Why is incest wrong?

by **Qahadim** » Sat May 11, 2013 10:52 am

Libertarian California wrote:
Qahadim wrote:I'll make it (hopefully) easier for you to answer.

Have your friends said they would bang your sister?

No, and I'd punch them if they did. My friends and I are all sex-crazed, but some things are just a no-go.

Does it somehow harm you to learn your friends think your sister is hot?

by **Distruzio** » Sat May 11, 2013 11:04 am

I can't offer an objective answer that would satisfy the non-religious. For me, incest is wrong because the Church says it is. Then again... the Church also says that sexual acts outside of marriage is wrong and... well... I find it difficult to obey them (although I do agree with them). So don't feel obligated to take this post as authoritative or anything other than a shoulder shrug.

by **Libertarian California** » Sat May 11, 2013 11:26 am

Qahadim wrote:
Libertarian California wrote:
No, and I'd punch them if they did. My friends and I are all sex-crazed, but some things are just a no-go.

Does it somehow harm you to learn your friends think your sister is hot?

Well it puts an imagine of my sister and my friends fucking, and I don't want to think about that.

by **Qahadim** » Sat May 11, 2013 11:47 am

Libertarian California wrote:
Qahadim wrote:Does it somehow harm you to learn your friends think your sister is hot?

Well it puts an imagine of my sister and my friends fucking, and I don't want to think about that.

The image of a complete stranger is less icky than that of someone you know and trust?

by **Nomagi** » Sat May 11, 2013 11:52 am

its not, because morality doesnt exist

by **Mike the Progressive** » Sat May 11, 2013 11:53 am

Because.

by **Cosara** » Sat May 11, 2013 12:01 pm

Nomagi wrote:its not, because morality doesnt exist

by **Tyriece** » Sat May 11, 2013 12:09 pm

Nomagi wrote:its not, because morality doesnt exist

It exists, just people have different views on whats moral or not. We all have some form of moral guidance with in our self's.

by **Gallifrey Express** » Sat May 11, 2013 12:19 pm

Cosara wrote:
Nomagi wrote:its not, because morality doesnt exist

Indeed so. The mere existence of beings with a perception of reality is evidence of morality - each being has it's own moral code.

by **Zweite Alaje** » Sat May 11, 2013 12:20 pm

Nomagi wrote:its not, because morality doesnt exist

Rape isn't wrong.
Slavery isn't wrong.
Genocide isn't wrong.
Racism isn't wrong.
Pedophilia isn't wrong.
Beastiality isn't wrong.

Yup, yup, "objectivity" FTW, herpa derp. *nods*

by **Hathradic States** » Sat May 11, 2013 12:23 pm

Because we're more evolved than the animals, and know it can cause bad genetic problems.

by **Gallifrey Express** » Sat May 11, 2013 12:27 pm

Zweite Alaje wrote:
Nomagi wrote:its not, because morality doesnt exist

Rape isn't wrong.
Slavery isn't wrong.
Genocide isn't wrong.
Racism isn't wrong.
Pedophilia isn't wrong.
Beastiality isn't wrong.

Yup, yup, "objectivity" FTW, herpa derp. *nods*

I've once held the position, but I don't anymore. I can't really accept the notion that morality doesn't exist, any more than any other human construct doesn't exist.

by **Gallifrey Express** » Sat May 11, 2013 12:28 pm

Hathradic States wrote:Because we're more evolved than the animals, and know it can cause bad genetic problems.

Not a very significant difference of chance.

by **Hathradic States** » Sat May 11, 2013 12:30 pm

Gallifrey Express wrote:
Hathradic States wrote:Because we're more evolved than the animals, and know it can cause bad genetic problems.

Not a very significant difference of chance.

Can you say that in a different way that makes a bit more sense?

by **Great Nepal** » Sat May 11, 2013 12:32 pm

Hathradic States wrote:
Gallifrey Express wrote:Not a very significant difference of chance.

Can you say that in a different way that makes a bit more sense?

Its increase by 4%, diabetic mother increases chance of major congenital malformations by 200%.

by **Hathradic States** » Sat May 11, 2013 12:34 pm

Great Nepal wrote:
Hathradic States wrote:Can you say that in a different way that makes a bit more sense?

Its increase by 4%, diabetic mother increases chance of major congenital malformations by 200%.

Ah, thank you.

My other guess is that it is just one of those things people see as icky and wrong.

by **Lamassu** » Sat May 11, 2013 12:35 pm

Apparently incest won't do anything to a newborn's genetics. Well, anything incredibly major like a third leg or mental retardation.

by **Esternial** » Sat May 11, 2013 12:36 pm

Lamassu wrote:Apparently incest won't do anything to a newborn's genetics. Well, anything incredibly major like a third leg or mental retardation.

It increases the chance of recessive genes surfacing.

Many harmful genes are recessive, ergo...

by **Gallifrey Express** » Sat May 11, 2013 12:36 pm

Hathradic States wrote:
Gallifrey Express wrote:Not a very significant difference of chance.

Can you say that in a different way that makes a bit more sense?

GN already said it, but I apologize for the confusing language.

by **Yankee Empire** » Sat May 11, 2013 12:39 pm

Zweite Alaje wrote:
Nomagi wrote:its not, because morality doesnt exist

Rape isn't wrong.
Slavery isn't wrong.
Genocide isn't wrong.
Racism isn't wrong.
Pedophilia isn't wrong.
Beastiality isn't wrong.

Yup, yup, "objectivity" FTW, herpa derp. *nods*

"Yup but opposin peoples fredumb and abiltiy to fuck whatever they want be wrung!

Cuz morality is social Consturct..."

So is Hedonist morality and the apparently unappoosable concept of consent and "Everyone knows whats best for themselves and no one knows whats better for anybody else".

Hypocrisy to the most retarted denominator.

by **Gallifrey Express** » Sat May 11, 2013 12:40 pm

Yankee Empire wrote:
Zweite Alaje wrote:
Rape isn't wrong.
Slavery isn't wrong.
Genocide isn't wrong.
Racism isn't wrong.
Pedophilia isn't wrong.
Beastiality isn't wrong.

Yup, yup, "objectivity" FTW, herpa derp. *nods*

"Yup but opposin peoples fredumb and abiltiy to fuck whatever they want be wrung!

Cuz morality is social Consturct..."

So is Hedonist morality and the apparently unappoosable concept of consent and Everyone knows whats best for themselves and no one knows whats better for anybody else".

Hypocrisy to the most retarted denominator.

by **Yankee Empire** » Sat May 11, 2013 12:44 pm

Quit using linguistic terms you don't understand in order to draw out an discussion to make it seem like your actually making a reasonable argument.

That was no strawman, THAT IS the basis for all the arguments in support and abiding of incest in this thread.

by **Gallifrey Express** » Sat May 11, 2013 12:46 pm

Yankee Empire wrote:Quit using linguistic terms you don't understand in order to draw out an discussion to make it seem like your actually making a reasonable argument.

That was no strawman, THAT IS the basis for all the arguments in support and abiding of incest in this thread.

No, it's actually not. It's not hedonism. It's not championing complete and total personal freedom. It's saying, 'hey, fuck you if you think you have the right to tell people what consenting adults they can shag'.

by **Yankee Empire** » Sat May 11, 2013 12:52 pm

Gallifrey Express wrote:
Yankee Empire wrote:Quit using linguistic terms you don't understand in order to draw out an discussion to make it seem like your actually making a reasonable argument.

That was no strawman, THAT IS the basis for all the arguments in support and abiding of incest in this thread.

No, it's actually not. It's not hedonism. It's not championing complete and total personal freedom. It's saying, 'hey, fuck you if you think you have the right to tell people ~~what consenting adults they can shag'~~fucking their close relatives is wrong and shouldn't be socially acceptable.

Because thats an argument? "Fuck you for telling me what i can't do".

That's all i've gotten out of people defending this degeneracy, "Fuck you oppressor!"

You show some empiracal evidence that indiviudals always now whats best for them and that others can't know hat better for them than the individual in question.

Can you do that? No because civilizatio nas it's structured is design completely aroudn the concept that individuals do't always know whats best for them, thats why we have laws ,restrictions and Taboos.

Why should I have to live in a society that tolerates this shit when it's wrong and offers absolutely no benefit to society ,humanity or civilization?

I have every goddamn right to oppose this rot.

by **Gallifrey Express** » Sat May 11, 2013 12:54 pm

Yankee Empire wrote:
Gallifrey Express wrote:No, it's actually not. It's not hedonism. It's not championing complete and total personal freedom. It's saying, 'hey, fuck you if you think you have the right to tell people ~~what consenting adults they can shag'~~fucking their close relatives is wrong and shouldn't be socially acceptable.

Because thats an arugment? "Fuck you for telling me what i can't do".

That's all i've gotten out of people defending this degeneracy, "Fuck you oppressor!"

Why should I have to live in a society that tolerates this shit when it's wrong and offers absolutely no benefit to society ,humanity or civilization?

I have every goddamn right to oppose this rot.

And until you actually show how it's wrong, instead of just constantly using the same words with nothing to back them up, you're just spitting up insane drivel because you can't fathom the concept of someone wanting to into sex with a relative. We get it. That disgusts you. Salmon disgusts me. I don't want to ban salmon.

And if incestuous relationships have no benefit for civilization, then the same thing can be said about all relationships, until you can prove how they're bad.

Why is incest wrong?

Who is online