Such people may have achieved some sort of genuine stream entry at some point, and then slipped back/regressed into very ego-centered patterns of thinking. Regardless, it calls their advice into question. I'm not surprised that some folks are dissuaded - and I'd caution people against doing "just a little bit" anyway, if they're aiming at anything like actual stream entry/enlightenment. Vipassana meditation demands a serious commitment; the casual, halfway-committed version of good practice is perhaps best represented by western Stoicism, or by common practices (not aiming solely at enlightenment) in e.g. Hinduist-inspired religions.

So humans being imperfect, stupid creatures negates anything else this person may have to say?

The idea that Buddhist teachers should be some kind of perfect being is utterly false, and to be fair, if you ever thought so or believed someone when they claimed to be such a one; perhaps buddhism wasn’t so suitable for you anyway.

The goal is not to become some kind of zen droid. Quite the opposite.

> So humans being imperfect, stupid creatures negates anything else this person may have to say?

Humans are just naked apes, no need to judge that harshly.

Having sex and drinking alcohol is fine in my mind, since i don't believe in religious morals.

Cognitive dissonance makes it possible to preach one thing and do another. We call it hypocrisy no?

Everything Shakyamuni has ever said is just a "finger pointed to the moon". It is only known through the memory and writings of other people, so it's sensible to take that statement — and pretty much everything attributed to him — with a grain of salt.