PastorAIO:



And further to that I also got an insight. That at no time did he ever espouse Amorality. In fact I don't know any atheists that do so. Atheists are just as moral as christians or moslems.
The point he was making was on the SOURCE of the morality. Agentofallah explains the moral impulse in Evolutionary terms. The christians just say 'God did it'.

According to Darwin Evolution would naturally select AGAINST incest. That revulsion that we naturally have for incest may later be attributed to a God by superficial persons but the fact that it has it's origins in evolutionary factors remain unchanged.

Ranchhoddas:
Lol! You do not want to know love.

---

I have mentioned you on that Ecclesiastes thread. I am yet to see your reply.

availableisme:


Yinka my friend i would have loved to stick around for long but this is one of those topics that Atheists would rather refuse giving direct answers to or they would shift the discussion to something else which has already been attempted on me. Do not expect anything from this thread. Shalom

Ranchhoddas:
How about you do it yourself and provide the link? Kindly post the parts of the article that support your statement.

shadeyinka:
I appreciate that you looked for scientific research to back up some of your claims. Although, we must know that unless a conclusion is repeatable, its value as a scientific conclusion is low.



You will know that in most cultures incest was a taboo as you have said but based on theistic ideologies:


"it is a sacrilege which pollutes the land, something the 'gods' frown at etc". Incest doesn't fall under social cultures like the culture of respect, cleanliness, etc. It falls under the guide of the gods and that is why no primitive society can say why inbreeding is wrong but somehow, they just class it as wrong ( because the gods say so).

"Inbreeding avoidance in animals" exist but not overwhelmingly the most common observation of sexuality in animals. I want to submit that among animals, the main cause of outbreeding is because of stronger sexual attraction based on "stronger smells" based on difference in family odors among animals (sorry, I am not a biologist so pardon my lack of use of proper technical words). i.e. animals from the same stock have familier scents and therefore not as sexually pungent as animals from other families.

However, in case of humans, its not just an aversion to inbreeding or preference for out breeding but a societal rejection usually based on the fact that it makes the gods angry.

The argument of "Natural Selection" favouring outbreeding is weak and is just a speculation. Natural selection must present the evidence that cultures who practice inbreeding became weaker and died out. Hence, this evidence should have some historical basis why inbreeding is avoided by subsequent generations and cultures. However, apart from modern scientific studies, no ancient/primitive culture know the reason why inbreeding is not moral.

PastorAIO:


Too much incest in theistic societies throughout history.

Ranchhoddas:
Your detectors appear to improperly configured this morning. This is a different person.

Lennycool:

The OP is just ignorant.

LightandDarkness:


What if they are married. Then it's no longer fornication and the "lust" is no longer lust but love between a married couple, a man and a 12 year old girl.

availableisme:


I cannot offer speculative answers but can only give you what i am sure about. If God did not mention it before Leviticus then it must have been for a reason. Same way a program can be rewritten on a system if the old one has served its purpose.

I thank you for admitting that there was no other recorded acts of incest after the law was given. This then begins to give you a clue about how Christian morality came to be. The law of moses made sure we were aware of the sin. The law woke us up to the reality of sin. Jesus now came and condemned sin In the flesh and gave us his spirit and a new law.

I hope you can relate

LightandDarkness:


The law of moses who committed the same sin?, I can't see why God wouldn't have warned Moses if it was truly a sin.

availableisme:


From Reddit

Reverend Jones himself was an Agnostic Atheist, to be precise. ... In 1978 at Jonestown, Jim Jones brutally poisoned and murdered 303 real children and their parents, for a grand total of 909 people

From wikipedia


In a 1976 phone conversation with John Maher, Jones alternately stated that he was an agnostic and an atheist.[41] Despite the Temple's fear that the IRS was investigating its religious tax exemption, Marceline Jones admitted in a 1977 New York Times interview that Jones was trying to promote Marxism in the United States by mobilizing people through religion, citing Mao Zedong as his inspiration.[37] She stated that, "Jim used religion to try to get some people out of the opiate of religion", and had slammed the Bible on the table yelling "I've got to destroy this paper idol!"[37] In one sermon, Jones said that, "You're gonna help yourself, or you'll get no help! There's only one hope of glory; that's within you! Nobody's gonna come out of the sky! There's no heaven up there! We'll have to make heaven down here!"[9]


From www.sixteensmallstones.org

But reality is far more interesting: Contrary to suppositions, The People’s Temple was in fact a deadly left-wing, atheist, Marxist cult and Jonestown was a Socialist commune.

Jim Jones was a dedicated communist from the outset. While he initially founded his group as a a liberal offshoot of the Methodist denomination, in his own biographical record he admitted that he did not really believe in religion, he saw it as a tool to disingenuously use to further his Marxist goals.

akintom:

This is obviously a normal trend of civilization. Just as we still have culture that neither criminalizes or victimizes incest -

Incest is sexual activity between family members or close
relatives.

This typically includes sexual activity between people in a consanguineous relationship (blood relations), and sometimes those related by affinity , such as individuals of the same household , step relatives, those related by
adoption or marriage , or members of the same clan or
lineage .

You will do well to state this your "wonderful" logic.

akintom:

You will do well to isolate yourself from bunch of NL mischievous and ignorant apologists who don't know the basic differences between religion and a mere belief system.

*an end of religion is an end of implicit and explicit idiocy and delusion, of the religious type.

*an end of religion, is an end to vicious hatred, victimization, segregation and terrorism.

*an end to religion, is an end to indoctrination of children against critical reasoning, creative thinking inhibitions, and rejection of inimical myths and superstitions.

*an end to religion, is an end to psychological traumatizing of children with horrific, monstrous and ubiquitous skydaddy, that poke nose around and will throw them to hell, if its nonsensical rules are not obeyed.

akintom:

Another puerile and foolish vomit of a typical apologist, on atheistic position.

Atheists accept in the present, homosexuality as a variant and NOT deviant sexual orientation. Based on this knowledge, they shouldn't be subjected to harassment, victimization and criminalization, based on religious laws, that are in the first place not informed by any known sound or scientific reasoning.
That same logic? I have told you the definition of that "same" logic as nonsensical.
Wrong questions on wrong premises.

akintom:

Non religious beliefs have advanced the world, to beautiful and beneficial level we are witnessing. As against the primitive and stone age that religion will prefer it remains.

This further confirm the disease of "over assumption in idiocy", that plagues most apologists. No one is as pathetic as a chronic case of religious delusion.

LightandDarkness:


Wow I didn't know that. Guess if a great man like moses could be a product of incest how could it possibly be wrong!

shadeyinka:


You truely sound like Squealer of Animal Farm!
So, agentofallah has become your Napoleon? SMH!

Atheists who have live in the shadows of popular votes with no mind of their own. The major question still is "If we are all atheists in the world, then there shall be nothing wrong with incestuously living: would this promote civilization?"

Anas09:

This is the kind of society they want. Besides sex, they are free to kill whoever they dislike, afterall life means nothing. But pray for them to die and see.

Once, i responded to Oga at the top. I said "Dont worry very soon you shall die and then get to find out if there's God or not".
The comment sparked fear in Oga that he got me banned for 2months. He said i threatened him with death. I no fit laf. Imagine me some saying something like to me, i wont even rememeber it after 5mins. Yet someone got so rattled that he took such drastic action.

And, that's someone who doesn't believe that someone is waiting for him at the end of the road.

They have double personality issues.

The human in them has believed these things because satan said so, the demons in them can't stop thinking of hellfire that awaits them.

Anas09:

Yes they will, but we won't be here when they will do so. Even when the Antichrist comes, he will want to be god and be worshipped. I don't know what these people are even about.

availableisme:


I know about evolution and it does not explain everything contrary to what you might think. Its still a hypothesis in the works. Statistically randomness cannot produce order so lets not go there.

If Natural selection is true then why did it not also deal with anger and hatred and bitterness since they are all emotional driven same way incest, homosexuality and sodomy are?

availableisme:


You need to follow my line of discussion. Who is Sin applicable to? Man or God?

If God chose not to let man know about that particular sin until later it is best known to Him, You on the other hand have acknowledged that such acts of incest totally stopped the moment the law was given. This then shows you that the law awakens us to sin as without the law there would be no sin.

Romans 5: 13 Certainly sin was in the world before the Law was given, but no record of sin is kept when there is no Law.

Romans 4: 15 for the Law produces wrath. Now where there is no Law, neither can there be any violation of it.

I need you to read those 2 scriptures and understand that this discussion should not be holding

KingEbukasBlog:


I was studying the origin of religion yesterday night when I discovered that . While atheism came during the final centuries of BCE (about 2,500 years ago) . Religion has always been with man .

availableisme:


You can look at it in two ways and that is as

a. His father’s sister, That is, kinswoman, as the Hebrew word frequently means. Amminadab or a prince of the tribe of Judah. If you look at it this way then we can say that the Levites might marry into any tribe, there being no danger of confusion or loss of inheritance thereby.

b. .If you can tell me when the Law was given or when it began then you can deduce your answer for yourself. Did Genesis 17: 16 come before Leviticus 18:12?

availableisme:


You can look at it in two ways and that is as

a. His father’s sister, That is, kinswoman, as the Hebrew word frequently means. Amminadab or a prince of the tribe of Judah. If you look at it this way then we can say that the Levites might marry into any tribe, there being no danger of confusion or loss of inheritance thereby.

b. .If you can tell me when the Law was given or when it began then you can deduce your answer for yourself. Did Genesis 17: 16 come before Leviticus 18:12?

Anas09:

but let me imform you that, you cannot wipe Christianity out, because true Christianity is not religion.

KingEbukasBlog:


Marriage is a covenant between God and man . And marriage should be for the right reasons . And it should be done willingly - conscious and explicit consent by both parties involved .

In all cases I've seen the girl child is usually forced to marry the man . So its against her will and she is not mature enough to fulfill any obligations as a wife .

So its wrong considering these factors .

So as an atheist , why is bad to marry a 12 year old girl ? Assuming you are in an African society which assents to such ? Remember an atheist believes societal laws determine what's right or wrong .

LightandDarkness:
Morality and our ideas of good and evil have always been subjectivery, labelling something as good or is not in reference to an absolute moral code but is simply a statement of opinion. This is why I've always said there is no such thing as a common good because everyone will have different opinions of what is truly good and what is bad.

A simple way to demonstrate my point is this passage from the bible. Theists this is not a trick question.


Deuteronomy 22:22
"If a man is found lying with a married woman, then both of them shall die, the man who lay with the woman, and the woman; thus you shall purge the evil from Israel."

Do you think this punishment is right or wrong?

If this was in the Nigerian constitution would you approve or disapprove?

Some mightime think this is right/good/just and some will be absolutely horrified. If majority of nigerian society approved then this punishement will be considered good in nigeria. If majortiy of british society disapproved this punishement would be considered bad.That's the way morality, and good and evil, works and always will work. Nothing to do with an absolute moral code.

hopefulLandlord:

I might be wrong about who is behind it but I'm pretty sure that person isn't new, all monickers created on 26th Nov 2016 and whose first post is on the Hardmirror thread minutes after creating the monicker isn't really new

LightandDarkness:
From one of my.old posts

"This argument about homosexuality leading to acceptance of incest, pedophilia and bestiality is old. One could argue that incest is wrong because it can produce offspring with harmful mutations, even if no children comes from incestuous relationships it could also be argued that it perverts the bond that exists between siblings and parents. Pedophilia is wrong because the sexual activity occurs between an adult who takes advantage of a child who isnt mentally/emotianally/physically mature, and pedophiles who purchase materials depicting pedophilia fund individuals who exploit children for money, essentially sexual slavery of children. As for bestiality, are you comparing the quality of relationships between two humans to the relationship between a human and an animal? :/ this one is generally just weak."

Although it seems like you're saying religion and religious texts are a complete moral source. I would like to know where exactly the bible condemned pedophilia and slavery, I haven't seen it, and yet you (hopefully) believe both are immoral. Ever wonder why or hoe you knew this?

LightandDarkness:


The discussion should still be held. If those two scriptures are valid then why did God punish Cain for killing Abel, it happened before the law and therefore is not a violation of the law, Cain therefore did not sin? The reason why you say its best known to God is because deep down you know it makes no actual sense

MrMontella:

hello brother!
Mention this monicker henceforth@the bolded...raphiemontella went on a vacay...he travelled and said i should substitute for him

---

On your incest...

Explain..

Under Your Theistic doctrine,which is under the dictation of your supreme being who is the source of morals..

1)The world was populated by incestuous relations...not once but twice...
2)Your theistic supreme being...
Blessed an incestous marriage
3)Your God's tight paddy,,if not his bestfriend;Moses was the product of an incestuous marriage...

Moralize these instances..

MrMontella:

she was not a kinswoman whatever



did enoch walk with God or not?

LightandDarkness:


Wow I didn't know that. Guess if a great man like moses could be a product of incest how could it possibly be wrong!

Ranchhoddas:
I do not support incest.

Lennycool:
Incest is practically supported in the Bible.
And the societies that practice incest are largely theistic.