Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
Rincewind

Hard to believe story

Recommended Posts

Posted

Unfair comparison between humans and hamsters. The massively multiplied intelligence we have and strong emotional ties to our families can't be compared to rodents. I doubt hamsters can even distinguish between their siblings, parents or just unrelated hamsters.

 

You think incest is wrong because of genetics? So you'd shag your sister with a condom on? :P

Was the last line for me? No I would not shag my sister because I have the built in moral code passed down through the centuries. What I meant was that thousands of years ago there may have been a lot of incest going on until it was deemed to be wrong. Maybe partly because the advent of religion and the threat of nasty things happening to you if you did shag a relative, These ethics have been passed down via evolution and our genes thus ending up as the way we are expected to live our lives, If one does not have elders that are able to pass on this moral code then it is possible we could revert back to the primitive state.

Posted

Unfair comparison between humans and hamsters. The massively multiplied intelligence we have and strong emotional ties to our families can't be compared to rodents. I doubt hamsters can even distinguish between their siblings, parents or just unrelated hamsters.

 

You think incest is wrong because of genetics? So you'd shag your sister with a condom on? :P

 

Nah it's not as much fun I would make sure she was on the pill. :thumbup:

 

Seriously though the laws on incest are mainly based around genetic diversity and the increased risk of fvcked up babies, not on the fact it's a bit gross. You said it was unnatural, it really isn't, but we aren't beings of nature any more, we are societal beings and right and wrong is taught within the context of the rules of society and not of the natural world. In the natural world you have 2 instincts, survive and reproduce. You take a human being out of society and provide no education it will go back to those 2 base urges, now if the only vessels of reproduction happen to be relatives, then without any moral guidance and no education on genetics and the risks then they are just going to sniff each others butts (or whatever the human mating dance was before text messages) and go at it like they do on the discovery channel.

Posted

CPF probably wouldn't have a problem with it. So long as she was of sexual and emotional maturity. :ph34r:

 

Not having this argument again, unless you want to have it another thread, my stand point remains the same, age is an arbitrary line in the sand and in my opinion anyone of sexual and emotinal maturity should be free to have consensual intercourse with whomever they choose, provided they too are sexually and emotionally mature enough. If that means some under the age of 16 fall into that category, then so be it likewise if it excludes some over the age of 16. I also understand it is probably impossible to legislate and there probably aren't clear definitions of sexual and emotional maturity, so it is much easier to draw an arbitrary line in the sand, but it really is that, arbitrary and largely ignored by almost everyone under that age anyway. 

Posted

Not ****ing your relatives isn't just a societal thing, we have evolved to feel revulsion at the idea of mating with those close to us when we grow up.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...