Civilization is defined as:
1. An organized culture encompassing many communities, often on the scale of a nation or a people;
2. A stage or system of social, political,or technical development.

Most of the cultural norms we have today have Theistic basis behind them. The concept of Morality is mostly theistic in origin.

Today, we have a culture that forbids incest almost throughout the world. I would want us to focus only on this vis-à-vis: The Wonderful Logics of Atheism and INCEST!

How you ever wondered how the world would be when Atheism becomes the worlds only "religion"?

Let's look at a typical Atheist logic about a theme as homosexuality. Most atheists are heterosexual BUT they see nothing wrong with Homosexuality because as far as they are concerned, as long as

1. The act of homosexuality is consensual
2. The Homosexuality is between Adults
3. The sexual act is hurting no one
Then, it should be respected as a NORMAL and VALID way of life and sexual expression.

Today, let's use the same logic for incest.
Fathers, Mothers, Children (adults) having consensual sex with each other as acceptable sexual orientation.

Now, to Atheists on Nairaland,(assuming pregnancy is ruled out)
Would incest be acceptable way of life?
Should this be encouraged ?
Would this be immoral?

Or (as a single question)

What is the stance of Atheism on Incest?

The answer you give will show us whether civilization will Collapse under the rule of Atheism or Advance.

I am sure that few atheists will respond to this: it is like giving them a rope to hang themselves.

Cc:
winner01 , kingebukasblog , scholar8200 , Muafrika2 Dejideji1 , MrPresident1, OLAADEGBU, Hardmirror, Raphiemontella, Donffd, KingEbukasBlog, anas09, OLAADEGBU, KingEbukaNaija, analice107, vooks, Ishilove, sukkot, gatiano, mrpresident1, lalasticlala, seun, Farmerforlife, 4evergod2, naijadeyhia

Of course they will see nothing wrong!

It has already been tested:

Hitlers Germany,
The Marxism of the Soviet Union
The Chinese and their Maoism

Terrible results¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡

Admittedly, religion, much like culture, promotes certain evolutionarily advantageous traits in terms of norms and taboos. Yet, you're wrong to attribute things you lack an understanding of to theism. Many old religions are silent on endogamy, yet incest has always been a social taboo in societies where these archaic religions were practiced.
This makes it clear that religion and culture are merely secondary reinforcers of our aversion to incestuous relationships. In fact, this aversion isn't just human, there is insurmountable evidence that it is panmammalian (see Pusey, A. and M. Wolf (1996). "Inbreeding avoidance in animals." Trends in Ecology & Evolution 11(5): 201-206.).

Clearly, the underlying common denominator here is that incest avoidance is patently a consequence of natural selection. Murray R.D. has addressed this exhaustively in his peer reviewed article (see Murray, R. D. (1980). "The evolution and functional significance of incest avoidance." Journal of Human Evolution 9(3): 173-178.). In his conclusion, he suggests that:
"...the primary function of incest avoidance is rooted in the origins of biparental reproduction in that it serves to maximize genetic variability necessary for adaptation. In accord, the human incest taboo is likely an extension of this biological predisposition, which does not exclude its incorporation in a multitude of additional social functions that have been addressed previously by several authors (Levi
Strauss, 1970; Slater, 1959)."
Obviously, from a natural selection viewpoint, pregnancy (that is, reproductive viability) is the natural factor from which the morality of mammalian aversion to inbreeding is derived, not any culture/religion. So you can't just whimsically assume it is ruled out and then proceed to debunk a hypothetical argument.

That said, having consensual sex with your family members will not cause any kind of far reaching damage to society, nor will it destroy civilisation (except your definition of civilisation has got something to do with sexual practices).

To answer your 3-pronged questions on incest (supposing pregnancy is ruled out, like you say):
1) It is an acceptable way of life.
2) It should neither be encouraged nor discouraged.
3) It was implicit in my explanation above, that morality is a by-product of evolution. Incest is no more (im)moral than exogamy.

While you're apt to contemplate the moral dilemmas of incest, be mindful that it is not a topic to be brushed over with partial reflectiveness. For one, it doesn't help to oversimplify complex human behaviours into religion/culture/morality; and it sure as hell helps to understand the role of cognitive bias in your musings and thought processes.

Finally, atheism has no stance on incest! You may find many atheists opposed to it, as you may find ones favourable towards it. The only stance of atheism (and all atheists) is that there is no evidence for god. The clue is in the definition of the word "Atheist".

... I asked what their morality is based on, till date I'm yet to get an answer... Or at least a sensible one.

Animals practice incest and that includes monkeys too. Seun said we evolved from monkeys (dumb) to who are now (smart).

Did we then drop inbreeding? How? Why? I know there have been recent researches done and postulations are made on why inbreeding is wrong, question however is how did people of say the 15th century know that inbreeding is wrong?

What gives me moral backing that inbreeding isn't OK and homosexuality is?

AgentofAllah

Finally, atheism has no stance on incest! You may find many atheists opposed to it, as you may find ones favourable towards it. The only stance of atheism (and all atheists) is that there is no evidence for god. The clue is in the definition of the word "Atheist".

Is the absence of evidence the proof of absence?

LambanoPeace:


Is the absence of evidence the proof of absence?

Certainly not!

shadeyinka:
Civilization is defined as:
1. An organized culture encompassing many communities, often on the scale of a nation or a people;
2. A stage or system of social, political,or technical development.

Most of the cultural norms we have today have Theistic basis behind them. The concept of Morality is mostly theistic in origin.

Today, we have a culture that forbids incest almost throughout the world. I would want us to focus only on this vis-à-vis: The Wonderful Logics of Atheism and INCEST!

How you ever wondered how the world would be when Atheism becomes the worlds only "religion"?

Let's look at a typical Atheist logic about a theme as homosexuality. Most atheists are heterosexual BUT they see nothing wrong with Homosexuality because as far as they are concerned, as long as

1. The act of homosexuality is consensual
2. The Homosexuality is between Adults
3. The sexual act is hurting no one
Then, it should be respected as a NORMAL and VALID way of life and sexual expression.

Today, let's use the same logic for incest.
Fathers, Mothers, Children (adults) having consensual sex with each other as acceptable sexual orientation.

Now, to Atheists on Nairaland,(assuming pregnancy is ruled out)
Would incest be acceptable way of life?
Should this be encouraged ?
Would this be immoral?

Or (as a single question)

What is the stance of Atheism on Incest?

The answer you give will show us whether civilization will Collapse under the rule of Atheism or Advance.

I am sure that few atheists will respond to this: it is like giving them a rope to hang themselves.

Cc:
winner01 , kingebukasblog , scholar8200 , Muafrika2 Dejideji1 , MrPresident1, OLAADEGBU, Hardmirror, Raphiemontella, Donffd, KingEbukasBlog, anas09, OLAADEGBU, KingEbukaNaija, analice107, vooks, Ishilove, sukkot, gatiano, mrpresident1, lalasticlala, seun, Farmerforlife, 4evergod2, naijadeyhia

Johnnydon22, Urahara, hahn, logicboy03, dalama,4kings, theonejabulani, AyeHateGod, Jonbellion, TomHagin, Deicide, hopefulLand, lepasharon, cloudgoddess, Freecocoa, Gombs, Oga Deepsight, Where is Ifeness sef? Weah, Obadiah777, HPaul, AlfaSeltzer, texanomaly, Sirweah, Frank316, Sarassin, Ayoku777, Image123, akintom, Realminz,Joseph1013, LaClickLaBenDin, Promise 10, Felixomor.

Where is hopefullandlord? This man here said, animals are homosextuals and incestuous, and since they evolved from them, they should freely sleep with their mothers, Fathers, and siblings.

Just imagine Hopefullandlord with his Atheistic wife and kids. He puts it into his daughters, his sons pits it into his wife. his daughters freely roll with their younger sisters and turn around and roll with their brothers too.

His sons roll with their brothers and turns around and roll with their sisters.

Relations come for visits, the rolling continues. When he feels like it, he rolls with his Dog. (I remember Hopefullandlord saying there's nothing wrong in people rolling with their animals), Yes, he rolls with his dogs and every other family memeber can do it with the Cats too.

And when they are feeling Gay, they all put a porn Video and start the rolling in his sitting room. Rolling around.

This is the Atheistic Utopian society that these Athiests are envisaging.

Satanism, Satanism, Satanism, Satanism.

Omudia11:
Of course they will see nothing wrong!

How can civilization be said to Advance if we all live like brute animals. SMH

Muafrika2:
It has already been tested:

Hitlers Germany,
The Marxism of the Soviet Union
The Chinese and their Maoism

Terrible results¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡

Strict Atheistic argument should favour this riotous living; after all, there is no "skydaddy" to call them to order.

Its easy to see that with atheism, Satan takes over completely human civilization

Anas09:
Where is hopefullandlord? This man here said, animals are homosextuals and incestuous, and since they evolved from them, they should freely sleep with their mothers, Fathers, and siblings.

Just imagine Hopefullandlord with his Atheistic wife and kids. He puts it into his daughters, his sons pits it into his wife. his daughters freely roll with their younger sisters and turn around and roll with their brothers too.

His sons roll with their brothers and turns around and roll with their sisters.

Relations come for visits, the rolling continues. When he feels like it, he rolls with his Dog. (I remember Hopefullandlord saying there's nothing wrong in people rolling with their animals), Yes, he rolls with his dogs and every other family memeber can do it with the Cats too.

And when they are feeling Gay, they all put a porn Video and start the rolling in his sitting room. Rolling around.

This is the Atheistic Utopian society that these Athiests are envisaging.

Satanism, Satanism, Satanism, Satanism.

I had to close my mind at a stage not to imagine the kind of unruly society where God is finally buried. Hope full landlord himself if he had a Dane gun will pursue you all the way to the gates of paradise on reading the about your description of the utopian society where he and his likes are the majority.

But seriously speaking, the end result of atheism is organized chaos!

LambanoPeace:
... I asked what their morality is based on, till date I'm yet to get an answer... Or at least a sensible one.

Animals practice incest and that includes monkeys too. Seun said we evolved from monkeys (dumb) to who are now (smart).

Did we then drop inbreeding? How? Why? I know there have been recent researches done and postulations are made on why inbreeding is wrong, question however is how did people of say the 15th century know that inbreeding is wrong?

What gives me moral backing that inbreeding isn't OK and homosexuality is?

Their morality unfortunately has been influenced by their theistic foundation which they are fighting hard to destroy.

Its like a man who climbed close to the top with a ladder kicking off the ladder because the ladder is made of wood. How will others get to that same top?

The negative effect of Inbreeding wasn't the reason why incest was banned in most cultures, it was simply a TABOO related to their theistic believes.

Anas09:

Johnnydon22, Urahara, hahn, logicboy03, dalama,4kings, theonejabulani, AyeHateGod, Jonbellion, TomHagin, Deicide, hopefulLand, lepasharon, cloudgoddess, Freecocoa, Gombs, Oga Deepsight, Where is Ifeness sef? Weah, Obadiah777, HPaul, AlfaSeltzer, texanomaly, Sirweah, Frank316, Sarassin, Ayoku777, Image123, akintom, Realminz,Joseph1013, LaClickLaBenDin, Promise 10, Felixomor.

Food don't land o!
Atheism will destroy this civilization!

Nice line of thought.

Its just a proof that last last, man will always return to worship something (as someone said)

If you dont worship God,
You will worship animals,
If you dont worship animals,
You will later worship yourself
And if you worship yourself, you will later worship the government.
Who worships the government will later worship the antichrist.
Who is the antichrist?
The devil .

There are no middle grounds.

shadeyinka:


Food don't land o!
Atheism will destroy this civilization!

Why have you ignored the only sensible comment on your thread so far; AgentofAllah's comment?

---

Anas09:
Where is hopefullandlord? This man here said, animals are homosextuals and incestuous, and since they evolved from them, they should freely sleep with their mothers, Fathers, and siblings.

Just imagine Hopefullandlord with his Atheistic wife and kids. He puts it into his daughters, his sons pits it into his wife. his daughters freely roll with their younger sisters and turn around and roll with their brothers too.

His sons roll with their brothers and turns around and roll with their sisters.

Relations come for visits, the rolling continues. When he feels like it, he rolls with his Dog. (I remember Hopefullandlord saying there's nothing wrong in people rolling with their animals), Yes, he rolls with his dogs and every other family memeber can do it with the Cats too.

And when they are feeling Gay, they all put a porn Video and start the rolling in his sitting room. Rolling around.

This is the Atheistic Utopian society that these Athiests are envisaging.

Satanism, Satanism, Satanism, Satanism.

Hahahahahahahahhahahahahaha


Are you kidding me? Well, let them answer if homosexuality is OK and why inbreeding isn't.

LambanoPeace:



Hahahahahahahahhahahahahaha


Are you kidding me? Well, let them answer if homosexuality is OK and why inbreeding isn't.

tell me why Paedophilia is not OK using quotes from your Bible

tell me where your god abolished slavery in the bible

tell me the punishment for raping virgins according to your Bible

societal laws sheets on any divine law

Religion has always existed . Even the Pre-Adamites were religious , as far as 300,000 thousand years ago, they practiced what is called urreligion .A from of natural religion or natural theology the type the deists practice . Even the Pre-Adamites with their low intelligence did understand that nature had a creator . Urreligion was said to be of divine origin , it was monotheistic in nature though arguable . It then progressed into animism then organized religion which came with polytheism and used as a tool for exploitation and mass control purposes .

We have seen atheists assent to incest and bestiality

Incest : https://www.nairaland.com/3202859/nairaland-atheists-incest-right-wrong

Bestiality :https://www.nairaland.com/3246878/nairaland-atheists-bestiality-right-wrong

AgentOfAllah:
Admittedly, religion, much like culture, promotes certain evolutionarily advantageous traits in terms of norms and taboos. Yet, you're wrong to attribute things you lack an understanding of to theism. Many old religions are silent on endogamy, yet incest has always been a social taboo in societies where these archaic religions were practiced.
This makes it clear that religion and culture are merely secondary reinforcers of our aversion to incestuous relationships. In fact, this aversion isn't just human, there is insurmountable evidence that it is panmammalian (see Pusey, A. and M. Wolf (1996). "Inbreeding avoidance in animals." Trends in Ecology & Evolution 11(5): 201-206.).

Clearly, the underlying common denominator here is that incest avoidance is patently a consequence of natural selection. Murray R.D. has addressed this exhaustively in his peer reviewed article (see Murray, R. D. (1980). "The evolution and functional significance of incest avoidance." Journal of Human Evolution 9(3): 173-178.). In his conclusion, he suggests that:
"...the primary function of incest avoidance is rooted in the origins of biparental reproduction in that it serves to maximize genetic variability necessary for adaptation. In accord, the human incest taboo is likely an extension of this biological predisposition, which does not exclude its incorporation in a multitude of additional social functions that have been addressed previously by several authors (Levi
Strauss, 1970; Slater, 1959)."
Obviously, from a natural selection viewpoint, pregnancy (that is, reproductive viability) is the natural factor from which the morality of mammalian aversion to inbreeding is derived, not any culture/religion. So you can't just whimsically assume it is ruled out and then proceed to debunk a hypothetical argument.

That said, having consensual sex with your family members will not cause any kind of far reaching damage to society, nor will it destroy civilisation (except your definition of civilisation has got something to do with sexual practices).

To answer your 3-pronged questions on incest (supposing pregnancy is ruled out, like you say):
1) It is an acceptable way of life.
2) It should neither be encouraged nor discouraged.
3) It was implicit in my explanation above, that morality is a by-product of evolution. Incest is no more (im)moral than exogamy.

While you're apt to contemplate the moral dilemmas of incest, be mindful that it is not a topic to be brushed over with partial reflectiveness. For one, it doesn't help to oversimplify complex human behaviours into religion/culture/morality; and it sure as hell helps to understand the role of cognitive bias in your musings and thought processes.

Finally, atheism has no stance on incest! You may find many atheists opposed to it, as you may find ones favourable towards it. The only stance of atheism (and all atheists) is that there is no evidence for god. The clue is in the definition of the word "Atheist".

First of all, we need to agree on something regarding atheism. Atheism is not by definition a disbelief in God or gods. That is the foundation of atheism and not a final position as there are atheists who disbelieve in God or gods but believe in spirits and reincarnation and...everything that God or gods are which is spirit.

Atheism is a foundation which other things are built on. If the foundation is that they lack belief in God or gods then what is permissible to be built on such a foundation which would still hold to their core belief yet make them comfortable which is why there are different kinds and classes of atheists in the world even here on nairaland.

If an atheist says homosexuality or incest is alright as long as both are adults and its based on mutual agreement then this is like a direct affront to the position of God whom they disbelieve. If they do not believe in God then they also by extension want to assert this by also seeing nothing wrong with those things God abhors otherwise that would mean they are okay with Gods idea of morality.

However if you say that in some nations homosexuality is permitted or even bestiality or perhaps incest as the focus is simply for you to do what makes you happy but does that make it right?

Anas09 painted a very vivid picture in her comment and a mind with a conscience and morals would either be repulsed at the thought of it or seriously think about it.

Not everyone is aware of the problems inbreeding may cause and in fact it does not always cause problems as both parties can have perfectly healthy genes but does that make it right is the question? Is there nothing inherently wrong with it? can you tell me?

Ranchhoddas:
Why have you ignored the only sensible comment on your thread so far; AgentofAllah's comment?

---

They all pretended as if it didnt exist, smh for these guys

AgentOfAllah:
Admittedly, religion, much like culture, promotes certain evolutionarily advantageous traits in terms of norms and taboos. Yet, you're wrong to attribute things you lack an understanding of to theism. Many old religions are silent on endogamy, yet incest has always been a social taboo in societies where these archaic religions were practiced.
This makes it clear that religion and culture are merely secondary reinforcers of our aversion to incestuous relationships. In fact, this aversion isn't just human, there is insurmountable evidence that it is panmammalian (see Pusey, A. and M. Wolf (1996). "Inbreeding avoidance in animals." Trends in Ecology & Evolution 11(5): 201-206.).

Clearly, the underlying common denominator here is that incest avoidance is patently a consequence of natural selection. Murray R.D. has addressed this exhaustively in his peer reviewed article (see Murray, R. D. (1980). "The evolution and functional significance of incest avoidance." Journal of Human Evolution 9(3): 173-178.). In his conclusion, he suggests that:
"...the primary function of incest avoidance is rooted in the origins of biparental reproduction in that it serves to maximize genetic variability necessary for adaptation. In accord, the human incest taboo is likely an extension of this biological predisposition, which does not exclude its incorporation in a multitude of additional social functions that have been addressed previously by several authors (Levi
Strauss, 1970; Slater, 1959)."
Obviously, from a natural selection viewpoint, pregnancy (that is, reproductive viability) is the natural factor from which the morality of mammalian aversion to inbreeding is derived, not any culture/religion. So you can't just whimsically assume it is ruled out and then proceed to debunk a hypothetical argument.

That said, having consensual sex with your family members will not cause any kind of far reaching damage to society, nor will it destroy civilisation (except your definition of civilisation has got something to do with sexual practices).

To answer your 3-pronged questions on incest (supposing pregnancy is ruled out, like you say):
1) It is an acceptable way of life.
2) It should neither be encouraged nor discouraged.
3) It was implicit in my explanation above, that morality is a by-product of evolution. Incest is no more (im)moral than exogamy.

While you're apt to contemplate the moral dilemmas of incest, be mindful that it is not a topic to be brushed over with partial reflectiveness. For one, it doesn't help to oversimplify complex human behaviours into religion/culture/morality; and it sure as hell helps to understand the role of cognitive bias in your musings and thought processes.

Finally, atheism has no stance on incest! You may find many atheists opposed to it, as you may find ones favourable towards it. The only stance of atheism (and all atheists) is that there is no evidence for god. The clue is in the definition of the word "Atheist".

This is some deep information you're dropping here. I recommend that the op should research up and follow his references.

thanks AgentofAllah.

hopefulLandlord:


tell me why Paedophilia is not OK using quotes from your Bible

tell me where your god abolished slavery in the bible

tell me the punishment for raping virgins according to your Bible

societal laws sheets on any divine law

If there were absolutely no societal laws in existence would you carry out any of the above you listed? If Yes, why?

^^ I've made it a point to ignore this monicker because I strongly suspect it's someone that said I shouldn't quote him again that's using another monicker to eat his cake and have it

hopefulLandlord:
^^ I've made it a point to ignore this monicker because I suspect it's someone that said I shouldn't quote him again that's using another monicker to eat his cake and have it

excuse me?

^Login with your main monicker and let's talk if you're not who I'm suspecting you to be

hopefulLandlord:
^Login with your main monicker and let's talk

Main moniwhat? Is something the matter? Who might you be taking me for please? Is there another moniker like mine out there?

availableisme:


First of all, we need to agree on something regarding atheism. Atheism is not by definition a disbelief in God or gods. That is the foundation of atheism and not a final position as there are atheists who disbelieve in God or gods but believe in spirits and reincarnation and...everything that God or gods are which is spirit.

Atheism is a foundation which other things are built on. If the foundation is that they lack belief in God or gods then what is permissible to be built on such a foundation which would still hold to their core belief yet make them comfortable which is why there are different kinds and classes of atheists in the world even here on nairaland.

If an atheist says homosexuality or incest is alright as long as both are adults and its based on mutual agreement then this is like a direct affront to the position of God whom they disbelieve. If they do not believe in God then they also by extension want to assert this by also seeing nothing wrong with those things God abhors otherwise that would mean they are okay with Gods idea of morality.

However if you say that in some nations homosexuality is permitted or even bestiality or perhaps incest as the focus is simply for you to do what makes you happy but does that make it right?

Anas09 painted a very vivid picture in her comment and a mind with a conscience and morals would either be repulsed at the thought of it or seriously think about it.

Not everyone is aware of the problems inbreeding may cause and in fact it does not always cause problems as both parties can have perfectly healthy genes but does that make it right is the question? Is there nothing inherently wrong with it? can you tell me?

People are naturally not attracted to members of their family, the same way we are naturally averse to suicide or mass murder. That is why he said that religion or culture are simply secondary regulators against such behaviour. We are evolutionarily primed to see them as wrong. That's his argument.

You ought to read AgentofAllah's post again. But this time slowly. And thoughtfully.

availableisme:


First of all, we need to agree on something regarding atheism. Atheism is not by definition a disbelief in God or gods. That is the foundation of atheism and not a final position as there are atheists who disbelieve in God or gods but believe in spirits and reincarnation and...everything that God or gods are which is spirit.

Atheism is a foundation which other things are built on. If the foundation is that they lack belief in God or gods then what is permissible to be built on such a foundation which would still hold to their core belief yet make them comfortable which is why there are different kinds and classes of atheists in the world even here on nairaland.

If an atheist says homosexuality or incest is alright as long as both are adults and its based on mutual agreement then this is like a direct affront to the position of God whom they disbelieve. If they do not believe in God then they also by extension want to assert this by also seeing nothing wrong with those things God abhors otherwise that would mean they are okay with Gods idea of morality.

However if you say that in some nations homosexuality is permitted or even bestiality or perhaps incest as the focus is simply for you to do what makes you happy but does that make it right?

Anas09 painted a very vivid picture in her comment and a mind with a conscience and morals would either be repulsed at the thought of it or seriously think about it.

Not everyone is aware of the problems inbreeding may cause and in fact it does not always cause problems as both parties can have perfectly healthy genes but does that make it right is the question? Is there nothing inherently wrong with it? can you tell me?

shadeyinka:
[b]
The answer you give will show us whether civilization will Collapse under the rule of Atheism

Can you please demonstrate how incest will lead to the end of civilization, where did you carry out your observations, how did you test your hypothesis

You and I both know your account is new but the person behind it isn't new

you created this monicker when perhaps your other monickers were banned in the hardmirror thread 26th Nov 2016, your first posts were on that thread

I don't have time for useless back and forth over something trivial, login with your main monicker and I'll be glad to reply you IF you're not whom I'm strongly (evidence by post history) suspecting you are