Why do you think incest is bad from a moral viewpoint? I'm not talking about the genetical stuff. We all know it's bad for the close genetic relatives to multiply, that one is obvious.
But what about the moral viewpoint? Why do you think it's bad in case of morals, assuming full consent of both parties of course and both being grown up (even more obvious)?
I mean, morally I don't really think it's... wrong? Not any more than other sexuality's, assuming both adults are consenting.
I think it's seen as morally wrong because people like to demonize other people's sexuality or choices. Of course, there is the inbreeding problem, which is why it's certainly not a very healthy practice.
Regardless, it's not like it's zoophilia or pedophilia, or something like that. As long as everyone involved is a consenting adult, I personally don't think it should be anyone else's business what you do in privacy... Regardless of how repulsive the idea would be to me personally. /shrug
__________________
"Why is everybody so ****ing stupid?"- Kim Jong Il, Team America.
__________________ Recently Produced and Distributed Young but High-Ranking Political Figure of Royal Ancestry within the Modern American Town Affectionately Referred To as Bel-Air.
It just seems weird. I dunno. Plus if it is normalized, how long until they wanna be able to have their retarded babies?
__________________ Chicken Boo, what's the matter with you? You don't act like the other chickens do. You wear a disguise to look like human guys, but you're not a man you're a Chicken Boo.
__________________ posted by Badabing
I don't know why some of you are going on about being right and winning. Rob and Impediment were in on this gag because I PMed them. Silent and Rao PMed me and figured I changed the post. I highly doubt anybody thought Quan made the post, but simply played along just for the lulz.
__________________ Recently Produced and Distributed Young but High-Ranking Political Figure of Royal Ancestry within the Modern American Town Affectionately Referred To as Bel-Air.
As others have pointed out, I think the landscape gets muddy around the consent issue. A parent-child relationship, even once the child can legally consent, is just a difficult relationship to examine.
We're talking potential situations where the life-long caregiver and primary authority figure raises their soon-to-be lover from birth. It's hard to imagine full agency from the child, even with a particularly conscientious parent.
It might be the most extreme scenario, but a possibility nonetheless.
Last edited by StyleTime on Apr 12th, 2018 at 01:47 AM
Because animals and children are not typically sufficiently mentally-equipped to consent to and handle a sexual encounter with a human adult is the reasoning I'd imagine.
Whereas my hot as phuck cousin Kim is perfectly mentally capable of handling a night with her sweet cousin Neme.
So one can't consent until their mid-twenties? That's when the frontal lobe (aka the rational part of the brain) is fully developed? Or do you draw the line earlier and if so, then where and why?
This may seem odd but when you have News Outlets like Salon who are trying to mainstreampedophilia (among others), you begin to see why we should question such things.
And just to avoid confusion, I'm 100% against incest and pedophilia.