Agnostic.com

314 12

Incest: Immoral or Moral?

I was asked this question today by a theist. If there is no God why is safe sex between brother and sister immoral to an atheist? This guy was smart to add safe sex because it closed off my avenue to argue the health issue. So, I was thinking why is it immoral if it is consensual? I understand we find it gross but is that because of Christian influence?

  • 140 votes
  • 79 votes
paul1967 8 Oct 12
Share

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account

314 comments (201 - 225)

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

1

Do 3rd cousins count?

If you think it does then, it does.

@paul1967 Then I'm good.🙂

2

Morality is mobile. What may be immoral for us today, may not have been in the past or in the future.
For now, for me it's immoral.

Really want is meant is by your sense of your morality is it moral, immoral or neither.

1

As long as they're both adults and consenting and aren't planning on making back babies, it's completely moral.

ronak Level 5 Apr 7, 2018
2

How any one can find their own sibling sexually attractive is beyond me. My family is NOT a sexual environment I seek out.

EMC2 Level 8 Apr 9, 2018

Look at president Trump how he goes on about his daughter. So it might be beyond you but...

@PontifexMarximus Oh yes I agree. But I am saying that to have that desire is not an issue of morality, it is a perversion

2

Ewwe wwww

LMFAO

3

Morality or immorality is a human question and as such, incest per se is not immoral, but society has decreed (with some good reasons) it to be immoral. I am a product of my society.

It's like anything else: if society deems it acceptable, it is. But if it's not acceptable, when it happens, even if consensual, it can cause severe traumatic and psychological distress, especially because it is a highly sensitive issue.

marga Level 7 Apr 11, 2018

Moral relativism is more easily understood in comparison to moral absolutism. Absolutism claims that morality relies on universal principles (natural law, conscience). Christian absolutists believe that God is the ultimate source of our common morality, and that it is, therefore, as unchanging as He is. Moral relativism asserts that morality is not based on any absolute standard. Rather, ethical “truths” depend on variables such as the situation, culture, one's feelings, etc.

I have to disagree that if a society sees some thing as acceptable, then it is.
Western society deemed slavery as acceptable. It wasn't.
Some arab countries believe it acceptable to prevent women from driving or stone them for adultery - it isn't.

1

Leviticus 18:24 says, “'Do not defile yourselves in any of these ways, because this is how the nations that I am going to drive out before you became defiled.” What were “any of these ways”? Chapter 18 focuses on immoral sexual practices, including incest, bestiality, same-sex activity, and adultery. In addition to prohibiting sexual immorality, Leviticus 18 addresses the heinous practice of sacrificing children to Molech verse 21

Well, having sex with animals and sacrificing children is just sick.

@ArthurPhillips Reading the bible or following it is just plain sick.

@NormCastle did you know that the Bible is the most read and printed book in the world.

1

I had sex with a cousin when I was a teen. She was way older and married and many other things, but it was just one of those things. I don't consider what happened wrong, and neither does she. It only happened once, and I would never consider being with any other family members. It's just a little odd, but I was a horny teenage boy at the time, so it seemed like a heck of a deal. We broke the legs off my Uncle's pool table.

1

Non Vote. But reckon poster is Very Amoral based on his post. Should had give us his definition of incest. What he believes incest is.

3

If it is done by consenting people, I have no problem, people will do what people will do, it has been done for thousands of years, and we're all still here, so ?

2

Taking procreation out of it, what consenting adults do to amuse themselves sexually is none of anyone else's business.

2

As an only child, I can't even begin to imagine incest. I've been indoctrinated that it's utterly wrong, and do seem to have succumbed to that view, but I have never really given it a second thought. I've actually seen this post laying here for a long time, but today is the first time I checked it out, just because it's so often in my "similar posts" list.

I would say to that person that morality has nothing to do with God, and would counter by bringing up Adam and Eve. According to the bible, there must have been a shit load of incest early on. As in, no choice. Be fruitful, and multiply, he said.

3

One does not have to be religious to believe in the laws of nature and since "safe sex" is not only a myth but man-made option than I rule that out as a test and say the consequences for incest are evident by the "fruit" being produced by those that choose it.

2

I don't know how many GREATS to add, so I will just say, ask my grandma Eve...since for a generation or so every male on earth was committing incest with her...and there are still lots of people buy that shit, without thinking about it...BUT on the serious side...I am in total awe and respect of all the professional postings...I can almost understand how everyone has an opinion, but only a few have actual experience....BUT KNOW ALL THE ANSWERS.... based on religious teachings....I have never experienced it, but an good friends with a man who grew up having sex with his year older sister, they are both married to others, but he is the father of his sisters 3 children, since the hubby is sterile ! ALL ARE HEALTHY, HAPPY, AND LIVING GOOD LIVES. So to that extent, I would have to say, it's all none of my business, and so long as they are no in jail, what the hell..as I said, I have never experienced it, but did have a sister who was my BFF before she died.

9

It's not just religion that makes incest taboo. No matter how low the genetic aberration rate is, I don't believe society should condone incestual relations between any two people closer than second cousins. Reasoning: every form of birth control has a failure rate, even sterilization. No one human should decide it's okay to risk giving a child severe deformities.

Incest also increases likelihood of psychological disorder due to misplaced growth of one's "love map." It's never a good idea to encourage obsessive behavior between siblings. There's more than one way this hypothetical situation could go terribly wrong.

I moved 100 miles from the Piedmont of North Carolina to the Western Appalachian Mountains. I see far more genetic aberrations occurring here than anyplace else I've ever lived. Two siblings have no idea how far a genetic physical or mental disorder will travel in a lightly populated area.

As a humanist, incest is the height of selfishness and ignorance as far as I am concerned. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

So by your reasoning it should be perfectly OK for a homosexual relationship between siblings.

And by the same reasoning, adults who know they carry defective genes that they will pass on the their offspring causing disabilities should be prevented from marrying or breeding?

@Uncorrugated Some actually are that caring , about their potential children . As difficult as it may be , informed , caring adults , who are aware that a specific relationship, will increase the potential of generically deformed offspring , will choose to behave in a mature manner , and seek alternatives .

@Cast1es I agree that some are. But there are many genetic disorders that have the potential to cause disabilities, but may not - in the same way that siblings may produce children with disabilities, but equally may not.

The argument was "No one human should decide it's okay to risk giving a child severe deformities" Hence my question, 'should couples who know that there is a chance that their offspring might have a disability be prevented from breeding?'

@Uncorrugated

Please don't twist other's words, it's the hallmark of a bad argument. No, I don't think homosexual relationships between siblings are okay. They screw up the family psychologically.

I would hope all couples would make the decision not to pass on genetic aberrations of their own accord. Alas, there are thousands which do not. This is mostly due to selfishness.

Ex. I know a prominent banker in Charlotte who married someone who carried the same genetic defect as he. Both were carriers but neither suffered the the genetic consequence. Knowing the odds were 50/50 for passing on a severe deformity and shortened lifespan, he talked the wife into having 3 children. ALL had the genetic defect...so he divorced her, abandoned the children, and married someone else so he could have his perfect heir. I would wager this happens most often in these cases, rather than the couple being "careful and thoughtful."

Now, should that couple have been banned by law from procreating? While I would be okay with such a law, because a 50/50 chance of a debilitating, life-threatening defect is not a decision I would make or endorse, it makes me uncomfortable because it is a slippery slope from there to eugenics. Eugenics is bad, see? In the third Reich, Hitler tried to eliminate the genetic factors for homosexuality. I happen to love my homosexual friends and don't want them thrown out of the gene pool. I'm sure others feel it is their right to charge society with taking care of children they discard. Unfortunately, American society does a particularly shitty job in this area.

We would need a caring humanist society here with universal health care and comprehensive child care to accomplish it. I don't see that happening in the near future. There is current example of a country endorsing the elimination of Down's syndrome. In Iceland, prenatal screening has led to a nearly 100% abortion rate of zygotes testing positive. The rate of Down's syndrome babies is also declining in the United States, but not as fast due to religious objections to abortion.

In my opinion, Icelandic women have chosen the more humanistic option. When it comes to custom-ordering your child a la "Gattaca," however, that is eugenics gone wild and I find it creepy.

@hemingwaykitten
"They screw up the family psychologically."
You do realize this is based on an atomic family model that may not be the end all.

@hemingwaykitten With respect, I didn't twist your words. I merely followed the reasoning behind your argument. the main thrust of which was potential genetic defects of any offspring - the likelihood of which is lower than many of known risks from other relationships which are not legislated against and which you have now also said, should not be legislated against. Whilst I agree that childhood incest can have a detrimental effect on the psychological growth of a child, once siblings have reached adulthood and their 'love map' is formed, the psychological impact is mostly impacted by society's treatment of their relationship.
And in the UK. we do have universal healthcare and mothers are also given the option to abort pregnancies where serious deformities have been identified.

You are not in favour of legislating against the choices some adults make with regard to their offspring, but it would appear that you are if they are siblings. Just because some societies find something taboo, doesn't necessarily make it immoral.

@Uncorrugated
The HUMAN Race pretty much finds sibling sex taboo.

@Uncorrugated, @GregGasiorowski
If she's your sister, there's no way sex doesn't mess with your family dynamic. I don't care if you're parents are trans, poly, or aliens!

@hemingwaykitten
Yes, but among adults this really isn't a hell of a lot different than dating a best friends ex, this too messes with a social dynamic but is generally accepted allbeit a hair frowned upon.
Personally I'm very trad atomic hetero, but this is for the sake of argument.

@hemingwaykitten
"The HUMAN Race pretty much finds sibling sex taboo."
Human taboos remain to be a very primitive form of morality.

@GregGasiorowski
Humans remain primitive. Just a thin veneer of civilization slapped on makes us think we've changed. Nope.

@hemingwaykitten
Having behavior dictated by taboos doesn't help this.

@GregGasiorowski @Uncorrugated I think you guys are making this issue too complicated and intellectual. If there are two consenting adults, have at it. But, incest is rarely about two consenting adults.

@hemingwaykitten If homosexual people didn't marry and have children with straight folks , there'd be no concern about them passing on that gene , if there even is such a thing . A problem has been more along the line that homosexuals have been afraid to , "Come out ," so married and had children with straight , even though it wasn't what they truly wanted . I am pleased that , in this day and age , same sex couples can both marry and also adopt a family . Although I can't speak for all , the ones I do know , seem to be doing a great job of parenting !

@crazycurlz Then if there is a lack of consent or involves children it is child abuse and rape and therefore immoral in my opinion.

I see consenting sexual relationships between adult siblings of any gender as being nobody's business but theirs.

@Uncorrugated actually I agree with you although I think 'consent' can mean one thing to one person and coercion to somebody else so it might be a slippery slope in many circumstances. And, yes, thanks for differentiating between kids and adults.

@GregGasiorowski The human race has its head up it's ass when it comes to defining morality and declaring taboos. Besides taboos are dying off for the same reasons religion is dying off. And this, what's so great about "primitive morality"?.

@Casey07
Ask hemingwaykitten.

@Casey07

For starters, the incest taboo lets humanity keep moving forward instead of dying off from inbreeding. That's a good thing.

3

Why would one bother about this question?
One should not worry about morality because their is no unversial edition of it.
Just learn to own your decisions!
Is it moral to pollute the air by driving a car?

Actually , the air was much , much more polluted , just a few years ago . Adding air cleaners to the automotive system AND having them routinely tested , has made dramatically cleaner air . While I think contraceptives would lesson the concern about genetically damaged children , there will be , "mistakes ," made , and there will be those who challenge the concept , and decide to have children anyhow . Even being careful , there are likely to be problems , because some children don't know who their sperm donars are , whether it was a matter of artificial insemination or whether it was a matter of adoption or even mistaken identification of the true father .

If you keep talking sense your gonna piss people off.

@Casey07 I know , My boss once told me , I shouldn't be a Federal employee , because I'm too logical . Keep wondering if that was as much of a comment about me . as it was about the government .

1

It was found long ago that inter breeding was dangerous. So incest was banned by the rulers and agreed to by the clergy (I think there is something in the bible about it). The problem is that they did not understand the genetics of the situation. So we now have the situation of where two adopted girl and boy cannot get married because they are siblings.

Yeah, the bible condones incest: Genesis 19:31-38:

30 Lot and his two daughters left Zoar and settled in the mountains, for he was afraid to stay in Zoar. He and his two daughters lived in a cave. 31 One day the older daughter said to the younger, “Our father is old, and there is no man around here to give us children—as is the custom all over the earth. 32 Let’s get our father to drink wine and then sleep with him and preserve our family line through our father.”

33 That night they got their father to drink wine, and the older daughter went in and slept with him. He was not aware of it when she lay down or when she got up.

34 The next day the older daughter said to the younger, “Last night I slept with my father. Let’s get him to drink wine again tonight, and you go in and sleep with him so we can preserve our family line through our father.” 35 So they got their father to drink wine that night also, and the younger daughter went in and slept with him. Again he was not aware of it when she lay down or when she got up.

36 So both of Lot’s daughters became pregnant by their father. 37 The older daughter had a son, and she named him Moab[g]; he is the father of the Moabites of today. 38 The younger daughter also had a son, and she named him Ben-Ammi[h]; he is the father of the Ammonites[i] of today.

@AtheistInNC
Well the bible has a high regard for women & other valuable livestock.

Many responses here intend to show a degree of irrationality that could possibly be traced back to religious roots. I think that many people what to be seen as righteous even within the group.

On the other hand, due to IVF, you might find that siblings engage in intercourse/interbreed without even knowing that they are siblings.

1

Why would you want to traumatize and ruin a persons life.

Slightly flimsy argument man do that all the time.

5

I would vote 'amoral'. In some cultures, brother/sister incest in the royal family was require to keep the blood line pure (Egypt and Hawaii are examples). This of course, assumed there would be -- and even encouraged offspring.
It is really only very recently that fertility could be sufficiently controlled that a child would not result from a sexual relationship (given almost perfect contraception and the option of a medically safe abortion). In that case, the original basis for making incest taboo -- the probability of genetically undesirable characteristics appearing -- no longer holds.
In our society, incest is not uncommon, the most common being sibling incest. This form is not associated with nearly as much mental health damage as is parent/child incest because with siblings there is very seldom the power differential or the coercion seen in other forms. In fact in many cases the participants identify the relationship as consensual.
To follow the logic, then, if there will be no offspring and there is no coercion (physical or emotional), then it probably follows that it's difficult to make a case against it. (I will admit it still makes me uneasy, and I cannot identify the basis of this discomfort.)

actually there is often a great deal of trauma involved in sibling relations. Anyone who has grown up with brothers and sisters knows all to well the power differentiation and coercion of a sibling just two yrs senior, let alone 5 yrs.

There are other biological indications that incest is not intended in the evolutionary process. Did you know a girl is likely to defer onset of her period if she lives with her father. On the other hand if she lives with a stepfather she is likely to start her periods early (a potential genetically compatible mate)

Today's birth control methods , while good , are not 100% effective , but most especially so , if one member wants to have babies , and tampers with the control methods .

@MsDemeanour sounds very interesting. Do you have a good source you could share?

2

Voted immoral because it leads to birth defects.

1

It remains immoral for other reasons. One argument falls into a simple evolutionary argument. The higher risk of serious defects in a child make the act dubious in my eyes.

Also, regardless of from where you derive tour morality, societal ethics still fall heavily against it. This argument is pretty flimsy, but social taboos exist.

That having been said, out of sight out of mind I suppose. If I don't know aboit it and they aren't hurting anyone I guess it's no different from any other kink.

Still though,

3

Now that the moral goal post have shifted and many jurisdictions have legalized marriage between partners of the same sex the argument of unwanted congenital defects in offspring is no longer an argument for same sex couples. Consequently the whole question has to be reevaluated. I think many people confuse morality with taste. So there is the temptation to sweep everything under the moral carpet.
I was thinking of Pitcairn. Those who know the story of the Mutiny of the Bounty might no the place. A couple of years ago the total population was estimated to be 48. The censors must just have been confused or to lazy to just count them. Now would you tell these brave souls that incest is a taboo?

Or St. Helena

The issue on Pitcairn was not just incest, but paedophilia. It was mostly the young girls that were "broken in" by the elders. The girls were raped as had no way to provide informed consent. Whether they were related to their abusers, in my opinion, is not relevant to the morality of incest.

@Uncorrugated but this was not part of the question. The is about incest. The issue of pedophilia depends largely on the definition of a child.

@PontifexMarximus In many societies the "coming of age" for a young girl was around 12 yrs old when she was given to or married off to a much older man for bearing children and other things.

2

I find it funny that people tend to forget the "why" of it in favor of some societal ingrained disgust.
I ponder a world where the tables are turned & its unhealthy to out breed, sex out of family would mindlessly be considered reprehensible.

“I’m sorry honey, but I’m booked for the night with our daughters.” That’s sounds just mildly repulsive.

In that world the daughters would be the honey & outsiders more than mildly repulsive.

3

I think this issue needs a more reflective approach. Think who people breed with. Humans breed with humans. More often than not people breed within their own ethnic group. I hate to employ the term race but most people produce offspring within groups their are familiar with. Despite increased mobility this remains a fact. Just look around and see how many people have partner that they share many traits with. So it might offended your mindset but arguably it is not as unnatural as many people make it out to be.
The issue of degeneration due to genetic mutations is a totally different issue.
As much as I appreciate people passionate responses they are extremely biased.
I wonder whether their are pet owners or farmers among the respondents here who feel attracted to specific breeds, or shall I call them inbreeds?

8

It is Immoral because it upsets the harmony of a family unit.Ethics are what we are talking about here & not morals. Ethics are about good behavior that makes it better to live in community.

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:1366
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.