What exactly is so morally wrong about two siblings consenting to explore their sexuality?

what exactly is so morally wrong about two siblings consenting to explore their sexuality?

Attached: 15173731.gif (500x393, 1.84M)

>open r9k first thing in the morning
>see this unintellegent disgrace
really?
can you people stop obsessing over temporary pleasure?

ugly babies

Why is he sitting on his hands?

he doesnt have any hands

I'm not into anal at all but this position is so fucking hot
watching her ass bouncing like that is just unf

that's one hypnotizing gif

Attached: 46b5eff2edbffe80e81379c6f2111d09.jpg (700x878, 91K)

this is my favorite position

Attached: 12483211.gif (320x240, 1.33M)

also thats not anal

There is nothing wrong with it. All the things that people say are wrong with it are not innate to it.
Babies? We have contraception. Also there are people with bad genes that almost guarantee their children will be retarded no matter the partner. Should we make it illegal for them to have kids?
Power difference? What about siblings that are similar in age and don't use any power to influence the other parties decision to have sex.
People just don't really think about those things honestly. They just have a feeling about things and they go with that. Same thing happens in politics. Preety much explains all the positions held by right-wing people.

I know, but most people would assume that one loving that position would be because of the easy view on the anus, while I literally don't give a shit about it

Anyone have source on this? Asking for my dad's boyfriend

i think her name is lindsey meadows

Because the circumstances leading to actual incest are the result of abuse and saying that is noraml leads to a question of your own morality

Incest is fun to fap to but incest in reality is usually the result of huge abuse and neglect

>Preety much explains all the positions held by right-wing people.
had to put the 'stopped reading there' moment at the very end of the post, didn't you

I addressed that. Power difference is not innate to incest and I could imagine a lot of cases in which most normal people that don't just say "it's bad cuz it's bad" would agree there is nothing wrong with those cases of incest.

Well I guess you havent read Flowers in the Attic lol

Yeah, I knew right-wingers are too easily triggered so I put that at the end.

LOL I guess I haven't. Good argument my dude. You won.

>morally wrong
that's like, givin me a spoon, telling me to eat a steak, and then all the while telling me to not look retarded.
Basically the frame of argument isn't the point of the discussion. You're giving me a fact and wanting me to extrapolate a system of ethics out of there.
Lol.
Here's a moral syllogism for you, and hopefully you'll see what I mean
>Since it is one's moral ought to live in the healthiest manner (moral premise)
>and incest is an act that implies there is something wrong with you mentally (premise)
>Therefore, incest is morally wrong (moral judgement).

Attached: 1539085699987.jpg (1046x1202, 639K)

Is there anything wrong with incest per se?
No, and in the future it is probably going to become fully acceptable.

Is there anything wrong with incest in the current system of western morality? Yes, and plenty, main gripe being the fact that romantic/erotic love is clearly separated from familial love for entirely functional reasons. A person is expected to treat family members with special care and attention, the kind of care and attention that is then extended to a lover/spouse-to-be in the act of expanding the family. Viewed like that, it's a bit clinical, because it is - families ultimately exist for the sole purpose of breeding and maintaining more people. Now, say, you introduce the concept of intrafamilial sex to this system. Where does it lead?
Well, into several unpleasant places. Firstly, sex must be utterly downgraded to the status of a mere carnal pleasure and nothing else, otherwise sex within the family will become an exclusionary act of special treatment. You do that, and suddenly the concept of fidelity is at stake - after all, if sex is nothing but physical, with no emotions and higher passions behind it, cheating is no longer an immoral act. With fidelity gone, the concept of family begins to disintegrate.
Secondly, if society wishes to flourish, it now must thrust itself into acceptance of eugenic principles (many people, myself included, would consider it a step up). After all, with incestual love rampant, people at large must be beaten over the head with genetic complexities of inbreeding to make them realise the difference between casual sex and sex for procreation. Otherwise, families begin to disintegrate even more, now on biological level

Everything about sex is wrong you incel

if you're going to get autistically fancy with me here then I'll attack your second premise as an unsubstantiated and unsafe assumption. Why does incest imply this?

The love between siblings is the purest love there is. How could it be morally wrong?

Attached: 6.jpg (1046x1500, 514K)

Absolutely NOTHING! ...But only if he's Chad.

Same applies for mom/chad son.

Siblings do on occasion explore their early sexuality (playing doctor, that kind of thing), which may or may not be a useful formative experience in a relatively safe environment, but actual intercourse carries the risk of pregnancy.