I know I'm gonna sound sick and twisted, but I have a question...?

Question

Why does everyone make a big deal about incest? Why is incest wrong? I'm not saying that I practice it personally, but not everyone got here just because of Adam and Eve. Carlos Mencia once joked about about it, but he wasn't necessarily lying...someone had to bone their sister! Someone please explain what the difference between what it talks about in the Bible and what the backward folks do?

Answer 1

You're right, you sound sick and twisted.

Answer 2

Most incestuous relationships are exploitative - that is, fathers raping daughters, brothers exploiting sisters, sometimes sisters taking advantage of vlunerable brothers. You'll find one case in a million of brother and sister falling in love in the usual way. So there are no good reasons for incest. It's biologically and evolutionarily disadvantageous. And there were no Adam and Eve.

Answer 3

Perhaps families and clans that have taboos about incest have a better survival rate than those who don't. Over time, incestuous clans and tribes would have either died off or been either forced or persuaded by the stronger tribes and nations to change their ways, so the that the taboos became universal values. Just a hypothesis, mind you.

Answer 4

Very good question, even though you could have phrased it a little better.

Actually, we have to go back to Adam and Eve.

They were the stuff that mythological gods were formed after.

Mr. America would look like a wimp next to Adam, and the most beautiful woman you can find would look ugly next to Eve.

And what happens when siblings procreate? The children are "mongoloid" (There's a more modern, politically correct term for this, even though I cannot offhand remember what it is.)

The point is, if even someone like Einstein looked like a moron next to Adam, and Seth married one of his cousins (perhaps one of Cain or Abel's children, both of which had to have married a sister), then the "mongoloid" results is us.

But remember, that was long before the Law was given - (1500 years perhaps?) and that was the only way the human race would have been able to get a foothold on earth.

So, again, that's a good question, and I trust my answer helps you to understand it a little better.

Answer 5

You made me think of something, if Adam and Eve were the only ones, that means everyone on the planet is inbred...retards are every corner..

but still incest is still wrong, if not morally then mentally, again being inbred isn't a good thing.

Answer 6

You're sick and twisted! :P

It's one thing when you have no choice/you're the only family on the planet.

Now, however, you have the following complications:

1) Greatly increased risk of birth defects.
2) Inherently unequal (and psychologically damaging) relationships.
3) Even greater likelihood of child molestation if incest were condoned.

Answer 7

We've seen gene pool answers, which is true, theRoyal families used to intermarry quite a bit - not technically incest but to close to have healthy genes.

Several cultures have used limited forms of incest for coming of age ceramonies etc.

Answer 8

Incest over multiple generations increases the likelihood of genetic defects. We've developed an aversion to the idea of it as a way to protect genetic diversity.

Answer 9

After Adam and Eve's disobedience , sin entered the world . Every generation since , the perfection in their genes declined until Jesus stopped inter family marriage in Leviticus 18:6

Answer 10

For the first several hundred years it was not a sin for brothers to marry their sisters.

The gene pool was pure to no side effects happened then.

But there came a time when God made it a sin, and from that point on it still is a sin.

Answer 11

during that time God put other people there to be equal partners with them so yeah it isnt true that they had to do incest, so no you dont sound sick and twisted, i had that question myself until i asked a preacher (my 20 year old best guy friend)