From Part I Chapter 5  Humans in the Myth

By Shane Stewart

Patrilineage: Lineal descent traced through the male line (Merriam Webster)

Because of the practice of patrilineage, as early as the 20th century, a child born outside of wedlock (lacking a “father” of record), could in fact be labeled an “illegitimate” human being.  Amazing, when you consider the fact that except for a brief encounter between the male and female for insemination, the presence of the male is not even necessary for the entire duration of a child’s life.  To this very day, without a man to claim line of descent, a human being, born of a woman, can be considered illegitimate. How can a child, born of a woman, be considered an illegitimate human being?  Women are the foundation upon which human reproduction stands.  Every human being on earth is the product of female labor.  Our survival as a dual-gender species depends mostly upon the blood, sweat, tears, sacrifice, and strength of women.  Being the source of human life should make it self-evident that women hold the natural and primary position of identity in the recording and tracing of human ancestry.  But if the male ego cannot control the reproduction of the human race, it will, and does, claim authority and control over the lineal descent of the human race. The practice of patrilineage is yet another ludicrous and nonsensical act of male oppression of the female.

Females are the most critical link in the continuation of human life, as they alone hold the power to allow life to be created.  Our human heritage is dependent upon children being properly identified as descendants in the line of their true ancestry.  Correct ancestral identity is crucial to human genealogy.  The ludicrous practice of patrilineage however has resulted in the irreparable corruption of human ancestry, because without DNA testing, it is impossible to be certain as to the identity of the biological father.  We generally accept that a husband is the father of his wife’s children.  There are however, a remarkable percentage of births where this is not the case.  The line of genealogy then has become “corrupted.”  In the case of an unwed mother we generally accept that the father is whoever she claims it is.  But only DNA testing can prove or disprove that claim.

Unlike the father, there is absolutely no question as to the identity of a child’s mother.  Because of this simple fact, the integrity of human ancestry can only be assured by following our natural line through the female.  This is called “matrilineage.”  But men have callously pushed women aside and unashamedly stolen their natural right of primary ancestry.  The implementation of patrilineage by the male ego is designed strictly for maintaining male domination over the female.  There is no other reason.  Men refuse to allow women to hold the position of primary ancestry of their children, because if human ancestral lines were followed through the female, it would erode and weaken the image of male superiority.

Under the facade of male superiority, men maintain that their importance to humanity far exceeds that of the female.  To create justification for assuming all power and authority over our species, men cast women as indecisive, weak, inferiors, incapable of wielding authority.  But the process of birth is an exclusive power held by women; an area of life where in fact men are the weak inferiors.  At its core, the practice of patrilineage is the proclamation that women simply serve as the vessel through which men are to receive their children.  Placing children under the ancestral line of a father is an insult to every woman who has ever given birth.  Patrilineage exposes a pathetic and neurotic aspect of men whose “security” can only come through their image of male superiority.

After thousands of years, patrilineage has poisoned our human family tree, and completely destroyed the integrity of collective human heritage. If a child’s primary ancestral identity is cut from the known mother, and pasted under the identity of a claimed father, it must be noted that that child may actually have no biological relationship to that man whatsoever.  As a farce of ancestry molded by the male ego, patrilineage has surely irreversibly damaged the scope of human heritage. We must note that when men perform work, they demand the right of recognition for the product of their labor.  They have organized labor unions to prevent more powerful men from exploiting their labor for a mere pittance.  But men steadfastly refuse women the right of recognition of the product of female labor; their children.

No one can deny that human life comes through the female ovum.  This significant fact clearly demonstrates that our natural ancestral identity then belongs under the name of the person who gives us birth; so why is this not being done?  Primitive males must have stood in awe as they witnessed a woman bringing a human being right out of her body!  Surely this gave them an understanding of the power women held over the creation of life.  Men did not have that power, nor could they just physically take it away from women.  Men found an answer to this dilemma in the creation of another facade.  They claimed that because they were naturally superior to women, the children women gave birth to must be kept under the ancestral line and authority of a superior male; a “father.”  As the fallacy of patrilineage was implemented, women were callously pushed aside from the position of primary ancestor to the very children they created.

Men openly dismiss women as emotional, irrational, and confused people, incapable of leadership.  Therefore, they are funneled into roles that are designed to serve and support the needs of superior males.  Men fabricate negative images of women as being ineffectual, incapable, incompetent, indecisive, emotional, weak, and inferior.  Men then point to these false images to justify denying women important positions of decision and authority in world affairs.  There are some men who are so steeped in their false image of male superiority that they are convinced that it is their duty in this man’s world to bar females from wielding power in society as a protection against female incompetence.  But men have clearly over stepped the bounds of male authority by taking control of a part of human life that is exclusively the realm of the female, an area of life in which women are obviously the “superior.”  A part of life in which men have absolutely no business, no knowledge, no power, and no authority, and in fact, cannot even enter.  This is a part of life that belongs strictly to the female, and one which men had to literally commandeer from women: the world of human reproduction and line of descent.

Human life is the exclusive product of women; the end result of their labor and their work is beyond the reach of any man.  Women are the authority in the creation of our species, and that authority is theirs alone.  Sharing the process of gestation and birth bonds the mother and child in the most unique and exclusive relationship on earth.  This bond does not exist between father and child and cannot be experienced in any other human relationship.  The primitive display of female oppression is not a random practice found sporadically in certain cultures, but a practice embraced by every culture on earth, from the smallest of tribal groups living in the most remote corners of the earth, to the teeming populations of our largest cities.  Nations may disagree on economics.  Religions may conflict about God.  Cultures may be divided by custom and tradition, but regardless of their differences, men will readily put them aside and join hands as a united and unified force behind the practice of female oppression.  Patrilineage is just another in the arsenal of weapons used by men in their senseless and endless battle to maintain control over women.

Ancestral Integrity Through the Mother

(A Story)

Within the walls of a local hospital, a soon-to-be mother is caught in the grip of labor.  The encouraging voices of the doctors and nurses seem far in the distance as she continues to struggle.  Exhausted and weakened, the woman retreats inside herself, gathering energy for the next contraction.  “Please!”  She moans, “This has to be the one!”  Drained, spent, and worn out, she shouts to no one in particular: “Don’t you understand I can’t do this anymore?!”  With the contraction squeezing at her very being, she bears down with all her might.  “Push! Yes! Yes, that’s it!  Push!” the doctor encourages, “Good, good!  Come on!  Breathe.  That’s it!  Just a little more now!”  He says.  Sensing the time has come, she bears down even harder, growling through clenched teeth like an angry beast.  Suddenly, out of the blood, sweat, tears, and flesh of her body, a newborn human cry’s out upon the face of the Earth. The new mother, giddy from exhaustion, collapses in welcome relief, overcome by the realization of what she has just done.  Shouts of congratulations bounce around the room and echo through her mind.  Smiling broadly, she breaks into laughter.  It took months of sacrifice, suffering and physical change for this child to form inside her body and then, just like that, it’s over?

This child lived and grew inside her body for nine months.  She was the essential and indispensable person in its successful journey to earth.  Without her, this child would not exist.  But after all her efforts and all her suffering, men will take her child’s identity from her.  She will not be recognized as the primary ancestor of the very person that just came through her body.  Through the cruel practice of patrilineage this woman will be pushed out of the ancestral identity of her child.  Unbelievably, this child’s ancestry will be recorded under the name of someone who was but incidental to its creation, wasn’t even present during its birth, and in fact, may not even be biologically connected to the child; that person is a supposed father!  There is something terribly wrong with this picture.  A child is the product of a woman’s labor, molded and formed for months out of her flesh and blood and delivered through her body.  If there is a right of ancestry it obviously and justifiably belongs to the female.  How can it be a man’s final authority to displace a mother’s natural identity as the primary ancestor of her children? There is no doubt about the identity of the mother of the child.  We just witnessed that child come through her body.  This establishes an undeniable biological identity between the mother and child and sets a direct link for ancestral purposes.  Could imagine someone ever standing up after witnessing a woman  giving birth and shout out, “Who is the mother of this child?”  But sadly, that is always the question about the “father.”

Ancestral corruption through the “father”

(A story)

A man paces nervously around a maternity ward waiting area. It seems like days have passed since his wife went into labor.  “It’s got to be a boy! It’s got to be a boy!” he repeatedly mumbles under his breath.  It was his wife’s lousy idea to wait until the birth to see if the child is a boy or a girl, and he only agreed to that because it would have upset her if he didn’t.  “It really doesn’t matter,” she had told him, “It’s our baby and that’s all that really counts, isn’t it?” “Yeah, you’re right, sweetheart, that’s all that counts,” He lovingly and insincerely agreed.  He wasn’t about to let her know his true thoughts and feelings which were: “Yeah, sure, right.  Women have the dumbest ideas.  Like hell it doesn’t matter!  This kid’s got to be a boy!”  He glances nervously at the faces of the other prospective fathers in the room.  He would have to remember to “act” happy if he’s told, “It’s a girl!”  Suddenly a smiling nurse enters the waiting room.  “Mr. Jones!” she says, “You’re a father again.”  Praying to hear the right” words, he coaxes her to continue. “Is it…is it…a…a…?” he stutters.  “Yes, it’s a boy”, she says.  He cannot contain himself.  “Alriiigghht!” he growls, pumping his fist into the air, “Yes! I have a son!”  Beaming with pride at the other men in the room, he quickly turns and follows the nurse.  His wife is laying comfortably in bed, exhausted, the child asleep in her arms.  “Our baby”, he says for his wife’s benefit.  “My son”, he says to himself.  His life has now been justified.  His world is complete.  He has his son to carry on his seed.  Later that night, the man gathers with his buddies and celebrates.  He passes out cigars announcing, “It’s a boy!”  He proudly blows smoke rings from his “It’s a boy!” cigar and smiles broadly at his friends.  “She got it right this time!” he boasts.

This man is not celebrating a father’s pride, or the pride of a parent.  He is celebrating the only thing that matters to him, a male child.  This is his reflection.  His male ego has been reproduced.  He can now relax in his manhood.  The mood was not so festive when he announced the birth of his first child.  Those cigars announced; “It’s a girl.”  He was actually disappointed, but in front of his friends he feigned happiness at having a daughter, although he half-jokingly blamed his wife for having a girl.  “Yeah right!” the guys cracked, “Couldn’t have had anything to do with weak sperm, now could it?” they chided, “What’s the matter, couldn’t man up for a son?”  “Next time she’ll get it right,” he mumbled embarrassingly.

What does “get it right” in this conversation mean?  What is a right human being?  Does it mean his wife gave a wrong birth to something that wasn’t human by having a girl?  In the dark recesses of the egotistical mind of most men, the only right birth is a birth that reflects their male ego; a boy.  But there is something this particular man does not know.  While his wife did give birth to a boy, he still has no son.  This man, like many others, lives in a virtual fantasy world of male ego.  This boy, being born under this man’s name, is his “legal” descendent.  But this child will never know its true ancestry or its true father.  You see, in truth, this boy’s birth is the result of its mother’s extramarital affair.  And even though she had the affair, she had calculated that her husband could also just as well have been the father, so she let it go at that – what we don’t know won’t hurt us!

This father’s egotistical vision of his seed being carried on by this boy will not be a reality, but only an image.  He and the boy, not being biologically related, will share in a fantasy relationship of family.  This child is the victim of displaced ancestry, an orphan of patrilineage.  Yes, this man’s family name will be carried on through this boy, but only on paper.  His descendants will occupy a virtual family tree hung with paper leaves.  In the reality of human heritage this man’s line of descent has been corrupted.  But in the fallacy of patrilineage, it continues as a mirage.  And in the shallow depths of the male mind, everything is always just fine as an image, unless someone says something about it.

This situation would be of no consequence to genealogy if human heritage were simply followed naturally and smoothly through the name of the mother.  Children would always be recorded in their proper ancestral line, regardless of the father’s identity.  There could be no errors in human heritage.  Men are aware that the practice of patrilineage long ago delivered a fatal blow to any confidence that we had in the truth and integrity of our ancestry.  But men do not like to talk about the fallacy of heritage through patrilineage.  They keep themselves wrapped in a cloak of denial, choosing to live in a fantasy that the corpse of ancestry is alive and well, and they demand that we all pretend as such. Creating images is the nature of the male ego.

Such is the horribly sad and corrupt condition of human ancestry today as the result of the fallacy of patrilineage.  The mother is truly every human’s primary ancestor, and if ancestry were being followed through her name, our lineage would flow naturally in a simple, truthful, and un-corrupted line.  Why are men so afraid of women having their proper right over ancestry?  It is simply to assuage the male ego.  Having human heritage follow through the name of the father feeds the image of male superiority and strengthens male domination over the female.

Patrilineage has made a mockery of our ancestry, rendering human heritage helpless to a flawed cut and paste process that is easily manipulated, riddled with falsehood, and saturated with error.  Uncountable generations of humans are occupying family trees to which they have no relationship.  Patrilineage is not a natural path for the recording of human ancestry.  It is simply an affront to the integrity of human heritage; a blatant display of female oppression, and an exhibition of total disregard for the truth.

Unjustly taking human heritage away from women, is just another in a long list of insulting and demeaning actions that men have taken in their campaign to strengthen the false image of female inferiority.  But this negative image of the female cannot be applied to the world of human reproduction.  That is the world of the female, and in that world, she is the only capable authority.  Men have over-stepped their bounds in trying to dominate the world of a mother and child.  There is no excuse that can justify the oppressive act of removing a mother from her natural position as the most important person to her children in human heritage.

How can a man possibly imagine that he is so much more important to the process of birth than the mother, that he has the right to claim her child as his?  What an incredible display of bloated, self-important, negative male ego!  What right does he have to take that child away from the mother’s name and place it under his own?  A man may not even be the father of a child, but he can take that child, who came through the body of its mother, and place it under his heritage?  By whose authority can he do that?  There is no reasoning that can justify a man stepping between a mother and her child.  But men continue to plunder women in every arena, stripping them of all their rights, even the right to the children they produce.  Again, considering that women are the very source of human life, it follows that the path of ancestral lineage can only be accurately and factually followed through the name of the mother, the person that gave us life.  That path is matrilineal.

All humans are direct descendants of their mother.  We are molded inside her body, and we are part of her flesh and blood.  She is the foundation of human life on Earth.  Compare the huge responsibility for reproduction carried by the female, to the fact that men have but a small and incidental role in the process of reproduction.  Beyond a brief encounter for insemination, they have absolutely no biological responsibility for human life.  There is only one answer to the question of “Where did you came from?”  That answer: “My mother.”  The exploitation of women and their bodies permeates the social workings of the external world, and the practice of patrilineage extends male exploitation, domination, and control of the female into the very cradle of creation itself, the female womb.  The practice of patrilineage is an embarrassing and shameful stain on the culture of the human race.

Men continue to repeat various socially acceptable phrases to justify patrilineage, such as; “That’s the way it’s supposed to be.”  “A woman’s purpose is to give a man his children.”  “Women are ineffectual and insecure and need to be directed and controlled.”  “God put women on earth to serve as the vessel through which a man is to receive his children.” etc., etc., etc.  These kinds of statements are rooted in myth, fallacy, and lies.  There is no truth in the practice of patrilineage.  It was designed by the male ego strictly to support the image of male superiority and maintain the unjust practice of female oppression.

  • Rerouting human lineage from the mother to the father is unnecessary and senseless. It has laid waste to our ancestral identity, subjecting it to manipulation, corruption, and irreversible error, and is hopelessly undermined by the uncertain identity of the father.
  • Our mother’s true identity is demonstrated with absolute certainty through the process of birth. We are all born through our mothers.  Our ancestral identity is unquestionably connected to her.  Yet we are shuffled into a questionable line of ancestry controlled by the name of a man to whom we may have no ancestral connection.  Uncountable generations of humans have been thrown into the branches of family trees to which they do not belong.  Even if a man can establish that he is the father of a child, taking that child from the mother’s name and placing it under the name of a “father,” is still a gross exploitation of women.
  • Removing a child’s obvious ancestral connection to the mother and patching it into the questionable line of ancestry of the supposed father, is critical to male authority over the female and supports the false image that men are of primary importance within our species.
  • Patrilineage is not a random practice carried out by men of particular nations or cultures, it is a worldwide practice that bonds and unites men of all nations and cultures under the common banner of female oppression and the image of male superiority.
  • Giving birth is entirely the realm of the female. It is the only thing that women can do that men cannot physically take away from them.  Men are not capable of performing this function.  But they have taken away the heritage of her children.  There can be no logical argument to justify this fact.  It is only done because controlling the heritage of a woman’s child is essential to the continued success of male domination of our society.
  • Women are the voice of authority when it comes to nurturing, developing, and caring for human beings and they alone occupy the world of birth; a world that cannot be entered, understood, nor experienced by any man.
  • Men discount the labor of women, claiming that giving birth is a duty that women must perform to give a man his children. More precisely, to give a man his  This demonstrates an ignorant disregard for the glaring and obvious fault inherent in patrilineage; the questionable identity of the true father!  It is this inherent fault that has already destroyed the integrity of recorded human ancestry.
  • Why do men think they are more important than women in human heritage? Why do men think a son is of greater importance than a daughter?  Why, in some cultures, can a man have many wives, but a woman only one husband?  In these cultures, why do women accept being one of many wives married to the same husband?
  • Human ancestry is based upon the assumption that a biological connection exists between the child and those who are considered to be its ancestors. Giving birth is empirical evidence of the connection between a mother and child.  A mother’s identity cannot be faked, questioned, or denied.  No greater proof that we are among our relatives exists beyond that of knowing we descended directly from our mother.

In observing this situation fairly and objectively, it becomes clear that the only true and logical path that can be used to define our genetic heritage leads through our mother.  Why is this not being done?  Why is a child placed under the ancestral name of a supposed father?  There are various “moral, social, personal and legal” reasons behind the misrepresentation of a child’s father.  This is done with no concern for truth in ancestry.  The only concern of patrilineage is that a child’s paper ancestry be in order.  Men do not care about true ancestry; they only care that their image as a father be maintained without anyone asking any questions.  Various circumstances contribute to the manipulation and corruption of our ancestry:

  • An unmarried woman may be expecting a child and the prospective mother is not sure who the true father is. She may logically deduce whom she thinks most likely fathered the child and inform this man that he is indeed the father.  The prospective father may or may not harbor doubts, but if he concedes to his name being placed on the birth record, the child is recorded as his descendant, whether he is the biological father or not.
  • Many couples start a relationship after the woman has become pregnant by a different man. The woman has told the prospective husband, and he is fully aware that he is not the father, but they marry before the child is born.  The child becomes a false descendent under the husband’s name.
  • A child may be born into a marriage after having been conceived outside that marriage. The mother is aware that her husband is not the father and she does, or does not, divulge this to him. Regardless, the child then becomes a member of a family to which it has no biological connection to the man it calls father.  This child is now misplaced in an ancestral line to which it has no relationship.  It is an orphan of patrilineage.

In these situations, the confusion as to the child’s genetics is entirely related to the questionable identity of the biological father.  But in every case, if matrilineal descent were properly being practiced, the child would naturally be recorded as a descendent of its mother.  Humans dismiss these scenarios as something that isn’t related to them; “That’s not something that’s happened in our family.”  We always think these things only happen to other people.  Most people are aware that following human heritage through the name of the father is inherently flawed, but to discuss it is taboo.  “Don’t say anything!”  People avoid asking questions because they know that the identity of the father is subject to uncertainty.  Do we fear we might possibly uncover something we really don’t want to face?  Are we truly related to our supposed ancestors or are we hiding from a possible truth?  Do you know a truth about your ancestry that you dare not divulge?  Without strict DNA testing we cannot be certain of our biological trail of ancestry.  As long as patrilineage is practiced, we can only be certain that it is a paper trail.

In spite of all this, my concern is not with the corruption of ancestry which patrilineage promotes.  I have little interest in biological ancestry.  Human beings are not defined by their heritage, but by what they make of themselves during their lives.  Human character is not biologically inherited.  In the final analysis, what you are as a person is not determined by where you came from.  The qualities that define you as a person such as integrity, honesty and being trustworthy, are qualities created within each individual.  My concern rather is with the obvious injustice of patrilineage.  When men took the natural right of ancestry from the female, it was just another “slap in the face,” another blatant step in their continuing campaign to strengthen their control, oppression and domination of the female.

  • The birth process endows the female with the inherent right of ancestry extending through her name. Every person on earth came through the ovum of a female.  The mother and child share an absolute identity and unique bond that cannot exist in any other human relationship.  Our mother is the essential foundation of our being.  Without her lengthy cooperation in giving us life, we would not exist.  Why then is the female not recognized as the foundation of human ancestry?  Why aren’t children’s identities inextricably tied to their mothers?
  • It is a human injustice and a stain on the character of humanity that family trees do not extend through the name of the mother. It would not be possible to have someone in our ancestral line that is not a true descendent if the path of lineage was followed through the mother. Your great, great grandmothers and grandfathers would be, beyond a doubt, your true ancestors. Your distant uncle would actually be your distant uncle.  Matrilineal identity is infallible in establishing the path from which we descended.
  • The chaos and deception existing in human ancestry came about because men took the line of ancestry away from women. This is an injustice that may stand uncorrected when all the while, without DNA testing, the only genetic connection we are certain of is the one we share with our mother.

It is demonstrated that every human being is a direct descendant of a particular female.  Why has our line of ancestry then been stripped from its secure female foundation and stitched into the line of someone we call father, to whom we may have no genealogical connection?  The answer is obvious and simple.  The human male is grossly insecure.  Men try to compensate for this insecurity by physically dominating everything around them, especially the female.  This supports their false image of superiority and gives them a false sense of security.

Allowing our ancestry to remain in the hands of the “inferior” female was damaging to the male’s image as the authority over humanity.  To rectify this, men forced women to surrender the right to their children’s line of descent and placed all children under the surname of a father.  This cowardly act was just another way to continue an on-going campaign by the male ego for maintaining male domination and oppression of women.  Women are conditioned from birth to believe that they are made for the purpose of being used as the vessel through which men are to receive their children. Many women accept this hoax as truth!

People observe their family trees, proudly pointing out and taking claim to characteristics and accomplishments of their ancestors, often going back hundreds, perhaps even thousands of years.  But how many of us are leaves on the branches of a paper family tree?  Is this unthinkable to you?  We look the other way and don’t rock the boat even though we all know that patrilineage is ludicrous.  Why do we not attempt to right this horrible wrong?  Is it all just too much work and nothing can be done about it anyway?  Do we just not want to open the proverbial “can of worms?”  What if a woman had chosen artificial insemination as the method through which to be impregnated?  Then the father’s identity could remain a mystery forever.  Whomever the mother identifies as the father is generally accepted as such, because DNA testing is rarely used to confirm paternity; just to contest it.  Is a father actually the father, or simply the designated line of descent listed on a paper birth certificate?  When we take all the dust in a room and sweep it under the rug, is the room really clean?

Feigning Responsibility for Life

With all the ludicrous heated arguments over who has the right to control a woman’s body, I feel every human being has the duty to express their thoughts on this matter.  Here is what I think is the solution to the male ego and its claim to be the “protector of life” simply for the sole purpose of continuing male control over, and domination of, the female and her body.

My rant on reproductive choice!

There are many pompous and sanctimonious men who claim they have been charged with a divine duty to protect the sanctity of life from “murderous” women who would end a pregnancy before full term.  These men want to legally prevent a woman from ending a pregnancy for any reason at all, even if continuing the pregnancy would result in her death.  How on earth does using the unborn as a weapon to kill women equate with protecting the sanctity of life?  These men have no concern for the sanctity of life.  They are only concerned with making sure that men maintain absolute control over women and their bodies in every way possible for as long as possible.

Those men, who say that women must die at the hands of the unborn, speak as cowards and hypocrites.  They would not so readily stand as heroic protectors of the sanctity of life if it were they who had to die during the process of giving birth.  But they’re not the ones facing death.  So, let’s give these guys a chance to prove their dedication to life.  How many men do you think would still be passionate about protecting the sanctity of life if it had to be done in the following manner:

“If a woman is forced to continue a pregnancy, even though it will result in her death,

then the father must die along with her!”

So how about it gentlemen; isn’t this the only brave, equal, and manly thing to do to show your true dedication to life that you claim?  Wouldn’t a good father, stand up and share the responsibility of dying for the life of his child along with its mother?


(A Quick Note)

Beginning toward the end of the 20th century, the negative male ego has been busy trying to dislodge and displace the female as the sole “creator” of life.  In a hilarious comedy of errors, men are desperately trying to perfect the process of cloning so they too can claim that they can “create life.”  But human cloning is not, and never will be the same as the process of giving birth to a human being.  The cloning process does not go through critical, gamete cellular division.  This is the process that produces a unique human being out of the combined DNA of two separate individuals.  This is where two halves make one whole.

A clone is the product of a single cell donor.  Cloning does not produce an original person, but uses the mature cells from a single person to produce a replicated, physical, genetic copy of that single person.  TFI is in complete, absolute, and total disagreement with the cloning of a complete human body; with replacing the “gamete” process with the “cloning” process.  TFI is however, in complete, absolute, and total agreement with the process of cloning particular organs that individuals can use to increase their health and well-being.

There is another aspect of cloning that we are sure many men have considered in great detail.  Being sexually motivated, it is possible that many men could have their favorite sexual female donate a cell to produce a clone for satisfying a man’s sexual ego.  This idea will obviously repel many people, but I know full well the negative sexual parameters of the male ego and what it is capable of doing.  We all may well live to see ads for sexual clones.  Where does the integrity of human heritage stand in all this?  What is the line of descent for a clone?  In the future, there will be much ado about the legal and human status of clones.

Like our Page on FB!


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s