Christian Engström, Pirat

4 maj 2013

Kopimism, Sex, and Morals

Filed under: English,kopimism — Christian Engström @ 10:37
"Sex, Death, and the Meaning of Life" with Richard Dawkins

Watch ”Sex, Death, and the Meaning of Life” with Richard Dawkins (47 min)

(This is a continuation of the Kopimist Creation Myth, which is also available in Swedish)

Religion critic Richard Dawkins has made a three-part television series called Sex, Death, and the Meaning of Life. The first episode focuses on sex.

Dawkins notes that most of the major religions have very strong views on how people manage their sex life, but that these views are from the bronze age. Today, they quite unnecessarily make people feel shame just because they are people, and at worst provide the foundation for harassment against anyone falling outside the most narrow heteronormative lifestyle.

As a Kopimist, I can only agree with what Dawkins says in this program. He shows with statistics how the persistent propaganda against for example masturbation by the Christian churches has had no effect whatsoever on how much Christians and non-Christians actually masturbate. Those numbers were identical according to the statistics, like 95% of all men and 70-75% of all women.

The only difference was that a large portion of the Christian masturbators had a strong feeling of shame that made their lives miserable. How completely unnecessary. There can be no other activity that is so cheap, fun, and totally risk-free as masturbation, and none so natural.

Even worse is when the bronze age morality of traditional religions becomes an excuse of intolerance against certain groups. How can Western religions, that claim to bring a message of Love, suddenly condemn love when it happens between two people of the same sex?

In this regard, the big world religions should simply shape up. A majority of the world’s homosexual people live repressed in societies where they can’t show their love openly. Various churches are more often seen on the side of the oppressors than the other. This is not acceptable. When a group of people become the victim of harassment, any church worth its name should be on their side.

In the meanwhile, there is Kopimism. We don’t judge anyone because he or she has the capacity to love fellow human beings of a particular gender. All love is good love. Consenting adults can do what they want, and it’s nobody else’s business unless they are personally invited to take part.

This is the attitude that all religions should have for strict reasons of tolerance. But for Kopimism, there is an additional strong theological argument to have a positive attitude towards sex.

Sex is Kopying, and a tribute to the Fundamental Principle that has given Kopimism its name.

The ultimate purpose of sex is to pass on the miracle of life by producing new individuals. Sexual reproduction is not about making identical copies, but about remixing, which we see as the highest form of copying. Our creation myth is about how life appeared and is passed on through Kopying. It is more or less obvious that Kopimism would to see sex as something fundamentally positive.

And with this fundamentally positive view of sex, there is no reason to restrict it to only pure reproductive sex. Homosexuality, pornography, masturbation, oral sex, sex with a condom, or sex between couples that have been married for 50 years, but still like doing it even though they are no longer fertile. None of these forms of sex can produce children, but they quite obviously have to do with sex. Non-reproductive sex is also a tribute to Kopying, the first of the Four Kopimist K’s.

If you insist on placing a religious interpretation on the fact that Onan spilled his seed on the ground, then the reasonable thing would be to see it as a fertility sacrifice, and something to please the Lord. Or, you can just say that it’s his private business.

Kopimism sees sex as a gift from the God(s), and a manifestation of the power of Kopying.

And in any case we, think it’s wrong smear guilt on consenting adults who live out the fact that they are human. Dawkins is completely right on this.

A Kopimist Moral System

Religions usually contain a moral framework that separates right from wrong. For Kopimism, we can derive a moral framework directly from the Four Kopimist K’s: Creativity, Copying, Cooperation, and Quality.

  • Creativity
    We see creativity as the driving force behind the evolution of the world, and something positive. This means that we want to see a society built on as much freedom as possible, to let creativity bloom. We see diversity as a positive expression of creativity in the world.
  • Copying
    We see it as something positive when culture and knowledge are shared, and amuse and assist people. We see sex as something positive, and a tribute to the fundamental principle of Copying.
  • Cooperation
    We cherish cooperation and want to have a calm, safe, and happy society where people can live in peace. From this follow the general humanistic principles that more or less everybody agree on. Thoul shalt not kill. Violence may not be used except as a last resort in self defence. Treat others as you would want to be treated yourself. Try to be generous and helpful. Smile, and the world will smile at you. Common sense and common decency. Nothing unexpected in these rules.
  • Quality
    The Abrahamic religions see their moral rules as dictated directly by God. Do they have to be, to get legitimacy? In Kopimism, we don’t think so. We say that there is a fundamental principle called Quality, that we humans have the capacity sense. We all have an inner moral compass, and we are perfectly capable of knowing ourselves what is right or wrong. Just like Richard Dawkins we Kopimists believe in humans as individuals, but thanks to Quality, we can also explain why.

No Kopimist would be very surprised by the contents of this moral system. It is freedom oriented humanism, just as one would expect. These morals are not at all unique to Kopimism, and have been expressed by many great philosophers since the Enlightenment and onwards.

In Cardamom Town, for instance, Constable Bastian has written the law for the town, and in his Law of Cardamom it says:

You may not do harm to others, you should try to act your best
Then you do as you see fit with all the rest

That summary is as good as any.

Constable Bastian believes in the good humanity, that we have an inner moral compass that points us right in most cases. He believes in a society based on tolerance, kindness, and that everyone has as much freedom as possible to lead their lives in their own ways. Many great philosophers have said the same. We Kopimists agree.

The only real surprise in this Kopimist moral framework is how easily and naturally it derives from the Four Fundamental Principles, the Four Kopimist K’s.

The moral system as such is the one that I feel is at the heart of the global Pirate movement on the internet. It is exactly the moral system that I would have wanted in a religion, and to be perfectly honest, I’m sure I would have been able to derive that moral system from more or less any set of fundamental principles.

But when I started looking at how the Fundamental Principles of Creativity, Copying, Cooperation, and Quality could be used to suggest a moral system, I was very surprised and impressed by how effortlessly exactly the moral system I wanted seemed to flow from the Four Kopimist K’s.

This is yet another indication that we are on the right track, and that Creativity, Copying, Cooperation, and Quality really are fundamental principles that deserve further study.

Copy and Share!


CC-BY-NC Christian Engström

5 kommentarer

  1. Like a true religious leader you choose the moral rules you want, and then interpret your scriptures in a way that lets you derive those rules. 🙂 It would be quite possible to conclude from those same four principles that non-reproductive sex should be condemned, if one wanted to.

    Kommentar av Björn Persson — 4 maj 2013 @ 14:06

  2. But Björn, wouldn’t that kinda go against the first law? The diversity in sexuality is creative and the condemnation of it can also be seen as going against law three.

    Kommentar av Anontalk — 4 maj 2013 @ 17:28

  3. […] Kopimism, Sex, and Morals. […]

    Pingback av Kopimism, Sex, and Morals | Urbansundstrom's Weblog — 4 maj 2013 @ 20:08

  4. Reblogged this on Urbansundstrom’s Weblog.

    Kommentar av urbansundstrom — 4 maj 2013 @ 20:08

  5. Howdy! I understand this is somewhat off-topic but I had to ask.
    Does running a well-established website such as yours take a massive amount work?
    I am brand new to operating a blog however I do write in my journal every day.
    I’d like to start a blog so I can share my own experience and thoughts online. Please let me know if you have any kind of suggestions or tips for brand new aspiring bloggers. Thankyou!

    Kommentar av youporn — 11 maj 2013 @ 13:11

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Blogg på

%d bloggare gillar detta: