- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Science, Race, Homosexuality, Abortion, and Religion
Posted on 2/10/14 at 2:31 pm to willthezombie
Posted on 2/10/14 at 2:31 pm to willthezombie
quote:
Well the study about homosexuality being epigenetic was done by the National Institute for Mathematical and Biological Synthesis. Which is funded by the National Science foundation, US department of Homeland Security, USDA, and the university of tennesse.
study
link
ETA: so I would assume this is public research dollars.
ETAA: the authors worked at cal and a university in Sweden. So this was definitely a public tax dollars and public researchers doing this study.
Thanks for the links.
I don't have a problem with funding this research publicly. I think the more we research and understand the facets of the human body, the better.
I would like to see the budget for scientific research increased across the board anyway.
0
Posted on 2/10/14 at 4:18 pm to AlaTiger
quote:
AlaTiger
Why are you presenting these social issues as if they must have either scientific or religious backing? And that if a society eschews the religious view on an issue, that it must use the scientific view? Or vice versa?
On the topic of race (and I will ignore the fact that there is a scientific and genetic basis for what we call "race", and that it is biologically real and useful to know one's genetic background), we do not "orchestrate public policy" these days simply for the fact that people are of different races... we do it in an (I think futile) attempt at righting the wrongs of our not-so-distant past (and present) in which certain races were put at a multi-generational disadvantage. There is no scientific or religious reason for it, it is purely for social and moral reasons.
On the topic of homosexuality (and, again, I will ignore your claim that there is no "gay" gene, since we are far, far away from figuring out what the entire genome does), it is of little importance whether it is a choice or whether they were born that way. The social and moral view is, if we do indeed live in a free society, then why do we have laws preventing people from doing things that do not harm others in any way, shape, or form?
On the topic of abortion, I don't think it is as clear-cut as the first two, and we have a lot to figure out as a society before we can even begin to put the issue to rest. But, again, science and religion will have little say in the discussion.
quote:
The larger point is that if you can make assertions in these areas based on social constructs or personal opinions, then how can you claim to be an objective society?
Who claims that our society is objective? Nearly every law or custom that we live by is rooted in morality, which is inherently subjective.
quote:The law reflects the reality of our collective moral code. Science does not say that murder, rape, or theft are wrong. Religion does (well, I guess some religions say murder is ok), as does the the morality of the majority of us.
The answer seems to be that groups are not able to make assertions about life (e.g., Race, Homosexuality, Abortion) apart from scientific facts or what can be proven. Everything else is just speculation and the law should reflect reality, not the testimony of people or their feelings.
The reality is that religion is derived from a set of human morals, not the other way around, and as such most modern societies revolve around morality instead of a particular set of religious views. Science is science, and is not derived from morality, nor is morality derived from science. Science is a tool, and as such can be used to help us understand our reality and morality, because we as humans tend to want real, objective facts to back up our beliefs. Sometimes science applies, sometimes it doesn't. That is up to society to decide.
Posted on 2/10/14 at 4:49 pm to Korkstand
quote:
Who claims that our society is objective? Nearly every law or custom that we live by is rooted in morality, which is inherently subjective.
There are lots of claims to objectivity when a debate is occurring. For example, on the gay marriage debate, when religious people used religion as a reason to not be in favor of it, that reason was dismissed as not relevant. Yet, the reasons for it are based in the same kind of thinking.
My point is that the debate is skewed with one set of evidence/argument being admitted and another being dismissed, but both arguments are of the same nature.
Long ago, people/society decided that they would treat people differently according to race. More recently, it was decided that homosexuality was not a choice, but was inborn. Abortion was deemed to be the sole decision of the mother. None of these decisions were rooted in science, but rather, in whatever benefitted the ones trying to convince the rest of us. And, a supposed secular society that claims to use "reason" and ground their beliefs in science and "fact" went along with all of it without even questioning it.
The only thing that seems to be questioned is a religious authority over morality, even though you admit that religion has helped to shape morality.
There are no rules for these types of discussions. It seems that truth is located in how one perspective can get the largest number of people agreeing with them so that they can then enforce their collective will on the rest of society, be it advancing racist theories to enslave Africans, promoting homosexuality, or killing unborn babies by the millions. It all comes from the same place - human subjectivity for the purpose of doing what one wants.
Posted on 2/10/14 at 4:57 pm to willthezombie
quote:
When you breed a dog you plan the mating taking away one of the fundamental laws of population genetics. That law is that mating is random in a wild population. The champion bloodline male black lab will have breed an in heat german second if he gets the chance.
It's the same with humans. It's called propinquity.
LINK
The short story...if you are on a desert island with Oprah you will eventually have sex with her. It doesn't matter how ugly she is.
Posted on 2/10/14 at 5:09 pm to uway
quote:
uway
quote:
If you are a Christian, you should never be surprised at the way the world chooses darkness over truth.
After all, we believe that the world (in a much more religious time), when presented with the Truth Incarnate, tortured and crucified Him to death.
AMEN brother. And one day, everyone will see the truth.
Posted on 2/10/14 at 6:11 pm to AlaTiger
Well
1. There is a slight genetic basis of race. After all our appearance is gene centered and race is based on physical appearance
2. We don't understand the full human genome, and there are also other factors that could lead to being born gay, various environmental (that is in utero environmental not growing up with a over dominating mother) that could contribute in effect with genetics to cause someone to be born gay.
3. Religion is fine point to argue, i think there is a stronger argument against abortion based on science. But religion shouldn't be used
4. There is no religious consensus so deciding any issue on religion is inherently unfair.
1. There is a slight genetic basis of race. After all our appearance is gene centered and race is based on physical appearance
2. We don't understand the full human genome, and there are also other factors that could lead to being born gay, various environmental (that is in utero environmental not growing up with a over dominating mother) that could contribute in effect with genetics to cause someone to be born gay.
3. Religion is fine point to argue, i think there is a stronger argument against abortion based on science. But religion shouldn't be used
4. There is no religious consensus so deciding any issue on religion is inherently unfair.
Posted on 2/10/14 at 6:18 pm to Zach
quote:
It's the same with humans. It's called propinquity.
LINK
The short story...if you are on a desert island with Oprah you will eventually have sex with her. It doesn't matter how ugly she is.
that is still random mating. For the most part humans mate randomly. We usually don't say I want my kids to be doctors so I am going to marry and reproduce with a doctor. When you breed a dog you say I want my dog to be a champion duck dog for example. You take your pure blood and breed with another pure blood to try and get the best bloodline. That is not random mating.
Posted on 2/10/14 at 6:20 pm to willthezombie
quote:
that is still random mating. For the most part humans mate randomly. We usually don't say I want my kids to be doctors so I am going to marry and reproduce with a doctor. When you breed a dog you say I want my dog to be a champion duck dog for example. You take your pure blood and breed with another pure blood to try and get the best bloodline. That is not random mating.
Human mating is not random, but it also isn't completely oriented to a certain trait.
some people do marry for intelligence, some for looks, some people settle.
Way to many people don't select for anything when mating.
Posted on 2/10/14 at 6:26 pm to SammyTiger
quote:
Human mating is not random, but it also isn't completely oriented to a certain trait
human mating is random. You decide who you are going to mate with but if you consider that you or anyone else doesn't know who you are going to mate with (unless it is an arranged marriage). That makes the population a randomly mating population.
Posted on 2/10/14 at 6:53 pm to willthezombie
It happens.
Posted on 2/10/14 at 7:12 pm to Korkstand
quote:Why ignore that? \
(and I will ignore the fact that there is a scientific and genetic basis for what we call "race", and that it is biologically real and useful to know one's genetic background)
It is as bizarre an assertion as I've seen posted here.
Posted on 2/10/14 at 7:15 pm to willthezombie
quote:
human mating is random. You decide who you are going to mate with but if you consider that you or anyone else doesn't know who you are going to mate with (unless it is an arranged marriage). That makes the population a randomly mating population.
No it isn't.
Random mating would mean there are no selective factors to our mating decisions.
Posted on 2/10/14 at 7:35 pm to willthezombie
quote:Not remotely.
That makes the population a randomly mating population.
Posted on 2/10/14 at 7:52 pm to NC_Tigah
There are some assertions in here that are just laughable. We've got those who think skin color is controlled by 2 alleles in a punnet square, people saying that humans exhibit random mating, and more!
Posted on 2/10/14 at 7:53 pm to willthezombie
quote:
human mating is random. You decide who you are going to mate with but if you consider that you or anyone else doesn't know who you are going to mate with (unless it is an arranged marriage). That makes the population a randomly mating population.
Oh my.
Posted on 2/10/14 at 8:55 pm to Tigerlaff
Ok yea there's no gay gene......... Hey where's the straight gene?
Posted on 2/10/14 at 8:56 pm to willthezombie
quote:
human mating is random.
No it isn't. Human mating violates literally every genetic criteria for randomness.
Our mating habits are by far the least random of any species on earth.
quote:
You decide who you are going to mate with but if you consider that you or anyone else doesn't know who you are going to mate with (unless it is an arranged marriage). That makes the population a randomly mating population.
I just died a little inside.
This post was edited on 2/10/14 at 8:58 pm
Posted on 2/10/14 at 9:02 pm to AlaTiger
quote:
The human genome has been mapped and there is no "gay" gene.
There's no autism gene either, and yet autism almost certainly as a significant genetic component.
This idea that all genetic traits are nice and neat, single allele, punnet square types is a damning indictment of our science curriculum in this country.
Posted on 2/10/14 at 9:02 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:Damn brown whiskey will do it every time.
no it isn't. Human mating violates literally every genetic criteria for randomness.
Posted on 2/10/14 at 9:05 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
This idea that all genetic traits are nice and neat, single allele, punnet square types is a damning indictment of our science curriculum in this country.
Quote of the day award. Congrats!
Page 4 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News