TrenGoblin

But forcing someone to go get help when they haven't even done anything morally wrong. Is immoral in my opinion. It should always be up to person if they want to get help or not.

I never said that its morally okay for pedophiles to causal molest pre pubescent because pre pubescent children can not consent to sex. They do not know the long term social ramifications of sex.

What I said was hypothetically speaking if a pedophile is just having fantasies in his head about molest pre pubescent children but never actually molest or watching actual CP then I don't think that they're a morally bad person. Because having fantasies in your head isn't hurting anybody as long as you don't actually follow through with.

If someone has fantasies in their head of killing someone but never actually kills anyone then they're morally not a bad person because the fantasies that they have in their head isn't hurting anybody.

But it's still possible for a brother and a sister to be in an incestuous relationship with each other without having a child together if the brother gets a vasectomy and the sister get her tubes tied.

Also what about two twin sisters who are both 18 years old who are in an incestuous relationship with each other what is your argument against them from doing so. They have no chance of having children together.

It's totally fine if think incest between siblings who are both consenting adults is gross and weird but it is not morally wrong because what they're doing isn't morally wrong as long as they do not have any kids together. Because what they're doing is hurting anybody.

Someone using herion is not a morally bad person as long as they're not going out of their to harm other people. If all they're doing is harming themselves then I think it's morally okay for them to use heroin.

Pedophiles are only morally bad person if they go out of their way to molest pre pubescent children or watch actual CP.

Hypothetically speaking if a pedophile is just having fantasies about pre pubescent children and are not going out of their way to molest them or watch actual CP then in my opinion I don't think they're morally a bad person because what they're doing isn't hurting anybody.

I believe everything is morally neutral unless I am given a valid reason as to why it's morally wrong. I don't get any of my morals from the law or from a religious book.

If you want to use heroin that is morally okay because what you are doing is only harming yourself and not other people. So it's perfectly fine if you want to shorten your life.

Society back in the day thought homosexualitly was mental illness and that people should seek therapy for it but then later realized that even though homosexualitly is a mental illness that is weird gross and not natural it's still morally okay for gay people to get married because what they're doing isn't harming anybody if it's consensual.

So the incest being considered a mental illness by society argument isn't a valid argument as to why incest between a brother and a sister who are both consenting adults is morally wrong or not.

Okay then I guess that I'm wrong about incest between siblings being common but I still don't think it's morally wrong as long as they're both consenting adults and they do not have any kids together.

Pedophilia however is morally wrong because pre pubescent children don't understand the long term social ramifications of sex which makes it impossible for them to truly be able to consent.

True but my guess is that there are also alot of people who are in an incestuous relationship with their siblings that are just keeping it a secret between them because of the social stigma.

Because people post about that on reddit alot their is literally entire subreddit dedicated to it.

If someone wants to smoke and get cancer that's morally okay for them to do so in my opinion because what they're doing isn't hurting anybody but themselves. So if someone would rather smoke cigarettes everyday and die at the age of 40 I think they should have the right to do that in my opinion.

But even couples who are not related to eachother can also have a child with massive birth defects. And it is possible for a perfectly healthy brother and a sister to have a healthy child together that doesn't have any birth defects. So even if a brother and a sister did have a child together I still think that they should have the right to marry each other. Because what they're doing is completely harmless and isn't hurting anybody.

I agree that most couples that aren't related to eachother will say at first they don't children and later change their mind.

But most people who are in an incestuous relationship with their siblings already know that if they have a child together there is a chance that they could have a child with birth defects of course the likelihood of them having a child with birth defects is low and even couples that are not related to each other can still have a child with birth defects. So hypothetically speak if a couple who are not related to each other took a test that showed they have very high risk of having a child with birth defects. Then they should also not be allowed to have any kids together in my opinion.