It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Science tells us why its gross to kiss your sister - did we need a study 4 this?

page: 2
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 26 2007 @ 05:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by infinite8
You obviously didn't read the rest of the post. Adam and Eve are believed to be the first man and woman, by many Christians and Jews alike. This means that their children would have had to have sex amongst each other to populate the earth. That is incest.


So you are taking everything in the Bible atWord -for- Word face value?


For the record, the Bible Only sais they were the First humans cerated by God! Nowhere in the Bible does it say he didn't make more people the same way.

Also, If you want to be litteral, the Bible only mentions Cain and Able by name as che children of Adam and Eve. News flash folks, two brothers can't have a child, you need a women in there somewhere!

Sorry folks, but you all really need to learn to read between the lines a bit!


Tim




posted on Feb, 26 2007 @ 05:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by djmcewen
No one told the ancient Egyptians, the Romans, the Greeks, and many monarchs throughout Europe. It was somewhat problematic in Europe, at least as far as anemia was concerned, but those other rather significant empires (one of which lasted the longest of any - 1000 years) didn't seem to have many problems as a result.

Don't think I'm advocating incest, because I'm not. I will say that "gross" is cultural rather than biological.


Although a good point, you have to remember that nobles married within their families in order to combine/keep lands. All the rich people continued to marry each other to preserve "royal blood", to keep power, and to show good faith between families. Most of these marriages were arranged, it's not like the Queen of Scotland could just choose to marry one of her stable boys for instance, even if she really, really wanted to. A Queen, King, Princess or Baron had a very limited choice in whom they could choose to marry. It's not right, and frankly most of the time no one was absolutely forced into it, but they did have to think about "hmmm... do I want to go on to become King, or do I want to marry my maid and be kicked out of the family for good? Back then that was a BIG deal, since (and this is just an estimate off the top of my head) only about 10% of the world population was truly "wealthy". It is probably still true today. By now all the Monarchies are probably related to each other in one way or another. To my knowledge the marriages weren't a result of 'natural' selection.



posted on Feb, 26 2007 @ 07:14 PM
link   
If you need science to know right from wrong, then you've got a big, big problem. Like transforming Science into a religion...

Why not actually reading some philosophy books, and use your BRAIN to make judgments, instead of relying on what the "other guy", may he be a scientist or a priest, is saying? Everybody has the ability to ascert what is right and wrong, both for themselves and others as well... they only need to trust their reason, and stop submitting to fallacious authorities.



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 01:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Echtelion
If you need science to know right from wrong, then you've got a big, big problem. Like transforming Science into a religion...

This research is not about using science to distinguish right from wrong.

This is about using science to explain why human beings consider incest 'wrong'. Another matter entirely.


Why not actually reading some philosophy books, and use your BRAIN to make judgments tumtitumtitumtitum...

Good advice. Doubtless you follow it yourself. Since you're so concerned about right and wrong, you might try a book called Beyond Good & Evil. It was written by some fellow called Nietzsche, apparently.

[edit on 27-2-2007 by Astyanax]




 
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join