WHY IS incest wrong? Especially since we are in the era of safe sex. Nothing could go wrong

Objectively in a non wealthy family it's a complete disadvantage to invest in a incestuous relationship especially for the female.

something not being advantageous or optimal is not a criteria for being morally wrong... it's disadvantageous to have a relationship from Tinder, doesn't mean it should be illegal or morally wrong.

But I didn't even bring up a morality or legality user. That's why I only focused on the objective point of view.

If people want to fuck their siblings that's on them.

BDSM training collars and gags.

Detrimental recessive genes

harder*

I'll die on that hill if incest gets normalized. Or pederasty/etc. Fuck your liberalism, full fash when that happens.

Yeah, fuck those liberal pedophiles! Oh wait...

mediamatters.org/blog/2017/11/10/roy-moore-and-rot-conservative-politics/218522

Fucking hate that autist, please don't post that faggot outside of /v/ and /pol/.

The answer to that question is going to come the day destiny debates thealternativehypothesis.

...

This is correct, in terms of evolutionary biology.

This guy don't understand evolutionary biology.

But that HAS already kinda happened.
youtube.com/watch?v=5i52kfGJnwU&t=1414s

It is not a debate though, since destiny obviously knows that he can't debate althype without making a giant fool out of himself it becomes a schooling session for destiny.

Not him, but all pedophiles should be shot.
Just like all people who want to legalize pedophilia, most of them are far left progressives, should be shot.

Incest between two grown adults who aren't reproducing isn't necessarily "wrong", but it is disgusting. Additionally, there is always a risk that what you're using for safe-sex could go wrong. Some hole in your condom or it busts when you bust a nut, and then you're stuck with some little three-eyed shit with half a skull who society has to be burdened by.

>morality from biology
This guy doesn't understand morality.

>but it is disgusting
alternative hypothesis, you're just a faggot

There's nothing wrong with it. Society is retarded.
If genetic disorders are the real issue then we should also be banning people over the age of 35 from having children.

>Nothing could go wrong.
You.

ITT: Perverts who want to fuck their sisters

my sisters are dumb roasties and I'd never touch them, but that doesn't mean other people can't have their fun

...

This is so fucking dishonest. This always comes up and its often the same people who want to discuss race realism without being called a racist, that are calling people sister fuckers for having a discussion on morality of Incest.

This discussion is actually a really good way to get into how people's morality functions. Because when you remove all the negatives that often are associated with incest(Pedophilia, genetic stagnation, power dynamics, etc.) If you are still morally against it, but can't say why, then maybe its time to reexamine what your morals are based on. And keep in mind, you can be disgusted by something with out thinking its immoral, Like eating boogers.

>when you remove the moral implications of something morally wrong it becomes morally ambiguous

you people are so fucking dumb

>And keep in mind, you can be disgusted by something with out thinking its immoral, Like eating boogers.
Also wrong

Nice job man. Great arguments. Did you think your great insight here would convince anyone?

Oh and you are most wrong, no take backs forever.

on this same line of thought

WHY IS drugs wrong? Especially since we are in the era of harm reduction. Nothing could go wrong.

The only way something could go wrong is if the user is an idiot, or if cartels profit but then that's only because drugs are illegal in the first place.

So if incest isn't morally wrong how can drugs be?
Drugs can kill an idiot, but incest can ruin entire families , PLUS it can ruin a life before it even exists(inbreeding). At least drugs mainly target the user

There is nothing to argue?
>This is so fucking dishonest. This always comes up and its often the same people who want to discuss race realism without being called a racist, that are calling people sister fuckers for having a discussion on morality of Incest.

nice generalization to adhom. way to cast a blanket of shame - literally no argument here

>This discussion is actually a really good way to get into how people's morality functions. Because when you remove all the negatives that often are associated with incest(Pedophilia, genetic stagnation, power dynamics, etc.) If you are still morally against it, but can't say why, then maybe its time to reexamine what your morals are based on. And keep in mind, you can be disgusted by something with out thinking its immoral, Like eating boogers.

nonintellectual handwaving that is founded purely in this posters delusions
Heres your argument moron

Inbreeding doesn't work like that. One generation will not make your baby a retard. Its genetic stagnation over several generations that gets very bad.

>when you remove all the negatives that often are associated with something, if you are still morally against it, but can't say why, then maybe it's time to reexamine what your morals are based on
Thanks, black science man.

Ok PHEW. So it's only morally wrong and should only be illegal for first generation inbred children. (as to prevent additional genetic stagnation over several generations)

You are a moron x 2.

There is clearly something to argue when it seems like we have very different opinions on it.

I mean, its a simple question. Are you morally against an incestuous relation ship between two connecting adults when the girl is on the pill and guy cut his string? Oh and their parents or rest of family is no longer an issue.

Where did I say this? I was simply correcting you.

>I mean, its a simple question. Are you morally against an incestuous relation ship between two connecting adults when the girl is on the pill and guy cut his string? Oh and their parents or rest of family is no longer an issue.

>I mean, its a simple question.

I mean, its a LOADED question.

Please fuck yourself off to another board.
Thanks!

There are plenty of things that ruin families and aren't illegal. What's the precedent here?

Waste of resources. Just don't have sex. Spend the extra time on physics or swinging a pickaxe. If we could euthanise, attraction to siblings would be desirable for removal.

Leave Destiny alone, he's great

This is not how loaded questions work. And clearly it triggers you even thinking about it.

If you don't want to answer my question that fine, but maybe you should examine why it triggers you so much. Its best to base your beliefs on rational concepts since It gets muddy pretty quickly if you have to bring up feelings like disgust to justify things.

Because in the context of the thread, the morality of incest, genetic stagnation is only relevant in the way i responded to you.

So if you were "just correcting", i already knew that and it's not what i was saying. And "inbreeding ruins lives, before they exist" is still 100% relevent to the morality of incest.

things that are illegal and taboo already

>, i already knew that and it's not what i was saying.
Well sorry then, it just seemed to me from your comment that you thought an accident incest baby would automatically fuck up its life.

That is EXACTLY how they work and
>maybe you should examine why it triggers you so much
100% confirms it
>ts best to base your beliefs on rational concepts since It gets muddy pretty quickly if you have to bring up feelings like disgust to justify things.
200% cements it as a loaded question

Destany and all these pseud debators are litereally just sheep herders abusing argumentum ad populum to grow a following. It's not news that the internet is full of contrarians just itching to be obnoxious about it, destany is just taking advantage of that. its S A D

*Might want to ice your brain before you read this post it will probably overclock your hippocampus.*

No lol, think a little deeper child.
What if that incest baby has an accidental incest baby.
NOW WE"RE THINKING WITH GENERATIONS.

So anything that is illegal should be illegal.

wow, such smart. I guess anyone wanting any laws to be reformed is clearly an idiot.

i mean i'm so sorry i didnt go digging into history for why both those things are illegal

to do legitimate research on this would take quite a while and im NOT YOUR FUCKING TEACHER, nor do i exist to help you form an argument

jesus

Gene therapy will be able to fix any problems with it so I don't see any issue with it especially in same-age cases like siblings or cousins.

For it to be a loaded question it would already be established that acknowledging the gray area of this specific example is a bad thing.

No one here that is past the age if 16 will call you an incest sex-manic for simply saying you are neutral with this very specific instance of incest.

What makes it wrong to ask about it? But, hey lets not talk about such sore subject, it can tell it makes you uncomfortable.

I find it funny that only white people bring this up. Makes me feel weird to be white because this plays into the oaky redneck stereotype. Sad world.

Maybe you should run your mouth on things you know nothing about.

its a loaded question because you are fishing for very specific answers that you have already prepared answers for

"the (loaded) question attempts to limit direct replies to be those that serve the questioner's agenda."

you arent asking a question, you are fishing for specific replies. really, get out

was this a Freudian slip?

All your condoms have holes in them.

Sad day when other people are going to have to pay for the abortion of your mentally ill or deformed child.

Disgusting makes me an even more extreme supporter of iq eugenics

That's what coat hangers are for.

Relevant and hilarious.
youtube.com/watch?v=W9VmmJ9iz8I

jokes on you i plug my penis with hot candle wax before sex. condoms are irrelevant

How many hours do you spend on /b/?

z e r 0

sci is my home babE

Do you really want to just argue about what a loaded question is? I disagree with you, but common, its fucking late and I don't want to spend my time on that. Its totally okay to move past that and get back to the actual topic of the thread. But it seems like it is the last thing you want to discuss, even though you are posting in this thread. Nice.

So basically the best argument we got were:
>deformity, illness, bad genes

These all apply for non-incestuous relationships. Does anyone have a legitimate argument?

>Are you morally against an incestuous relation ship between two connecting adults when the girl is on the pill and guy cut his string?

Here's why you're retarded. In logic, in order to disprove that for all x, p(x) is false, you would have to demonstrate there exists an x for which p(x) is true. By saying that incest is wrong, you're making the claim that ALL incest is wrong. The proof that counters this claim, is that there EXISTS at least one instance where incest is not wrong. This this not an instance of ambiguously interpreting the answer to the question to deceive, its logical conclusion is axiomatic, not an appeal to fallacious intuition.

Ok. Can you present the topic/question in a realistic way that has actual groundings in human life?

see

IIT nihilist brainlets live by the first conclusion they come to

>offers no counterargument

Pure familial love, or spiritual love is the highest form of love. Sexual love is the lust of the transient body, and is so itself transient.

Children always feel familial love prior to sexual attraction, the love of the parents and siblings is a naive and innocent love. Sexual attraction introduces a second love, much later, based on transient pleasure. Sexual partners can become family, and this transition is celebrated because it is a transition into a higher state of attraction; however, if family become sexual partners there is a debasement of the higher love with the lower.

Taking the fraternal bond and perverting it with arse fucking is aesthetically and morally vulgar. Incest is a fall from the higher relation to the debased. The ancients knew this, and incest was the great perversion, a tragedy, a curse.

Gay brothers should be hanged.

cringe

...

"forms of love" is pseudoscience

Metaphysics, ethics, and aesthetics are not deficient sciences. Moron, I'm not wasting more time on you.

There are many forms of incest. Father +daughter / mother + son / siblings / cousins / father + son / mother + daughter / grandparent + grandchild. So I think one can't give a single definitive answer to the question because every single form of incest I mentioned have a different dynamic at play.
Like others have said, most often incestual relationships have a power dynamic, with the other side exerting their will on the more subservient "partner". This is wrong.
>what if there is no such dynamic? both are consenting adults?
If both are consenting adults, then objective wrong doesn't apply anymore but moral wrong comes into play.
Be if whatever form of incestual relationship, the family bonds "may" be strengthened between the two adults for the time they are in the relationship, I'm not denying it, the relationship can shed light into a part of their being that you didn't see before. But what about then when your feelings for your kin dissipate? What about when you start seeing better alternatives? What if you want to have your own babies? It's a platonic bond that is forever shattered by a feeling of lust and mending it after the relationship becomes nigh impossible. Most often people go into these relationships without contemplating the repercussions the actions have on the long run.
The relationship will most likely turn you and your lover into outcasts. You are cast out from your family, circle of friends and anyone you really know will harbor disdain towards you two. Are you ready to not only taking this immense social pressure on your shoulders but also casting it on your lover?
Is incest wrong? Objectively yes when there is an oppressive power dynamic coming from either person involved in the relationship. Morally it's all around wrong, it tramples on the familial bonds and has the chance of tearing the whole family apart.

[cont]

Now in a ideal situation where the family is understanding, no power dynamic is present, they refrain from having children and they either commit to each other for the rest of their lives or break the relationship in such a manner that they are both able to continue on living as siblings in a functional family, I don't see it neither morally or objectively wrong. Then again, almost never does it happen like this.

>It's a platonic bond that is forever shattered by a feeling of lust and mending it after the relationship becomes nigh impossible.
m8 literally 10% of people have fucked their sibling/cousin/parent/child at some point
these people generally don't "shatter" their platonic relationships when they stop doing it

>The relationship will most likely turn you and your lover into outcasts. You are cast out from your family, circle of friends and anyone you really know will harbor disdain towards you two. Are you ready to not only taking this immense social pressure on your shoulders but also casting it on your lover?
incest is bad because the knee-jerk reaction against incest is bad
hmmm...

>when there is an oppressive power dynamic coming from either person involved in the relationship
there are plenty of "normal" relationships with this problem

>m8 literally 10% of people have fucked their sibling/cousin/parent/child at some point
I don't know the veracity of that claim, but let's assume it's correct. Yes, perhaps in a drunken situation, at an age when they were still experimenting with each other (8-14), or as adults just trying it once. Having fucked your kin once, most likely will not have any lasting impact on your relationship, but I was talking more in the lines of a full blown relationship spanning years.
>incest is bad because the knee-jerk reaction against incest is bad
Was giving more of an argument against incest, not saying it made it wrong.

>there are plenty of "normal" relationships with this problem
Yes, and they are wrong also.

Like I said at the beginning, there isn't a definitive answer, some forms of incest are definitely wrong while others are okay.
Definitely wrong > parent / older sibling forcing themselves on their child / much younger sibling.
Okay > The ideal situation I described at the end.
It all comes down to chance. Will all those things line up when you decide to pursue your relationship? Will you still feel love towards your kin after years of being in a relationship? There's such a small chance of it amounting to anything good with such heavy repercussions.

but nihilism is the only logical conclusion. please tell me what a molecule of justice looks like. where can I find the morality boson? They're useful illusions and anyone blankly asking how incest is immoral is a retard too stupid to understand why the question doesn't make sense.

>alabama man

this, what makes the forbidden fruit forbidden?

I'd argue its not worth it though, love your sister... just not that way. you only really ever do get 1 or maybe 2 siblings on average, cherish the ones you have

If you would like to practice incest, legally move to New Jersey.
As long as everyone is over 18 and you sign an affidavit that you will have no children, it's all good.
No barrier's, no limitations.
Grandma and grandson, father and daughter, brother and sister.
No worries.
It's all good in Jersey.

Rules vary from state to state, most say no but many allow it with certain conditions such as one or both being over a certain age or being sterilized.
Just look it up, Google is your friend.

But New Jersey is the place to be if you want to openly fuck your family members.

wait, did Destiny "white trash" Ultima fuck his sister?

see