1PeaceMaker
New member
No need to do that. He can use his very own definition.
Why men won't marry you
- Thread starter serpentdove
- Start date
No need to do that. He can use his very own definition.
I do. It does not mean the a woman gains salvation by having babies. Salvation comes from God through Jesus and there are no other options.
:chuckle: Oh. You believe you are speaking for all the readers. Have fun with that.
SO that you can change things up after he says something? No, better to get it defined first.
My wife is a pharmacist. Men are pharmacists. Therefore, my wife is at least as smart as men. There are men who flunked out of pharmacy school therefore my wife is smarter than some men. Do you agree?
1PeaceMaker
New member
Without a woman the average man can't accomplish much of anything, either.
That's a perverse reading of his intent.
Because you would have been mostly avoiding that blessing in your life. Using birth control, in other words, has made you feel defensive of your choices.
1PeaceMaker
New member
Not possible; it's already his word. Anything he says is smart, goes. Nothing would change in my argument.
You mean your wife is as smart as other men who can do the same job? I don't doubt she does as good/bad a job as other men who do the same things. Yes, your wife, in at least one sense is smarter than some men.
Do you think all men who flunked are less intelligent than your wife?
Do you really think that women (on average) are smarter than men (on average)? Why?
1PeaceMaker
New member
So you are afraid of sharing how you feel about post #1083?
I agree that together we are greater than we are apart.
I don't think so at all.
I have nothing to feel defensive about. God has richly blessed our life together in many ways. I am thankful for my life.
1PeaceMaker
New member
That's not agreeing with me, though, right?
Weak defense of your assertion.
Sure. You have to defend your choice to use your marriage for yourselves while avoiding childbearing.
Did you avoid childbearing because of ill health or convenience? Did God tell you to do it or close her womb for you?
It's remarkable that you would even state that is something that needs defending.
Way to insert yourself into relationships and choices that are none of your business.
No doubt CM and many other intelligent men do not see the only need/use for women as bearing children.
Ps 51:5
1PeaceMaker
New member
Trying to distract me from post #1083?
Believers who understand that there are only a few laborers for a giant harvest, where the gospel has not gone out into the whole world, know that having believing children to labor for Christ is such a high priority they would have to defend choosing otherwise.
The last religion to devalue children is now dead. (see: the Shaker religion)
I'm not part of his choice, so I can't be inserted. His choice is made. Long over.
Just replace the word birth control for abortion and maybe you might have a shot at understanding me.
He doesn't see the need at all from the way he talks. He must think God has all the souls he wants, already or something.
If you are a woman, the only reason you are is so you can use your womanliness for the glory of God. Otherwise you would have been born a man or a hermaphrodite - or perhaps a spirit-being or asexual angel.
There are many reasons people flunk, "smarts" is but one. I must also point out that you are one again subtlety altering the meaning of words to bolster your position.
On average, I think men and women possess the same degree of intelligence. I think that because I don't fir one second belive that God created Eve inferior to Adam in any way.
I stated what I agree with.
His statement dorks fir itself. One only need read it.
While "dorks fir" is highly amusing and reasonably accurate, it should have said, "speaks for". That us what I get for swiping on the bus.
Having two children is avoiding child bearing. Got ya.
We are free in Christ to plan our life so we did. We made choices based on the fact that there is more to having children than pumping out babies. We wanted to raise them with many experiences in life. Good seems to have honored that choice.
Last edited:
Goodness no. You are free to ramble on about it all day and night.
You mean those who agree with you. If someone with 6, 8, 10, etc. children is incapable of financially providing for their children as compared to someone who provides above and beyond for their child, which parent is giving superior care?
No thank you ... I understand perfectly well what it means to value children.
And yet you inserted your unwarranted, judgmental opinion into something that has nothing to do with you.
Nope. The two are only interchangeable in your mind.
OR ... perhaps he just has a mature and realistic understanding attitude in regards to relationships, wisdom and physical ability.
And the scattered reasoning continues ...
J. Philippe Rushton, a psychologist at the University of Western Ontario, Canada did a study on the comparative intelligence of men and women. Here is what he had to say in an interview in 2006 regarding his study:
While Rushton called his results significant, he doesn't think they are a basis for uprooting the field of education.
"I don't think it has any real implications for education policy or schoolwork," he said. "In fact, females actually get better grades than males.”
Plus, he doesn't think the IQ difference would show up in everyday activities. "For the vast majority of people in the vast majority of jobs, it really doesn't translate into very much," he said.
But when it comes to Nobel Prize winners, he said that men could outnumber women 10-to-1. "Where it will really show up is at the very high end of the distribution," Rushton said.
While Rushton called his results significant, he doesn't think they are a basis for uprooting the field of education.
"I don't think it has any real implications for education policy or schoolwork," he said. "In fact, females actually get better grades than males.”
Plus, he doesn't think the IQ difference would show up in everyday activities. "For the vast majority of people in the vast majority of jobs, it really doesn't translate into very much," he said.
But when it comes to Nobel Prize winners, he said that men could outnumber women 10-to-1. "Where it will really show up is at the very high end of the distribution," Rushton said.
Last edited:
On to irrationality. To the extent a person is driven by emotion and hormones, the more irrational their thinking becomes. From what I have read, women are controlled more often than men by emotions. But this appears to be a social construct more than something inate. There is one week out of the month where hormones can cause problems in premenopausal women. All of this together can make a case that women are usually the more irrational gender.
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
You didn't answer the question. Do you think that women in general are less smart than men?
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Truster's a nut IMO too but no, I don't have Yorhzik confused with him or anybody else. He's a misogynistic moron and a complete patriarchal crank. He's probably still upset about the day women were allowed to vote...
lain:
Like you are doing in this post, you hypocrite heathen. You should not even participate if you were to stay out of their business.