So why do you think incest is abnormal/immoral?
Your only reasoning for saying it was immoral was that it was not normal, but you just said that if you think it’s immoral, it’s not normal.
i think you all have missed my main point. what im trying to say is incest with intent to reproduce is immoral because it brings a third party into the picture, one whom will have (by in large a great chance) harm caused to them. simply put: the child will be retarded. get it? nothing is immoral about fuckin’ your brother or sister. have at it! haha, but i certainly wont partake in the act.
incest = taboo
incest with intent of bearing children = immoral
Apparently I’m going in circles with you. This is not a joke to me. I’ve stated my point clearly and you won’t or can’t see it. Your lack of morality won’t let you see what I am saying, so this is fruitless.
Isn’t the matter based on genetic coding that determines whether or not an individual is open to incest? Most people don’t seem to be, but there are those who seem to have no moral qualms about it - so, most of us are hard-wired to be repulsed by incest, and others not so.
Then our definition of morality are opposite views.
I ignored this largely because it was based on the false belief that children from the union will be retarded. It would take several generations of incest to result in mental retardation.
As for Libiwhatever…
This is the conversation
You- I don’t like it.
Us- Why?
You- Because it’s bad.
Us- Why is it bad?
You- Because I don’t like it.
Us- But…why don’t you like it?
You-Because it’s bad.
You’re the one going in circles…we’re just watching you and laughing.
Dude, you don’t even appear to have a view on morality…you just keep telling everyone it’s bad because you don’t like it.
Welcome to my life…
What do you expect,
He’s clearly a Christian.
Tourtoise- A remarkably large amount of my time is spent dealing with people who wander around in circles.
Oni- In all fairness, some Christians are fairly good at explaining themselves.
Yes, though it is a bit difficult to rationalise an irrational belief system.
Ironic i suppose that my previous post was my 666th. 
That’s funny, given the fact that you are advocating the first and not the second.
There is a possibility, not nearly so large as you are suggesting, that a child of such a union would be retarded. However, this idea that the possible harm to a potential child makes the act of two consenting adults immoral is simply false. This potential child has no mortgage on the lives of it’s parents. If they wish to have a sexual relationship and thereby to procreate with one another such is their right. The potential child’s rights are not infringed upon by such action because the potential child has no rights (potential people aren’t people they’re potential) much less a right to deprive someone else of their choice of a sexual partner.
I was actually going to point that out, but then I thought “It’s probably one of the rigged post counts that always says 666 or something”
Morality’s subjective either way. I think it’s just fine if I were to take someone and keep him locked in my basement and torture him everyday as long as I kept him alive. As long as he lives, my conscience is fine. My morals prevent me from killing, but don’t prevent me from torturing. Your idea of morals or rights and consent are irrelevant to mine. Or is it that I can’t impose my idea of morals on those who don’t share them? Or is it what is detrimental to society?
‘Rights’ are not universal, just a general agreement on what ‘should’ be and can be with little/no immediate cost. Society agrees that incest is wrong, maybe based on preference, and the simple fact that it’s not healthy in comparison with…the absence of incest. Society agrees, the majority agrees, biologists agree; if you really wanna do your sister, don’t claim pseudologic. Taboo is something society may want, like anal sex which has been taboo for thousands of years although many people engage in it; immoral is something the majority agrees they just simply don’t want. Incest is not taboo, it’s immoral. Immoral is devoid of religious connotation in this context. If society were to think incest was normal, our entire biology would be different. In a society where sex is just another physical act, incest is not about preference, but a disorder. For the same reasons that doing a 16 year old may not be ‘wrong’, if you’re 40 and you’re doing a 16 year old, there’s probably something missing.
Mob rule does not determine what is right and wrong.
And?
And what? I wasn’t aware that I needed to expand on the statement.
My two cents: As long as fucking a relative doesn’t infringe on anyone’s rights it’s fine. It’s not immoral just because I don’t agree with it. Emotions don’t determine what is right and wrong. And neither do society trends.
I was under the impression that you were responding to my statement. I see that I was mistaken.