Talk Elections

I vote for options 10-19.

     Given that all of these involve consenting adults, all of the above.

Can't see any point to having a gender based distinction for incest.  Only the lack of a gender neutral term would require mentioning both the relationship between an uncle and a nibling as well as an aunt and a nibling.  Only the fact that nibling is not a commonly used word might make doubling these again for niece and nephew worth doing.

Is it incest only if the participants involved are genetically related?  I always thought so. 

Uncle and nephew.  ONLY uncle and nephew.

:P

No blood-relatives with less than 2 steps away.

2nd cousins yes - step-situations (creepy, but yes). 

i voted for the lesbian ones

NOTA...incest is creepy...

This thread just makes me think of Terrence and Phillip; presumably I'm not the only one.

All the step siblings and all the first cousins.

I voted all but options four and five.

Intresting that you left out father-son and mother daughter

12, 13, 15, and 19

All of them that are non-blood. I guess the blood ones that are in the same generation. But it shouldn't be legal for, say, a father to marry his daughter. That's just begging creepers to raise their kids in a sick way. You can't just say consenting adults can do it because it allows the authority to manipulate the submissive in the relationship. Sickos will do that. Otherwise, yeah, I don't really care.

That was by accident.

for legal recognition, 6-19 (those outside a nuclear biological family), but none of these relationships should be illegal for private purposes.

All of the above.

Government should not be legislating marriage. Let churches decide who they want to marry.

I can't see marriage between immediate family members like Mother/son, Uncle/nephew, ect, as "healthy" for a child's upbringing.

None. It is just really gross. Yes, my opinion does not really have a hard concrete reason as to why but it just shouldnt be legal. However, you are suppose to mix your genes with other genes. Not keep your family genes.  bleh! just gross.

The government should not have the capacity to regulate marriage at all. Let marriage be a concern of the church and the legal side of current marriage sorted with civil contracts available to all.

()

I vote NOTA. Obviously the state cannot stop anyone from having consenting relationships, but anyone who enters such relationships most likely has another more serious problem the state should punish. Like, Josef Fritzel.

This is distinct from gay marriages, since no offspring is possible with them. Here an offspring from incest is extremely likely to have very serious problems.


Which is exactly why almost all the European families became full of retards and genetic misfits which greatly contributed to their downfalls.

What about gay incest?

The beauty of that chart is a pleasant surprise whenever it crosses my path.