Incest is verboten because judaism/christianity forbids it.
>>83509827As an orthodox christian, i've never understood anti eugenicism. Every time I've asked so far why's it bad I didn't get an answer good enough that was even worth remembering.
>>83509827Who did Noah's children marry to repopulate the earthThe bible literally says nothing about incest being bad
>>83509899Judaism/Christianity are not beholden to genesis for moral laws. They explicitly forbid incest. It is codified.
>>83509920Cite a verse then.
>>83510029Graduate highschool before posting again.
>>83510029Book of leviticus, retard
>>83510076The book of Leviticus forbids incest?Why do you eat shellfish and wear mixed fabrics if LEVITICUS is your guide?
>>83510029Leviticus Chapter 18>6: None of you shall approach to any that is near of kin to him, to uncover their nakedness. I am the LORD.>7: The nakedness of thy father, and the nakedness of thy mother, shalt thou not uncover: she is thy mother; thou shalt not uncover her nakedness.>8: The nakedness of thy father's wife shalt thou not uncover: it is thy father's nakedness.>9: The nakedness of thy sister, the daughter of thy father, or the daughter of thy mother, whether born at home, or born abroad, even their nakedness thou shalt not uncover.>10: The nakedness of thy son's daughter, or of thy daughter's daughter, even their nakedness thou shalt not uncover; for theirs is thine own nakedness.>11: The nakedness of thy father's wife's daughter, begotten of thy father, she is thy sister, thou shalt not uncover her nakedness.>12: Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy father's sister: she is thy father's near kinswoman.>13: Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy mother's sister; for she is thy mother's near kinswoman.>14: Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy father's brother, thou shalt not approach to his wife: she is thine aunt.>15: Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy daughter-in-law: she is thy son's wife; thou shalt not uncover her nakedness.>16: Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy brother's wife: it is thy brother's nakedness.>17: Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of a woman and her daughter; thou shalt not take her son's daughter, or her daughter's daughter, to uncover her nakedness: they are near kinswomen; it is lewdness.>18: And thou shalt not take a woman to her sister, to be a rival to her, to uncover her nakedness, beside the other in her lifetime.
>>83510122It's not just Leviticus. Paul in one of his letters calls out someone for having a relationship with his mother, or mother in law. I can't remember which.
>>83509827Judaism/Christianity also forbid mixing fabrics, eating shellfish and touching pig skin
>>83510216No it doesn't, you're ignorant.
>>83510239Literally the same book
>>83510190Leviticus must've had some serious beef with incest holy shit.
>>83509864There is nothing in the Bible that justifies eugenics. There is plenty in the Bible about protecting the weak and being kind to the less fortunate so maybe you are just an edgelord using religion to justify unrelated and indeed contradicting beliefs.
>>83510122Just because Jesus says He fulfilled OT doesn't mean everything forbidden in the law is now free for taking, tard. Old covenant wasnt just dietary and circumcision laws, most of it is literally basic morals we adhere to to this day. Only jew specific laws are nullified.
>>83510246https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affinity_(Catholic_canon_law)
>>83510263nta, don't know shit about the bible, but I'm pretty sure being kind to the less fortunate does not equal encouraging the less fortunate to make more spawn that will inevitably be less fortunate.
>>83510263So being kind to the less fortunate and protecting weak equals letting felons mental asylum escapees reproduce?
>>83510317Oh? How convenient. So slavery's bad then? Last time I read my witch hunter's version (KJV) Jesus told slaves not to rebel or change the system because in the afterlife they'll be free.Also I don't take anything catholics say as true. They didn't rule Galileo's innocence for centuries.
>>83510345>Last time I readWhich is clearly never.
>>83510239>Lev 19:19 - Ye shall keep my statutes. Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind: thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled seed: neither shall a garment mingled of linen and woollen come upon thee.>Deut 22:11 - Thou shalt not wear a garment of divers sorts, as of woollen and linen together.>Lev 11:9 - These shall ye eat of all that are in the waters: whatsoever hath fins and scales in the waters, in the seas, and in the rivers, them shall ye eat.>Lev 11:10 - And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you:>Lev 11:11 - They shall be even an abomination unto you; ye shall not eat of their flesh, but ye shall have their carcases in abomination.>Lev 11:12 - Whatsoever hath no fins nor scales in the waters, that shall be an abomination unto you.>Lev 11:7 - And the swine, though he divide the hoof, and be clovenfooted, yet he cheweth not the cud; he is unclean to you.>Lev 11:8 - Of their flesh shall ye not eat, and their carcase shall ye not touch; they are unclean to you.
>>83510263>There is plenty in the Bible about protecting the weak and being kind to the less fortunateChristians are completely blind when you mention this.Don't even get me started on the scathing hatred Jesus had towards the greedy and those that grift.Christianity is a fucking joke, but all religions are when you view them with any scrutiny.
>>83510317Isn't that nice, all of our obvious basic morals are coincidentally the ones we chose to follow
>>83510320The bible literally says "Go forth and multiply" and there isn't a single caveat about the makeup or worth of your genetics, Anon, stop being purposefully ignorant.
>>83510407Only the moral laws apply to Christians. Again, you're ignorant.I hate jews/christians more than you do.
>>83510418Wasn't there a quote about how hard it is for a rich man to get to heaven?
>>83510434"Eugenics" is imprinted in our very biology in the form of preference for more attractive and stable partner. Cope.
>>83509827It's bullshit. If I wanna bang my cousin nobody can stop me. I thought the new testament was fine with it, though.
>>83510513That's the irony. When god is calling for child sacrifice and genocide that's different, the new covenant makes it irrelevant, but when it comes to loving your neighbor, ERM, ACKSHULLY LOVE MEANS FOLLOWING DA RULESH ASH OUTLINED IN DE OLD TESHTAMENT
>>83510454What makes not eating pigs not "moral law" but incest is? Both have adequate reasoning provided. It's not like God made certain laws for shits and giggles
>>83510545>ERM, ACKSHULLY LOVE MEANS FOLLOWING DA RULESH ASH OUTLINED IN DE OLD TESHTAMENTYeah they cherry pick things they like from both the old and new testament whenever it suits them. Christians are so annoying I swear.
>>83510558Yahweh isn't real. Jews/Christians are retarded. Only the moral laws apply to Christians.Christianity forbids incest.
Everything you atheifags bark about can be answered in a single google search. If you are slow or look for some more esoteric answers, call in some high profile apologists like jay dyer and prepare to get your fragile worldview shattered in front of you
>>83510616And yet, most if not all the questions are answered by deflecting, redirecting, moving the goalposts, or claiming that the OT meand nothing, except wait it's actually super important, just not when it talks about marrying POWs.
>>83510630>talks about deflection>still didn't research the subject asking the question aboutHow can you faggots be so pretentious lol
>>83510190>>17: Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of a woman and her daughter; >>it is lewdness.Oyakodon officially banned.
>>83510818>what are general statements
>>83510498And you believe that women will most likely choose a stable partner?Are you really this naive?
>>83510616The unassailable esoteric answers:>mysterious ways>if we presuppose that the woodchuck could chuck, then we can conclude that it does chuck>a watch needs a watchmaker, therefore a flower needs a florist!
>>83510878And yet you can't answer any of these without stepping into a fallacyFaggot
>>83510616Intllectual giant Jay Dyer known for his takes like "catholicism is false because I saw a priest do a silly video once"
>>83510900HaahhahahaReduce and cope more
>>83510937You are hav a low IQ if you think that the orthodox church has more credibility than the catholic church.
>>83510898Okay, then name one.
>>83511125How can I name them when you didn't attempt to give an answer dumbass. Just leave
>>83511138Answer to what, "you can't explain why god would do it, therefore god works in mysterious ways, therefore he's real?" What do I have to work with?
>>83511156>strawman>captcha
