Joy "Most people would frown upon a 45 year old man getting it on with a 19 year old girl"

Unlike you I won't make the absurd and risible claim to know what most people think, but I will tell you categorically that this wouldn't even register as any of my business, let alone raise an objection from me. Why on earth would it?

Joy "We all would not hesitate to say even if two adult consenting brother and sister wanted to hook up, it is wrong"

My but you do love making facile sweeping generalisations, I sense you're lining them up for a reason as well, unsurprisingly as bigots often use the slippery slope fallacy to object to the harmless natural loving relationships of two consenting adults. Siblings are at risk of producing offspring that have a high likelihood of being physically and mentally impaired, but beyond that I can't think of any moral objection. Then again as I've said before, what I find objectionable is hardly a sound basis for morality, in truth only a narrow minded bigot would think their own distaste of something is a sound basis for declaring it immoral.

Joy "We have no problem saying a 40 year old dad should not have even consensual sex with his 20 year old daughter. "

...and down the fallacious slope she goes, again the facile nature of this latest claim in your fallacy is evident in you not even pretending to say why you'd object here.

Joy "We have laws that forbid polygamy, even if consenting. "

Indeed, but not to stop groups of any number of people, of all sexual persuasions and proclivities from making the beast with 2 backs, or any number of backs come to that. Now since again your claim is demonstrable facile, ask yourself why one is illegal, but the other not? As an example of how specious it is for you to cite individual laws as indicators of what is moral, the Nazis for example had a raft of laws that were demonstrably immoral, so care to guess where you're going awry here?

Joy "most people would agree bestiality is wrong, even if the animal is a willing participant. "

Unless you're claiming to be Dr fucking Doolittle, I'm at a loss as how you can infer an animal can give consent, that said you have made a raft of claims to know what most people are thinking, so who fucking knows what other powers you're assigning yourself. You clearly are religious, and are clearly cherry picking religion's archaic morals for the bits that mesh with what you choose to find objectionable, it's hilarious you think we won't notice this bias or the bigotry behind it.

Edited: For grammar, typos and clarity.

"Most people would frown upon a 45 year old man getting it on with a 19 year old girl – such set ups typically receive quite a bit of judgment. "

You better say: " Most ridiculous, sanctimonious, jealous, envious, closed-minded people would frown..." I am a 66 year old man hooked up with a 24 year old man and we rock! His family and friends and my family and friends welcome our relationship and are enthusiastically supportive.

“Morality is a human construct and is entirely subjective”

Actually a quick Google search shows amazing debates between some brilliant minds who have been unable to prove morality is subjective and in fact such opinions have actually been debunked. Even atheist hero Sam Harris admits morality is objective. He simply says that doesn’t mean we need to believe in God. Of course he also can’t demonstrate where said objective morality comes from.