Anyone want to step up and defend consensual incest being legal (but a bad idea)

[Earth]

Gotcha.

[Countess Anya of the North Parish]

I think it has nothing to do with it being legal. No one will know unless you post it in you tube. It comes down to morals.

[Robespierre's Jaw]

I think it has nothing to do with it being legal. No one will know unless you post it in you tube. It comes down to morals.

You know, contrary to popular belief, people have actually known about consensual incest and incest in general long before YouTube was around and well known.

[Countess Anya of the North Parish]

I think it has nothing to do with it being legal. No one will know unless you post it in you tube. It comes down to morals.

You know, contrary to popular belief, people have actually known about consensual incest and incest in general long before YouTube was around and well known.

Yeah but now people are always on the computer so they don't stick there nose in their nabores lives as much.

[Marokai Backbeat]

I hope that was an intentional typo.

[Countess Anya of the North Parish]

I hope that was an intentional typo.

whopse

[Matt Damon™]

Unless we get the technology to genetically alter fetuses in the womb(and removing the risks associated with incest) I'm leery of increasing acceptance for incest. Once we get that technology the game changes.

[Lunar]

Unless we get the technology to genetically alter fetuses in the womb(and removing the risks associated with incest) I'm leery of increasing acceptance for incest. Once we get that technology the game changes.

This isn't about acceptance, this about legality.  I think most people here acknowledge there should be a taboo about this just like there is a taboo against landmines.

How do you answer the critiques in this thread about drinking or smoking during pregnancy (which are probably more heavily associated with genetic defects).  We don't have to be accepting of incest, or pregnant drinkers, but what do we do with them when we discover them?

[A18]

Should be legal. I would not bestow government recognition on incestuous "marriages," though.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Keep the government out of the bedroom.  Once it leaves the bedroom (marriage licenses, kids), I'm fine with it being illegal.

So, what should happen if the neighbors report that two siblings have six kids next door?

Foster family the kids and a fine?

A fine.  They can keep the kids.  The whole point of the law is because incestual intercourses often results in kids with defects.  If you can fix that, I'm fine with it, as long as nobody knows about it.

[Earth]

What is the need for a fine because you've given birth to an incestuous, handicapped child?* It's sure as hell not the government's concern. At least, it shouldn't be. This speaks of a greater underlying mentality of regulation, and unaccepted diaviations of the norm that some of you think should be punished.

I think it's ridiculous to legislate against incest, even if the child is born with some handicap, you don't have to raise them.

*And not all children of incestuous relationships are born 'defective'.

[Lunar]

Good post Earth.

I find this issue amusing since there is no clear-cut answer.  It's a  ridiculous minority of cases, but yet it can easily be used as a strawman or a logical tool to tear holes into any number of socially liberal arguments (that I support).

And I'd like everyone on this thread to discuss the legal extent that incest should be allowed and the penalties.

Stop short of marriage?  If so, WHY?

[Flying Dog]

No law should be made either way. It should, of course, be socially frowned upon and viewed as morally unacceptable. 


Plus, it's just damn sick, dude.

[Lunar]

The question isn't whether it's sick.

The law is forced to make a decision somewhere.  Should it allow kids?  Marriage licenses?  And if not, on what basis should they be refused?

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

The question isn't whether it's sick.

The law is forced to make a decision somewhere.  Should it allow kids?  Marriage licenses?  And if not, on what basis should they be refused?

Based on the same reason polygamy is illegal - it'ss been shown to be unhealthy (or at least that's what some on the forum had argued when I said I thought it could be ok.  Then people gave statistics of spousal abuse, and I was willing to accept polygamy as illegal).

[Lunar]

What's the punishment for Polygamy anyway?

[Person Man]

What's the punishment for Polygamy anyway?

I voted "No", but what are you going to do, anyway? This seems more like a social thing than a criminal thing. Perhaps convicts of this crime should be dealt with in a compassionate, medical way than a hard and fast criminal way.

[Lunar]

What's the punishment for Polygamy anyway?

I voted "No", but what are you going to do, anyway? This seems more like a social thing than a criminal thing. Perhaps convicts of this crime should be dealt with in a compassionate, medical way than a hard and fast criminal way.

I want more than just platitudes though!

Define the exact extent the law should take and why.

[Flying Dog]

The question isn't whether it's sick.

Are you sure? I mean, "sick" is the the reason a lot of things are banned for the basis of being morally reprehensible and uncouth. Just look at some of the state laws in Alabama/Georgia...it being "sick" would be apt reason to ban in plenty of states/counties.

However, I suppose if a child is produced, then the child should be taken away for proper care while the parents are served with a hefty fine and threatened with jail time if another child is produced.

[Person Man]

What's the punishment for Polygamy anyway?

I voted "No", but what are you going to do, anyway? This seems more like a social thing than a criminal thing. Perhaps convicts of this crime should be dealt with in a compassionate, medical way than a hard and fast criminal way.

I want more than just platitudes though!

Define the exact extent the law should take and why.

This is a very tough issue to look into, though. Perhaps no closer than second cousin, unless there is proof that the sexual partners are incapable of producing children. There should also be no recognition of inter-family marriage because it would complicate the legal benefits allowed between the members.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

And if not, on what basis should they be refused?

Because it's sick (thinking more of relationships between very close relatives here). Which isn't, actually, an awful reason to ban something. Another reason, of course, is the link with abuse. There are also serious problems with consent. And so on.

[Dr. Cynic]

I am split on this issue... Really split.

I don't like the idea of standing in the way of two consentual adults in love... But I also know that incest is potentially dangerous for offspring.

I'll err on my libertarian side and say that the government should not stand in the way, although I would hope that they would choose to adopt rather than procreate if they wanted children.

[danny]

The question isn't whether it's sick.

The law is forced to make a decision somewhere.  Should it allow kids?  Marriage licenses?  And if not, on what basis should they be refused?

Based on the same reason polygamy is illegal - it'ss been shown to be unhealthy (or at least that's what some on the forum had argued when I said I thought it could be ok.  Then people gave statistics of spousal abuse, and I was willing to accept polygamy as illegal).

If there's spousal abuse involved why cant just prosecute for that?

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

The question isn't whether it's sick.

The law is forced to make a decision somewhere.  Should it allow kids?  Marriage licenses?  And if not, on what basis should they be refused?

Based on the same reason polygamy is illegal - it'ss been shown to be unhealthy (or at least that's what some on the forum had argued when I said I thought it could be ok.  Then people gave statistics of spousal abuse, and I was willing to accept polygamy as illegal).

If there's spousal abuse involved why cant just prosecute for that?

That's what I said, but some on the forum (and at the time, it was Democrats) argued against polygamy.

[A18]

And I'd like everyone on this thread to discuss the legal extent that incest should be allowed and the penalties.

Stop short of marriage?  If so, WHY?

I would not "outlaw" incestuous marriage; at least, if by that you mean a law forbidding any two people, forming an incestuous couple, from living together in a manner roughly analogous to marriage.

As for state bestowal of marital status, that is a complicated issue. But the institution has normative and cultural significance; I would not have the government "overrule" societal values on this point. In granting marital status to an incestuous couple, the state makes a social statement that this is a morally legitimate relationship.