Homeopathic morality and Muslim sexuality

According to Livescience:

Of all the world’s major religious groups, Muslims are the least likely to have sex outside of marriage, new research found. And as a country’s Muslim population grows, the rate of premarital sex declines for all residents, even non-Muslims, according to the study.
Researchers analyzed the responses of over 620,000 people (ages 15-59) who were interviewed as part of the Demographic and Health Surveys in 31 mostly developing nations from 2000 to 2008. Most countries included in the sample had either a Muslim or Christian majority, except India and Nepal, which have Hindu majorities, and Cambodia which has a Buddhist majority. (The United States was not included in the study.)
They found that, overall, the odds of married Muslims reporting premarital sex are 53 percent lower than for Christians. Hindus are 40 percent less likely to report premarital sex, compared with Christians. Meanwhile, Jews and Buddhists have greater chances of having sex before getting hitched than Christians do, according to the study.

The study has some obvious weak spots. For example, it could be that people in Muslim-dominated societies are more likely to lie about their sex-lives than others. The authors of this study assumed that lying would be kept to a minimum if the interviewers were the same sex as the subjects, and if nobody else was in the room. Perhaps. I suppose that, short of following people around and monitoring their sex-lives, this was the best they could do.
Also,the article goes on to say:

“All major world religions discourage sex outside of marriage, but they are not all equally effective in shaping behavior,” wrote the researchers, led by Amy Adamczyk, an associate professor of sociology at John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York.

Yes, it’s true that other religions are not as effective; probably because their adherents don’t resort to honor-killings, acid attacks and female genital mutilation. Lynch mobs are very effective at curbing criminal behavior, but I’m willing to bet that Adamczyk does not support them.
In Adamczyk’s defense, she has published a number of similar studies in the past, all of which tend to support her conclusions in this book. She’s studies HIV rates and found them to be lower in predominantly Muslim countries as well.
I’m not sure that Livescience did a good job conveying the nature of the study to its readership. If we consult the John Jay College account of Professor  Adamczyk and co-author Brittany Hayes’s book, “Religion and Sexual Behaviors: Understanding the Influence of Islamic Cultures and Religious Affiliation for Explaining Sex Outside of Marriage,” we find the following:

Adamczyk and Hayes’s study found that Hindus and Muslims are less likely than Christians and Jews to have premarital sex and Muslims are less likely to have extramarital sex. Muslims’ lower likelihood of premarital and extramarital sex is related to their commitment to, and community support for, strict religious tenants that only permit sex within marriage. The researchers also found that national Islamic cultures influence the sexual behaviors of all residents, even people who do not identify themselves as Muslim. The authors posit that religion tends to have a more powerful effect than restrictions on women’s movement in many Muslim countries (bold mine).

This supports what I’ve been saying for quite some time, that the dominant culture/religion of a society shapes the overall behavior of that society, even those who do not subscribe to the dominant religion/culture. We can carry this insight one step further, into the realm of time, and state that historically Christian societies behave differently, even after the religion is gone, than historically non-Christian societies. If I may be so bold, I would like to call this homeopathic morality. It’s the religion-based morality that remains even after the religion is gone.
A good friend of mine has claimed that we have little to fear from a “Muslim-majority” Europe since the vast majority of “European Muslims” shed their religiosity. Like the masses of shiftless, mindless, youth everywhere, they’d rather be second-rate niggers* than first-rate Arabs or Polynesians or what have you. But, unfortunately, Europe can suffer the worst of both worlds. The same second, and third, generation aliens can be niggers during periods of bad behavior, and Muslims during periods of good behavior. That is to say, when they’re not murdering, looting, raping and vandalizing, they’re voting for Muslim interests, raising Muslim kids, participating in Muslim marches and protests and supporting Muslim culture. It’s a double-edged sword. Good cop/bad cop.
*For new readers: When I say “nigger”, I refer to criminal, trashy, people of any background or those who make it a point to emulate them.

This entry was posted in immigration/ Hispanics, Muslims. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Homeopathic morality and Muslim sexuality

  1. Apopkian says:

    Having lived in Muslim countries it’s been my experience that Muslims have much higher rates of bestiality, pedophilia and recreational homosexuality. They don’t consider these things to be sex outside of marriage so they are not actually lying in the survey.

  2. Georgia Resident says:

    It’s no good for people to “shed their religious identity”, if they take up a worse one. I doubt that most of the “French” (North and sub-saharan African) youths who rioted a few years back really give a damn about Mohammed, they just saw a weak native authority and the opportunity to run rampant. They have, as JAY so aptly put it, a “second-rate nigger” culture, which is probably worse than a normal muslim culture. Maybe that’s why the second generation of immigrants to France actually behaved worse than the first generation. Their parents, even if they were nonreligious, still carried their “homeopathic” morality from their native countries, but their children, having grown up in a country that is neither Christian nor muslim, have no identity or morality other than that of street thugs.

  3. jewamongyou says:

    The friend I was referring to wanted to clarify his position and sent me the following:
    I think you understood part of my position but misunderstood part of it also. What I dislike and would rather not see is a niggerized Europe (resulting in large part from the children and grandchildren of persons you identify as “Muslims” or who may self identify as such living in Europe. I don’t want that.
    Like you I also oppose immigration from the so called “Islamic” world into Europe. My fear isn’t Islam though but that the children and grandchildren will not be Muslim and will become typical low class niggers. We both oppose the same immigration but for the opposite reason I think. I fear them because I know once they assimilate into Europe they will become shiftless niggers with no morals. They will cease to be Muslim.
    I think you fear that Islam will become powerful and oppress other peoples or attempt to enforce Islamic edicts on them. This is impossible because dumb brown people cannot resist the lure of western hedonism. It takes a person with a certain level of self control and moral values to live in a culture with prostitution, drugs and alcohol yet not become a whore monger, drug addict or criminal. Many whites do not possess this level of self control as we know, yet you seem to think Muslims will have that level of self control, that they will live among a society saturated with sexuality, alcoholism and permissiveness yet somehow they will be strong enough to continue as Muslims? No offence intended but to me that is an irrational fear. We should fear dumb brown and dangerous people but we shouldn’t fear Islam in my view if that makes sense. The real danger is what these people will be like when they aren’t Muslim as we are seeing with the crime reports out of the UK for instance. Most of the children and grandchildren of Muslims are becoming brown thugs and ceasing to be Muslim.

    • Apopkian says:

      The problem is that being a low life hedonist doesn’t stop a person from supporting religious leadership. I’ve seen many blacks in America support and give respect to their local religious leaders while at the same time abandoning their own kids.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *