Mother and son in New Mexico face jail time for incestuous relationship

[Excited Penguin]

No dictionary on earth will define personal morals for you. It's a phrase, not a word. Your thoughts regarding what laws should be about are morals and are personal. Therefore, they are personal morals.

My thoughts regarding what laws should be about are opinions and have nothing to do with morality.

Morals are concerns with the principles of right vs wrong. Laws are legal mandates which in my opinion should protect people from harm and enforce socially constructive responsibilities regardless of what I might consider right or wrong. Laws should be neutral. It's not about any one person's moral compass nor should it be about the majority moral compass.

I find many many things to be morally wrong that do not actually harm anyone and therefore should not be illegal. In many cases I do not believe that stealing is morally wrong but I still agree with it being illegal. I don't know why this is so hard for you to understand.

There's thing about debating with you that's infuriating. It's that instead of disagreeing with me, you instead tell me that I am wrong about my own thoughts or opinions. It's insulting and childish. Don't tell me what I think, as if you would know.

Your opinions regarding laws are of a moral nature and are concerned with morality at an essential level. So yes, they have everything to do with morality. Maybe you should read up on what morality means.

It certainly requires some nuance on one's part to make the connection between morality and laws, so I can argue 'till I'm blue in the face here, I'm not going to make you see it if you're intent on not making that connection.

Laws are never neutral. They reflect the morality of the society in which they are dictated in the case of a perfect democracy, or/and the one of the ruling class in case of an imperfect democracy or other type of governing. It has to be about some moral compass, or we wouldn't have any laws at all. There is no other entity to make up rules for humanity, humans have to make them up on their own, and they do that by consulting their own moral compasses and reaching a mutually beneficial agreement(for the most part).

You can't possibly think anything morally wrong if it doesn't harm anyone in any way. You don't think stealing is morally wrong in some cases, but you still think there should be a law to prevent stealing. That just means you wouldn't choose to enforce those laws in some particular cases, but otherwise would. That's why we have judges.

I'm not telling you what you think, I'm criticizing the way you think and some of your thoughts.