Biology is my Religion: The Bible was wrong, the meek do not inherit the earth!

There is a cycle between two types of societies, between two things. A self-centered society and a society-centered society. The meek are the society centered and during hard times yes they do inherit the earth but during good times they do not, during good times nature does not want us to just survive, during good times nature wants us to compete and have only the very best survive. So both the meek and the self-centered inherit the earth and if I am to judge things by my internal selfishness vs. my internal socialness it would seem that more often than not the self-centered inherit the earth!

Also to note, there is not one patriarchy or one matriarchy or one socialism or one capitalism, over time it is a cycle that has happened an uncountable number of time in every layer of society and even within our minds. We settle with the parts that favor society that we need while taking the parts that favor self that we can. We settle with governments and laws and schools (all on the social sides), while taking the parts of the self side that we can.


Biology is my religion: for the meek shall inherit the earth!

I am not religious, but I think that a lot can be learnt from religion. The bible says “Matthew 5:5 Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth”. And this seems to be true.

Meek people are humble people, and humble people are okay with putting the needs of others and the needs of society above their own needs. In this case the bible meant that people who were not self-serving, self-centered, or selfish will inherit the earth and that seems to be very true.

Meek people do very well in traditional setting because they are okay with accepting guidance from the past or from “God” (if they believe). Meek people are better at co-operation, they are more inclined to have more children (since having children take a lot of self-sacrifice), and their children are more inclined to survive (because they follow a system or culture that prioritizes the lives of children).

It is the genetics of the meek that shall make it in to the future and so, it is the meek who shall inherit the earth.

Self-centered people also make it into the future (or it would not be encoded so well into our genetics), but in recent history it is the meek that have built larger and more successful societies. Self-centered societies simply could not compete with traditional societies.

Early societies. How I imagine the social structure of at least one early society was.

Picture this: Women give birth and live together with other women and all of the children who have been born. The women go out and search for food and water and other resources which exist in safe spaces near enough to their community.

Men lived separately; boys joined the males when they were old enough to no longer need their mothers (maybe around 10-12 years old). Males hunted and gathered; generally not in the same places as women. They hunted in places further away and gathered in more dangerous territory. They did this because it often meant less work for the same quantity/quality of food and it meant they could access resources which they could use to trade with women.

Women and men were generally uncommitted to each other and most were bisexual. The women mostly slept with each other however from time to time they would trade sex for something of value that one of the males had to offer.  Homosexuality was human’s first all-natural birth control.

Males competed among each other and that drove the ‘’economy”. It was a capitalist economy and it was a capitalist mating system. Something along the way changed though and we switched to a socialist mating system. To monogamy, to traditionalism and it worked. I think for the betas in society (like me!!!) it would be good to hold on to this system; but for the alphas the old system is better. Who will win and what are your thoughts?

Cultural evolution: Do cultural norms have an evolution of their own?

The social structure and cultural norms that we have today are the result of hundreds of thousands of years of war and luck and conquest. It is not simply by chance and it does have a lot to say about what it takes to survive through some of life’s most harsh conditions, through famine, war and all of the other horrible things that we as humans can face.

Do you ever think about religion in terms of what it is? How did it come to being? How did it evolve? I know a lot of people look at it as coming from the bible or starting as a conspiracy or so. But look at the fact that the bible is very disconnected from many of the core beliefs of Christians. I mean polygamy is bad to Christians but it was okay in the Bible.

I do not know so much about Christianity though but it does seem to me that religion is more about culture than it is about a book or the book they claim to follow. It seems that in many cases the culture may have even come before the book. I think that in the same exact same way that physical traits have an evolutionary history which rest on the ‘’survival of the fittest’’ principle, cultural norms also had an evolution.

The cultural norms that led to better societies survived for a reason. Societies that were Christian, Muslim, Hindu etc., those that had monogamy survived for a reason. They were the fittest societies and they won the most wars.

Everything is connected. How traditionalism is socialist, while liberalism is capitalistic!

You ever notice how everything in life is connected. Every little thing. I mean really deeply connected. How did I even start blogging about feminism, it was through looking at things about children and babies and toddlers, which led me to working mother versus stay at home mother things, which led to feminism, and that to family and social structure, which recently led me to capitalism versus socialism, which leads me to human instincts, which leads back to children and babies.

EVERY thought can be connected to every thought and every person and every leaf and everything that exist and does not exist is all so deeply connected. The world is beautiful and we should celebrate it!

Traditionalism is the socialist model of structuring families. It is model of co-dependence that does not rely on competition to drive it. It promotes monogamy so that everyone gets a piece of the pie. Everyone gets access to sex. Everyone gets a spouse and can get access to ‘’work/the profits of male work’’ and access to sex and children. It is socialist at its heart.

Liberalism is the capitalist way of structuring society. We sleep around and there is no commitment. Sex or work is not guaranteed. In these societies many people go without being able to have children. The men who are richest or compete and end up successful with the biggest prey etc. get the most sex. This is the most natural way and it is the way we spent most of our existence.

It seems very interesting to me that conservatives are for capitalism while being for traditionalism, while liberals are for socialism while being for liberalism. It suggests that most of us truly are balanced and searching for something in-between. I am drawn more to socialism although capitalism seems far more natural. But the question still remains which one is truly better?? Whose interest should we seek; self or society?

Is the concept of capitalism better than the concept or socialism or the other way around? What do you think?

Undervalued parenthood; why I think taking care of children is so drastically undervalued!

Every time I read a blog post about ‘’why I regret being a stay at home mom’’ I get the impression that these people do not regret being stay at home mothers but rather that they feel as though society has refused to acknowledge their work as real work and that is what depresses them.

And it gets me angry to think about just how much parenting is undervalued. A part of me understands why but a part of me does not and gets furious that people cannot see that there is no future without kids.

Reading statements like ‘’do not have kids if you cannot afford it’’, ‘’having kids is a luxury’’, ‘’do not expect us single people to sponsor the lifestyle choices of parents, we did not have kids for a reason’’,  ‘’stay at home moms; your kids do not need you’’. It all makes me sick to my stomach. Society does not value kids, society does not value the work of parenthood, society does not value parenting, and society therefore does not value people.

I see my purpose in life as to have kids. I respect that others do not see it this way but I want to know from them what do they think is the purpose of life? What is the purpose of life to you? Biology is my religion and so happiness, feeling joy and of course having kids (which brings joy) is my purpose in life. My life exists because someone birthed me, and my life exists to birth others.

And the more I think about it, and the more I explore the idea of feminism the more I realize that one of my core issues with feminism is that it seriously undervalues motherhood and parenting. Parenting for the most part has historically been the female’s job simply because she was the one who got pregnant and evolutionarily speaking the guy who got her pregnant may not have always been around.

Child care is women’s work, while going out into places that have been historically speaking unsafe (ie. the working world) is male work. Women’s work is undervalued. It is undervalued because we took it for granted, because we could not avoid it, it was a fact of life and half of the population did it. Times have now changed though, we have control over whether we have kids or not and so we have to start valuing parenthood again.

We have to start changing society to make parenthood enjoyable. We have to start treating parenthood as a birthright. Everyone should have the right to enjoyable parenthood. At least to have 1 or 2 children. Isn’t it sad that we live in a world where people think parenting is a chore and no one is doing anything to change it?

Biology is my Religion. Why sex is more than just SEX!

Despite the many things that I do not agree with the church on, in my opinion the church(and not biology) has it right on sex! Sex is not just sex for two major reasons:

1) Sex is the most intimate thing you can do with another human being.

2) Sex results in new human beings, whose lives should be considered before the act of sex takes place.

What are my values with respect to sex? Well I think virginity is a good thing. I respect people who keep their virginity until they meet someone who they want to build a life and have children with, however I think it is unhealthy to focus on your virginity or to think of yourself as having lost a part of yourself when your virginity is lost. Non virgins should be valued pretty much as equally as virgins in the world of sex and relationships. Ideally I think that people should discuss how committed they are before having sex and they should be committed so that if a child was to be the result of sex, that child would have the highest possible chance of having his or her needs met. That child would have the benefit of two committed parents.

I know that the reality is very different from the ideal and that is okay, but we should not change the ideal just because most people are unable to achieve it though. It is an ideal; we can explain to people that being able to achieve this ideal is unlikely and that there is no reason to beat yourself up over it; yet still this is the ideal because it is what is most likely to give the best results. I think that we should look at sex as intimate and something that should ideally only be done within the context of stable relationships, however if we do have sex with the wrong person that should be shame-free. We should not be encouraged to stay in sexual relationships with people who we would not have kids with, but we should also not feel guilty about having sex with the wrong person or about giving in to our very natural desires to have sex simply for pleasure.

I am weird like this but personally speaking if my husband was to cheat on me as hurt as I would be I would not leave him (unless it was with a close friend or relative). As long as he can explain it to me I would be okay with and move on, we all make mistakes and we all give into our desires even though we intend not to. I can also see myself potentially being okay with an open relationship if there was a way for me to be 999% sure that my husband would not be getting other women pregnant and that I would not get any STDs; this is not reality though. In reality (no matter WHAT, ie even with condoms/a vasectomy)  I would fear him either giving me an STD or getting someone else pregnant. Plus I used to be an easily jealous person.

So giving into sexual desires, if you genuinely have those desires, is not bad; but it is also not the ideal! According to biology it is the ideal because biology just wants as many fit children as it can get and fit to biology is unfortunately still physical might and having a skill set more needed in the hunter-gatherer days than what is needed today. So on this one point Religion rather than biology is my religion because mankind has already created an unnaturally large society that biology did not get time to cater for and so we cannot just depend on our biological instincts when it comes to sex. Depending on biology here would mean promoting a structure for society that no longer works. Yes there are health benefits that come from giving into sexual desires, but at the same time I feel it is important for society to understand that sex is not just sex and that it is not really in the best interest of society as a whole to encourage people to give into to their desires without preparing for the children that may result.

It is also not in the best interest of society to demonize causal sex, but we as a society need to keep in mind that since sex results in babies, and babies/children do better within family settings. Who we are having sex with and the type of relationship we have when engaging in sex therefore DOES matter. Of course birth control has changed a lot with respect to this argument and with birth control sex can potentially be just sex, but birth control is not 100% effective, and in my opinion being really safe means preparing for all possible outcomes no matter how unlikely.

Biology is my Religion. Bring yourself and others joy not pain.

As most people who are not religious say, you do not need religion to have moral standards. I think biology can also offer insight into the right vs. wrong dilemma of life. We each know pain and pleasure and we know that pain is bad while pleasure is good. Morally we can look at each situation and determine who we would bring pain to by acting a certain way and who we would bring pleasure to. If we believe that our actions would bring us and those around us more joy than pain they are good actions, if not they are bad actions.

Of course it gets way more complicated than that in real life but that is the basis, and living within that realm can bring you very, very close to the moral standards of any major religion.

Biology is my Religion. Our minds are dynamic.

The other fundamental question which I have not yet answered, and is the first question I ever remember asking my mother, was ‘’who created God?’’. I must have been four because it was after primary school juma. I was in kindergarten and I have very little solid memories other than this from this time period. I remember asking her ‘’Who created Allah?’’ those were the words I used and she said ‘’I do not know”’. It was the first time my mother had said something like that and I remember feeling so shocked that she did not know. It was like a revelation that it was possible for mommy not to know something lol.

And this revelation brings me to the next part of religion that does not make sense; it is incompatible with the dynamic mind. Before asking my mother that question I believed that she knew everything. Her answer to that question changed the way I thought; it taught me something new. I discovered something that I did not believe to be true before that point. I, in that second, learnt that there were some things that mommy did not know. The fact that we can fully believe something to be true in one second and in the very next second fully believe a completely contradicting statement to be true shows us that truth cannot ever be achieved. Maybe I will change my mind on this on day but for pretty much all of my life that is how I have seen it.

When we believe something to be true and we later change our mind about it the feeling of having a new truth is exactly the same of the feeling we got with the old truth so how can we ever be sure that the new truth will not also become an old truth once we discover new information to prove that it is also not true? The point is the nature of our mind is such that it is dynamic and such that there is no difference in feeling between ”lies” that are believed and ”truths” that are believed. So everything you believe to be true now could be a lie and religion refuses to acknowledge this. This is also why I could never consider myself to be an atheist.

Biology is my Religion. There is no free will.

Okay so far I have said that I think closer to the atheists than to religious people, but what is it that I really think? Okay my father is a Christian and my mother is a Muslim. Neither of them are very strict but we grew up in church on a Sunday and the Mosque on a Friday. The church was the worse of the two because there was a Sunday school part of church and the teachers there all hated my mother. They told us that she was definitely going to hell and that she was evil (one even said she had the devil living inside of her). We of course knew this not to be true and I think as a very young child that was the reason my brother and I rejected religion completely.

Week after week of going to two different religious meetings just showed us that both people were nice and weird and that neither was better or worse than the other and that it was impossible for one person to KNOW that they were correct, or more correct than the other. We explored religion and found many of its fundamental claims to be untrue (to us, though we respect that they are true to others). One fundamental untruth that we saw in both religions was the concept of free will. We found that people, like all other animals and things in this world are a reaction or a mirror of everything around them. We found that the there is no such thing as ‘’self’’ independent from the world around us and that if self does not exist in the first place, it cannot be said to make decisions.

We are all the same. We are all reactions. We all have no control and make no choices. Choice is an illusion. If you did not choose to be born, or to be born into the family that you were born into and you can see that your family has affected the way you think and the choices you make then how can those choices be your own? Even if you say your surroundings only push you in one direction or the next and merely influence you and that you make the final decision, then who are you? Who is this you that makes the final decision? Is it your biological nature (not something you choose)? Is it the sum of everything you’ve experienced (not something you choose)? Or is it free will itself (not something you choose to have or designed)?

You did not choose your family, your nationality, your genetics or even your existence and they are your beginning. They affected the first decisions you ever made and those decisions affected the rest making each decision in your life the tipping point of one huge, connected domino field.  Everything, every single thing affects our choices. Every person we met, every movie we see, every church we go to, our biology, everything affects our choices. So choices are in no way free. I am not religious at least in part because of my childhood experiences with opposing religions and that is something that I had no control over. Likewise people who are religious are so in part because of things they also had no control over.

And if this is true how can any person be justifiably judged on what they happen to believe. If this is so then ‘’God’’ is in control of what each of us believe, and there are no good people or bad people. ‘’God’’ the one who designed us and our surrounding or who created the domino field representing our decisions is in control of every decision made and why then would he put me in a family and setting that shows me that the concepts behind religion make no sense? Why then would he create atheists only to then judge us and send us to hell? We are all just people reacting to the influences around us which we had no control over and which we did not choose.