entire personality, not simply a different physical sexual preference.
Click to expand...


Ya know, normally when I hear people say we shouldn't let religious people hold office, because they're obviuosly insane because they believe in God, I usually write it off as the rantings of a militant and angry atheist.


But reading the drivel you just posted, as well as looking back to your previous thoughts on this subject, I think you just made the most clear cut arguement for it.
 
Lachean said:
There is no reason to believe "The Creation Story" ever occurred in history. Like the chicken and the egg, they both evolved into being at the same time with no clear demarcation between the pre-chicken and chicken.
Click to expand...

And like the chicken and the egg, Creationism answers: The Rooster.
 
Is it really necessary to believe that an ancient creation myth is literally true in order to be a Christian?

or are Christians allowed to believe that some of the Bible stories are just stories?
 
If we all start off the same, couldn't one equally argue that women are genetically inferior because they did not complete the genetic transformation that men did thereby rendering them Autistic Men?

*ducks to avoid incoming frying pan*
 
Ray410 said:
Another platform for the atheists and homosexuals to attack Christianity! What a novel idea!
Click to expand...

You know, it was the Jewish creation myth first before you guys stole it. It's often interesting how members of the dominant religion tend to conflate the very idea of religion with the specifics of their own religion.

A lot of myths create men before women. Because they were usually written in cultures that were rife with misogyny and often treated women as property. Not only does the Jewish myth show this, but the Greek, Japanese, and many other myths contain this "male first" element. So, disagreement with it is not an issue exclusively for Christianity. Don't be so ethnocentric.
 
God needed a dry run with a prototype before she made the real thing. That's why scrotums are made of left-over elbow-skin.
 
grip said:
Why do you have nipples?
Click to expand...

Hypothetically, because it's easier to just keep them. Understand that the genetic/evolutionary framework required to entirely construct the nipple, and entirely remove it, would be signiciantly more complex then just making it "not produce milk and be a sexual differentiator", but keep the nipple. Since there apparently was not evolutionary pressure for it to go away, it did not.

It would possible be more odd if it DID go away, than if it remains but in a less pronounced and certainly less utilitarian fashion.
 
Mach said:
Hypothetically, because it's easier to just keep them. Understand that the genetic/evolutionary framework required to entirely construct the nipple, and entirely remove it, would be signiciantly more complex then just making it "not produce milk and be a sexual differentiator", but keep the nipple. Since there apparently was not evolutionary pressure for it to go away, it did not.

It would possible be more odd if it DID go away, than if it remains but in a less pronounced and certainly less utilitarian fashion.
Click to expand...

Because you started out as a woman in the womb.
 
grip said:
You obviously didn't watch the video.
Click to expand...

Actually I did, care to explain your "obvious" statement?

grip said:
Because you started out as a woman in the womb.
Click to expand...

Nonsense, a woman (adult female, post puberty) has breasts and a vagina, a cluster of cells does not.

You're attributing human characteristics to developmental stages.
 
Lachean said:
Actually I did, care to explain your "obvious" statement?



Nonsense, a woman (adult female, post puberty) has breasts and a vagina, a cluster of cells does not.

You're attributing human characteristics to developmental stages.
Click to expand...

I repeat from this uninformed reply by you that you haven't seen the video. Do try and keep up.
 
Lachean said:
That question presumes a purpose, rather than a byproduct of evolution.

Why do you ask?
Click to expand...

Men can produce milk, though it is mostly considered to be a problem.

Male testes are modified ovaries. Penises are modified clitorus.

The Y chromosome does not suppress female characteristics, it modifies them.
 
Dittohead not! said:
Is it really necessary to believe that an ancient creation myth is literally true in order to be a Christian?

or are Christians allowed to believe that some of the Bible stories are just stories?
Click to expand...
While I have no problem with that, many Christians themselves do not believe it. Some are Creationists believing every word literally. Others believe the Creation story passes on ancient knowledge; I'm sure you've seen those who try to push evolution and the formation of the Universe as we know it, including Earth, into the six days of Creation. (I did this myself in the Dark Ages of my childhood.) The idea grip has presented refutes even those latter elements because Eve would have come first instead of Adam. So it's not just a matter of it being literally true but even the order of Creation as presented in Genesis is patently wrong. There's no problem with Christians believing the Bible is a book of stories but if the stories don't have some truth behind them, then they're only fiction with not even a good lesson to pass along. However, I'm willing to hear what you think the lesson of the creation story is other than "God created everything, therefore He is All Powerful and we should worship Him for it."
 
MoSurveyor said:
While I have no problem with that, many Christians themselves do not believe it. Some are Creationists believing every word literally. Others believe the Creation story passes on ancient knowledge; I'm sure you've seen those who try to push evolution and the formation of the Universe as we know it, including Earth, into the six days of Creation. (I did this myself in the Dark Ages of my childhood.) The idea grip has presented refutes even those latter elements because Eve would have come first instead of Adam. So it's not just a matter of it being literally true but even the order of Creation as presented in Genesis is patently wrong. There's no problem with Christians believing the Bible is a book of stories but if the stories don't have some truth behind them, then they're only fiction with not even a good lesson to pass along. However, I'm willing to hear what you think the lesson of the creation story is other than "God created everything, therefore He is All Powerful and we should worship Him for it."
Click to expand...

the creation story is just one of many myths people have made up to explain how humans got here.

Or is it? Think about it: Somewhere around the time of the Garden of Eden, human beings started to experiment with agriculture, with writing, with mathematics, and building cities, this after spending 95% of our existence as hunter-gatherers.

Maybe god actually created two humans that were different, and did a little tinkering with the genetic code in that way.

Pure wild speculation, of course, but it's the only way the creation story could have any basis in reality.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom