WEIGHT: 55 kg
Bust: 3
One HOUR:60$
NIGHT: +80$
Services: Swinging, Striptease pro, Tantric, Sex lesbian, Games
We rely on the support of readers like you. Please consider supporting TheTorah. By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use. Ancient Near Eastern law collections do not unequivocally prohibit a son from marrying his father's wife, and neither do modern incest laws. And yet, the Bible repeats this prohibition multiple times. Six reasons why. Leviticus β18 lists female kinβwhether consanguines related by blood [1] or affines related by marriage βwith whom a man is forbidden to have sex.
As Eve Levavi-Feinstein argues, the law almost certainly applies even after the marriage was dissolved by divorce or death, otherwise the act is forbidden anyway as a form of adultery. Several ancient Near Eastern law collections prohibit sex with a mother.
For example, the Laws of Hammurabi 18 th cent. But if his father is still living, it is an unpermitted sexual pairing. This contrasts with the biblical prohibition, which is absolute, applying to all sons with all wives.
The contrast we see here between biblical law and other ANE law collections in this case is reflected in modern incest laws. A quick survey of US incest laws, for instance, shows that in some states e.
Leviticus 20 contains a list of prohibited sexual pairings among other things similar to Leviticus 18, including seven categories of incest, with specific punishments given for each infraction arranged according to the severity of the penalty, beginning with death penalty acts.