# Should incest be legal?



## euphoria04 (May 8, 2012)

I personally have no interest in it, but I have yet to see a compelling argument against it being legal.

It seems the same attitude is taken toward it as the attitude toward homosexuality in the past, namely people trying to project their personal beliefs and comfort levels on everyone else's lifestyle.


----------



## Sacrieur (Jan 14, 2013)

How do you regulate that sort of thing?


----------



## crimeclub (Nov 7, 2013)

Id say knowingly bringing handicapped people into the world should for sure be illegal.


----------



## euphoria04 (May 8, 2012)

Sacrieur said:


> How do you regulate that sort of thing?


You don't if it's legal.



crimeclub said:


> Id say knowingly bringing handicapped people into the world should for sure be illegal.


Slippery slope. Should we make it illegal for people with genetic disorders to reproduce as well?


----------



## missingno (Sep 29, 2011)

Of course it should be legal. They just shouldn't be allowed to reproduce


----------



## arnie (Jan 24, 2012)

crimeclub said:


> Id say knowingly bringing handicapped people into the world should for sure be illegal.


Birth control is a thing nowadays.

Everyone needs to stop conflating sex with reproduction.

So long as everyone involved is over 18 and a consenting adult, what business does the government have telling us who we can and can't have sex with?


----------



## euphoria04 (May 8, 2012)

likeaspacemonkey said:


> That. I'm actually not aware if it even is illegal. What's illegal? Sex? Just exactly that question. How do you regulate that? You can't. So basically legal or not, it's something that you can do.
> 
> As far as I'm concerned, anything that doesn't affect me negatively should be legal.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_regarding_incest#United_States


----------



## tbyrfan (Feb 24, 2011)

Actually, i'm not entirely sure of my stance on it. But I do think they should be strongly encouraged to use birth control to prevent genetic disorders.


----------



## tbyrfan (Feb 24, 2011)

likeaspacemonkey said:


> It should be fairly obvious. You think a brother and a sister who have sex should go to jail, or pay a fine? I don't think so.
> 
> The second part makes sense if you're into the whole progress of humanity thing.


No, I don't think they should go to jail/pay for it. But I think in any situation where there is a high genetic risk, people should be aware of the consequences. Not sure about laws though. That would be a little too similar to eugenics. I do think, however, that mothers who drink and do drugs while they are pregnant should be punished for intentionally harming their child. That really bothers me.


----------



## crimeclub (Nov 7, 2013)

euphoria04 said:


> You don't if it's legal.
> 
> Slippery slope. Should we make it illegal for people with genetic disorders to reproduce as well?


Of course not, that's a completely different situation.


----------



## euphoria04 (May 8, 2012)

likeaspacemonkey said:


> We agree.
> 
> Now THAT's a nice slippery slope. Punished how?


Jailed? Nothing is black and white, that's for sure. But actions come with consequences, even if the effect isn't ill-intended. You drink and drive and kill someone, you go to jail. Not for being a bad person, but for being impulsive and a hazard to the well being of society.

I guess even I'm not sure where I stand with regards to incest. :|


----------



## euphoria04 (May 8, 2012)

crimeclub said:


> Of course not, that's a completely different situation.


That's exactly what people with genetic disorders are doing though, "knowingly bringing handicapped people into the world".

You said that should be illegal. Do you stand by that statement or no?


----------



## euphoria04 (May 8, 2012)

likeaspacemonkey said:


> Not at all. It's the same exact situation.
> 
> So if you saw a clearly pregnant woman drinking and smoking, you'd have to report it to the police?


Hmm... I guess so. You would consider calling the police if you saw a woman downing hard alcohol while driving right? The result might not be as instantaneously catastrophic with the pregnant woman as the driver, but it can last a lifetime.


----------



## tbyrfan (Feb 24, 2011)

likeaspacemonkey said:


> Now THAT's a nice slippery slope. Punished how?


I'm not entirely sure. I don't know enough about law to have a well-informed stance on it. I think they should at least have to go to rehab for the substance abuse, though.


----------



## euphoria04 (May 8, 2012)

likeaspacemonkey said:


> I wouldn't be obligated to do so. I'd stop her from driving, like most would. But she hasn't commited a crime.
> 
> Also, you can't compare a fetus to a person. Unless you're religious, in which case this conversation would get a bit too hard for me.


Driving under the influence is against the law though. It's also illegal to have an open container in a moving vehicle.

Fair point about the fetus. This is why things aren't black & white... different definitions, and applying laws on a somewhat arbitrary basis. I'll have to think about it... it's a grey area, but do you agree from a moral standpoint it's a pretty awful thing to do?


----------



## scarpia (Nov 23, 2009)

If it's not illegal it could lead to beastiality and almost everyone hates beastiality.


----------



## AceEmoKid (Apr 27, 2012)

I don't think incest should be criminalized. That being said, I don't think the government should have any say in who we choose to consent to have sex with. Laws ideally should be in place to protect us, not strip away someone's rights in order to ensure some other population's sense of moral "security."

Now, if we were talking about related issues: Comprehensive, accessible sex education is a must, just as a proper biology lesson is


----------



## tbyrfan (Feb 24, 2011)

likeaspacemonkey said:


> The question isn't if a pregnant woman drinking or doing drugs is illegal, the question is if it *should be* illegal? Same situation with the rehab thing. That should be enforced by law? I absolutely agree that the people that surround and care about this person should do what they can to convince her she needs to stop this behaviour. But should it be a law?


It's hard to say, because even though a lot of people think it's wrong, it's still the woman's own body. So where do we draw the line, you know? How much choice should someone have?


----------



## euphoria04 (May 8, 2012)

likeaspacemonkey said:


> I'd say that a woman that knows certain behaviours will be detrimental for a person that she's bringing to the world, and still goes ahead and does it, yeah, it's morally a bad thing. But it's still her body, the only one thing a person really naturally owns, isn't it? Isn't it also morally wrong to take away someone's freedom to do with their body as they please? Does her body stop being hers during pregnancy?


Like the drinking & driving example, it goes back to the doing what you please with your body _so long as_ it doesn't impinge on the life of another human being. Which of course gets into the debate about a fetus deserving human rights or not again...

I do think it should be against the law until the mother gets the abortion, if she plans on getting one. Whereas with the abortion debate the fetus never feels the suffering because it never experiences life, the fetal alcohol child will have to deal with the ramifications for their entire life. Surely this condition makes us reconsider our approach right?


----------



## millenniumman75 (Feb 4, 2005)

No, it should not be legal.


----------



## euphoria04 (May 8, 2012)

likeaspacemonkey said:


> Which leads back to reproduction between people with genetic disorders, or reproduction between genetically related folks. You'd then agree with crimeclub's point? Should it be illegal for them to have kids as they'd very likely be bringing a handicapped child to the world, and that child would have to deal with those ramifications his/her entire life?


Undecided.

Absolutes vs. conditionals and all dat. I don't think any law can absolutely cover a moral position.


----------



## euphoria04 (May 8, 2012)

likeaspacemonkey said:


> Which leads back to reproduction between people with genetic disorders, or reproduction between genetically related folks. You'd then agree with crimeclub's point? Should it be illegal for them to have kids as they'd very likely be bringing a handicapped child to the world, and that child would have to deal with those ramifications his/her entire life?


I want to expand on this with another post. What qualifies as a genetic disorder? At what point does a genetic disorder become so debilitating that life isn't worth living? Surely that's a subjective question right there? Should people with underbites not reproduce? Only the genetic elite?

You can take everything to the extreme, as you can see; and nothing is definitive, it's more along the lines of majority rules. But you, and I, and most non-alcoholics and non-druggies would agree that a pregnant woman shouldn't drink or do drugs, as such an action exhibits a gross disregard for a future person's well being. I certainly think that should be against the law, regardless of if the incest law exists or not.


----------



## CheekyBunny (Nov 10, 2013)

I don't think anyone for any reason should have their reproductive rights stripped, sorry.


----------



## Subject 1 (Oct 30, 2013)

I would only say yes due to the potential of producing offspring with defects.
Contraception is not 100% guaranteed to stop a couple having a child.

If the likelihood of producing children with defects is the same as between couple who are not blood relatives then I would see no problem with incest.


----------



## zstandig (Sep 21, 2013)

first cousins are already legal.

Personally I don't think the gov should waste time punishing consenting adults for having sex. As long as they don't have messed up kids I don't see anything wrong with keeping it in the family...but it's gonna cause so psyche problems.


----------



## DeeperUnderstanding (May 19, 2007)

No. That's like asking, should beastality be legal? 

You get deformed children if there is incest. It's literally screwing the gene pool. If you want mutants like in the Wrong Turn movies, so be it, but that's not something that attracts me.


----------



## Bluestar29 (Oct 26, 2013)

No. I'll protest against it if it ever is considered.


----------



## scooby (Jun 24, 2009)

DeeperUnderstanding said:


> No. That's like asking, should beastality be legal?
> 
> You get deformed children if there is incest. It's literally screwing the gene pool. If you want mutants like in the Wrong Turn movies, so be it, but that's not something that attracts me.


I don't see how it is like asking if bestiality should be legal. Animals can't give consent.


----------



## arnie (Jan 24, 2012)

Subject 1 said:


> I would only say yes due to the potential of producing offspring with defects.
> Contraception is not 100% guaranteed to stop a couple having a child.
> 
> If the likelihood of producing children with defects is the same as between couple who are not blood relatives then I would see no problem with incest.





DeeperUnderstanding said:


> No. That's like asking, should beastality be legal?
> 
> You get deformed children if there is incest. It's literally screwing the gene pool. If you want mutants like in the Wrong Turn movies, so be it, but that's not something that attracts me.


No, you get deformities if an incestuous couple has kids. However, sex does not equal reproduction.

What if the woman is older than 45 and marries her brother? Why should that be illegal? There is absolutely 0 chance of children. What if the man had a vasectomy or was infertile or the woman had a hysterectomy at some point. What about gay couples? Surely there's no chance of children there. Why should we deny these people that right to be with who the choose just because society doesn't like it?

The law shouldn't criminalize the sex itself. It should only prosecute those who actually have children that are the product of incest.


----------



## AmandaMarie87 (Apr 24, 2013)

As long as the couple promises not to have and/or can't have any children together I say yes.


----------



## Digital Dictator (Nov 24, 2011)

Hillbillies practice incest.

Do you honestly want to support their cause?


----------



## Zeppelin (Jan 23, 2012)

No. It's gross, and wrong.


----------



## nullptr (Sep 21, 2012)

I had to marry the emperor of britannia to his niece, without it the empire would have gone through more claim wars. Though I regret that weird messed up decision, the engine allows me to do so, and historically it wasn't unusual.


----------



## Whatev (Feb 6, 2012)

YOLO?


----------



## komorikun (Jan 11, 2009)

Yes, but not parent-child.


----------



## DeeperUnderstanding (May 19, 2007)

Third cousins can be legal, and certain step child or sibling relationships.

Although I find that incredibly screwed up. I had a cousin once who I thought was kind of hot, but the idea of possibly mutated children stopped me from it.


----------



## arnie (Jan 24, 2012)

What if you were separated at birth and didn't know she was your sister?


----------



## monotonous (Feb 1, 2013)

i dont think it's illegal to begin with


----------



## arnie (Jan 24, 2012)

monotonous said:


> i dont think it's illegal to begin with


False.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_regarding_incest#United_States

Get a little frisky with your sister and it's 25 years to life.


----------



## Kalliber (Aug 18, 2012)

I'm against it..just wtf


----------



## Digital Dictator (Nov 24, 2011)

Should pedophilia be legal? What if both partners give consent? Nothing wrong with that, right? It's just *L.O.V.E.*!


----------



## JakeBoston1000 (Apr 8, 2008)




----------



## inerameia (Jan 26, 2012)

Sure. I don't believe we can tell people not to have sex. We can look down on it, but criminalizing it is absurd.


----------



## inerameia (Jan 26, 2012)

Thundersteel said:


> Should pedophilia be legal? What if both partners give consent? Nothing wrong with that, right? It's just *L.O.V.E.*!


I do believe the topic is about incest, not pedophilia.

incest =/= pedophilia


----------



## euphoria04 (May 8, 2012)

likeaspacemonkey said:


> I really doubt any of the ones who voted "no" would take actual legal action against an incestous couple. It's just that an alarm is going off in their brains, as it's one huge taboo subject in this day and age. They're reading *"INCEST INCEST INCEST INCEST INCEST? YES OR NO?"*
> Maybe I'm wrong though. Maybe some of them really would imprison or fine or something these people.


Same views of disgust as homosexuality in the past imo, it's their knee jerk reaction like you said. There's nothing naturally abnormal about it, seeing as it's observed in the animal kingdom.

As for pedophilia, that gets into the realm of consent and emotional maturity, and is a completely different thing. I'm definitely not for that.


----------



## moloko (May 1, 2013)

Leaning towards no, just can't make a definite decision because I don't know exactly how genetics work when two close relatives have children. Leaning towards no because it's obvious that there are problems regarding that. You can see that in small rural areas where cousins marry cousins and the percentage of mentally retarded offspring is way higher than in urban areas. Legalizing marriage and forbidding them from having children is stupid, in my opinion. On the other hand, this also falls under the category of personal liberty, and since I'm all for that I can see pros to it, even though I personally disagree.


----------



## Alone75 (Jul 29, 2013)

Oh crap, I just realised I misread this as "should incest be illegal" and I voted yes. Lots of east Asian first cousin married couples have disabled children here http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/h...ities-due-to-cousin-marriages-every-year.html , so it's a strain on the health service. Well the natives here used to "keep it in the family a lot as well in the old days" erm it should be illegal. 
But saying that, I don't personally care if brothers and sisters, cousins ect can't resist each other. Just don't bring kids in to it.


----------



## Digital Dictator (Nov 24, 2011)

euphoria04 said:


> As for pedophilia, that gets into the realm of consent and emotional maturity, and is a completely different thing. I'm definitely not for that.


 What if, say, a sixteen-year-old and a thirty-year-old are both conscious about their age difference, and still agree to be together? Where do we draw the line on the legal age limit for teens to date adults?


omofca said:


> I do believe the topic is about incest, not pedophilia.
> 
> incest =/= pedophilia


I'm positive that making incest legal is going to eventually lead to more people seeing the good in pedophilia. I'm not bothered one bit about homosexuality or interracial couples, but incest and pedophilia are way out the door for me. I don't support breaking traditional family values further down. It's only going to make things more complicated, and there's the risk of giving birth to mutated or deformed children.


----------



## scooby (Jun 24, 2009)

Thundersteel said:


> What if, say, a sixteen-year-old and a thirty-year-old are both conscious about their age difference, and still agree to be together? Where do we draw the line on the legal age limit for teens to date adults?
> 
> I'm positive that making incest legal is going to eventually lead to more people seeing the good in pedophilia. I'm not bothered one bit about homosexuality or interracial couples, but incest and pedophilia are way out the door for me. I don't support breaking traditional family values further down. It's only going to make things more complicated, and there's the risk of giving birth to mutated or deformed children.


 What about incest couples that are sterile, unable to have children? Or gay incest couples? What about if a couple plans to use birth control their whole relationship and aborts their child if the birth control failed to work?


----------



## euphoria04 (May 8, 2012)

Thundersteel said:


> What if, say, a sixteen-year-old and a thirty-year-old are both conscious about their age difference, and still agree to be together? Where do we draw the line on the legal age limit for teens to date adults?


Arbitrarily. Some people emotionally mature when they're 15 years old, some people when they're 30. The law can't possibly account for individuals and their development, so 18 is established as a general age limit (or whatever it is in the individual state).


----------



## moloko (May 1, 2013)

scooby said:


> What about incest couples that are sterile, unable to have children? Or gay incest couples? What about if a couple plans to use birth control their whole relationship and aborts their child if the birth control failed to work?


So, legalize only for those who can't/won't have children and keep illegal to all others who do want? This in itself would illegal. Everyone is equal before the law. It's one of the basis of democracy. You can't discriminate.


----------



## Digital Dictator (Nov 24, 2011)

moloko said:


> So, legalize only for those who can't/won't have children and keep illegal to all others who do want? This in itself would illegal. Everyone is equal before the law. It's one of the basis of democracy. You can't discriminate.


Pretty much this.


----------



## scooby (Jun 24, 2009)

moloko said:


> So, legalize only for those who can't/won't have children and keep illegal to all others who do want? This in itself would illegal. Everyone is equal before the law. It's one of the basis of democracy. You can't discriminate.


Im not saying to make it legal for only them. Im pointing out that theres other things to consider with incest before prohibiting all forms of incest due to 1 reason. Are you against incest between any sort of relatives, or just siblings and or parent/child. Also isnt there a higher risk of having abnormailities in offspring if the mother is an older woman as well? Do you think that should be illegal?


----------



## moloko (May 1, 2013)

I don't have a definite opinion on this. I'm just pointing out that it can't be legalized for just a part of the population, and I don't think it is possible to deny people to have children. So, if incest is to be legalized, the possibility of those people having children comes in the package. It's all or nothing.


----------



## scooby (Jun 24, 2009)

I definitely agree with the all or nothing. I just think there needs to be a lot of thought put into issues like these before prohibiting it. Whether we can stop 2 consenting adults to have a romantic relationship or not.


----------



## moloko (May 1, 2013)

likeaspacemonkey said:


> But what would you do with an incestous couple? If one day you find out your good ol' pal John and his girl Mindy (lol I don't know why exactly) are brother and sister. What happens next?


Apply the law and fine them, jail them, whatever happens in this case. I guess it differs from country to country. There's the possibility of some stuff to be illegal, but decriminalized, like is the case of some soft drugs. In that case, they would be fined.



scooby said:


> I definitely agree with the all or nothing. I just think there needs to be a lot of thought put into issues like these before prohibiting it.


Definitely. That's why I can't make a decision on this. If it turns out that children born out of a incestuous relationship don't suffer any more health risks than the others, go ahead and legalize it, in my opinion. It would be pretty ****ed up in my eyes, but who I am to tell people how to live their lives? Live and let live. As long as a third party isn't affected by it, people can do whatever they want in order to be happy.


----------



## moloko (May 1, 2013)

Decriminalize it then. It would be a pretty hypocritical solution, but that way people wouldn't be jailed for it. They would pay a fine. There could also be the possibility of it being decriminalized, but the law not being enforced. Which means, it's illegal but if you do it nothing happens to you. Which is stupid, but I know of cases when it happened in the past for other reasons (abortion).


----------



## nubly (Nov 2, 2006)

Ick, no incest should be illegal. That's just sick.


----------



## Digital Dictator (Nov 24, 2011)

likeaspacemonkey said:


> That already happens. We all know it's a blurry line, and I doubt it's a line that'll ever go away.


So, let's let adults marry teenagers. If they (the younger partner) consents, we shouldn't tell them what they can and can't do, right?


likeaspacemonkey said:


> How?


I don't know how to explain, but I feel there are going to be less walls put up.


----------



## Digital Dictator (Nov 24, 2011)

likeaspacemonkey said:


> I didn't say that. That situation there is harder for me than the situation presented by this thread. Also I don't think anyone mentioned marriage, I thought we were talking about sex.


Marriage or sex; you know what I meant to say.


----------



## shinycaptain (Nov 17, 2013)

euphoria04 said:


> I personally have no interest in it, but I have yet to see a compelling argument against it being legal.
> 
> It seems the same attitude is taken toward it as the attitude toward homosexuality in the past, namely people trying to project their personal beliefs and comfort levels on everyone else's lifestyle.


What about genetics? Breeding between closely related family members e.g. brother and sister hugely increases the risk of genetic problems in the child. Which is why almost all societies in history have outlawed incest.


----------



## arnie (Jan 24, 2012)

shinycaptain said:


> What about genetics? Breeding between closely related family members e.g. brother and sister hugely increases the risk of genetic problems in the child. Which is why almost all societies in history have outlawed incest.


Once again: *sex does not equal reproduction.* There are lots of people that have sex with zero chance of babies.
:no


----------



## scooby (Jun 24, 2009)

I'm curious to know if the people who say it's wrong because of genetics are also against reproduction/relationships between people who have a genetic disorder. Should that also be illegal?


----------



## fineline (Oct 21, 2011)

hmmm hope i dont put my foot in my mouth here. might!

incest. having sex with someone in your family. i dont really understand how this is a debate? 

is it as if there are alot of people in the world who are in a relationship with someone in their family and wish that incest was legal so they can have sex with their partner?

dont compare it to homosexuals being persecuted and not being able to marry. i think that is different. if someone finds people of the same sex attractive, that is fine. such individuals should be able to marry. IMO.

but you can never really have a "family" with someone who is already in your family...i dont at all understand the argument. is this really even an argument ?? lol. i wonder if the internet would even help me.

ah, i see. i had to do a google search to find out that people wanting to have sex with their sisters and marry them and whatnot is actually a "thing" ...


----------



## fineline (Oct 21, 2011)

oh, and who is to stop a consenting mail and female from the same family wanting to have kids the old fashion way...

and if they arent aware of the dangers of doing so? lack of education.

and if they "dont believe in" the dangers? (such like some people refute global warming, which is a scientific fact.) 

religion: (eg. "God will make my child healthy.")

and if they dont care about the dangers?
(eg. "I will love my child no matter what defects he/she is born with.")

and short of surgery, abstinence is the only birth control that is 100% fool proof. all other birth control methods are only 99.9% fool proof. so that means...

they may conceive by accident.

gotta face facts. sex is fun and all...but its for making babies. accidents are going to happy between mary lou and her brother billy joe.


----------



## Fruitcake (Jan 19, 2012)

I agree with the above poster. Homosexuality is different because it's right and incest is wrong. If we let people get away with banging their own brothers then it won't be long before we have paediatricians running rampant with sequined foot-long edible dildos and just jamming them up whichever hole of whomever species they want.


----------



## moloko (May 1, 2013)

scooby said:


> I'm curious to know if the people who say it's wrong because of genetics are also against reproduction/relationships between people who have a genetic disorder. Should that also be illegal?


It's an interesting question worth of putting thought on it. But... Two wrongs don't make a right.


----------



## Donnie in the Dark (Mar 15, 2011)

You can't stop people if they are above consenting age, well, not if you are a liberal, which I would guess at least 80% of people here are.


----------



## fineline (Oct 21, 2011)

likeaspacemonkey said:


> That's not the point.
> 
> I'd be interested in seeing your answer to scooby's question below.


hmm, i may get knocked for this, but i would say its a bit selfish. the two adults with genetic disorders having a child together, and pass that disorder on to their offspring. they are bring into the world a child who will potentially and very likely have a very rough time in life.

being born with a defect of some kind, depending on what it is, is a lifelong battle. and speaking of life, the childs lifespan may be significantly reduced from a genetic disorder.

but having said that..i suppose the adults should just have a serious talk before they plan everything..they need to know exactly what will and what can happen by having a child together.

i just dont think its right...if i had a genetic defect, i would not take part in making a baby.

my genes gave me alcoholism and psychiatric disorders. i was predisposed for it, and now i have it. knowing that, i decided some years back that i would never have a son. i just couldnt do it knowing he or she would have to struggle like me.

check my original post about incest to see where i left off the conversation/debate.


----------



## fineline (Oct 21, 2011)

likeaspacemonkey said:


> I read it. I thought it wasn't clear enough. When you say "there shouldn't be a discussion" you're wrong. There can always be a discussion. We're just talking. That's why the question.
> 
> I'd disagree with "I don't think it's right", cause I think that's a bit too absolute of a statement. But other than that, I agree. It's selfish, and intelligent people living in an overpopulated world, with lots of orphans waiting to be adopted while we're at that, I think if someone has a *serious* genetic defect, it'd be a good thing if they didn't have a genetic offspring. Same case with incest then.
> 
> But from there to saying it should be illegal, or that it's "wrong" even, I think there's a long way. So you'd back up the argument that incest is "wrong"?


i think this is a question of morality. where do we, as a culture, draw the line?

is there no limit to what we allow? or is the "new wave" society going to be total and complete freedom. where do we draw the line? do "we" (government representatives of the people) have the right to "draw the line" at all?

I dont want to come off as being gross or anything, but just let me make an example.

What if someone says: "I want to have intercourse with that horse. And I also desire to form a relationship with that horse, even though it isnt a person. I still feel a deep connection to it, and would like to marry."

Too much, you say? But why? Zoophelia. has a huge following. and is also ILLEGAL and considered animal abuse.

Shall people start saying they feel oppressed by the laws that make doing such a thing illegal? and then, do we as a culture and society say "ok, lets legalize that."

its a brave new world people...im not sure who will draw the line...and where it will be drawn.


----------



## scooby (Jun 24, 2009)

A horse can't give consent. It has no understanding of a romantic relationship or marriage that humans have.


----------



## JakeBoston1000 (Apr 8, 2008)

I had sex with my first cousin. I wonder if I broke the law. it was a long time ago so I think im all set.


----------



## bsd3355 (Nov 30, 2005)

I'm leaning towards being it should be illegal because it is active practice of actively bringing babies into a world who are prone to having health issues. The baby didn't ask to be brought into a world ****ed up, and the rest of the population deals with increasing chances of inbreeding due to it being legal, which means more deformities and health problems, and like I said, it likely has bad implications on our social system if it becomes popular enough. Doesn't sound like a good idea to me, but that's from my limited viewpoint on the matter... maybe if there was a way to make sure the baby came out healthy; i think that would sway my opinion perhaps...

if i was political i guess you can call me a "liberal" and i'm an atheist too, so religion isn't affecting my decision, but knowingly bringing in a baby into the world without it's permission to maybe being ****ed up and unhealthy is pretty ****ed up if you ask me... you are somewhat gambling with another person's health and well-being for life, which then has consequences on society as a whole too


----------



## fineline (Oct 21, 2011)

i dont think there are any laws against any two consenting adults having intercourse with each other. and my answer is, there shouldn't be. it is something that would be impossible to morally enforce. and obviously sterilizing people at birth who have genetic defects is NOT a moral thing to do. no such law will ever exist. 

and after some thought, i agree that incest should be perfectly legal. although i dont MORALLY agree with it, that means nothing when it comes to the law. legally? yes, go right ahead and **** your sister. i find it confusing and odd that anyone would do this, and i think it only tears away at the moral fabric of our society. because our society is made up of familys. familys that teach their young values...and morals...

these would be things that are quite obviously to be considered righteous and "good" so please dont screw with me. example. it is "wrong" and "immoral" to kick a homeless person in the face. we know that to be true

the farther we go in allowing certain "behavior" to be allowed in our society, the further we become less NATURAL to this planet. we are mammals, with higher thought processes, but lets not get ****ing carried away holy ****. i would draw the line for you. for everyone. the **** is going too far.


----------



## bsd3355 (Nov 30, 2005)

likeaspacemonkey said:


> What would be your position on this?


I already said it. From my limited understanding on the topic, I would think it is wrong to actively take a chance of bring an unhealthy baby into the world, which of whom did not ask to be messed up. The baby is the one who has to feel the affects of being messed up, not the parents. And even further, if inbreeding was popularized as something normal amongst our society then it encourages the same instances of offspring who had no choice in the matter to be born deformed or sick. I am fine with people's free choice, but as soon as it affects someone else negatively, that is where I draw the line, especially if the person affected did not ask for it.

Once again, this is coming from my current understanding on the subject, which is limited. This is my current stance from that viewpoint.


----------



## fineline (Oct 21, 2011)

dang you got me thinking so deep. its fun 

i was going to write something about why i think it is immoral to have intercourse with someone that is of the same bloodline...but you know what? i have no good reason!

i simply disagree with it. i, personally, find it to be absurd. disgusting. wrong. family is family. lovers are lovers. keep it that way.

that is my opinion and believe we have reached the end of our individual debate on the matter. well played sir. 

now its someone elses turn lol. i would love to discuss morals with u. im on facebook right now if u want to hit me up. just PM on here with the details


----------



## PoutineDelight (Nov 2, 2013)

In all fairness, why shouldn't it be legal? Although within the same vein, you could agure that if a 12 year old knows what sex is and what it requires, then having sex with a much older person shouldn't be illegal either, should it now?
Laws regarding sex are iffy and can be a matter of debate for the most part. It almost comes down to personal opinion.
And no, before anyone gets stupid and thinks I condone pedophilia, I don't, I'm simply making a point.


----------



## ThatGuy11200 (Sep 3, 2012)

bwidger85 said:


> I'm leaning towards being it should be illegal because it is active practice of actively bringing babies into a world who are prone to having health issues. The baby didn't ask to be brought into a world ****ed up, and the rest of the population deals with increasing chances of inbreeding due to it being legal, which means more deformities and health problems, and like I said, it likely has bad implications on our social system if it becomes popular enough. Doesn't sound like a good idea to me, but that's from my limited viewpoint on the matter... maybe if there was a way to make sure the baby came out healthy; i think that would sway my opinion perhaps...
> 
> if i was political i guess you can call me a "liberal" and i'm an atheist too, so religion isn't affecting my decision, but knowingly bringing in a baby into the world without it's permission to maybe being ****ed up and unhealthy is pretty ****ed up if you ask me... you are somewhat gambling with another person's health and well-being for life, which then has consequences on society as a whole too


What if they have IVF and any fetuses with genetic diseases are filtered out?


----------



## moloko (May 1, 2013)

Thumbs up for this thread. Open discussion instead of deaf people talking to each other.


----------



## bsd3355 (Nov 30, 2005)

ThatGuy11200 said:


> What if they have IVF and any fetuses with genetic diseases are filtered out?


Then they should have at it! In this instance, no one is getting hurt, and thus I see no reason why it is wrong.


----------



## hoddesdon (Jul 28, 2011)

This is ridiculous. Homosexuality should also be not accepted.


----------



## bsd3355 (Nov 30, 2005)

hoddesdon said:


> This is ridiculous. Homosexuality should also be not accepted.


Why?


----------



## Zeeshan (Sep 4, 2011)

hoddesdon said:


> This is ridiculous. Homosexuality should also be not accepted.


I DONT have a problem with it

I do however have a problem with an homosexual person allowed access to adopting a child


----------



## bsd3355 (Nov 30, 2005)

Zeeshan said:


> I do however have a problem with an homosexual person allowed access to adopting a child


Why?


----------



## hoddesdon (Jul 28, 2011)

bwidger85 said:


> Why?


The Bourbons practised this sort of thing and they ended up in a bad way genetically.


----------



## scooby (Jun 24, 2009)

I'm confused. Gay people passing on their genetics to adopted kids?


----------



## bsd3355 (Nov 30, 2005)

hoddesdon said:


> The Bourbons practised this sort of thing and they ended up in a bad way genetically.


OK. Yeah, I don't know why I asked you why because I agree with you there. I don't think it's right in that instance either. Durr moment, me!


----------



## moloko (May 1, 2013)

hoddesdon said:


> The Bourbons practised this sort of thing and they ended up in a bad way genetically.


 Habsburg jaw

By the way, I don't mix incest with homosexuality. One has nothing to do with the other.


----------



## moloko (May 1, 2013)

likeaspacemonkey said:


> I think homophobia should not be accepted.


Checkmate.


----------



## hoddesdon (Jul 28, 2011)

likeaspacemonkey said:


> I think homophobia should not be accepted.


Homophobia is directed at the person, whereas what I said was about the practice. Unless you think that that practice defines the person. Do you think that SA defines you?


----------



## WillYouStopDave (Jul 14, 2013)

As long as everyone is over 18 and there is no intent to reproduce. Of course, people are stupid so if you get a brother and sister or something, they're going to get the bright idea that they need kids. From there, genetic train wreck.


----------



## rawrguy (Mar 29, 2008)

Where do you think the first humans came from? Certainly they were related and the human race came out (no pun intended) just fun duhh .


----------

