VISION FOR ALL

Rahul Kumar

275 Posts

32 comments

Reader Blogs are not moderated, Jagran is not responsible for the views, opinions and content posted by the readers.
blogid : 8093 postid : 432

SECOND PHASE OF EVOLUTION WITHOUT SEX

Posted On 13 Jun, 2013 Others में

  • SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

SECOND PHASE OF EVOLUTION WITHOUT SEX

We should always live even beyond the nature..Human has gained such power that he can challenge the order of nature.It is always said that it is natural to undergo sex by standing it necessary for procreation or reproduction. But we should just try to think over it in some challenging ways. Was it not possible to opt different process for procreation in place of sex? Was it not possible to make a species free from the dependency to its another species for the procreation? We are not dependent to our species for respiration, movement, feeding etc. Then why nature followed wrong way of Evolutionary process to make dependent a species to its another for procreation?

In Course Of Evolution,nature did wrong and sex became the result of that…Now Human has been extreme Corrupt and challenging nature negatively. It may be resulted in destruction of nature. But after crore of years, nature will start evolution again by obtaining suitable environment. In the second phase of evolution followed by nature after the destruction of present nature, nature should opt healthy and pure way of procreation in place of sex ,if nature wants to see itself not destroyed by a creature like Human.

It gives shock to think over allegation imposed on me. Even sex is not natural instinct and I am trapped in unnatural sex –which has been termed against the order of nature by the law under section 377 of IPC .How I can be involved because I can state nature wrong for its impure evolutionary process which evolved sex as an action for procreation.



Tags:   

Rate this Article:

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)
Loading ... Loading ...

3 प्रतिक्रिया

  • SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Post a Comment

CAPTCHA Image
*

Reset

नवीनतम प्रतिक्रियाएंLatest Comments

O P PAREEK के द्वारा
June 13, 2013

Well Rahul, the question raised by you on evoution of certain procesess involved in the natural expansion of the species. Even Darwin did not raise such question which you ostensible raise on account of some personal dillemma. To that extent I would like to compliment you but the evolution theory is a big gamble and many “whys” are yet to be answered by scientists and the anthropologists. As regards your last one which ends on a personal note, but sorry to say that your assertion here is contadictary since on the one hand you say that “sex is not a natural instinct” and in the same breath you state that you are trapped in so called unnatural sex. Well my friend no sex is unnatural as long as it remains in confines of mutual consent. Yes of course, nature may have devised sex for recreation and that’s true with animal world but as regards humans they have always been inventive – be it sex or something else. I dont know how you bring Section 377 while raising a very fundamental question. Its like climbing down from Everest to the plains. Is’nt it. Anyway, the restrictions imposed by laws on the so called unnatural acts are product of a societal mindset, attitudes and outdated traditions. You know about the favourable court case re: Section 377. At last it has dawned onour judiciary that these useless (and also draconian laws) has no place in 21st century which understands both biology and psyche of human beings far better than any other time in human history. By the way your english syntax is very very poor, so I suggest you to improve on that score. With my best wishes and regards: oppareek43.jagranjunction.com. .

    648rahul के द्वारा
    June 16, 2013

    Thanks sir for your valuable remarks. I haven’t gone through the process of evolution which occurred and questions which have been answered and many ‘’whys’’ which are to be answered yet. I have only raised questions against the way of evolution followed by nature by devising sex for procreation because it might have some alternatives instead of interdependency to own species. As I have stated that ‘’sex is not a natural instinct.’’ That’s why what form of sex may be, as per my view, all is unnatural whether ‘’It remains in confines of mutual consent or not.’’ Sir, sorry to say but your one assertion is also contradictory since on the one hand you say that ‘’Humans have always been inventive-be it sex or something else for recreation’’ and in the same breath you state that ‘’ no sex is unnatural as long as it remains in confines of mutual consent. In view of your above both assertions, one can raise question easily that if humans have been inventive and can opt sex or something else for recreation, then why sex is not unnatural for humans because there may be no need of sex for recreation. Product of societal mindset, attitudes and outdated traditions are wrong in mostly cases but restrictions imposed by laws on unnatural acts on ground of societal mindset, attitudes and outdated traditions are right because we should see others on ground of realizations and experimental feelings and for this purpose, it is necessary to stop the quench of sex as far as possible and unnatural acts are only quench of sex. If it has dawned onour Judiciary that ‘’ section 377 has no place in 21st century which understands both biology and psyche of human beings for better than any other time in human history‘’ ,judiciary has committed an error of record and should rectify it because biology of human don’t permit to undergo unnatural sex and so far as psyche is concerned, if we make our psyche such, only then we start to believe that our psyche is favourable for unnatural acts also. So far as homosexual relationship is concerned, I don’t oppose those same sex people who live together but I suggest those to leave the sexual contact. One should live together and can live together with people of same sex for mutual cooperation and understanding to feel good and work freely which ones psyche needs. Going sexually is not need for ones psyche. Thanks for your suggestion to improve my English Syntax and I have started to improve since now as per your suggestion. Please continue to give your valuable suggestions.

    648rahul के द्वारा
    June 16, 2013

    Thanks sir for your valuable remarks. I haven’t gone through the process of evolution which occurred and questions which have been answered and many ‘’whys’’ which are to be answered yet. I have only raised questions against the way of evolution followed by nature by devising sex for procreation because it might have some alternatives instead of interdependency to own species. As I have stated that ‘’sex is not a natural instinct.’’ That’s why what form of sex may be, as per my view, all is unnatural whether ‘’It remains in confines of mutual consent or not.’’ Sir, sorry to say but your one assertion is also contradictory since on the one hand you say that ‘’Humans have always been inventive-be it sex or something else for recreation’’ and in the same breath you state that ‘’ no sex is unnatural as long as it remains in confines of mutual consent. In view of your above both assertions, one can raise question easily that if humans have been inventive and can opt sex or something else for recreation, then why sex is not unnatural for humans because there may be no need of sex for recreation. Product of societal mindset, attitudes and outdated traditions are wrong in mostly cases but restrictions imposed by laws on unnatural acts on ground of societal mindset, attitudes and outdated traditions are right because we should see others on ground of realizations and experimental feelings and for this purpose, it is necessary to stop the quench of sex as far as possible and unnatural acts are only quench of sex. If it has dawned onour Judiciary that ‘’ section 377 has no place in 21st century which understands both biology and psyche of human beings for better than any other time in human history‘’ ,judiciary has committed an error of record and should rectify it because biology of human don’t permit to undergo unnatural sex and so far as psyche is concerned, if we make our psyche such, only then we start to believe that our psyche is favourable for unnatural acts also. So far as homosexual relationship is concerned, I don’t oppose those same sex people who live together but I suggest those to leave the sexual contact. One should live together and can live together with people of same sex for mutual cooperation and understanding to feel good and work freely which ones psyche needs. Going sexually is not need for ones psyche. Thanks for your suggestion to improve my English Syntax and I have started to improve since now as per your suggestion. Please continue to give your valuable suggestions.


topic of the week



latest from jagran