Originally Posted by
-:Undertaker:-
Didn't argue it was the fault of the person.
In terms of emotion though, why not? Even if it is a rare chemical inbalance, why does that declassify it as a feeling? It remains such.
I haven't got it, but you said something along those lines because you didn't like what the NHS and the experts had to say on drugs probably because you hold the view that drugs should be decriminalised which again is funny considering how much of a zealot you are when it comes to smoking.
Actually no, that is what I am arguing against. As the video I posted before explained, what is an illness or what isn't an illness is very hard to define because you could argue that homosexuality is a disorder (which I would still hold to, but which the experts changed opinion on in the 1970s) or you could argue that it isn't. The fact is that most of these classifications, as the video explains, are simply a moral book of guidelines that changes with the times depending on the moral code of the day.
Which is personally why I prefer the Bible and religious texts, but yeah.
Well actually, yeah - that's completely right. You're asking us to believe 100% in the mainstream expert view, yet it's often turned out to be completely wrong or incredibly dangerous.... which proves to me in a bigger picture that science cannot provide a moral code for humanity to abide by, which is why I moved from an atheist to religious.
If a field has a track record in getting things wrong, you don't blindly put your faith in it.
Just like how the experts predictions about global warming climate change have all turned out to be scaremongering rubbish, yep.
Haven't argued that.
Just warning that pumping a population full of drugs and making excuses for the bad things that happen in life (some of which are our fault, some of which are not our fault but simply a part of life itself) should at least be treated with some scepticism.