Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

1.5K

A religion with high standards for members is effectively doing evolutionary selection for its group based on these standards. Most religions encourage in-group breeding. Good religions encourage monogamy which is eugenic and discourage promiscuity which is dysgenic. Monogamy selects for responsible parenting while promiscuity selects for immoral behavior through Fisherian selection. I wrote a long post about these ideas here:

http://www.mikraite.org/Human-Evolution-tp17.html

Religion is the only practical solution. Political solutions are simply not practical. But a small group of people could form a eugenic religion.

A religion with high standards for members is effectively doing evolutionary selection for its group based on these standards. Most religions encourage in-group breeding. Good religions encourage monogamy which is eugenic and discourage promiscuity which is dysgenic. Monogamy selects for responsible parenting while promiscuity selects for immoral behavior through Fisherian selection. I wrote a long post about these ideas here: http://www.mikraite.org/Human-Evolution-tp17.html Religion is the only practical solution. Political solutions are simply not practical. But a small group of people could form a eugenic religion.

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (28).
[–] • 0 pt (edited )

Marriage between first cousins ... has no negative effect on the overall gene pool.

Citation needed.

Take a look at this . It seems like the problems extend to the community at large where inbreeding occurs -- not just the inbred children.

Even if you say all of the problems in this community are 100% the children of first cousin marriages and those problems all go away in the second generation, it still has a negative effect on the genepool.

So I would say not every religion is necessarily eugenic.

[–] • -1 pt

I give up. If someone asks for a citation to support the statement "1 + 1 = 2" then I just need to end the conversation.

[–] • 0 pt

"1+1=2" is fairly obvious. But here,

"Marriage between first cousins ... has no negative effect on the overall gene pool" is pretty dubious on its face, which makes it different from your 1+1=2 example.

You should really be able to back a claim like that up if you're going to make it in the first place.