15 December, 2010

So, Why Is Incest Wrong? The next social 'advancement' in our experimentation with social institutions

AlbertMohler.com – So, Why Is Incest Wrong?

12 comments:

  1. In the "progessive" mind, the only thing that matters is that you have consenting mammals. So given enough time this too will be legal.

    Cheers
    Paul

    ReplyDelete
  2. It's not a question of whether or not it's wrong. It's a question of whether there should be laws against it.

    If we had laws against everything that clearly violated common morality and decency, you would be in big trouble, Buddy.

    ReplyDelete
  3. "If we had laws against everything that clearly violated common morality and decency, you would be in big trouble, Buddy"

    For what specifically?

    Cheers
    Paul

    ReplyDelete
  4. Incest is destructive to the family unit, the individuals themselves, and society in general.

    Leviticus 18:9 The nakedness of thy sister, the daughter of thy father, or daughter of thy mother, whether she be born at home, or born abroad, even their nakedness thou shalt not uncover.

    Deuteronomy 27:22 Cursed be he that lieth with his sister, the daughter of his father, or the daughter of his mother. And all the people shall say, Amen.

    God created man and woman as special and created the marriage institution between man and woman as special for specific reasons.

    ReplyDelete
  5. "Incest is destructive to the family unit, the individuals themselves, and society in general."

    Wayne, while it's nice that everyone has opinions, you're not really helping the conversation by simply dropping pat little word bombs into the middle and standing back while they fizzle, and everyone just trips over them.

    In other words, please explain what you mean. Try starting by defining what you mean by "destructive" and "family unit." Then answer the objection, "But what if there is no family unit?" Then how about letting the individuals themselves decide for themselves what is destructive to them? And finally, I'm sorry, but "society in general" is a fictional construct that does not actually exist.

    "God created man and woman as special and created the marriage institution between man and woman as special for specific reasons."

    So...leaving aside for a moment the idea that marriage is anything but a financial and political institution entirely invented by people with a particular philosophical bent, you're saying that those who don't believe in your god are free to behave as they choose, without consequences? I actually rather like that idea...

    But...in decrying what you call incest, how about you take a look at how different countries and different cultures define incest? In some places, cousins are forbidden from marrying. In others, it's fine for an uncle to marry a niece or an aunt to marry a nephew (and I think you'll find that Italy is one of those places -- the country that surrounds the Vatican). However, among the Navaho, incest is defined as any intimate relationship between two members of the same clan.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Lady Janus,

    It is well known there has occasionally been cases of incest within families. But this might better called sexual abuse. I knew of a native girl who had been abused by her father when she was about twelve years old (or younger). This causes tremendous phychological damage to children and probably destroys their chance for a normal relationship for the rest of their life in many cases. However, perhaps incest does not refer to sexual abuse such as this, but rather a supposedly concentually relationship.

    Even if a son or daughter was older and there was a sexual relationship with a parent, I would think this would cause great harm to the family's relationship with each other. I would think it also damages a young person's ability to have a normal marriage and relationship with other people later.

    Even if it occurs outside a family, say between two consenting adults, it would still not be a good thing because it is not a normal relationship between a man and woman which God intended. I know you will make the counter argument that it should be nobody else's business. Polygamy for example is everyone's business because it is harmful to young women who are forced into it. Children can be harmed by it and the women can be harmed by it because it is abnormal and again not what God intended.

    I am not getting into a debate about what relatives would define incest as I don't claim to have knowledge on that. The laws concerning marriage may define that in western democracies.

    No, I am not saying those who don't believe in my God are free to behave as they choose. We are all under the same laws within the same country in order to protect people and maintain order in society. I think the laws of the land would define who may marry. What laws there are concerning incest I do not know.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Lady Janus,

    What I mean by destructive is psychologically it is damaging to the individuals involved because it makes it more difficult or impossible to function as normal married people when they participate in incest. That is one practical reason and does not even take into account the biblical prohibition. All these kinds of sins are forgivable for the Christian but it does not mean there is not mental damage done which can be hard to deal with.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Incest is disgusting and un-natural and changes who people are and become. Aside from the immorality of it science has proven it leads to children born with many physical problems because of the gene factor...nobody would every convince me that a grown man who want to have a sexual relationship with his own child is mentally ok. And for those who do think it is ok i respectfully suggest they NEVER speak out about the clerical scandal in the Catholic Church as they live in "an anything goes world" which contravines the law of God and the law of man but is ok as nobody has any accountability for their actions. I believe that no accountability is a fine definition of nonsense and i know i will get lots of flack for that stance and that is ok too. All of us have freedom to do what we want but we need ALWAYS that freedom is a 2 sided coin...i have a license to drive and if i drive the wrong way down a one way street my freedom wikk be revocked till i learn to act responsibily and not endanger my fellow man.

    ReplyDelete
  9. "What I mean by destructive is psychologically it is damaging to the individuals involved because it makes it more difficult or impossible to function as normal married people when they participate in incest."

    Sorry, Wayne, but that doesn't actually explain anything. "Difficult or impossible" how, exactly? And who defines "normal?"

    ReplyDelete
  10. Mary, what is disgusting to you may not be so to someone else. And, as you are a free adult within your culture, you may choose not to partake of whatever you find disgusting, although you may not make that choice for anyone else. There have been great civilizations for which incest was actually the rule, especially for the governing class. Two such were the Hawaiians and the Egyptians. There were probably more.

    But we are not speaking of involving children, so your example of a man wanting to have sex with his daughter may be off the topic. Unless his daughter is a consenting adult in whatever culture in which they live. And while I don't know of any such offhand, I'm not going to rule out the possibility than one exists.

    As for incest's being "unnatural," that depends on how you define "unnatural." From a strictly zooological point of view, it's not in the least bit unnatural. It's only when you bring such ephemeral concepts as "morality" into play that you can use such terms with any accuracy, and even then, you can only apply it to the specific groups or cultures for which it is important.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Lady Janus,

    What is normal is what a culture or society defines as acceptable within that society.

    However, the christian looks at not just what is normal according to the standards of society, but what God requires or expects according to his Word. In other words, society might deem that certain things are normal or acceptable that are still forbidden according to God's law. The christian must follow the higher law of God, not what society deems as acceptable. Those who do not accept God's law as taught in his Word are still accountable to God in the end for their actions. The Bible says God so loved the world that he sent his only begotten Son that whosoever believeth in Him will not perish but have everlasting life.

    As far as incest is concerned, the Bible says "Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body." 1 Corinthians ch6 vs18 I take this to mean that this sin seriously harms one's own body. Incest falls within that category. We are sometimes told things in the Bible without detailed explanation as to why; but we accept by faith that it is true. God does not need to explain why to us. But he gives us instruction for our good.

    Sexual union of men and women creates a kind of bond. When a man has sex with a harlot the Bible says he is joined to her (1 Corinthians 6:16). That is how God has created mankind. I hope you can see where I am coming from on this.

    ReplyDelete
  12. "What is normal is what a culture or society defines as acceptable within that society."

    Only true so far as it pertains only to members of that culture or society; but not to anyone else! For example, as a non-Christian, I do not in any way feel bound to live up to your Christian expectations, and you have no way to enforce those expectations on me, so they absolutely do not apply to me.

    And I'm not going to swallow what Corinthians says with explanation, either. How does it define "harm?" If it can't, or won't, explain, and you can't explain, then why would I accept it? And why would you expect me to do so? What you call "faith" is not part of my culture or society.

    Sexual activity does not always create any kind of "bond" with one's partner. Sometimes, a romp in the hay is simply good clean fun, especially if you have a talented partner! And yes, I do see where you're coming from on this. Once again, you are trying to impose your own values on those who have no use for them and do not want them. Sorry, Wayne, but your saying that someone else is "accountable" to your god does not make it so.

    ReplyDelete

Followers of this blog:

Blog Archive

Google Analytics