Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Religion's unhealthy obsession with sexuality

0 views
Skip to first unread message

Sigmund

unread,
May 24, 2010, 2:54:12 PM5/24/10
to
Religions are power structures, and they have largely been formulated
and promoted by men (this is certainly the case in most current
religions and their immediate predecessors). A recurring feature of
religious behavioural codes is the assignment of power over women to
men. This reflects gender roles within patriarchal societies, and has
some relation to evolutionary mechanisms.* Put simply, it is
advantageous for the survival of the species for all men to have a
strong sexual drive, while women tend to select the most ‘desirable’
partner – i.e. a partner choice that represents the best chance of
survival for offspring.

This results in a fundamental conflict of interests, leading to all
sorts of psychological and socio-cultural complications. The male urge
to possess and control women, and to prescribe sexual behaviour, is
articulated in behavioural codes and power structures, religion and
its ‘morality’ being but one example of this process. In this way
religions contribute to the preservation of patriarchal societies and
enforce social mores that encourage inequality. Extremes of this
phenomenon can be observed in the gender inequality of Islam (see
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Quran/010-women-worth-less.htm) and
the Old Testament (see http://atheistprinciples.tripod.com/moralexamples.htm),
and to this day religion encourages unfair and unhealthy attitudes
towards women and sexuality.

*It is becoming increasingly clear that religion is nothing more than
an unfortunate byproduct of evolutionary mechanisms – read an
introduction with further links here: http://atheistprinciples.tripod.com/evolution.htm
For a discussion of the workings of morality (hint: it’s got
absolutely nothing to do with religion), see
http://atheistprinciples.tripod.com/discussions.htm#_On_Social_and

Michael Alpert

unread,
May 25, 2010, 6:28:41 AM5/25/10
to
Why the religious suppression of sex? Sex is driven by the most
powerful force in the universe, the attraction of opposite polarities.

"All sex is polarity, but, not all polarity is sex."- Lahunken.
Basically in the one substance, E=Mc², differentiation can only be in
closed circuitry, that there be something to move out of the way and
fill in behind.

One side is counterclockwise (male) and the other is clockwise (female).
Those are the real polarities. They undifferentiate by confluency.

It's like, shake a bottle of water. The bubbles represent the
differentiations. They strive to undifferentiate. That which facilitates
undifferentiation are the "opposite polarities".

When opposite polarities undifferentiate, the energy that maintained
them is released, E=Mc². The entities themselves become nonexistent.

It's like, take a cloth sheet. The cloth sheet represents energy.
Wrinkle it up. The wrinkles represent "information" (matter, etc.), the
"conformation of energy".

Pull that sheet out straight, and the wrinkles (information) becomes
nonexistent. This is more that an analogy.

Dr. Shing-Tung Yao said, "In physics, Ricci curvature is analogous to
matter. Space with zero Ricci curvature is space without matter - a
vacuum."

This is a view of the universe on the eighth, ninth, and tenth
dimensions. But, it shows the attainment of nonexistence.

Everything is trying to run down, and it is only wound up by that which
is running down. At the heart of every pleasure there is a moment of
nonexistence, which shows that nonexistence is the satisfaction of all
desires.

The force forcing undifferentiation is the result of the ambient
repulsions of nonconfluent differentiations clashing. Undifferentiation
is relief.

But, it also powers reproduction so that hypocrites attempt to ban
anything associated with this force, the most powerful natural force in
the universe.

Many lies have been told about this subject by hypocrites and special
interests attempting to keep this powerful knowledge for themselves.

Even, Ben Franklin falsified the polarities backwards in obedience to
his oaths of secrecy, so that electrons, posited solids, are called
negative, and then the negated holes had to be called positive.

It is advisable for you to spread this knowledge, for, you now "know too
much"; but, THEY can't get everybody; so, tell everybody.

0 new messages