Disbelief: On homosexuality, heaven, and epistemology

This is based off a forum post where I asked about how a Mother can be happy and tearless in Heaven while her homosexual son (intended just to give an example) is suffering eternally in Hell. I was asked:

Are you claiming there are no (former) homosexuals in heaven?

I'm not making that claim but a vast number of Christians (and especially Catholics) do.

I wouldn't make such claims because I don't believe in a 'heaven' nor a 'hell' nor a 'god' - I used to believe such things because I was inculcated with those beliefs as a child. Then I learned about Islam, Judaism, Zoroastrianism, Hellenism, Hinduism (esp the case of Sri Sathya Sai Baba), Sikhism, Shinto, Jainism (I really liked that one), Bahá'í, Cao Ðài, Cheondoism, Tenrikyo, Wicca, Rastafari, Scientology, Eckankar, Raëlism. I learned about how divided even just Christians are on hundreds of important theological points (with some 33,000 some-odd sects of just Christianity, thousands of those are very deep divisions). They can't even agree on the Trinity (see Arius, et al.). Yes, you call them Heresy and they call your beliefs Heresy and there is no evidence upon which to decide << this is the fundamental issue.

I learned about history and the role religion often plays in promulgating prejudices -- such as those today against those who don't share your normative sexuality or aren't gender binary; our gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgendered, queer, (and many others on the spectrum) fellow human beings who suffer emotional damage, physical violence, and a denial of fair and equal treatment under our laws, all at the hands of the small-minded. All based on ignorance and a fear that appeals to scripture as did Reverend Richard Fuller when he summed up the Christian position on Slavery in 1845: “What God sanctioned in the Old Testament, and permitted in the New, cannot be a sin”.

I read Martin Luther's "On The Jews And Their Lies", I read about the racism, slavery, and violence of the Vatican (and Islam, and many others) and I saw the result that played out as human populations rose, our technology for mass murder advanced but our ability to communicate and to know what was happened lagged behind -- by the end of it, some 200 million people enslaved, slaughtered, their culture destroyed and the 'survivors' emotionally destroyed. Africans and the natives through the islands of the Americas, the Aztec and Mayan people in South America, and the natives of North America. Virtually wiped out, not merely decimated. And it was largely a Christian people who did that, largely under the 'authority' of the Spanish Requerimiento and doctrine of Manifest Destiny.

But let me be clear, I DO NOT BLAME religion, per se, (see link)

Perspective on World Violence

People often wonder where we are and where we are going, are things getting 'better' or 'worse' in the world?

If we look at recent history in the United States we see a very sharp drop in the rate of violent crime, down about 50% from 757.7 per 100,000 in 1992 to 386.3 per 100,000 in 2011. Aside: There are some very good arguments to be made that a component of this drop is credited to an environmental reduction in lead [MJ] [Forbes] [NBER] [AlterNet]

But I think that, even as bad as some places are globally, on the whole the world is a better place today.

First Cause and other Creationist Lies about the Big Bang

It is a common creationist trope to assert that 'something can't come from nothing' and they dishonestly assert the Big Bang is a 'creation' event. [wiki]

The Big Bang is not an explosion of matter moving outward to fill an empty universe. Instead, space itself expands with time everywhere and increases the physical distance between two comoving points.

There are several issues with these claims...

Foremost of the issues is that the Big Bang doesn't even CLAIM to be a creation event (nor an 'explosion'), it is an expansion - often characterized by an Inflationary period that evidence suggests began within those early moments.

The Big Bang theory CANNOT address events prior to about 1 Planck second because we have NO direct or indirect knowledge of that period. So these assertions are just grossly and plainly false.

So I want to be very clear - when creationists make these claims they are 'BEARING FALSE WITNESS'. Furthermore, when they are making these claims publically they have purposefully abandoned their duty of due diligence. In my book this makes you a LIAR. Not merely mistaken, a flat out LIAR. There is no excuse for purposefully misrepresenting science. You Are A Liar. Period.

Now, if you have any Intellectual Honesty (even that of the size of a grain of mustard seed), you will admit your error and work to correct it. If you don't do this then I find you not only a Liar but a Fraud in my book. And if you are stuck at this stage in your intellectual development you might as well stop here.

Debunking: Gene duplication doesn't increase the information in DNA

Numerous creationists have made claims along the lines of 'Gene duplication doesn't increase the information in DNA', I would challenge them to show their math.

First, let's begin with some definitions:

1. Entropy is NOT a measure of 'disorder' (a very common misstatement) but of the dispersal of energy in a system (this dispersal makes it unavailable to do work)
2. Shannon Entropy quantifies the information content of a message, it is a quantitative measure of the average unpredictability, given by:
   

   H(X) = -∑ P(x) log₂ [P(x)]
   P(x) probability X is in state x [P log₂ P = 0 where P=0]

   see: Mathematical Foundations of Information Theory, Khinchin
3. Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) is composed of two long polymers of simple units called nucleotides, with backbones made of five-carbon sugars and phosphate groups joined by ester bonds; attached to each sugar is one of four bases: thymine (T), cytosine (C), guanine (G), and adenine (A). A group of three bases, taken together, represent a codon (which map to Amino Acids or control Codons) It is the sequence of these Codons that compose the bulk of the 'informational' content of DNA.

Now let's look at the math.

On Tihomir Dimitrov's 'Fifty Nobel Laureates Who Believe in God'

I ran across this website that mentions a self-published "book" called 'Fifty Nobel Laureates Who Believe in God' by Tihomir Dimitrov, which is also available via his website: http://nobelists.net/

This just screams *argument from authority*, so I had to take a look.

First of all, many of the people listed are from hundreds of years ago (or even in the 20th century in some ways) when the Churches promulgated and enforced Christianity at the point of a sword. You couldn't be in a professional position during most of the past two millennia and not profess a belief in a God. You would have been put under tremendous pressure from family and intimidation from the authorities, quite often under threat of torture or a forfeiture of life and property and the destruction of your family. Most of the 'Christian persecution' in Roman times was because Christians refused to accept the 'real' Gods (the Roman Gods), afterall, how could you be a good person and reject the REAL Gods? It seemed to clear to the Romans of the time. And then in the fourth century when Christians rose in power they seemingly forgot this and repeated the error, persecuting the pagans and even other Christians such as Arius and his followers:

"In addition, if any writing composed by Arius should be found, it should be handed over to the flames, so that not only will the wickedness of his teaching be obliterated, but nothing will be left even to remind anyone of him. And I hereby make a public order, that if someone should be discovered to have hidden a writing composed by Arius, and not to have immediately brought it forward and destroyed it by fire, his penalty shall be death. As soon as he is discovered in this offence, he shall be submitted for capital punishment" — Edict by Emperor Constantine

As well as other many other Christian sects such as the Gnostics (various), Marcionites, Manicheans, etc.

Gun Rights in the United States

I'm not an expert on Guns or Gun Rights, I have a vast array of other things that consume my attention. But I do have a few considered observations and questions.

Concessions:

1. US gun rights are derived largely from the 2nd Amendment to the US Constitution with the language:
   

   A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

2. I stipulate that there is a Natural right to self-defense, but I hold that this must be carried out in the most ethical manner, as we hold in the balance the power to violate the Right to Life (which is certainly the greater Right) of others with this power
3. I stipulate that this self-defense applies to the people against tyranny of government (not imagined tyranny)
4. I stipulate that the militia referenced is of the Va. Declaration of Rights §13 (1776), in 7 Thorpe 3812, 3814 (referring to “a well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms”)
5. I stipulate that this right extends to the 'whole people' (one way in which this Right has already evolved, as it used to be only 'men')
   

Science says Life begins at conception...

"Science says Life begins at conception..."

No, that isn't what 'science' says. The evidence is that life began ~3.6Gya and that HUMAN life BEGAN about 200,000 years ago.

Since that earliest life there has been a continuous chain of decent of one cell to another generation of cell with constant mutation:

The variable somatic genome

Extensive genetic variation in somatic human tissues

From the above, we see that every cellular descendant is somewhat unique, not just at fertilization. You are merely making an arbitrary special pleading case.

It's ON! Another fool makes a specific prediction

Here it is folks:

10 Days...April ,9.Supernatural Experiences...For Every Atheist In America.Let's Agree.#drMM#fb 

— Dr. Mike Murdock (@drmikemurdock) April 2, 2013

To which I accepted so mark your calendars! April 9th apparently (I think it started several days ago or this is a case of 'Gospel math').

I just LOVE it when they make specific predictions, they just fail over and over and over - this helps break some people out of their ingrained beliefs and it helps to discredit them in the eyes of the public.

You're ON! failure = Deuteronomy 18:20-22 @drmikemurdock [in] 10 Days…Supernatural Experiences…For Every #Atheist In America

— Dark Star (@ColdDimSum) April 2, 2013

Deuteronomy 18:20-22 says:

20 “‘However, the prophet who presumes to speak in my name a word that I have not commanded him to speak or who speaks in the name of other gods, that prophet must die. 21 And in case you should say in your heart: “How shall we know the word that Jehovah has not spoken?” 22 when the prophet speaks in the name of Jehovah and the word does not occur or come true, that is the word that Jehovah did not speak.

Think he'll agree that to that? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA No way, they will NEVER put their money where their mouth is - this is nothing but a 'make me Richer' scheme, and it will undoubtedly serve that TRUE purpose. If this fails will he admit he is a false prophet? Or will he make excuses?

I even go the extra mile:

I'll even PRAY in Jesus' name to give me one, right now, PLEASE JESUS, Bring me a supernatual experience so I can KNOW @drmikemurdock

— Dark Star (@ColdDimSum) April 2, 2013

But, despite my excited state of anticipation, nothing supernatural happened:

Wait… what was that… something is happening… oh sorry, I just farted #MyBad I'll keep trying @drmikemurdock

— Dark Star (@ColdDimSum) April 2, 2013

Maybe it didn't work because of my typo?

UPDATE: It is now April 12th and absolutely nothing happened. Another failure, another false prophet, another liar, another hypocrite.

Oh, the Irony:

The Reason For Their Silence...Is To Hide Information.

Never Forget It.#drMM#fb 

— Dr. Mike Murdock (@drmikemurdock) April 11, 2013

A Challenge for Jehovah's Witnesses

I can't promise this will yield any specific result or outcome but it might be entertaining...

If Jehovah's Witnesses come calling, ask them in and go over a few things with them.

They tend to use their own 'New World Translation' but you can use any version of the Bible, I've taken these quotes out of their own Bible to help avoid arguments about 'translation'.

(1) Ask them if they believe they speak in the name of Jehovah, they should say they do

(2) Read and discuss Matthew 24:3-5,11,24:

3 While he was sitting upon the Mount of Olives, the disciples approached him privately, saying: “Tell us, When will these things be, and what will be the sign of your presence and of the conclusion of the system of things?” 4 And in answer Jesus said to them: “Look out that nobody misleads ​YOU; 5 for many will come on the basis of my name, saying, ‘I am the Christ,’ and will mislead many.
...
11 And many false prophets will arise and mislead many;
...
24 For false Christs and false prophets will arise and will give great signs and wonders so as to mislead, if possible, even the chosen ones.

Confirm that this is saying that misleading people with false information makes one a false prophet.

This is a repeated theme in the Bible, as in Jeremiah 23:25-29:

25 “I have heard what the prophets who are prophesying falsehood in my own name have said, saying, ‘I have had a dream! I have had a dream!’ 26 How long will it exist in the heart of the prophets who are prophesying the falsehood and who are prophets of the trickiness of their own heart? 27 They are thinking of making my people forget my name by means of their dreams that they keep relating each one to the other, just as their fathers forgot my name by means of Ba′al. 28 The prophet with whom there is a dream, let him relate the dream; but the one with whom my own word is, let him speak forth my word truthfully.”

(3) hopefully they have agreed with you about false prophets, how to identify them, and that they claim to speak in the name of Jehovah. If so, then ask them about their religions repeated failed prophesy (see details at linked page) about the end times.

I'm sure they will hem and haw about it... move on

(4) and ask them about Deuteronomy 18:20-22

20 “‘However, the prophet who presumes to speak in my name a word that I have not commanded him to speak or who speaks in the name of other gods, that prophet must die. 21 And in case you should say in your heart: “How shall we know the word that Jehovah has not spoken?” 22 when the prophet speaks in the name of Jehovah and the word does not occur or come true, that is the word that Jehovah did not speak.

Have the Jehovah's Witnesses not spoken in the name of Jehovah?

Have their predictions not failed to come true?

Are they not then false prophets?

But because you don't believe that nonsense, you refuse to demand their death for simply being wrong because that would be evil!

(5) If you aren't bored yet ask them about 1 Kings 18 and ask if they can provide you with such a demonstration that THEIR claimed god is real.

If they protest that you can't "test god" quote E‧li′jah from section [27] and say: “Call at the top of ​YOUR​ voice, for he is a god; for he must be concerned with a matter, and he has excrement and has to go to the privy. Or maybe he is asleep and ought to wake up!”

Point out that excuses weren't accepted on behalf of other gods and the consequence was (according to the Bible) the mass murder of hundreds of priests.

1 Kings 18:40 Then E‧li′jah said to them: “Seize the prophets of Ba′al! Do not let a single one of them escape!” At once they seized them, and E‧li′jah then brought them down to the torrent valley of Ki′shon and slaughtered them there.

Ask them if that seems a fair punishment for people who claim speak for a god that refuses to set bull meat on fire when prayed to?

Demand an answer to that and they will have to say that it was God's will and so it was right and just, and then point out what hypocrisy it is to refuse to be held to the same standard you're religion claims it has held others to.

Identifying the Problem: Prejudices

I wanted a checklist to look over periodically to check my cultural biases, so I'm making a list (and you can help me check it twice).

What is a prejudice?

A prejudice is a preconceived opinion which is not based on reason or experience. All prejudices are based on errors of fact and/or logic. If a property of some class is valid and the consequent is sound and it doesn't make or imply a value judgement based on these properties, then it isn't a prejudice.

This is NOT ranked or ordered, but here are some of the predominate types of prejudice I was able to identify. Please feel free to point out more in comments!

• Racism
  
• Sexism
  
• Gender-identity, sexuality, intersex (including LGBTQ*)
  
• Religious discrimination (including against those who choose not to have a religion (especially in the military) and minority religions)
  
• Ableism (discrimination against the disabled)
  
• Mental Illness / Neurotypicalism (multifaceted)
  
• Intelligence (people across the spectrum suffer discrimination & bullying)
  
• Appearance (height, weight, looks, dress)
  
• Linguistic discrimination
  
• Ageism
  
• Classism/socioeconomic discrimination
  
• Nationalism
  
• Rape, Abuse, & Violence stigma
  
• Political discrimination
  
• Discrimination against former felons
  
• Prohibitionist prejudices (assuming that all people who wish to explore altered states of consciousness are 'drug fiends', etc)