• We're currently experiencing a minor issue with our email system preventing emails for new registrations and verifications going out. We're currently working to fix this
  • Be sure to join the discussion on our discord at: Discord.gg/serebii
  • If you're still waiting for the e-mail, be sure to check your junk/spam e-mail folders

The Tangent Topic (Currently: Homosexuality and Religion)

Brutaka

Ignition
Hey! hold on! I'm atheist. I was talking about that theory because it was defended by a catholic "scientist" who also used it to justify creationism.
My initial point is that many scientists (included atheists) bought the idea that the "universe" was created from a microscopic body, with no space-time precious to this event...it sounds like creationism to me.
Honestly, I don't care about the politics of a theory, only the science. If anyone used it to justify creationism, they're doing science wrong. Plain and simple.
But you make it sound like The Big Bang Theory is some sort of hoax that 'fooled' all the scientists... BBT, as Zora explained thoroughly, is incredibly supported by science. If someone believes that the BBT is the best explainable model for what we see, they aren't being 'fooled', they're a rational human being. Because BBT is nothing like creationism, and I can't see how you'd think that.

I am aware that our "visible universe" can be product of a more condensed state, my criticism is based on the fact of making "universe=known universe"
in the same way known physical laws may not work inside a black hole (even when IMO our knowledge is insufficient to explain effects of G forces out of our immediate planetary boundaries) they may not work in the non-visually-reachable universe.
....Except that it's largely unscientific to declare stuff like this. See, we suggest that certain physical laws don't work in a black hole because our math fails. This might change if we develop new mathematics to deal with infinities and infinitesimals, but insofar, that's the stance. But we don't say anything about anything outside of the observable universe... because we haven't observed it. Saying anything about it would be unscientific. Saying that the area outside of the observable universe works different than inside that range is like proposing that a God might exist. It's technically possible, but without any way to verify or falsify it, it's worthless and unscientific.
It's great to stay open-minded about ideas, like m-theory, string theory, multiverse stuff, etc, but you can't actually say anything about it until it's testable and falsifiable. And it would be wrong to discredit The Big Bang Theory because there might be something outside of our knowledge that we can't see, just as it is wrong to discredit the Theory of Evolution because creationism might be true.

I'm not trying to antagonize anything, I'm just saying that when we talk of science, we must be scientific.
 

Zora

Who dies first?
Thanks for the detailed answer, I am not really desperate for answers, I was just expressing a point of view.
Let me guess, you study physics or engineering, I studied some of this concepts (lots of years ago).
I am aware that our "visible universe" can be product of a more condensed state, my criticism is based on the fact of making "universe=known universe"
in the same way known physical laws may not work inside a black hole (even when IMO our knowledge is insufficient to explain effects of G forces out of our immediate planetary boundaries) they may not work in the non-visually-reachable universe.
To make it simple... you have a dish with water and pour some drops of oil, the spot where the oil "touches" the water expands... but, what about the rest of the dish?
we, humans, in this context, would be like quarks thinking that our "oily" universe expands and was born from a singularity.
If you say "out time" began about 13.8 B years ago I may buy it.
I don't even know what to make of this post.

- The definition of "universe" in the context of our universe is that it's the sum of all energy contained within our own cosmological horizon. In the case of your oil-drop analogy, our universe by definition would be the expanding oil drop; that water down below is someone else's universe.

- If our universe happens to belong to some sort of superspace (where I'm defining superspace as an antonym for subspace; i.e. a superset of a vector space that is itself a vector space) that has more universes, then--well, it happens to belong to some sort of superspace that has more universes. There's no consensus on whether or not there are more univserses out there (i.e. regions of this supposed superspace with their own cosmological horizon), but multiverses are being talked about within the scientific community.

- What "known" laws of black holes. We don't have a physical model for black holes because we don't have an adequate theory for quantum gravity ("adequate" meaning corroborated with evidence).

- Of course G-Forces work outside our immediate planetary boundaries--or at least the physics behind G-forces. G-Force accelerations are the result of contact forces, which are in turn a result of electromagnetism (as described quantum mechanically) as are all contact forces. If you have a reason to suppose electromagnetic theory (i.e. QED or derivatives) fail to work outside of our planetary boundary, I'd very much like to see a reasonable doubt. However, given that we use electromagnetic theory to make predictions--in particular, electromagnetic radiation to study distant galaxies, there isn't any reason to doubt that (accelerations due to) contact forces don't work beyond our planetary boundaries.

- If our universe were modeled as an oil drop, then by definition, our universe would be that expanding oil drop. The oil dropper and the water are just something else in some sort of superspace that our cosmological horizon happens to be in.

- If you really want to call it "our time" just to make yourself feel better, be our guest. There are scientists out there who have suggested that 13.8 billion years ago wasn't the beginning of absolute time--such as Sean Carroll in his book "From Here to Eternity" in which he discussed the "before the big bang" as a universe that shrunk down to a singularity and then expanded again as a possibility. In the general sense, scientists don't know what happened before the big bang and all we know is from the Friedmann Equations it that our universe was incredibly dense 13.8 billion years ago, a theoretical result is that is corroborated by microwave background radiation and red shift. Don't get hung-up over the fact we mathematically refer to this time as "t=0," since we're just defining this period of 13.8 billion years ago as some common reference point where all worldlines would converge to temporally. But the truth is that no scientist knows if it's the beginning of "our time" or some "absolute time," and since there's no scientific consensus either which way there's no point in making a fuss over it.

Either way, the fact that scientists don't lay claim to the fact that our universe was "created" as in just "poofed" into existence (in the form of a singularity)--which was the point my entire last post by going through what the science says. The fact that no one is saying the universe just "poofed" undermines your earlier claim that the BBT provides support for divinity via a supposed creation of spacetime, namely by attacking the assertion that spacetime was "created" as a unsupported assumption.
 
Last edited:

Poke Trainer J

Well-Known Member
We Are Now In the Early Stages of a Mass Extinction -

A new study suggests that thousands of species on Earth going extinct at a rate that far exceeds what’s typical. We are in the beginnings of a mass extinction, argue scientists, and it could lead to global starvation for humans — as well as many other animals.

The new study, published today in Science Advances, explains that we are suffering extremely elevated levels of species losses. It’s not an issue of a snowy owl there or a tree frog there. We’re talking about thousands upon thousands of species going extinct, which will lead to a loss of biodiversity. Without that much-needed diversity in an ecosystem, the risk is that food sources will dwindle — one frog going extinct can mean that the birds who feed on it go extinct, which means the cats that eat those birds go extinct, and so on. Before you know it, the food web has collapsed and rates of extinction go sky-high.

Write the authors of the study:

The loss of biodiversity is one of the most critical current environmental problems, threatening valuable ecosystem services and human well-being. A growing body of evidence indicates that current species extinction rates are higher than the pre-human background rate, with hundreds of anthropogenic vertebrate extinctions documented in prehistoric and historic times.


Their breakthrough in this study is to collect vast amounts of data that suggest species are going extinct at levels that exceed typical extinction rates — but also, perhaps more importantly, the loss of biodiversity is correlated with human activities. They explain:

We assess, using extremely conservative assumptions, whether human activities are causing a mass extinction. First, we use a recent estimate of a background rate of 2 mammal extinctions per 10,000 species per 100 years (that is, 2 E/MSY), which is twice as high as widely used previous estimates. We then compare this rate with the current rate of mammal and vertebrate extinctions. The latter is conservatively low because listing a species as extinct requires meeting stringent criteria. Even under our assumptions, which would tend to minimize evidence of an incipient mass extinction, the average rate of vertebrate species loss over the last century is up to 114 times higher than the background rate. Under the 2 E/MSY background rate, the number of species that have gone extinct in the last century would have taken, depending on the vertebrate taxon, between 800 and 10,000 years to disappear. These estimates reveal an exceptionally rapid loss of biodiversity over the last few centuries, indicating that a sixth mass extinction is already under way. Averting a dramatic decay of biodiversity and the subsequent loss of ecosystem services is still possible through intensified conservation efforts, but that window of opportunity is rapidly closing.


A mass extinction is technically an event where 75 percent of species on the planet go extinct in a million years or less. There have been five in the 4.5 billion year history of our planet, most recently when the majority of dinosaurs were killed off by the one-two punch of mega-volcanoes in India and a huge asteroid smashing into the Gulf of Mexico. That was 65 million years ago.

Today we’re seeing what appears to be a very rapid die-off of many species, which is sure to lead to more die-offs due to food web collapse. It’s not too late to prevent this mass extinction, and more and more scientists are saying we need to accept the reality of this “sixth mass extinction” so that we stop the starvation before it starts.
Source:

http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/1/5/e1400253.full
 
What does that have to do with homosexuality or religion?
Pretty sure the tangent topic has spread out much more since the original post. Basically it's a free for all tangent conversation. As for human extinction, meh. Been a while coming, can't say we're undeserving as a species.
 
Pretty sure the tangent topic has spread out much more since the original post. Basically it's a free for all tangent conversation.
>Currently: Homosexuality and Religion

That honestly put me off, but now that's been cleared up I guess there's a lot more discussion options available. Didn't want to walk into a topic and post anything that might be irrelevant like the poster above did until it was okay.
 
Yep, very sad. Hits pretty close to home considering its in my state and not that far away from me.
 

Spacial

procrastination
Does anyone know the average jail time for homosexuality in countries where it is illegal? I'm doing some coursework and couldn't find it, thought this thread would be relevant - thanks!
 

Bananarama

The light is coming
Does anyone know the average jail time for homosexuality in countries where it is illegal? I'm doing some coursework and couldn't find it, thought this thread would be relevant - thanks!
It varies from country to country. For example, in countries like Singapore where it is technichally illegal, almost no penalties exist, and they have a pretty active LGBT community.

Countries like Saudi Arabia, on the other hand, pride themselves on enforcing their barbaric laws toward LGBT people. Unfortunately, the death penalty isn't uncommon there.
 

Vlazamal

Yup. I'm a neocon.
Another public shooting, another gun-caused tragedy. This time in Louisiana. This has to stop.
I agree. I believe we can take a fair approach of stopping these acts from the ground up by social change. There are a large amount of solutions thrown out to the public, but in the end, I do not believe that the existence of firearms is the main cause of this. I believe personally that the sacrifice of arms is not a viable solution, because of the threat of tyranny. Call me old fashioned, but statistics show that nurture can prevent these kind of events. A gargantuan portion of the public shooters exerted control over their parents, often isolated from their peers. They are often extremely isolated, and refuse psychological counseling. They're often stubborn and have massive self-esteem issues. Issues like these are products of a bad society. There is MUCH less of a kinship along families now. Families are degrading, especially below the middle class. A quick timeline of mass shootings tells about how the changing cultural landscape of America is leading to more deaths.

Timeline of shootings

Insight into the young minds committing the acts
 

jnshucker12

Well-Known Member
I'm confused to what this thread is. But at least I can go on a long talking thing about homosexuality.

I have austism and I have an obsession with homosexuality. It's lessened in recent years as I have better stuff to do than google random stuff about homosexuality... mainly forums and Youtube.

I wrote Deviantart article thing about how Genesis chapter 2 verse 18-24, KJV, says why the bible says homosexuality is a sin. I won't link it because I've had too many rage/people angry or upset comments. I wrote this:
"Please know that if you don’t believe in god or simply hold a different opinion than me then that’s fine and you have the right to your own opinion. I made this mainly as a resource to other. Also please know that if anything I say is wrong then that simply means I’m wrong; I’m doing a lot of this from memory. I have four main reasons to start out with, but I may add on if I feel the need."

and people still raged.

I also wrote this on Deviantart. I'll paste it here.

There were two brothers. One is homosexuality. One is heterosexuality.
Homosexuality was unfortunate enough to have been called a sin by the Jewish/Christian/Abrahamic god. He existed in the animal kingdom by their natural instincts. It was impossible for them to be unnatural as they were animals. But among the humans he was broken; sinful. They gawked at him, hated him. He was distraught at first, but slowly lost all of his caring for himself until he didn't care for himself at all. He didn't care about the humans or God either. All he wanted was to not exist. He was only an action, a shadow of a real thing, so one can say that he already didn't exist in the first place. But to him this was not enough. He didn't want to exist at all.

He was beautiful. He was ugly.
He was natural. He was unnatural.
He was love. He was sin.
He kills people. People kill him.
People push him into ruin. He pushes people into ruin.
People hurt him. He hurts people.

He hasn't seen his brother in a long time, nor any of the "holy" virtues. Or holy world/natural things. And so on. He was associated with sin. But he didn't live with sin. He lived by his lonesome.

He is broken. He is pale. He is sick. He sighs often. When others ask him what his name is, he either replies that he is "Love" or that he dares not speak his name.

It's based on the "Two Loves" poem. This was more emotional/just expressional to me.

I one day plan on creating a Christian TV show. There is a man, who is transgender, 23 or 24, and he works at the top of a book publishing company. He is single. He has 5 adopted daughters. The show is slice of life and a comedy. The man is transgender, one of his daughters is transgender, one is a lesbian, one of the girl's psychiatrist is a transexual MtF.

I also once had a dream that I obsessed over a show about a boy (15, teenager), his girlfriend, and his uncle. The uncle was a pedophile. I woke up. I started thinking about that dream afterwards. I wondered what it would be like to have a pedophilic uncle. All I need to do is remove that attraction to his nephew, remove creepiness, and do some other stuff, and I can make it into a real show; which I plan on doing.
 
Last edited:

ChloboShoka

Writer
I watched a documentary about priests working in The Vatican sexually molesting young boys and girls. Amazing that some members The Vatican condemn homosexuality in public, yet do it behind closed doors.
 

lemoncatpower

Cynical optimist
I watched a documentary about priests working in The Vatican sexually molesting young boys and girls. Amazing that some members The Vatican condemn homosexuality in public, yet do it behind closed doors.
anywhere christianity has touched, you'll find old men touching little kids.
 

Ereshkigal

Well-Known Member
I had a fun chat with some door-to-door missionaries a bit earlier. They were trying to recruit me to attend their church. The majority of their recruitment speech was about gay marriage being wrong and not allowing gays into their church. On and on about needing to find the love of god... Honestly, I think I fell asleep at one point.

Finally, I got tired and asked, "How can they know the love of god if they're not allowed in his house?"

When they had no answer, I went back inside and hunted down one of my favorite Lady Gaga songs.

Honestly, I'm hoping someone can answer that question and make their stance have at least some logical sense.
 

windwakemeup

Bee Prince
I know this is only marginally relaed, but I hate that because I'm gay and trans my life is inherently political to most people. I can't hold another guy's hand or use the guy's restroom without people going "I really wish that those gays wouldn't flaunt their gayness! I wish they kept their opinion to themselves and stop shoving it in my face all the time!!"

Also all christians I've met have been annoying and full of homophobic rhetoric so I try to avoid them as much as possible. They are snakes dressed up as sheep imho.
 

chess-z

campy vampire
I know this is only marginally relaed, but I hate that because I'm gay and trans my life is inherently political to most people. I can't hold another guy's hand or use the guy's restroom without people going "I really wish that those gays wouldn't flaunt their gayness! I wish they kept their opinion to themselves and stop shoving it in my face all the time!!"

Also all christians I've met have been annoying and full of homophobic rhetoric so I try to avoid them as much as possible. They are snakes dressed up as sheep imho.
GOD SAME.

Because they politicized my identity, now everything I do is political and somehow that's my fault. Really gets my gears grinding.
 

M.E.R.255

Triangle Face
That's the first time I saw a forum debate religion and homosexuality! O_O Don't worry though, I'm quite open with a lot of things and don't mind sharing stuff. ^^ Just wanted to say that I'm proud of you guys for allowing members to debate these topics! =D

AHEM! Anyways... I'm bisexual and have had a boyfriend for the last 6 years. ^^ He lives in Canada, so I haven't been able to live with him due to immigration being in our way. ._. His mother demanded that whenever I would visit (we only saw another in person 4x...) we would never hold hands in public, nor kiss. -_- Despite my dad having received the news from me years ago, he is STILL trying to get me to hook up with girls...

To be honest though, I used to hate gays as teen, but only because I was told to dislike them, and was in denial of having feelings towards feminine guys due to being bullied for a friend of mine acting gay. ._. I wasn't raised bisexual... it's due to the fact that the female side of my family abused me till I was 16 that I had a tremendous fear of women until I became an adult. *sweat*
(Unless there's a topic that discusses this stuff, I rather not share it... Let's just say that even to this day do I have a problem looking people in the eyes and am terrified of making mistakes.)
Even to this day is it hard for me to trust them... Women are no monsters, but my mother and sister were.
I suppose because of that, I prefer someone who needs my help and won't mistreat me. =) I do still feel something for women... but I feel a lot calmer around guys and feel attraction to them as well. ^^

(I found it quite odd then when I was told to touch and fondle a breast... I didn't feel anything. That wasn't recent, of course, but it still baffled me how I had the desire to do so, and then after being told to do it, it didn't have an impact on me whatsoever. =O Maybe I'm more into guys than I thought... Or the person just wasn't the right type.)

I respect people for openly admit that they have feeling towards their own gender, both genders, or to none whatsoever! =D
However um... it does aggravate me when someone says "I'm asexual" (has no feelings towards gender or doesn't have sexual desires) yet has a ton of mature content on their hard drive or creates mature content on a weekly basis. -_- How can you draw overly-sexualized art when you claim you're asexual?!

As for religion... Hmm...
I'm neutral (not Atheist, just someone who doesn't want to pick a side so he can remain neutral *sweat*) and do think that religion can help to steer a person into the right direction... buuuuut... I've seen a lot of people who instead try to find excuses to do things that are wrong. =/
Why would someone learn about treating another kindly just turn around and stab them in the back?
You're telling me that some people made sub-religions of religions to alter certain parts to what they like? Why?
I saw an older lady say "Your friend is going to hell!" to a young guy who just lost his friend because of his depression and committing suicide because of it. Even IF that was the case, do you really think that would cheer the poor guy up?! He just lost a close friend to his that he couldn't save from suicide! Have some sympathy! oO

All in all, I'm not against any sexuality or religion... But when one uses them as excuses to intentionally do bad things, then it does upset me. -_-

I hope this didn't upset anyone and that it could contribute in some shape or form! *sweat*
 
Top