Where do we start off on a discussion about reproduction? A scientific discussion about reproduction starts with the development of germinal cells in a fetus which develop on their way to become fully functional adult reproductive organs and from there on to conception upto the child birth. But what are creationist discussions concerned about, under the heading of "reproduction"? Their idea of human life is a gift from god, and any discussion about the manufacture of this gift is often suppressed by "god did it". So what is this gift supposed to be? Sperm? ovum? viable fetus? newborn? Creationists aren't heard of talking like "god gifted the man a sperm and the woman an ovum, from which they could conceive a zygote". So is it a viable fetus? No, because the knowledge of age of viability was not known in biblical times and jesus never bothered to get bible updated on this. Its not a newborn because there is a deadly idea called "anti-abortion". Creationists aren't heard of making distinctions between "zygote", "embryo" and "fetus" in their anti-abortion propaganda, perhaps because of their ignorance of human embryology (I take it that they are ignorant of human embryology because it is actually a telltale of human evolution).

 Fear of hell being the cause of persistence of faith is not a new concept, but what most theists don’t understand that just like the admittance of any other kind of fear, admitting fear of hell and/ or the wrath of god is an essential element in the faith of anyone who had ever developed any doubt about his faith. I hold the view that since doubt is the one of the most basic element of human thinking, there never existed a believer, no matter how unshakable he may sound, to have never entertained a doubt about his/her faith. But there is Pascal's wager which is basically stupid, yet powerful tool on the theist's mind.

As some men are more courageous than others, some fear the unseen and unreported more than the others, this goes a way in deciding as to precisely what kind of theists will have the fear of god's wrath, as an important factor in determining the persistence of their faith. So what if u are a coward and keep as priority your own safety above all truth? What if your life or your genes made you so helplessly afraid of the unpleasant things that in order to have a stable and non-suicidal mind it becomes essential for you to be a hypocrite in all sensitive matters in life? What if u are so hopeless that your therapist advises a world of fantasies for u to stay sane?
Is there a way to allow such people to stay cool without religion?

 So far as one section of our species can go to devalue, abuse, and oppress another section, the selfish motives, more often than not, call for a limit to oppression. A master can cane its slave as much as one wants to, but will mostly refrain from permanently damaging the slave’s organs of labor, the hands and the legs. Acute impulses to dominate an individual or a group of individuals are thus limited in intensity by the rationale to persistently dominate them.

Here is why “I think” female genital mutilation (FGM) is not popular, rejected or even condemned by the majority of muslim populations, even though they already are the most misogynist sections (I use “sections of people” and not religion, because pick any group, based on whatever differences, nothing get more misogynist than muslim “section&rdquo on the planet and possess the capacity to go worse.

 Every demand of peace and