So, how long before incest becomes morally acceptable?

Not trolling here, but rather I'm honestly interested.

There is not one logical reason why incest is morally wrong. Take, for example, a brother and sister who are in an incestuous relationship. They're both older than the age of consent, and they use methods of contraception--let's say vasectomy, hysterectomy, condoms, and the pill. There is virtually no chance of them ever creating a child, so there will never be the pitter-patter of little Quasimodos lumbering about the house one day.

So, how long until it's acceptable and the bans on intra-family marriage are lifted?

I think, in most cases, "morally acceptable" and "legal" are radically different terms

however, given http://www.livescience.com/health/070214_kin_detector.html (natural revulsion to inscest) I don't think it will ever be morally acceptable.

Also, the incestous do not seem to start lobby groups or pride movements to conjur political power or change, so I really don't see it happening... ever

If something is morally acceptable, then why shouldn't it be legal? (Not that I find incest morally acceptable, mind you; I'm just speaking from a strictly logical point-of-view that ignores any of my bigoted religious beliefs.)

i agree with that logic

however, i don't see it ever becomming morally acceptable because of the natural revulsion it appears we as humans have to the idea.

When the sister's hot.

Originally posted by FeceMan
Not trolling here, but rather I'm honestly interested.

There is not one logical reason why incest is morally wrong. Take, for example, a brother and sister who are in an incestuous relationship. They're both older than the age of consent, and they use methods of contraception--let's say vasectomy, hysterectomy, condoms, and the pill. There is virtually no chance of them ever creating a child, so there will never be the pitter-patter of little Quasimodos lumbering about the house one day.

So, how long until it's acceptable and the bans on intra-family marriage are lifted?

Hmm, well, hopefully soon.

Originally posted by inimalist
however, i don't see it ever becomming morally acceptable because of the natural revulsion it appears we as humans have to the idea.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Hmm, well, hopefully soon.

Bwhahaha, now your an incestuous nazi-pedo.

Originally posted by FeceMan
Not trolling here, but rather I'm honestly interested.

There is not one logical reason why incest is morally wrong. Take, for example, a brother and sister who are in an incestuous relationship. They're both older than the age of consent, and they use methods of contraception--let's say vasectomy, hysterectomy, condoms, and the pill. There is virtually no chance of them ever creating a child, so there will never be the pitter-patter of little Quasimodos lumbering about the house one day.

So, how long until it's acceptable and the bans on intra-family marriage are lifted?

Never. People who engage in incest are sick and need to be shot as soon as possible. They are an evil that must be eradicated from the Earth. 😛

Originally posted by FeceMan
So, how long until it's acceptable and the bans on intra-family marriage are lifted?

Just as soon as we elect a democrat president, I'm sure you'll get the answer. Damn democrats, with their coloured candidates and heathen values!

Originally posted by Devil King
Just as soon as we elect a democrat president, I'm sure you'll get the answer. Damn democrats, with their coloured candidates and heathen values!

They will not do that unless there is a big voter block supporting it. 😉

A long time ago, young girls of about 12 or so would marry their uncles! Because of all the wars and stuff happening, very few young unrelated men were not killed, leaving only family to marry. Some had no choice...either they would have to deal with incest or die out I guess. So I guess it was morally excepted back then...I don't fully know. And incest is still excepted today by some people. I forget where they are, but yeah they have been marring into family and having children by them for so long that their skin is actually a pale blue color!

Originally posted by whitewolfgurl
A long time ago, young girls of about 12 or so would marry their uncles! Because of all the wars and stuff happening, very few young unrelated men were not killed, leaving only family to marry. Some had no choice...either they would have to deal with incest or die out I guess. So I guess it was morally excepted back then...I don't fully know. And incest is still excepted today by some people. I forget where they are, but yeah they have been marring into family and having children by them for so long that their skin is actually a pale blue color!

Wow.... I like all your sources, very credible post.

How many times in the bible is incest ok?

Well in the Bible it says incest is a sin. Yet, Adam and Eve were the only humans created and they had kids so their kids had to have married each other. We are all supposed to be descendants of Adam and Eve so isn't that incest in some way down the line?

Originally posted by whitewolfgurl
Well in the Bible it says incest is a sin. Yet, Adam and Eve were the only humans created and they had kids so their kids had to have married each other. We are all supposed to be descendants of Adam and Eve so isn't that incest in some way down the line?

Well, I tend to believe that there were other humans on the planet when adam and eve were supposed to be around. I think that when some people try to support the notion that the earth has been around for a little over 6000 years...they have to be slightly ludacris. This is for the religion forum though and I will not go any further with this.

What the Bible says or does not say has any applicability to this thread.

Although, Backfire may be correct.

Originally posted by FeceMan
What the Bible says or does not say has any applicability to this thread.

Although, Backfire may be correct.

It is afterall a philosophical text....

Originally posted by FeceMan
What the Bible says or does not say has any applicability to this thread.

Although, Backfire may be correct.

The bible has a large barring on the fundamentalist view on morals. I believe the essence behind this thread is the struggle of moral identity. How can you talk about moral identity without talking about the bible?

It's already accept in cinema...it's consider artistic by some.