Is homosexuality a choice or is it genetic?

[numinus]

We live in an EXPANDING universe. Of course it's FINITE.
This one statement is a perfect example of why I'm not going to continue trying to discuss with you. Absolutes coupled to non sequiturs embedded in axioms described in ambiguous terms punctuated with "sigh"s.

That statement is a SCIENTIFIC FACT.

The universe couldn't be EXPANDING and INFINITE at the same time, wouldn't you say? Since we know it is expanding from hubble's law, then it couldn't be infinite.

It has a breadth of at least 15 billion lightyears (since this is the furthest distance anyone has observed).

Consequently, it has an age of not less than 15 billion years. Anything less would make it impossible for us to observe anything at 15 billion lightyears, no?

So the universe is finite. And even if this isn't so, our environment restricts us to a space-time existence.

The only way we can pierce this restriction is through our reasoning faculty. That is why we can concieve of 5, 6, even n-dimensional mathematics without actually seeing or experiencing such a thing. That is why we can concieve of a curving and finite space-time - a proven and demonstrable fact through special and general relativity.

I've had more cogent discussions with people on weed! I don't know if it's me or you, but we have no communication taking place here. If someone else wants to try to decipher your maelstrom of prose then they are welcome to it. Have a philosophically nice day.

The thing is, moral relativity is simply unprecedented in the history of human thought. You have the whole of human experience against your assertion. And in such a hopeless situation, it is your assertion that is saddled by the burden of proof.

Have a nice day yourself.

 

[9sublime]

I think we have found the philosophers of the board then.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

That statement is a SCIENTIFIC FACT.
The universe couldn't be EXPANDING and INFINITE at the same time, wouldn't you say? Since we know it is expanding from hubble's law, then it couldn't be infinite.
It has a breadth of at least 15 billion lightyears (since this is the furthest distance anyone has observed).
Consequently, it has an age of not less than 15 billion years. Anything less would make it impossible for us to observe anything at 15 billion lightyears, no?
So the universe is finite. And even if this isn't so, our environment restricts us to a space-time existence.
The only way we can pierce this restriction is through our reasoning faculty. That is why we can concieve of 5, 6, even n-dimensional mathematics without actually seeing or experiencing such a thing. That is why we can concieve of a curving and finite space-time - a proven and demonstrable fact through special and general relativity.
The thing is, moral relativity is simply unprecedented in the history of human thought. You have the whole of human experience against your assertion. And in such a hopeless situation, it is your assertion that is saddled by the burden of proof.
Have a nice day yourself.

The bolded part is an example of not defining terms while still being willing to argue them. "Universe" means what? You are apparently meaning only the observable part of it, I was referring to its totality. If something is expanding then there must be space into which it CAN EXPAND, that space is part of the Universe for which their is not even a theoretical end. Definitions are important and you don't do it nearly enough.

I think that human sexual orientation is a genetically controlled trait. (There you go, Sublime.)

 

[numinus]

The bolded part is an example of not defining terms while still being willing to argue them. "Universe" means what? You are apparently meaning only the observable part of it, I was referring to its totality. If something is expanding then there must be space into which it CAN EXPAND, that space is part of the Universe for which their is not even a theoretical end. Definitions are important and you don't do it nearly enough.

NO, NO, NO.

SPACE-TIME ITSELF IS EXPANDING.

Consider two object that have no velocity relative to one another. They would still appear to be moving away from each other because the space that separates them is expanding.

This is the most obvious feature of einstein's general relativity.

And what exactly lies beyond the lead end of this expansion is NOTHING, not even SPACE nor TIME.

I think that human sexual orientation is a genetically controlled trait. (There you go, Sublime.)

The imperatives of survival causes undue stress to any organism such that it forces the same to behave outside rational patterns.

Lions attack full grown elephants without regard to the futility of such a thing. Rats eat their young against the very maternal instinct their built with.

I am even willing to concede that homosexual behavior, through the continous application of stress both in the concious and unconcious level, may have been some sort of genetic adaptation.

BUT, the essence of human civilization is always towards better and rational conditions of existence. We are a 'thinking' species simply because we are capable of discerning the laws that govern us and the natural world we live in - and thus act ACCORDINGLY.

Do you mean for the human person to remain a slave to his own genetic inclinations?

Isn't rationality there precisely to guide human appetites towards a desired objective end?

Do we give vent to all concieveable sexual urges for the simple reason that they are there?

 

[Segep]

NO, NO, NO.

SPACE-TIME ITSELF IS EXPANDING.

Consider two object that have no velocity relative to one another. They would still appear to be moving away from each other because the space that separates them is expanding.

This is the most obvious feature of einstein's general relativity.

And what exactly lies beyond the lead end of this expansion is NOTHING, not even SPACE nor TIME.

How do you know the leading edge isn't also the point of origin?

Isn't rationality there precisely to guide human appetites towards a desired objective end?

Whose desired objective end? Sounds pretty subjective to me.

Do we give vent to all concieveable sexual urges for the simple reason that they are there?

Hey, I resist the urge to masturbate in public all the time.

 

[numinus]

How do you know the leading edge isn't also the point of origin?

Einstein's field equation and hubble's law.

Whose desired objective end? Sounds pretty subjective to me.

An end according to a rational principle applies to everyone. Equality - remember?

Hey, I resist the urge to masturbate in public all the time.

Case in point!

 

[Segep]

Einstein's field equation and hubble's law.

I'll admit I don't know enough to intelligently comment. I just tossed it out there.

An end according to a rational principle applies to everyone. Equality - remember?

What rational principle? (here comes my old pal Slippery Slope....)

Case in point!

Sorry, what I do in my own bedroom with another consenting adult and what I do in public are two very different things. Gay sex bother you? Stay the hell out of my bedroom you perv.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

NO, NO, NO.

SPACE-TIME ITSELF IS EXPANDING.

Consider two object that have no velocity relative to one another. They would still appear to be moving away from each other because the space that separates them is expanding.

This is the most obvious feature of einstein's general relativity.

And what exactly lies beyond the lead end of this expansion is NOTHING, not even SPACE nor TIME.

NO, NO, NO! You are assuming that nothing exists outside of Space/Time and you have nothing with which to support that.

The imperatives of survival causes undue stress to any organism such that it forces the same to behave outside rational patterns.

Lions attack full grown elephants without regard to the futility of such a thing. Rats eat their young against the very maternal instinct their built with.

I am even willing to concede that homosexual behavior, through the continous application of stress both in the concious and unconcious level, may have been some sort of genetic adaptation.

BUT, the essence of human civilization is always towards better and rational conditions of existence. We are a 'thinking' species simply because we are capable of discerning the laws that govern us and the natural world we live in - and thus act ACCORDINGLY.

Do you mean for the human person to remain a slave to his own genetic inclinations?

Isn't rationality there precisely to guide human appetites towards a desired objective end?

Do we give vent to all concieveable sexual urges for the simple reason that they are there?

You cannot control what sexually arouses you. You can control what you do with that arousal. Two very different things. If you are arguing that a person can change from being hetero to being homo (and we're not talking about bi-sexual people here) then you should be willing to do it for us and prove that it can be done.

Underlying your position is that homosexual behavior is "less than" in some way when you ask, "Do we give vent to all concieveable sexual urges for the simple reason that they are there?" Knowing fullwell that no one is arguing for that, we are arguing for equal rights for all consenting adults to participate in the LEGAL CONTRACT OF MARRIAGE as set forth in US Law.

 

[numinus]

I'll admit I don't know enough to intelligently comment. I just tossed it out there.

Einstein's field equations (minus the cosmological constant) predicts 3 distinct geometries of the universe - spherical, flat, and pseudo-spherical. Depending on the geometry, the universe is either, contracting, static or expanding. And since we are talking about symmetrical geometries, its origin is not at the its expanding horizon.

Hubble observed that the universe is indeed expanding, at a more or less stable or reduced rate.

What rational principle? (here comes my old pal Slippery Slope....)

A rational law or a principle is merely that which govern 'like things'. The laws of physics govern matter and energy, the laws of mathematics, that of numbers and their operations, and so forth.

A statement of equality among human persons implies an operation within a set of 'like things'. And if there is 'sameness' within human nature, then a law or principle that is applicable to it equally, must exist.

Understand?

Sorry, what I do in my own bedroom with another consenting adult and what I do in public are two very different things. Gay sex bother you? Stay the hell out of my bedroom you perv.

So what's the point of legislating something that you do in your own bedroom, eh?

Rather than keep it private, as is your right, you in fact invite other people to your bedroom.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

So what's the point of legislating something that you do in your own bedroom, eh?

Rather than keep it private, as is your right, you in fact invite other people to your bedroom.

It's the laws passed by religious people penalizing homosexual people and denying them legal equality that is the issue. Sex between consenting adults should not be subject to government or religious control unless unwanted babies are being produced--which is hardly an issue with gay sex, is it?

 

[numinus]

NO, NO, NO! You are assuming that nothing exists outside of Space/Time and you have nothing with which to support that.

Excuse me, but you are the one assuming, and not a particularly correct assumption at that. You said:

"If something is expanding then there must be space into which it CAN EXPAND"

How can there be space into which space can expand?

Throw away your euclidean notions of space for a while and imagine that space itself has a particular geometry. What lies outside this geometry is NOT space, nor anything anyone can imagine scientifically at the moment.

Personally, I think god's creative will exists outside of this.

You cannot control what sexually arouses you. You can control what you do with that arousal. Two very different things. If you are arguing that a person can change from being hetero to being homo (and we're not talking about bi-sexual people here) then you should be willing to do it for us and prove that it can be done.

You cannot change your appetites - only the way you manifest them.

Underlying your position is that homosexual behavior is "less than" in some way when you ask, "Do we give vent to all concieveable sexual urges for the simple reason that they are there?" Knowing fullwell that no one is arguing for that, we are arguing for equal rights for all consenting adults to participate in the LEGAL CONTRACT OF MARRIAGE as set forth in US Law.

Marriage is NOT an absolute right. It must adhere to certain LEGAL FORMS. It certainly is something more than the standard contracts between any two consenting adults,

You cannot marry under the age of 18.

You cannot marry more than one person at a time.

You cannot marry a relative within a certain degree of consanguinity.

You cannot marry your pet.

You cannot marry another person of the same gender.

Your right to privacy however, allows you to engage in whatever sexual behavior you wish. You just can't use this as a sole basis of marriage.

 

[numinus]

It's the laws passed by religious people penalizing homosexual people and denying them legal equality that is the issue. Sex between consenting adults should not be subject to government or religious control unless unwanted babies are being produced--which is hardly an issue with gay sex, is it?

But you said it yourself - you wanted gay marriage LEGALIZED.

What is that if not 'subject to government control'?

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

Excuse me, but you are the one assuming, and not a particularly correct assumption at that. You said:

"If something is expanding then there must be space into which it CAN EXPAND"

How can there be space into which space can expand? Throw away your euclidean notions of space for a while and imagine that space itself has a particular geometry. What lies outside this geometry is NOT space, nor anything anyone can imagine scientifically at the moment.

Personally, I think god's creative will exists outside of this.

I was using the term space metaphorically. If something is expanding it has to be able to expand in SOME sense. I was using the metaphorical "space" to refer to the area where you are postulating God's Creative Will exists. I would like to refer to that area with some word, but I am willing to allow you to pick the word if that will make you happy.

Marriage is NOT an absolute right. It must adhere to certain LEGAL FORMS. It certainly is something more than the standard contracts between any two consenting adults,

You cannot marry under the age of 18.

You cannot marry more than one person at a time.

You cannot marry a relative within a certain degree of consanguinity.

You cannot marry your pet.

You cannot marry another person of the same gender.

Your right to privacy however, allows you to engage in whatever sexual behavior you wish. You just can't use this as a sole basis of marriage.

No one is arguing that marriage is an absolute right. I have always defined it as it is set forth in US Law, between consenting adults. The only reason that one cannot marry a member of the same gender is the deeply entrenched religious bigotry in this culture. Don't go stupid here, Numi, pets are not consenting adults, neither are refridgerators. Under 18 (differs from state to state) one is not a consenting adult, and plural marriage is not legal in this country at this time but it has been in many countries down through history. Look at how many wives King Solomon had. There is no reason that I know of to ban plural marriages any more than gay marriages.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

But you said it yourself - you wanted gay marriage LEGALIZED.

What is that if not 'subject to government control'?

No, I want the control removed, right now the government interferes on the basis of a bunch of religious myths and penalizes homosexual people for no good reason. I want that to end, the only way for that to happen is for the government to change the religious-based laws it currently has on the books.

 

[Segep]

Einstein's field equations (minus the cosmological constant) predicts 3 distinct geometries of the universe - spherical, flat, and pseudo-spherical. Depending on the geometry, the universe is either, contracting, static or expanding. And since we are talking about symmetrical geometries, its origin is not at the its expanding horizon.

Hubble observed that the universe is indeed expanding, at a more or less stable or reduced rate.



A rational law or a principle is merely that which govern 'like things'. The laws of physics govern matter and energy, the laws of mathematics, that of numbers and their operations, and so forth.

A statement of equality among human persons implies an operation within a set of 'like things'. And if there is 'sameness' within human nature, then a law or principle that is applicable to it equally, must exist.

Understand?

Not really, because none of this has anything to do with the issue at hand. The only "sameness" in human nature that pertains to this discussion is that nobody can control who they are attracted to.

So what's the point of legislating something that you do in your own bedroom, eh?

Rather than keep it private, as is your right, you in fact invite other people to your bedroom.

No offense, but you are not invited to my bedroom. If you're in there it's because you want to be there.