Saturday, 15 July 2017

(209) Religion is a kind of breeding

Basic Dimension

http://sexualreligion.blogspot.com/ 

Number Archive





If human religion developed from animal sexuality we must be able to show its origin in the evolution. We know primal religion (inbreeding and incest) interfered with sexual choice. We know, even in our times Muslim girls cannot choose the man of their choice. At best they are free to choose a Muslim, but not seldom they are sold in infancy or have to marry their cousin. This means sexual religion must be placed as artificial sexual choice between sexual attraction and sexual selection.






Assumption 315: If religion steers sexual culture it is a form of breeding.








Higher order time derivatives cannot really explain reincarnation (below). It's just an analogy. Also we lost the connection with derivatives because reincarnation is a magical concept and derivatives are not. We changed the independent variable.

Therefore, we only use the first order time derivative for steering sexual culture:





Then, we see striving for genetic immortality as concluded from the first derivative is the same as in animal sexuality. In fact it is genetic procreation, the primal animal religion:




But the problem is, in inbreeding cultures the wish for genetic procreation actually comes down to extinction of the species:



Phenotypical mortality




The inbreeding culture is at odds with nature and must be permanently repaired by 'fertility stress':









Pedophilia

The insane human form of pedophilia is an inherited sexual deviation which does not exist in animals and is invented by bipedal Homininae (7 Ma; 400cc). Quadruped Panini have not developed inbreeding in the first place, since they exchange fresh juvenile females with other groups.





Bonobos have some funny pedophile like coping behavior with juveniles, but undeveloped secondary sexual characteristics does not make them horny. That's no real pedophilia. But human males turn the world upside down what is a clear sexual anomaly in the animal world. How come? It all has to do with perpetual orgasm compressed into this lifetime, which has been the sick start of the following development: 





Though Islam is the third stage of Paradise culture, regression to the first stage is quite common but not reported:


Tuesday, Oct 11th 2016

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3832242/Muslim-father-rapes-daughter-Norway-punishment-Westernised.html

Muslim father rapes his daughter as punishment because she had become 'too Westernised' living in Norway 

  • The man, in his 40s has been charged with rape and incest after he attacked his daughter in their family home
  • The daughter ran out of the house in the city of Fredrikstad and told a passing postman who called the police
  • The daughter told police she had been punished by her father for living a Western lifestyle 








As a religious rulepedophilia was an incentive, a reward for males to participate in the inbreeding culture, where they had to copulate with ugly cousins and sisters, since there was less contact with other groups. And the more pedophilia is permitted, the more inbreeding goes crescendo. Notice, in the rebound sexual culture becomes a function of religious measures (pedophilia in this life and perpetual orgasm in the afterlife):




The relation between higher order time derivatives and religious dimensionality is based solely on analogous reasoning: Higher order time derivatives are built from lower ones. And reincarnation into the parallel universe is developed from the earlier stage of reincarnation into the earthly universe.


In the same way, perpetual orgasm in Heaven (72 virgins) is developed from perpetual orgasm of ancestors in descendants (earthly reincarnation), which in turn is developed from pedophilia in this lifetime with the widest discrepancy between the oldest impotent males and the youngest unmatured children. So, perpetual orgasm is born from pedophilia as 'perpetual orgasm across generations':








On the other hand, capturing and raping female slaves from other tribes (Christians) lowers inbreeding figures and delivers outbreeding as compensation:




There is no fundamental difference between animal sexuality and human religion. Both strive to propagate their genes to eternity:





Assumption 319: There is no fundamental difference between animal sexuality and human religion. Both strive to propagate their genes to eternity with rational and irrational means. Thereby, human males generally misuse the female sexual attraction process for non-sexual purposes as the distribution of the inheritance and the like. 

For animals rational and logical rules have been formulated to obtain genetic immortality:





If rules of sexual religion for peafowls are are agreed upon by females for females then beautiful feathered males might indeed be the most sexiest. Then, strong and beautiful males (sexual religion) are in accordance with sexual attraction, but in the end the peafowl makes a free choice to select a peacock.





But it goes wrong, when (Muslim) males impose religious rules on (Muslim) females 
for what they have to find sexually attractive. Then, religious rules do not pursue 
sexual attraction any longer and the mechanism of reproduction is misused for other purposes. 

Then it is used for self-identity of the male kin bonded lineage (cousin marriages) or for reincarnation into descendants of the daughter (cousin marriages), or flatly for the distribution of the inheritance:






But remember, this might be still the best way to survival for the group as a whole (in case of Muslims: fertility stress):





It is by inspection of the atrocities of human religion (inbreeding) that we conclude cousin marriages have nothing to do with sexual attraction in the first place:





In general, religious rules are completely free to implant any nonsense as disturbing variable between sexual attraction and sexual selection. And there is no reason this would be different for animals. So, animal religion is not bound to sexual attraction either. 

But even sexual attraction need not be linked to survival of the fittest in the first place. Maybe the most attractive woman will not survive in nature, like Lucy did. Though, Lucy would not survive in our world. Only if sexual selection leads to survival we come to know these species. How many lovely creatures did not make it in the evolution?








Religious interventions into sexual culture

Cultural diversity concerns often differences in wedding ceremonies, which are the end products of earlier religious rules. If the father has a say in the partner choice of his daughter and he agrees he will lead her to the altar, otherwise not.

In Islam we have the father who enforces his daughter to marry her cousin, which is a pure religious measure without sexual attraction: inbreedingCousin marriages are the darkest phenomenons of sexual religion in the world. If the father disagrees with her choice on the basis of sexual attraction (genetic diversity), he might kill her. To kill his daughter in this context must be seen as a sexual lust, a compensation for his missed reincarnation into her descendants. It is the best example of derailment of the human cauliflower brain:





Sexual religion: survival of the most religious



Then, sexual attraction is overruled by sexual religion and is misused for special male interests. Blocked sexual selection for females is found in psychopathic cultures:





                             





Cauliflower brain

Humans developed a cauliflower brain suitable for millions and millions of crazy and magical ganglia, by which they lost natural contact with sexuality and which sexual anomaly (e.g. pedophilia) they called 'religion':








And just before the human brain exploded in Homo Sapiens (350 ka; 1400cc) the main human like infrastructure was laid by Homo naledi (2,3 Ma - 335 ka; 550 - 600cc). Homo naledi was a rational thinker without much capacity to irrational magical thoughts:




                                                                                    




Here we see how human interference has converted the sexual attraction process into disaster, into phenotypical mortality:





But we are left with the main rule of genetic procreation which is still working for mankind (fertility stress for Muslims) and we realize that humans only found an illogical solution for eternal life in magical concepts. So, there is no real difference in results for this lifetime between animal and human religion:




Animals propagate genetically with natural means and humans with unnatural, illogical and magical concepts. 

The only thing that matters is that mankind is still alive. That they will never attain eternal life by their 'soul' is no problem, since this just underlines their similarity with other animals...

Also there is a weird aspect to human religion. In history Muslims as well as Christians survived many times calling the name of Allah or Jesus. 



Allahu Akbar


These magical words gave believers extra power to survive. Therefore, religious measures do not really need to link with reality to be effective. They only must be interpreted as such. These kinds of rituals are found in animals too, also they can have apparently senseless mating behavior, which yet seems to work one way or the other to genetic propagation. So again, there is no principal difference between animal sexuality and human religion.

Assumption 319: There is no fundamental difference between animal sexuality and human religion. Both strive to propagate their genes to eternity with rational and irrational means. Thereby, human males generally misuse the female sexual attraction process for non-sexual purposes as the distribution of the inheritance and the like. 

Therefore, we developed the human model of religion straight forward from animal sexuality:

Assumption 315: If religion steers sexual culture it is a form of breeding.

Assumption 318: If religion is a kind of breeding then Islam is inbreeding and Christianity is outbreeding.










cc-by-nc-sa




This work is licenced under a Creative Commons Attibution-Non Commercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International Licence.


                           

No comments:

Post a Comment