Posted on 12/15/2010 9:18:21 PM PST by This Just In
So, Why Is Incest Wrong?
Wednesday, December 15, 2010
There are certain questions now pressed upon us that previous generations would never believe could be asked. One of these is thrust upon us by events in New York City, where a well-known Ivy League professor has been arrested for the crime of incest. What makes the question urgent is not so much the arrest, but the controversy surrounding it.
David Epstein is a professor of political science at Columbia University, where his wife also teaches. He previously taught on the faculties of Harvard and Stanford. Last week, he was arraigned before a judge in Manhattan, charged with a single count of felony incest. According to authorities, Professor Epstein was for several years involved in a sexual relationship with his adult daughter, now age 24.
Though the story was ignored by much of the mainstream media, it quickly found its way into the cultural conversation. William Saletan of Slate.com, who remains one of today’s most relevant writers working on the issues of bioethics and human nature, jumped on the story with a very interesting essay that openly asked the question many others were more quietly asking: “If homosexuality is OK, why is incest wrong?” Related Posts
* Homosexuality and the Bible — One Very Wrong Way to Deal With the Text * America’s Debate over Homosexuality: Are Christians On the Wrong Side of History? (Audio) * “Rights Talk” Collides with Right and Wrong * “Both Wrong and Dangerous” — Scientists Have Worldviews, Too. * “The Land of Never Wrong” — The Real World of Big-Time Sports
(Excerpt) Read more at albertmohler.com ...
A vicious circle...
“I can not believe that this is even debatable.”
It is not debatable. It is quite simply DETESTABLE.
And more.
liberals not only do everything they can to destroy the beauty and innocence of childhood, but they seem to thrive on destroying the entire framework of family.
They use abortion as birth control. Never considering the life they snuff out has the potential to live a long and beautiful life.
They promote sexualizing little children with crap like homosexual sensitivity and worse, experimentation and flat out promotion. Making children feel badly for having the natural ICK FACTOR that goes with the very idea of same sex crap. It is full of ew-gie, yuck factors and we are all supposed to suppress and ignore this so that the few who need to ADVERTISE their deviant sexual proclivities can reach some guiltless nirvana in society. Tough.
They attempt to mock and degrade anyone who stands against their ideas of tolerance...even when that intolerance is actually healthy and perhaps natural. ONLY what liberals deem as ok is ok. And nothing is too low for them to embrace.
Incest?
Oh fine. Destroy little children by laying an horrific abuse of adult power and betrayal upon them.
Rob the children of their right to grow up safe and to MAKE CHOICES regarding whom they will have sexual relations with....that's the ticket for a liberal....STEAL EVERYTHING SPECIAL ABOUT CHILDHOOD and DESTROY the LITTLE SOUL DEVELOPING WITHIN.
Make um stay in teacher unionized schools where tenure rules and if a kid has to put up with a teacher who does not teach....let that kid miss a year of education...as long as the lazy, imcompetent teacher gets that paycheck. Who cares....it's just kids.
Liberals must REALLY HATE CHILDREN. From the earliest development of a life to the adult that leaves home-defeated and without a compass upon which to build a solid life.
liberals are my enemy. a bunch of perverts who need to sexualize children in order to justify their mental illness.
How about it being just plain icky!!!
Not to mention its just plain nasty.
Humans are animals, by definition, belonging to kingdom animalia, phylum chordata, class mammalia, etc.
Please! That cliche is vile.
****************************************
Yes. There is no morality without God.
***************************
So is incest. Vile and evil.
One has to wonder if these same idiots thatare debating this are also into advocating or debating beastiality....incredible. *shakeshead* =.=
That is a beautiful quote. Goes up in my office. Thanks.
can we get the numbers of senators thinking of voting for this, I’ve called McCain and my rep but can’t get a hold of the two sisters and Brown
I guess the “definition” all depends on which dictionary you’re reading. Modern language(which redefines the meaning of words; as in this case) or from the original Greek and Latin.
According to Websters 1828 dictionary, which I’ll trust over any modern day dictionary, human is defined as such:
[l. humanus; Fr. humain; Sp. humano; It. umano...]
1. Belonging to man or mankind; pertaining or relating to the race of man; as a human voice; human shape; human nature; human knowledge; human life.
2. Having the qualities of a man.
No we’re not animals. When’s the last time you witnessed an animal design a car, or seek to develop a more efficient tool to build a house? The last time I saw an “art piece” created by an animal was as a result of some moron actually placing a paint brush in some elephants trunk and shoving a canvass in its face.
No doctors, musicians, soccer players, biologists, speech therapists, theologians in the wild kingdom. Animals generally behave by instinct. They mate, play, and eat. You understand what I’m saying, I hope. We are not animals. Our species is not the same.
I come to this thought with some frequency these days.
Progressives push society to being creatures of the field and only men when it serves to get creatures out of a predicament such as a contracting an STD or dealing with an inconvenient pregnancy.
Social conservatives, Bible Christians and Catholics try to aim higher.
Sick! First came the fags, they were accepted. Next comes incest, then what, sex with the family dog? The whole family has an orgy with the family pets? WTF is going on in this country?
For since the creation of the world His invisible
attributes, His eternal power and divine nature,
have been clearly seen, being understood through
what has been made, so that they are without excuse.
(Romans 1:20)
For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie,
and worshiped and served the creature rather
than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
For this reason God gave them over to DEGRADING
PASSIONG; for their women exchanged the natural
function for that which is UNNATURAL, and in the
same way also the men abandoned the natural
function of the woman and burned in their desire
toward one another, men with men committing
INDECENT ACTS and receiving in their own persons
the due penalty of their error (wasting diseases).
(Romans 1:25-27)
Rand Paul would probably vote for incest too and no I’m not joking.
I think you’ve got several windows open and meant to reply on a DADT thread?
I don’t think there are any votes about incest, at least not yet...
Coming soon, no doubt!!
grrr
Of course he would. He’s a sick in the head evil ****** ******.
called the north east fools, Murkowski, Demint and McCain today and let it be known that they are making a serious mistake if they allow the repeal.
The rudest was Murkoski who just said thank you to which I replied I have seen friends die and still have friends over there serving and all you can do for this call is to say thank you and then want to get off the phone.
Surely McCain or someone can delay this vote or do amendments to slow it down, hell close down Govt and to hell with those wanting to go to a state park this Christmas.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.