>>18058985 (OP)
Basically only the inbreeding danger. Everything else is bogus, mostly motivated by how people find it icky. (See also, why is homosexuality immoral)
>>18059041 >It harms familial relationships
Most people who commit consensual incest never had those in the first place. >social order
A sub permille fraction of people doing whatever do not hurt social order.
>>18058985 (OP)
Incest is not inherently immoral, it is just intuitively associated with immoral things like inbreeding or predatory relationships with skewed power dynamics. In a theoretical scenario where those things are not in play then incest should not be immoral.
>>18058985 (OP)
It depends what type of incest >father or mother
Obvious power dynamic problem. Father is supposed to be a role model, an authority. Having sexual intercourse would be an attack on his role in the family. > uncle or aunt
Daughter is his father property. If his own brother fucks with his daughter it would be an attack of his honor and as man. It could break the balance and dynamics of the family > brothers or sisters
Technically nothing wrong if you don't want offspring. But usually people want to start their own family so society does good on warning people to breed with their kin. > cousins
Borderline acceptable in some culture. Still frowned upon because it generates children with defects. >>18059034
Ever heard of unexpected pregnancy?
>>18059359 >Borderline acceptable in some culture
In all cultures it is atleast borderline acceptable. In the west many will look down upon you or mock you for marrying your cousin, but the reaction is very mild compared to how they would react if you married your own sister. It is also completely legal and not that uncommon (especially if you count 2nd or 3rd cousin). >it generates children with defects.
I believe the odds are fairly low as long as there has not been other cousin marriages further back, doing it in every generation like Pakis often do.is what really gets you in trouble.
>>18058985 (OP)
I believe that spending time actually debating things like this or zoophilia or pedophilia ect is a waste of time and people who really push this debate or deranged sex freaks who should be humanly executed
>>18058997
well, back in ancient times when humans were gahering around a bunch of families in tribes they didn't fully understood how pregnancy worked so it wasn't a planned thing, so they probably knew through generations how whole tribes collapsed because of inbreeding so it became taboo for lots of reasons. So if you say some siblings are having casual sex, still there's a risk of pregnancy, thus breaking the taboo
>>18059408
a communist would probably call it "a degeneracy of the burgeoise" since they're the ones with too much time in their hands to commit crimes against society
>>18059328
No you don't, it's like saying you need a reason to justify axioms. That being said a theist can always justify any reason with God's wisdom and/or essence. Also an appeal to the fact that this is simply the kind of natural world he decided to create is always possible. It would still be objective morality if the theist concedes that it was an "arbitrary" choice since his will literally defines reality.
>>18059408
other than domestic abuse, perversion and compounding congenital defects?
even unmaried couples were considered decadent in comunism, it was called 'wild marriage', might as well be cousin fucking or fags, anything that wasnt clear, straight and official was decadence
>>18062031
so its like, satan rules earth and gets up to shit and torments people, but if he gets too out of line god sends in some earthquakes, plagues and volcanoes?
it should only be illegal if between intermediate family members and only between heterosexual couples which could result in children. they could continue to do so if they sterilize themselves. the man issue is birth defects, not incest itself.
>>18062160
People lived in large families and what is prohibited is usualy what gets done a lot, so incest was likely very problematic in many different ways from unwanted pregnancies to rape and abuse and infections and other complications, to all sorts of related violence over who gets to touch whos sister and whos uncle put what where
Then again sometimes it was just a way to keep land in the family
>>18062173
well its a good thing we live in modern times huh? i understand the rational why, clan was the most important binding tradition back than, but we aren’t dealing with that anymore. the incest itself isn’t the issue as we are all humans and know love for all humankind, its the burden on society to bring into the world defective and disabled people we must take care of.
>>18062185
its still a messy thing, your logic implies it all falls under the 'consensual adults' category and everione is sensible and of sound mind, but in reality things get way way more fucked
>>18062026
Defects is only a valid reason if you're logically consistent enough to go full eugenics, otherwise you're just being hypocritical when you're allowing people with shit like huntingtons diseases have kids but splitting hairs over a 2% increase in risk between cousins.
>>18062185 >>18062209
what i mean by this is the significance of a sexual act is not determined solely by anatomical functions as in sucking dick isnt wholy described with 'oral masage of the genital organ' abstracted from other context, what to someone might be just fun and games to another might be cause for agravated assult or a lifetime of psychoterapy
>>18062212
Its a perfectly valid reason and one of the main reasons why it was prohibited and bloodlines were tracked by birth books and family trees, its not me being hypocritical its thousands of years of culture and written law
>>18058985 (OP)
Incest disrupts ancient bloodline pacts with ancestral spirits inviting generational karmic decay by violating the sacred biological separation they ordained for soul evolution.
>>18058985 (OP)
inbreeding is the obvious one
beyond that, we are clearly "programmed" to not find close relatives sexually attractive, so, if you do, there's clearly something fucked up about you
also, but not necessarily, I suppose sex between close relatives is more likely to also involve some sort of age difference and/or uneven power dynamic (older sibling, father, provider, caretaker), so incest is associated with rape in our minds
The entire argument is just "eww gross" and appeal to nature.
You can't even articulate harm without invoking retard babies, which is solved with a vasectomy or a condom. Two consenting adults in private aren't hurting anyone.
