 - Last login: 4 hours agoSexualizingsanta
- Megan is a 27 year old woman from Los Angeles, California, USA.
- Likes 2,749 pages, 59 videos, 571 photos • 287 fans • Received 41 reviews
- Member since Aug 08, 2007
Do NOT bother e-mailing me soliciting me for sex, a relationship, "pics", and so forth. Waste of your time, 'cause I'll ignore it, and if it's offensive enough, forward it to the SU admins. I'm here to stumble upon interesting, intelligent and/or amusing websites. If your favorites consists of porn, good for you, but I'm not interested - and I won't be interesting to you. Unless you want to read every single page of the History of the Kings of Britain. Which I doubt you do. And even if you do, still, no.
For those that fall under the category of the once-a-month emailer, 'helpfully' informing me this "About Me" is bound to attract the solicitation by trolling creeps to an even greater extent - thanks and all, but hear that? That's the sound of wrong. Having to delete 10 sexually explicit emails a day has gone down to..... your 1 email a month. Gee, I'd say it worked.
Favorites » Her Blog
-
God knows why faith is thriving
-
May 6, 6:21pm
9 reviews
•http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article...
-
From the page: "...imagine two groups of people -- let's call them the Secular Tribe and the Religious Tribe -- who subscribe to one of these two views. Which of the two is more likely to survive, prosper and multiply? The religious tribe is made up of people who have an animating sense of purpose. The secular tribe is made up of people who are not sure why they exist at all. The religious tribe is composed of individuals who view their every thought and action as consequential. The secular tribe is made up of matter that cannot explain why it is able to think at all.
...atheist conventions only draw a handful of embittered souls, and the atheist lifestyle seems to produce listless tribes that cannot even reproduce themselves. Russia is one of the most atheist countries in the world, and there abortions outnumber live births 2 to 1.
Traditionally, scholars have tried to give an economic explanation for these trends. The general idea is that population was a function of affluence. Sociologists noted that as people and countries became richer, they had fewer children. Presumably, primitive societies needed children to help in the fields, and more-prosperous societies no longer did. From this perspective, religion was explained as a phenomenon of poverty, insecurity and fear, and many pundits predicted that with the spread of modernity and prosperity, religion would fade away.
The economic explanation is now being questioned. It was never all that plausible anyway. Undoubtedly, poor people are more economically dependent on their children, but on the other hand, rich people can afford more children. Wealthy people in America today tend to have one child or none, but wealthy families in the past tended to have three or more children. The real difference is not merely in the level of income. The real difference is that in the past, children were valued as gifts from God, and now they are viewed by many people as instruments of self-gratification. The old principle was, "Be fruitful and multiply." The new one is, "Have as many children as enhance your lifestyle."
My conclusion is that it is not religion but atheism that requires a Darwinian explanation. It seems perplexing why nature would breed a group of people who see no purpose to life or the universe, indeed whose only moral drive seems to be sneering at their fellow human beings who do have a sense of purpose. Here is where the biological expertise of Dawkins and his friends could prove illuminating. Maybe they can turn their Darwinian lens on themselves and help us understand how atheism, like the human tailbone and the panda's thumb, somehow survived as an evolutionary leftover of our primitive past."
|
Add her as a friend >
sexualizingsanta's blog