Archive for chromosomes

God Didn’t Mention Chromosomes

Posted in agnoticism, Atheism, Atheist, belief, Christianity, culture, faith, freethought, gay culture, humanity, life, random, religion, science, sex, sex taboos, thoughts, Uncategorized with tags , , , , , , on May 3, 2010 by chouck017894

Love is the alleged message of Christian  faith—but the “holy” twist that pulpit charlatans put upon that message is only if that love is breeder-friendly.  The bewilderment of why god would discriminate against any commitment of love was brought back into question by an elderly Asian man who was soliciting signatures and donations at a market entrance for the drive to reestablish California state’s earlier approval of gay marriages. 1   As a father of a son and daughter, both hetero, his prime concern was over the calloused inequality practiced in the name of spiritual truth—a sense of inequality that had been imposed upon California voters by the Utah-based Mormon church’s intrusion into other peoples’ affairs through a devious $42 million ad campaign.  Interest in other people’s sexual attraction—which is nothing more than voyeurism and autoeroticism—should not be mistaken as a launch pad into God’s good graces. 

Previous posts here, such as Sex in Sacred Disguise (March 2009), pondered over how sexual allusions are intertwined throughout the whole framework of Judeo-Christian religious literature.  Words such as sacrament, testament, and seminary, we have seen, are directly traceable to sexual implication. 2  But despite such sexual allusions, the old priests and “prophets” who fathered these cults knew precious little regarding the holy secrets that set life in motion—those active principles which approve and insure the great diversity in life expressions.  That non-revealed process of life’s means composition proved blissful for the cult founders, for it allowed them the freedom to practice all forms of sexual intolerance.

Those much revered priest-mythmakers, for example, had not been informed by God about  how chromosomes and the chemistry of the brain determine the development of a person’s physical and sexual makeup. Unfortunately, even today the blindly faithful choose to accept principles set down long ago by those unenlightened men and completely ignore what science research has revealed concerning human development.  For example, the effects of sex chromosomes and the chemical sex hormones do NOT have an undeviating  manner of lining up according to one’s general anatomical features as religious prejudices have taught us to believe. 

Furthermore, anatomists know that there are considerable variations in the human brain—its shape, thalamus, structure of the cerebrum, etc.—that are extremely variable and are as individual as one’s fingerprints.  This means that mental and/or sensory properties connected within the brain structure may align within vastly diverse ranges, and no two persons will ever be exactly the same.  Obviously individuals are not meant to be identical in their life expressions.  So, as far as religious approval of human sexual expression goes, one size does not fit all.

Within these God-allowable differences there is left open the allowance for every diverse expression of life and love.  The chromosomes are what chemically controls the total development of the body, brain and intelligence.  These do so in a vast range of ways throughout each person’s lifetime.  Therefore, for political or religious faction to pretend that the “Creator” expects only one narrow expression of life or love to be striven for by all individuals is to be appallingly self-indulgent.  Even worse, such an unyielding attitude amounts to sacrilege. 

Hard-line, ego-driven religionists refuse to even consider the holy code used in production of all  life forms—the code of chromosomal and chemical “design” that decrees that there must be great diversity in human physical, mental and emotional expression.  Only in great diversity of life can the omniscient creative power be fully served.  This seems to be problematic only for those who choose to work themselves into histrionics over the fact that all life expressions mirror the power that gives forth all life.

Perhaps the great body of self-indulgence that is religion would do well to remember what science has also shown: The brain needs considerable amount of body to function in muscular circumstances, but very little brain is necessary for the body to corrode into corruption.

  • 1  Related post: Victimizing Gays is to Mock Jesus, October 2009
  • 2  Related post: Dressed for Sex, September 2009

1 Comment »

Sex Attraction, A Bogus “Spiritual” Dilemma

Posted in Atheist, biological traits, Christianity, culture, freethought, humanity, life, logic, medical, naturalism, random, religion, science, sex, sex taboos with tags , , , , , , , on October 19, 2009 by chouck017894

(There was enough sex-charged spam feedback on a previous post, Thoughts on Gay Marriage, to merit a few other comments.)

Chromosomes and the chemistry of the brain determine a person’s behavior and their attraction to other persons functioning on a similar wavelength, so to speak.  The effect of sex chromosomes and the chemical sex hormones do not have an undeviating manner of lining up or assembling according to one’s general anatomical features as adherents of radical religious prejudices choose to pretend.  Furthermore, anatomists know there are considerable variations in the human brain—its shape, thalamus, structure of the cerebrum, etc.—that are extremely variable and are as individual as an individual’s fingerprints.  Mental and/or sensory properties connected with brain structure may align within widely diverse ranges, and no two person will ever be exactly the same—not even “identical” twins.

The chromosomes chemically control the total development of the body, the brain and intelligence.  These do so in a wide range of ways throughout a person’s life.  Within these God-allowable differences there is left open the allowance for great diversity of life and love expressions.  Therefore, for religious or political factions to pretend that only one narrow expression of life or love is expected by “god” to be striven for by all  individuals is contrary to the manner in which the physical human organism was created.  If one believes that “intelligent design” is at work and responsible for all manifestations, then religious or political demands for one-style-only expressions of personal affection amounts to sacrilege.

Those who wax with rigid divine certainty regarding same-sex attraction would do well to remember that studies in the difference in development of body and brain have shown that the brain needs considerable amount of body to function well.  On the other hand, it has been medically authenticated that the body needs very little brain to exist.  Radical religionists seem to be out to prove this.

The physical body differences of male and female provides personal consciousness with only a representation of the interactions that take place between the chemical code in the chromosomes and the chemical process that contribute to physical body differences.  In other words, the chromosomal and chemical “design” decrees great tolerance in human physical, mental and emotional expression.  This is problematic only for those who choose to work themselves into hysterical prejudice and hatred for anyone that finds personal expression in a differnent manner from themselves.

 No, Virginia, there is no “gay gene,” but there is something that is infinitely grand: the God-allowable differences for all life expressions.

3 Comments »

The Stringy Coil of Life

Posted in culture, life, Middle Ages,, nature, prehistory, random, religion, science with tags , , , , , , , , , , on July 1, 2009 by chouck017894

In the distant past, around 300 million years ago, the determinants of life consisted of identical chromosomes carried within an ancestral mammal-like creature.  Then some energy infusion caused the identical chromosomes to mutate and diverge as the X and Y chromosomes.  These were to set the destiny for life-form variations.  In other words, the sex method of creature reproduction evolved.  In biblical myth this is Eve being carved out of the side of Adam.  There is nothing sacred initiated with this mutation of the long, stringy masses of genes that convey heredity information.

In the conception of physical life there is, in a sense, a reenactment in miniature of the continuous action of Creation.  In human development, when the male spermatozoon comes into contact with the female pro-nucleus, they fuse and form a new nucleus that contains both male and female elements.  This nucleus is known as the blastosphere.  The first result of fertilization is the division of the ovum.  These two parts then continue dividing and initiate protoplasm development—the energy-substance from which potential life may collect as form.  A fascinating aspect of this division is that two separate masses of protoplasm are established, each containing a nucleus and with the same energy composition but slightly unequal in size.  The segmentation of each mass of protoplasm then develops differently!

The slightly larger cellular mass is more pallid than the other, and after the two cells have subdivided three or four times the rate of cleavage in the cells of the paler mass becomes more rapid than the cells of the other protoplasm mass.  These paler cells have a tendency to spread over and enclose the cells of the other protoplasm mass, and by the ninth or tenth division an external layer of pale cells enclose the mass of slightly smaller, less numerous, more opaque cells.

This is an extremely simplified version of earliest life-form inception, but it shows that the process of fetal development follows the same principles that account for development of everything in Creation.  This energy is the likeness spoken of in Genesis 1:26, “…Let us make man in our image, after our likeness…”

That “likeness” is conveyed through 92 different chemical elements and it is through chemical evolution that the multitude of compounds necessary for biological life are generated.  The ineffectual religious interpretation of this is to characterize the defining action that takes place through an amoral chemical process as the “will of God.”  (Amoral does not mean immoral: it is something more akin to indifferent.)

The “soul” and its link to matter-life has been a constant and nagging problem for theologians for over a millennium.  The Roman Catholic Church, for example, reached a theological conclusion that the soul of a human “…is created and united by God to the infant body yet unborn, which union is called passive conception.”  This theological circumvention of elucidation brought the Church “fathers” considerable anguish and perplexity since its medieval time of  institution, for if God unites the soul “to an infant body yet unborn,” then how are they to account for all the infants that the church considers to be “illegitimate”?

The catch-22 to this self-mortifying quandary is that if, as the church insists, God is morally loath to fornication then how is it that he indulges himself in “passive conception” of infants shunned by the church?  This sticky theological puzzle has never been blessed with a sane answer because the religiously disoriented refuse to accept amoral biological facts.  Instead the religious business machines choose to portray this chemical action as the result of some moral being who “passively conceives” in a manner that can only be politely termed as unrestrained.

And because this theologically inspired superstition does not provide any information of just when or at what stage God supposedly unites the soul (self-awareness) to the infant body yet unborn, the church is obliged to condemn abortion of non-conscious energy-substance at any stage of its evolutionary transformation in a chemical base.  So unrealistic is this view of the biological process of life that even preventing conception is condemned!  Of course all this “revealed wisdom” was postulated in the Dark Ages by male-only think-tank members known as the clergy.

The more ancient nature-based faiths were more scientifically astute and positively pro-life than have been the hierarchical, militaristic, and tyrannical religions of the western world through the last two/three millennia.  The degraded and maligned Pagan wisdom understood properly that the microcosm reflects the macrocosm, and all creation principles apply at every level—even in the situations in which individual life forms begin to manifest.   As in the manifestation of other matter-forms throughout the universe, until a definable prototypal form is energized it is simply substance which holds only the potential for matter development.  Human gestation was recognized to mimic these creation principles, so if they pondered over the when or at what stage self-awareness begins to evolve they would be instructed that it is not until the fourth month that a very imprecise awareness as self  is initiated.  It is at this stage of energy involvement, as an example, that sexual polarity is tentatively determined.  Once the developing energy-mass begins to take on unquestionable sexual identity, the will of life can be said to have been taken up.  Even so, the brain, where self-awareness guides the consciousness of life, is not even fully assembled until months after the infant body takes it first breath of life.  Indeed, the brain then grows to half its adult size by the age of six months, and this accelerated brain growth happens only once in life.

See also earlier postings, God Forgot to Say, March 28,2009; The Code of Life, April 1, 2009: RNA/DNA’s Covenant with Life, April 18; What’s in a Name?, April 26.                    The bulk of the above information is taken from The Celestial Scriptures, page 396, regarding lessons of life taught using constellation figures as a subject’s focus.

 

3 Comments »

Poles (not so far) Apart

Posted in Atheist, freethought with tags , , , , , , on April 1, 2009 by chouck017894

Throughout the western world’s religious understanding of “spiritual principles” there is customarily an awkward insistence that godly reward is to be achieved from eliminating one half of Creation’s balancing system. 

For example, the common religious assertion in western religions is that light can be achieved only by eliminating darkness.  In this type of religious “guidance” everything is then placed in an atmosphere of constant confrontation, stress and battle.  In western faith systems the stance is taken that choice must be taken: it is either God or Satan, good or evil, faithful or infidel, saved or lost, chosen or rejected, angelic or demonic, life or non-life, etc.  The only form of opposites that western religions grudgingly accept is the male/female dilemma–with woman accepted only by default!

The result of Judaic, Christian and Isamic faith systems’ insistence of trying to separate two ends of one Cause is that all seekers often find themselves struggling with gnawing feelings of resentment that arise from not understanding how anyone can possibly achieve such “purity.”  The holy fact is that nothing is definable without contrast, and the elimination of opposite (or  polar) interactions that is championed by these self-serving militant faith systems would result in the annihilation of everything–including them.  Let us not continue to be mesmerized by such irrationality.  We would do well to heed words of wisdom from a Zen teacher, Lao-Tzu, who noted something to the effect that inferior virtue cannot let go of the pretense of virtue.

All life forms, as points of self-aware consciousness, are not active in this plane of energy/matter to do battle against the principles of polarity that sustains every definable thing in Creation.  If there can be said to be any purpose in the experience of self-awareness in this dimension of energy-density, it is that advancement (evolution) is attained only by transcending the seeming battle of opposites.1  That type of  pretense lurks in any religious teaching that encourages belief that individualization takes place and performs with no relationship to the whole.

In a round-about way this brings us back to the male/female dilemma–and those annoying little factors of chromosomes.  As disturbing as it may be to common religious instruction, every life form carries within itself the hibernating factor of the opposite sex.  No man is ever one hundred percent male, and no woman is ever one hundred percent female: and the amount  of dominance of one over the other is never an inviolable law.  Each living thing, each human being is a temporary energy manifestation assumed by a self-aware unit of consciousness.  How each manifestation expresses itself is unique unto itself, and that is how Creation observes itself.

1) Polar establishment of defineable energy-substances is explained in depth in  The Celestial Scriptures: Keys to the Suppressed Wisdom of  the  Ancients.

1 Comment »

God Forgot to Say

Posted in Atheist, Bible, sex taboos with tags , , , , , , , , on March 31, 2009 by chouck017894

The priests and prophets of biblical lore claimed to have received all necessary information needed by man directly from an omnipotent, all-knowing being. It is astonishing, therefore, how much God seems to have neglected to explain to his favorites. In view of the fact that sex is the foundation of all material life forms, why did he not make clear the microscopic process by which he bestowed diversity within all life forms?

For example, male and female development is dependent upon the different determinants or segments or genes distributed along the X and Y chromosomes–X for female and Y for male. Every individual is “designed” or created with different and unique combinations of these, and they affect each person’s body structure, brain activity (including physical desires), and behavioral patterns.

The X and Y chromosomes demonstrate how the chemical process results in character traits and attractions that are of psychological and social interest. For instance, all males with an excess of either X or Y chromosomes tend to produce an increased amount of male hormones which tend to become expressed with a tendency toward aggressiveness and a lower threshold for committing violence in comparison with so-called “normal” male population. Perhaps the hardline religious leaders could possibly be accounted for by an extra X or Y in their chromsomal composition.

For YXX males it seems that violence generally begins early; around the age of 13 instead of around age 18 for the “average” male. The YXX males issue out of a fairly “normal” sample of the population, but they feel at odds with the “normal” environment.

The religiously obsessed choose to ignore the means by which life’s diverse “designs” are allowed and encouraged to manifest as physical form. The idea that human propagation is a sacred duty, for example, elbowed its way into western religious decree through the development of a self-serving Jewish “law,” said to be passed down by God, but clearly fashioned upon tribal mentality. The priest-authors who interpreted God’s “laws” sought to encourage reproduction of their followers to insure the increase of their followers to stand against the differently oriented societies around them. Any sexual activity that did not contribute to the desired growth of followers was deemed a threat to the social/political authority of those priests and prophets claiming divine guidance.

Thus it was claimed by the priest-authors of “holy word” that the Lord abhorred and condemned any nonproductive sexual activity such as masturbation, abortion, homosexuality, celibacy, etc. This was, to be blunt, politically and economically profitable for the priest class, as well as racially eugenic.

Today, with the human population on this little planet hovering over seven billion, for Judaism, Christian, Islam and even eastern “faiths” to continue to regard the propgation of more humans to be a sacred duty is hardly pursuing life’s  higher potential in a responsible manner.

3 Comments »