what is wrong

would something still be considered morally wrong if we eliminate all the possible negative consequences. it's a big IF, and there's no way of proving that consequences can be reduced to none. but then again, religion still stands without evidence, so this theory should too.

something is considered wrong for many reasons, albeit because it goes agaisnt culture, religion, our conscience, or perhaps because of its negative impact inflicted upon us, and those around us.

here's an example. a pair of siblings of different gender, both above the age of consent had sex. they took precautionary measures to make sure it would be impossible to result in having babies. both kept it a secret. both mutually agreed to it. by any means, if real life consequences are eliminated...is incest wrong? why?

it's against human nature? against religions' teachings? against cultural values? if so, why and how?

can morality exist solely based on logic or does it still require abstract preferences?