You slightly misinterrupted what I said....

Posted by HuBBsDoctor on .
IMO I never said that people who were mental or physically challenged were not perfect. I probably didn't explain fully either. You see in out religion we are given bodies as a test to rpove our faith to god. But in this test we must pass through a Vail that takes all our knowldge of the pre mortal existance. But sometimes thats not the only thing taken from us. Sometimes we lose something in translation. A birth defect, mental disabilities, what have you. As we die we are then restored to our perfect form in heaven. Every hear on your head shall be restored. God has perfect body and therefore if we die should we not have a perfect body as well when we rejoin him? This is what I was taught and what I believe. Its not a strike against or demeaning against anyone who is mentally or physically handicapped at all. "What me worry?"

In reply to: Re: The real problem. posted by pepsibeth on .
"Which means retards people who lost their arms or weren't born with a right arm will be perfect again."

imo just because someone doesn't have the "perfect" body or mind doesn't make them less perfect as an individual. Now, I'm agnostic, but if I did believe in a God, I'd like to think that that God would accept each person as perfect as they were, no matter the visual/intellectual faults, since he would have created them, and saw his creation as good.

My son has a whole ton of mental disorders. But he is still a perfect person. Everyone is, no matter what deformities, or illnesses they have. They are what makes him who he is. To say "oh but when he gets to heaven, he'll be better - he'll be made ideal and perfect and whole" is a crock of sh!t and totally demeaning and insulting to who he is. That kind of attitude (he's not like everyone else, so he's imperfect) is why kids like him (or with other things like deformities etc.) are teased and bullied.


Replies:
Re: You slightly misinterrupted what I said....
johnross -- 10/19/2005 7:36 am UTC
Re: You slightly misinterrupted what I said....
pepsibeth -- 10/19/2005 1:37 am UTC
God would accept the way we are.
HuBBsDoctor -- 10/19/2005 8:44 am UTC
Re: God would accept the way we are.
Syntax -- 10/20/2005 4:49 am UTC
Re: God would accept the way we are.
HuBBsDoctor -- 10/20/2005 8:55 am UTC
Re: God would accept the way we are.
Syntax -- 10/20/2005 8:07 pm UTC
Re: God would accept the way we are.
HuBBsDoctor -- 10/21/2005 1:18 am UTC
Re: God would accept the way we are.
Syntax -- 10/21/2005 1:26 am UTC
Re: God would accept the way we are.
HuBBsDoctor -- 10/21/2005 10:43 am UTC
Re: God would accept the way we are.
Syntax -- 10/21/2005 5:19 pm UTC
Re: God would accept the way we are.
johnross -- 10/20/2005 1:34 pm UTC
I have a mohawk.
HuBBsDoctor -- 10/20/2005 2:21 pm UTC
Re: I have a mohawk.
Syntax -- 10/20/2005 8:27 pm UTC
Re: I have a mohawk.
johnross -- 10/21/2005 7:43 am UTC
Re: I have a mohawk.
HuBBsDoctor -- 10/21/2005 1:24 am UTC
Re: I have a mohawk.
johnross -- 10/20/2005 4:33 pm UTC
Re: I have a mohawk.
Dakota Smith -- 10/20/2005 8:33 pm UTC
Re: I have a mohawk.
HuBBsDoctor -- 10/21/2005 1:25 am UTC
Re: I have a mohawk.
Syntax -- 10/20/2005 8:42 pm UTC
Re: I have a mohawk.
Dakota Smith -- 10/23/2005 6:54 pm UTC
Re: God would accept the way we are.
johnross -- 10/19/2005 9:08 am UTC
I'd also like to point out...
HuBBsDoctor -- 10/18/2005 11:44 pm UTC
Re: I'd also like to point out...
johnross -- 10/19/2005 7:41 am UTC
Re: I'd also like to point out...
pepsibeth -- 10/19/2005 1:45 am UTC
Re: I'd also like to point out...
johnross -- 10/19/2005 7:44 am UTC
jk *nt*
johnross -- 10/19/2005 7:45 am UTC
p.s.
johnross -- 10/19/2005 7:49 am UTC