What stops you to have sex with your mothers, fathers, sisters, brothers, sons or daughters, if you not follow any religion as there are no Biological restrictions.
No rude aswers please, only explain with logic.
2007-03-30 20:28:51 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Yeah. It's sort of like the kids game "follow the leader." They feel that monkeys existed before humans did, so they are following in the footsteps of their ancestors. Kind of like "monkey see, monkey do.""
2007-03-30 20:38:51 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 6⤋
Two strong legal arguments exist about morals against things such as incest.
Taking HLA Hart and legal positivism (America, common-law countries) as our basis:
People are fundamentally self-interested. They want to survive. At some point, they realize that just like they want to survive, others want to survive too. Their self-interest will then extend to others, hence the moral foundation on benevolence alone.
Taking legal science (Europe, civil-law countries) as our basis:
Survival is something that is beneficial for humankind and is a good goal to pursue. At some point, humans realize this good goal and its attached benefits, and they create a society based on it that includes in it a moral upbringing based on what they deem a good goal.
There are two arguments for morals in a society without any religion coming into it at all. Furthermore, even IF you claim that morals are based on your chosen religion, then they're also based on the other Big 5 religions, as well as other religions - don't steal, don't kill, be good to your parents, etc., are commandments (small 'c') that exist in every religion and philosophy.
Incest does not help society survive, so both legal realism and natural law would be against it due to biological explanations which others have dealt with far more expediently than I could have.
2007-03-30 20:48:10 · answer #2 · answered by Kate S 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Why don't you, as a bible believing christian, have sex with your sister, your daughter, etc. since all of those acts are described as taken place within the bible?
Morals and ethics are not the product of religion but are created, defined, enforced, and changed by society as a whole.
In some societies incest is an acceptable behavior.
In some societies cannibalism is an acceptable behavior.
In early American times it was common and accepted behavior for first cousins to marry.
And the list could go on and on ..............
Since morals and ethics are not the product of religion why would you expect an atheist to be any less moral or ethical than anyone else?
Your claim to religion places you on no higher plain of morality than anyone else.
2007-03-30 20:55:36 · answer #3 · answered by ndmagicman 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
I would argue that there are biological restrictions. Perpetuation of the species urges most (all?) creatures to mate outside their immediate gene-pool to create diversity. Nevertheless inbreeding occurs, and inevitably leads to an ending of that particular line - in humans as in all animals.
Now let's go with the Adam and Eve story here - can we see where that might have necessitated incestuous relationships?
2007-03-30 20:40:28 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
LOL, so... Following that logic, If you didn't have your almighty whats-its-face to tell you not to, you'd have sex with your mother, father, sister, brother, son-daughter?
Personally, sounds like you're a pretty jaded person. I don't need all that insanity that could lead me to strap an explosive to my chest and kill a bunch of women and children (and myself) to stop me from wanting to engage in sexual debauchery of that nature.
But hey, whatever floats your boat.
2007-03-30 20:39:43 · answer #5 · answered by Slosh 2 · 4⤊ 1⤋
If you are serious about this, then I must conclude that you are a fool for asking such a foolish question. Is this the type of foolishness that you learn at church? Perhaps you should take up a little thinking as a habit, for a change.
2007-03-30 20:33:32 · answer #6 · answered by Fred 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
I don't need a religion to tell me the difference between right and wrong. Believers should be the last ones to talk. Remember that your God called pedophiles to the priesthood and never stopped them from molesting children.
2007-03-30 20:33:59 · answer #7 · answered by liberty11235 6 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Those individuals who mate with their immediate family members produce offspring that are either not at all viable, or are horribly deformed.
Via natural selection, evolution favored individuals who did not mate with their offspring.
In fact, there have been studies showing that we are "turned off" by the natural smell of the sweat of our immediate family members... a mechanism we no doubt evolved to prevent the practice of incest, and with it, the production of disfigured offspring.
2007-03-30 20:36:40 · answer #8 · answered by Snark 7 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Actually, as much as it is morally wrong.....it is also medically wrong. Because children who are inbred, have MUCH higher chances of being born with mental deficiencies.
Just fyi, religion was not the beginning of morals.
2007-03-30 21:27:44 · answer #9 · answered by Abby C 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No rude answers to a rude question? I'll try my best, no promises.
Here's my question. So, if you weren't theist you would be sleeping with you parents, siblings and children?
2007-03-30 21:29:08 · answer #10 · answered by uz 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Seeing as our ancestors are millions of years seperated, your "logic" is flawed. Though it seems that religious nuts still enjoy a good feces fight, this question for example.
2007-03-30 20:42:45 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋