If its just love, why shouldnt incest be ok?

[PureX]

Anyone who would reject their own children, accept wholesale social rejection and imprisonment for the sake of a sexual relationship (regardless of the incest) is clearly psychologically obsessed. As such, I think this is more an issue of when society must use the law to intervene in self-destructive/anti-social behavior than it is an issue of incest, itself. The incest is just the icing on the whole crazy-cake.

They both need psychological help, not 'punishment'.

 

[ClimateSanity]

then it isn't about fertility.

You're forgetting it's all about motivation, not whether there is actually fertility. God looks at the heart. If you're intention in getting married is to have sex without children , it's sin. If you are no longer able to have kids at some point in your marriage,sex is optional.

Your looking at it like a modern lawyer. God looks at it from the heart. His purpose for marriage is procreation. If you knowingly get married that you or her are infertile, you are sinning.

 

[WonderfulLordJesus]

There simply is no divide apart from the illusory dogma that imparts the desire for such. You seek the divide because you need the divide in order to contrive pertinence to an antiquated divisive ideology. You're your own worse enemy blindfully pitting one man-made ideology against another. By your own logic I could likewise follow the divine tenets of of the Qur'an and you've no recourse to contend it's "word".

Just have it your way. It's not profitable to argue with somebody's scrambling of knowledge and issues you don't understand. Sure, we could argue all day your sophistry, flat earth, you, versus globe, me, and it's just exactly so one of us is right. That's not you, Proverbs 14:12. Read the New Testament. This is the bottom line, all that can be said to you.

 

[ClimateSanity]

how is that a sufficient answer?

Things in the bible don't have to be explicitly written down to be true. The bible is not the Constitution and is not to be looked at like a lawyer would (like you ).

You are demanding a legal like proof from Theo when no such proof is necessary. Read the Law of the bible in its entirety and you will see that it is practically categorised as such. Study each of the categories and you will notice they are all treated or applied in different ways. If law was not divisible , you would not see such differences.

 

[quip]

Just have it your way. It's not profitable to argue with somebody's scrambling of knowledge and issues you don't understand. Sure, we could argue all day your sophistry, flat earth, you, versus globe, me, and it's just exactly so one of us is right. That's not you, Proverbs 14:12. Read the New Testament. This is the bottom line, all that can be said to you.

Likewise, examine the hostile universal forces you believe you're divided against...and realize the enemy you must first and foremost "battle" ... lies within.

 

[gcthomas]

Great quote, explaining a lot of the comments on ToL.

Things in the bible don't have to be explicitly written down to be true.

 

[ClimateSanity]

Great quote, explaining a lot of the comments on ToL.

It's not a modern book with the expectations that brings.

 

[rocketman]

How does that even happen, seriously :AMR:

Lust of the flesh, lust of the eyes, the pride of life i.e. SIN.

 

[gcthomas]

It's not a modern book with the expectations that brings.

I agree with this comment, but I was amused by the apparent meaning of the previous one. :up:

 

[PureX]

Lust of the flesh, lust of the eyes, the pride of life i.e. SIN.

Being psychologically ill is not a sin. I think this woman is psychologically ill. Not just because of the incest factor, but because she is willing to reject everyone else in her life, her reputation, and even her freedom, for this sexual obsession with this one son. It's very irrational and very self-destructive, not to mention being very destructive to the son she purports to 'love'.

Just shouting "IT'S A SIN" and jumping back under that big rock of self-righteousness doesn't accomplish anything. I think both of these people: mother and son, need professional help. Not meaningless condemnation. I'm sure many instances of incest are just flat out examples of the 'sin' of selfishness and of lust, as you say. But in those instances the perpetrators are ashamed. And they try to hide it because they know they're in the wrong. But this woman doesn't seem to understand that she's in the wrong. She thinks her insanely obsessive and destructive lust, is love. She's crazy.

And it's not a sin to be crazy.

 

[Crucible]

Being psychologically ill is not a sin. I think this woman is psychologically ill. Not just because of the incest factor, but because she is willing to reject everyone else in her life, her reputation, and even her freedom, for this sexual obsession with this one son. It's very irrational and very self-destructive, not to mention being very destructive to the son she purports to 'love'.

Just shouting "IT'S A SIN" and jumping back under your rock of self-righteousness doesn't accomplish anything. I think both of these folks need professional help. Not meaningless condemnation. I'm sure many instances of incest are just flat out the 'sin' of selfishness and of lust. But in those instances the perpetrators are ashamed. And try to hide it. Because they know they are wrong. But this woman doesn't seem to understand that she is wrong. Because I think she is crazy.

And it's not a sin to be crazy.

Mental stress or illness are mitigating factors in committing sin. It's when it is done with full knowledge and carnality that sins are dire to the person's soul.

However, that is not a license to sin- it's obvious that such a woman must be suffering from some mental illness, but if she doesn't get help then she'll be without excuse.
And that's the same for all the sexually deviant.

 

[WonderfulLordJesus]

Likewise, examine the hostile universal forces you believe you're divided against...and realize the enemy you must first and foremost "battle" ... lies within.

Unless, of course, this universal enemy within doesn't pertain to you, therefore admitting you're a deluded, flaming hypocrite, it's amazing you start out by saying that the Christian can't be trusted for some skewed, misplaced notion we don't trust ourselves to be sane and a misunderstanding of theological depravity, but that you must necessarily, in contrast, fancy that you can trust yourself. Not that flaming hypocrite, right? Yet now you've morphed into that we have an enemy within we can't trust? How do you account for your enemy within that you're trusting, instead of God, that refuses any outside help? You're like an alcoholic who won't admit he has a problem, accusing the sober people of being drunks. Sure, you can handle your sin and evil, right?

Nice little quip, this "enemy within" thing, worthy of your identity, that may belong on the back of a cereal box, in an episode of Star Trek or be the "quote for the day" in a newspaper, but hardly standing the test of reason, by you contradicting your own claims, nor relevant to the deeper ditch you keep digging around yourself. You're beginning to appear the troll, who can't keep things straight across a few screens and fewer posts. You're beginning to become amusing, but too mildly so.

I have a novel idea for your time, and this for about the third time, is it? Logoff and go read the New Testament, do something about your enemy within, to keep yourself out of hell, recognize the true tragedy your heart stopping would be, in the middle of another irrational comment.

 

[PureX]

Mental stress or illness are mitigating factors in committing sin. It's when it is done with full knowledge and carnality that sins are dire to the person's soul.

However, that is not a license to sin- it's obvious that such a woman must be suffering from some mental illness, but if she doesn't get help then she'll be without excuse.
And that's the same for all the sexually deviant.

This is why we should be leaving the judgment to God, and not taking it upon ourselves. None of us really know to what degree this woman understands her "sin". And none of us knows how mentally capable she is of asking or receiving psychological help for her illness. In the United States, finding and affording help for mental illnesses is very difficult. And mental illnesses in general tend to be accompanied by intense denial. So that even if help is available, it's often not understood as being needed by the person that really needs it. And we can't just lock people up and force mental health on them unless they have become a clear danger to themselves or others.

A lot of behavior that we're so quick to label "sin" and want to see "punished" may well be the result of mental illness rather than "sin". Or may be some combination of these in ratios that we could not hope to discern. And I think we ought to keep this in mind when we read these kinds of stories and then want so badly to condemn the "sinners".

 

[WizardofOz]

if you agree with homosexual relationships but NOT incest, and why one is then ok and not the other

I just read the entire thread. I have yet to see anyone address this particular question...:think:
Why shouldn't a mother or father be allowed to marry his or her (adult) son? Why shouldn't two brothers or two sisters be able to marry one another? If you're OK with same-sex relationships, why should someone be locked up just because they are related?

Related For Gay Marriage but Against Father Marrying Son?

 

[Crucible]

I just learned a pretty important detail about the woman and her son and now it's making more sense.

Apparently, they never knew each other as mother and son, because she gave him up for adoption after he was born. They reunited only a year before what's going on now.

Because of this, they see each other as strangers rather than mother and son regardless of the fact. This in turn potentially opens up a precarious door to intimacy rather than a familial relation.

I stated before that she probably has a mental issue, and that's still likely true- but that is far less mitigating then with this little detail. She was probably lonely and is living out a fantasy of being with someone young, at the expense of the insanity in it being her son.

 

[WonderfulLordJesus]

I just read the entire thread. I have yet to see anyone address this particular question...:think:
Why shouldn't a mother or father be allowed to marry his or her (adult) son? Why shouldn't two brothers or two sisters be able to marry one another? If you're OK with same-sex relationships, why should someone be locked up just because they are related?

Related For Gay Marriage but Against Father Marrying Son?

What about proven science as to shared recessive genes causing birth defects, mental illnesses and retardation? I'm not alright with homosexuality, but at least they don't breed, right?

Just throwing this hard fact out there, that can cause harm to children. Would you want inbreeding to become the norm, people that windup being like your majority web forum participants? Is this the sort of world you want?

 

[WizardofOz]

What about proven science as to shared recessive genes causing birth defects, mental illnesses and retardation? I'm not alright with homosexuality, but at least they don't breed, right?

Just throwing this hard fact out there, that can cause harm to children. Would you want inbreeding to become the norm, people that windup being like your majority web forum participants? Is this the sort of world you want?

Um no. Of course not.

How about same-sex relatives? Why can't a father marry his son or mother marry her daughter? How about two sisters or two brothers?

Back to the OP: if you agree with homosexual relationships but NOT (homosexual) incest, and why one is then ok and not the other?

 

[gcthomas]

I just read the entire thread. I have yet to see anyone address this particular question...:think:
Why shouldn't a mother or father be allowed to marry his or her (adult) son? Why shouldn't two brothers or two sisters be able to marry one another? If you're OK with same-sex relationships, why should someone be locked up just because they are related?

Related For Gay Marriage but Against Father Marrying Son?

The law should be there to prevent harm and protect the vulnerable. So sex with a minor by someone in a position of power over them should be illegal as it is a form of child sexual abuse, whether a blood relative or not. Consenting adult relationships are more difficult to argue against, since the 'yuck' factor is a poor basis for law if a more rational harm-based reason cannot be found, especially if there is no ability/desire to have a child (due to lack of fertility) or genetic testing rules out inherited recessive diseases.

Who am I to decide on another person's choice of partner if there is no objective harm done to anyone?

 

[WonderfulLordJesus]

Um no. Of course not.

How about same-sex relatives? Why can't a father marry his son or mother marry her daughter? How about two sisters or two brothers?

Back to the OP: if you agree with homosexual relationships but NOT (homosexual) incest, and why one is then ok and not the other?

Though ultimate judgment is the Lord's, alone, Romans 12:19, therefore not into this idea of legally punishing any number of sins, I don't agree homo relationships are alright, period, and do roundly condemn so-called homosexual "marriage." But I was just butting in and adding a point of order as to the genetic considerations and potential harm that must be in the incest calculation, if there's any concept of societal and child welfare, as should be. (There's also a huge child welfare issue with, especially, male homosexuals adopting boys, one could imagine likewise the female situation.) You asked for what's the difference, and I offered one important one. As to the thread, I was rather content, trying to communicate with a soul bound for hell, and you should be amazed and grateful I posted something relevant to the thread subject, especially in light of how out of character and strange that personally felt.

 

[gcthomas]

What about proven science as to shared recessive genes causing birth defects, mental illnesses and retardation? I'm not alright with homosexuality, but at least they don't breed, right?

Just throwing this hard fact out there, that can cause harm to children. Would you want inbreeding to become the norm, people that windup being like your majority web forum participants? Is this the sort of world you want?

Should we routinely test heterosexual couples to make sure they don't share recessive diseases, and ban them from sex if they do?