The concept of prohibited incest, does not come about until long after the flood. The logical reason for this is that Adam and Eve were perfect, having perfect genetic makeup, and therefore procreating would not be subject to the genetic defects that came later. As time progressed, those defects accumulated, so procreation of close relatives eventually became a biological problem.
What about the moral implications about incest?
What moral implications? Where would that have come from?
So, if the only moral implications for incest derive from the implications of birth defects in children, what is your take on the morality of incest between consenting adult close relatives when child birth is not possible?
That's a really interesting question. Having not thought on that, my answer will be strictly off the cuff...
My take, and it's mine alone and subject to correction, is that if child birth is truly not possible, then there is no possibility of harm - assuming we're talking about adults acting in freedom, and it's a life long commitment. Someone may be along to correct me, but I can't think of a more appropriate answer.
I know. It sounds strange - but there it is.
