The incest taboo is a universal rule, that is, it is present in all human societies for which there is an ethnographic record. It consists in prohibiting the occurrence of sexual and marital relations between close relatives, as occurs between parents and children and siblings. Its existence would not have resulted from genetic problems, as many imagine, but, above all, from socio-cultural issues, such as the need for social relations guided by reciprocity and alliance between families. If it were a prohibitive rule determined biologically, there would certainly be a taboo of incest among non-human primates, felines, canids, cattle, etc. Therefore, kinship is a relationship constructed socially and culturally, as it happens, just to exemplify, between parents and adopted children.
The recognition and classification of relatives varies from one society to another and there are the most complex rules on incest. An example of this is society the father's brother is called the uncle, the paternal uncle. In certain indigenous societies he is also considered a father and, therefore, his children are brothers (not cousins) of his brother's children. In such cases, the recognition of who is a brother implies knowing with which relatives it is forbidden to have sexual and marital relations. There is, however, the registration of marriage between brothers in ancient Egyptian royalty and among the Incas, among others, but they are exceptions to the rule.
Budget surplus is the situation when revenue exceeds expenses
Answer:
It asserts that Americans as a whole (and not as members of their respective colonies) are a distinct “people.” To “dissolve the political bands” revokes the “social compact” that existed between the Americans and the rest of “the People” of the British commonwealth, reinstates the “state of nature” between Americans and the government of Great Britain, and makes “the Laws of Nature” the standard by which this dissolution and whatever government is to follow are judged. “Declare the causes” indicates they are publicly stating the reasons and justifying their actions rather than acting as thieves in the night. The Declaration is like the indictment of a criminal that states the basis of his criminality. But the ultimate judge of the rightness of their cause will be God, which is why the revolutionaries spoke of an “appeal to heaven”—an expression commonly found on revolutionary banners and flags. As British political theorist John Locke wrote: “The people have no other remedy in this, as in all other cases where they have no judge on earth, but to appeal to heaven.” The reference to a “decent respect to the opinions of mankind” might be viewed as a kind of an international public opinion test. Or perhaps the emphasis is on the word “respect,” recognizing the obligation to provide the rest of the world with an explanation they can evaluate for themselves.
