Incest should be legal between consenting adults.

[Zelder]

I think that if it's between two consenting adults, sexual relations/intercourse between two related people should be legal. I'd actually also go as far to say that they should be allowed to get married if they want. They aren't hurting anybody; right now incest is a victimless crime. I see no reason it should be illegal. As with the whole gay rights debate, you should be allowed to love who you want. In Germany there was a case of two adult siblings who were caught having sex, and they were jailed for years. I think this is completely unfair. Your thoughts?

Remember I'm talking about consenting adults here.

[Jess]

Yes, I definitely agree. I usually find it a bit...disturbing but it's none of my business

[TheDeepestDepths]

I disagree, I'm all for the expression of sexuality but incest will usually (98% of the time) create a genetic disorder or mutation because both the child's inherited gene pools are extremely similar and will clash, creating a chromosomal deletion or translocation. It is illegal to bring a mutated child intentionally or an extremely-likely mutated child (90% or higher) into the world according to the Humanitiy &. Genetics act of 1982. It's a measure to protect the unborn children.

Homosexuality is different as it is unlikely to result in deformed babies.

[laurakoller0815]

i think TheDeppestDepths expressed very good. i agree with. well most of the times we cant decide where the love gonna fall but we can decide how we deal with it every time.

[britishboy]

I disagree, I'm all for the expression of sexuality but incest will usually (98% of the time) create a genetic disorder or mutation because both the child's inherited gene pools are extremely similar and will clash, creating a chromosomal deletion or translocation. It is illegal to bring a mutated child intentionally or an extremely-likely mutated child (90% or higher) into the world according to the Humanitiy &. Genetics act of 1982. It's a measure to protect the unborn children.

Homosexuality is different as it is unlikely to result in deformed babies.

100% agree also it is DISGUSTING it's your own blood

[Harry Smith]

100% agree also it is DISGUSTING it's your own blood

Many people see heterosexual sex as disgusting, that doesn't mean anything in the law if something is seen as disgusting

[britishboy]

Many people see heterosexual sex as disgusting, that doesn't mean anything in the law if something is seen as disgusting

this is incest not gay stuff and it is illegal in your beloved Britain and want to see how rank it is? go up to some stranger and say to him 'you got your sister pregnant', you will get beaten up. also when gays have sex there is ni risk of a baby, in incest the baby will be deformed and have to say hes a inbred

[TheDeepestDepths]

100% agree also it is DISGUSTING it's your own blood

I don't think it's disgusting it's just sex, I just think that it's irresponsible and am glad it's banned because of the baby issue. If there was zero risk of pregnancy then who am I to judge? Have at it if that's what you want.

[Emerald Dream]

I'm not so sure about this one.

There are probably many cases where incestual relationships involve two adults, but one (or both) of the "consenting" partners may have gone through a long period of emotional abuse...to the point where their sense of right-from-wrong has been skewed.

In a cases like that - I wouldn't call that either "love" or "consentual."

[Harry Smith]

this is incest not gay stuff and it is illegal in your beloved Britain and want to see how rank it is? go up to some stranger and say to him 'you got your sister pregnant', you will get beaten up. also when gays have sex there is ni risk of a baby, in incest the baby will be deformed and have to say hes a inbred

gay stuff? Good language their. I'm comparing it to society view, and saying that your 'rule of thug' doesn't work. Just because you don't like it that doesn't mean that it's bad. I'm sure I would get beaten up if I told someone that I'm gay.

So then do you believe that down syndrome adults shouldn't have sex?

[ovoxo23]

I think that if it's between two consenting adults, sexual relations/intercourse between two related people should be legal. I'd actually also go as far to say that they should be allowed to get married if they want. They aren't hurting anybody; right now incest is a victimless crime. I see no reason it should be illegal. As with the whole gay rights debate, you should be allowed to love who you want. In Germany there was a case of two adult siblings who were caught having sex, and they were jailed for years. I think this is completely unfair. Your thoughts?

Remember I'm talking about consenting adults here.

I agree. Though, I'm I wouldn't ever participate in incest, I do think that if you're adults and can make your own decisions, then you should be allowed.

[britishboy]

I don't think it's disgusting it's just sex, I just think that it's irresponsible and am glad it's banned because of the baby issue. If there was zero risk of pregnancy then who am I to judge? Have at it if that's what you want.

I agree with the pregnancy thing but personally? I think its also disgusting

[uglyinsideandout]

I disagree, I'm all for the expression of sexuality but incest will usually (98% of the time) create a genetic disorder or mutation because both the child's inherited gene pools are extremely similar and will clash, creating a chromosomal deletion or translocation.

This is incorrect. Incest increases the likelyhood of birth defects by 7% to a total of 9%. I just had a very long talk with a doctor about this as it's something I was really worried about. Also incest doesn't create a genetic disorder, it just lets whatever is already present come through, so 2 people that don't have genetic disorders themselves are still pretty unlikely to pass what they don't have to a child.

But whatever, believe whatever you want, that's what people seem to do best.

[TheBigUnit]

I think that if it's between two consenting adults, sexual relations/intercourse between two related people should be legal. I'd actually also go as far to say that they should be allowed to get married if they want. They aren't hurting anybody; right now incest is a victimless crime. I see no reason it should be illegal. As with the whole gay rights debate, you should be allowed to love who you want. In Germany there was a case of two adult siblings who were caught having sex, and they were jailed for years. I think this is completely unfair. Your thoughts?

Remember I'm talking about consenting adults here.

Victimless crime?!?! He stole my post vvvvvv

I disagree, I'm all for the expression of sexuality but incest will usually (98% of the time) create a genetic disorder or mutation because both the child's inherited gene pools are extremely similar and will clash, creating a chromosomal deletion or translocation. It is illegal to bring a mutated child intentionally or an extremely-likely mutated child (90% or higher) into the world according to the Humanitiy &. Genetics act of 1982. It's a measure to protect the unborn children.

Homosexuality is different as it is unlikely to result in deformed babies.

...^^^ homosexuality is different because there will be NO babies..unless theres a sex change



Anyway maybe incest shouldnt be illegal but no way anyone will really accept it morally

[teen.jpg]

I agree with you. I think that it's kind of hypocritical for us to fight for LGBT rights, and then do the EXACT SAME THING that straight used to do to us, to insestual people.

If that's what they wanna do, why can't they? Besides, aren't you supposed to love your child no matter what?

**P.S. Incest and Inbreeding are two VERY different things. You guys seem to be confused by that.**

[tovaris]

It is not a victemles crime, especely for children of such an arangement.

[Zelder]

100% agree also it is DISGUSTING it's your own blood

Just because you find it disgusting doesn't mean it should be illegal. If we made laws like that homosexuality would be illegal.

[Lost in the Echo]

While in my opinion, it is wrong, and disgusting , if it is between 2 adults, it should be legal. The way I see it, is do whatever you want to do. As long as your decision does not affect me, I don't care.
But, the problem I do see with this, is in most cases of incest, the child will have some serious birth defects. But hey, if someone wants to take that risk, then let them. It's their life.

[Walter Powers]

Yeah it's disgusting but the main reason I'd be opposed to legalizing it is the risk of creating a mutated child. I'm also worried making it legal could send the message to young people it's okay to do it. You'd have young boys flirting with their sisters...it'd cause problems within the family structure.
While in my opinion, it is wrong, and disgusting , if it is between 2 adults, it should be legal. The way I see it, is do whatever you want to do. As long as your decision does not affect me, I don't care.
But, the problem I do see with this, is in most cases of incest, the child will have some serious birth defects. But hey, if someone wants to take that risk, then let them. It's their life.


No it's not just their life...what about the baby that's born mentally disabled and with 12 fingers?



this is incest not gay stuff and it is illegal in your beloved Britain and want to see how rank it is? go up to some stranger and say to him 'you got your sister pregnant', you will get beaten up. also when gays have sex there is ni risk of a baby, in incest the baby will be deformed and have to say hes a inbred

Exactly. Hey, doesn't the British monarch sometimes do incest to keep power in the family? Are you oppose to them doing that? Just curious.

[teen.jpg]

Yeah it's disgusting but the main reason I'd be opposed to legalizing it is the risk of creating a mutated child. I'm also worried making it legal could send the message to young people it's okay to do it. You'd have young boys flirting with their sisters...it'd cause problems within the family structure.



No it's not just their life...what about the baby that's born mentally disabled and with 12 fingers?

You do know that incest doesn't mean having a child? That's inbreeding you're thinking of, which is an entirely different subject.

[Harry Smith]

Yeah it's disgusting but the main reason I'd be opposed to legalizing it is the risk of creating a mutated child. I'm also worried making it legal could send the message to young people it's okay to do it. You'd have young boys flirting with their sisters...it'd cause problems within the family structure.



No it's not just their life...what about the baby that's born mentally disabled and with 12 fingers?

As said before,your thinking of inbreeding. If they use protection and it's too consulting adults then what reason do you have to oppose it?

[Walter Powers]

You do know that incest doesn't mean having a child? That's inbreeding you're thinking of, which is an entirely different subject.
As said before,your thinking of inbreeding. If they use protection and it's too consulting adults then what reason do you have to oppose it?


Just because you don't want a child doesn't mean you won't get one, Birth control and condoms isn't guranteed effective.

[teen.jpg]

Just because you don't want a child doesn't mean you won't get one, Birth control and condoms isn't guranteed effective.

I think you're just trying to find any reason to hate it because you find it disgusting.

[Walter Powers]

I think you're just trying to find any reason to hate it because you find it disgusting.

You don't find it disgusting? Would you do your sister if she was attractive?

It's disgusting for a reason. Our creator, or evolution, or whatever you believe in probably made it seem that way to us for a reason, namely it's unhealthy.

[saea97]

As long as two siblings (whether M/M, M/F, F/F etc.) can love each other in that way, then of course incestuous relationships/intercourse/marriage should be legal for them; it would be a tragedy if it weren't, just as it's a tragedy that bigots stop gays from fully expressing their love for each other in the majority of the world. As for mutations and inbreeding (the risk of which is much smaller than is portrayed by some here): they're adults, they'll know the risks and respond accordingly. With the effectiveness of birth control, that counterargument just doesn't have enough weight. Additionally, if incest wasn't such a taboo, such couples would feel more comfortable speaking to a doctor beforehand to learn the risks.

As an aside, the prevalence of the word "disgusting" in this thread is, in itself, disgusting.

[teen.jpg]

You don't find it disgusting? Would you do your sister if she was attractive?

It's disgusting for a reason. Our creator, or evolution, or whatever you believe in probably made it seem that way to us for a reason, namely it's unhealthy.

Who the fuck am I, you, or anyone to TELL someone who to love or not? Exactly.

Sure, I don't think it's the best choice to make, but am I going to sit here, act high and mighty, tell them they're disgusting, and tell them what they can and can't do? NO.

And please, don't go dragging this into your personal beliefs. It's completely irrelevant to the topic. If it was up to every single person's personal beliefs on issues, we'd have no progress.

As long as two siblings (whether M/M, M/F, F/F etc.) can love each other in that way, then of course incestuous relationships/intercourse/marriage should be legal for them; it would be a tragedy if it weren't, just as it's a tragedy that bigots stop gays from fully expressing their love for each other in the majority of the world. As for mutations and inbreeding: they're adults, they'll know the risks and respond accordingly. With the effectiveness of birth control, that counterargument just doesn't have enough weight. Additionally, if incest wasn't such a taboo, such couples would feel more comfortable speaking to a doctor beforehand to learn the risks.

As an aside, the prevalence of the word "disgusting" in this thread is, in itself, disgusting.

My faith in humanity is slowly being restored.

[Gigablue]

I disagree, I'm all for the expression of sexuality but incest will usually (98% of the time) create a genetic disorder or mutation because both the child's inherited gene pools are extremely similar and will clash, creating a chromosomal deletion or translocation. It is illegal to bring a mutated child intentionally or an extremely-likely mutated child (90% or higher) into the world according to the Humanitiy &. Genetics act of 1982. It's a measure to protect the unborn children.

But, the problem I do see with this, is in most cases of incest, the child will have some serious birth defects. But hey, if someone wants to take that risk, then let them. It's their life.

also when gays have sex there is ni risk of a baby, in incest the baby will be deformed and have to say hes a inbred

Yeah it's disgusting but the main reason I'd be opposed to legalizing it is the risk of creating a mutated child.

No it's not just their life...what about the baby that's born mentally disabled and with 12 fingers?

Doesn't anyone on this site know anything about genetics. Incest does not guarantee birth defects. In fact, it only slightly increases the risk of genetic anomalies, and only in certain cases.

The reason incest can cause genetic disorders is that close relatives are more genetically similar. For example, if you are a carrier for a genetic disease, there is a 50% chance that your sibling will also be a carrier. The further away you go, the lower the risk. For example, your first cousin would have a 12.5% chance of sharing the allele with you.

Suppose you were a carrier of a recessive genetic disease, and you had a child with a sibling. There is a 50% chance that they carry the same allele. If they do, there is a 25% chance that the child would be homozygous for that allele and have the disease. Thus there is a total 12.5% chance that the child would have that genetic disease. With a cousin, the risk is 3.125%.

However, very few people are carriers for serious genetic diseases. If both partners are carriers, they shouldn't have children. However, this applies in all relationships, not just familial ones. There is still a chance that unrelated people would both be carriers.

Chromosomal anomalies, another common type of genetic anomaly, are no more common in incestuous relationships.

In short, there is a slightly elevated risk of genetic diseases in incestuous relationships, but it is very small. Also, this can be avoided by genetic testing.

On a side note, if we wanted to protect babies from birth defects, we would ban anyone carrying a genetic disease from reproducing. We would also have to stop mothers over 35 from having children, since they have an elevated risk of having a child with chromosomal abnormalities. If you want to ban incest, you also logically should ban the groups mentioned above.

[Jess]

Just because you don't want a child doesn't mean you won't get one, Birth control and condoms isn't guranteed effective.

What if they avoid sexual intercourse all together? No children will be born then.

[Left Now]

Completely disagree with incest to be legal!

Family marriages are risky a lot themselves,even when they are not incest!But if they be incest,the risk will be greater!Think about it;What will happen to the child which is going to born because of an incest relation!

[teen.jpg]

Completely disagree with incest to be legal!

Family marriages are risky a lot themselves,even when they are not incest!But if they be incest,the risk will be greater!Think about it;What will happen to the child which is going to born because of an incest relation!

Nevermind the fact that you aren't 100% coherent, we've already touched on all of those reasons why it's "wrong", so your arguement is pretty invalid.

[randomnessqueen]

even outside of incest, there are certain people who will have children with disorders, and noone would tell them they are not allowed to have children because of it.
whats wrong with having a disorder? not all disorders cause suffering to the individual, and even for those which do dont think so singlepointedly, they arent the only individual being affected. the parents will still be glad they have a child, they wont disown it for being different and will take care of it.

[Left Now]

Nevermind the fact that you aren't 100% coherent, we've already touched on all of those reasons why it's "wrong", so your arguement is pretty invalid.

Ah,yeah.

[Sugaree]

100% agree also it is DISGUSTING it's your own blood

"Waaah that offends/disgusts me! We better ban it so no one does it!"

Does it never occur to you that, when you ban something, nine times out of ten people just have a reflex to want to do it more? So what if a brother and sister decide to have sex on a semi-regular basis? If they consent and are of legal age, the law shouldn't have anything to do with a private relationship.

[Harry Smith]

Just because you don't want a child doesn't mean you won't get one, Birth control and condoms isn't guranteed effective.

So should people with down syndrome or genetic disorders be banned from sexual intercourse?

[Rina]

I personally find the thought of family actually being together disgusting. And the arguments for it are mostly, "People can do what they want!" Which is rather stupid because no people can't do what they want. Then again, there isn't much of a case against it either except a slightly higher chance of genetic issues. It's just the way most Americans have been raised and thus we are meant to find it disgusting. Just like age gaps and the like.

This is purely something about morals and you can't really decide if it's right or wrong...

Also, comparing Homosexuality to Incest isn't correct, imo. Sexuality isn't a choice. Incest is something you have to consent to and thus you are choosing to do so.

[CharlieHorse]

What if a related couple got married and adopted a child?

[teen.jpg]

Sexuality isn't a choice.

Being in love isn't either. I'm sure nobody would choose to face a taboo as strong as incest unless they were truly in love.

[Rina]

Being in love isn't either. I'm sure nobody would choose to face a taboo as strong as incest unless they were truly in love.

But acting on it is. I can fall for someone, but acting on that love is something you choose to do.

Just like I don't choose to be angered by something, it's an involuntary reaction. But I can choose or not to choose to act on that anger which can lead to consequences that I know of.

[Walter Powers]

So should people with down syndrome or genetic disorders be banned from sexual intercourse?

No, however I would hope that they realize what they'd be doing to a potential baby and have compassion.

[removeddddd]

Just because you don't want a child doesn't mean you won't get one, Birth control and condoms isn't guranteed effective.

Abort! Abort!


on a serious note i agree with you...kinda. If it was made legal then it might get exploited, i mean what would stop a parent from indoctrinating their child into loving them( in a sexual way) or their sibling? The child wouldn't grow up and make his/her own unbiased decision on the matter. but if that didn't happen and they are both willing and give consent then it isn't any of my business.

[britishboy]

oh if theyre both consenting it must be fine! what about a 5 year old and a 65 year old?

Completely disagree with incest to be legal!

Family marriages are risky a lot themselves,even when they are not incest!But if they be incest,the risk will be greater!Think about it;What will happen to the child which is going to born because of an incest relation!

aahhh the words of wisdom! 100% agree!


-merged double post. -Emerald Dream

[teen.jpg]

oh if theyre both consenting it must be fine! what about a 5 year old and a 65 year old?

That bullshit and you know it.

[britishboy]

That bullshit and you know it.

no if all that matters is wether theyre consenting pedophilia should be made legal also

[teen.jpg]

no if all that matters is wether theyre consenting pedophilia should be made legal also

You do realize that a child isn't consenting in pedophilia, right? And that the main point in the TITLE OF THE THREAD is consenting ADULTS.

You really cannot be that oblivious.

[britishboy]

You do realize that a child isn't consenting in pedophilia, right? And that the main point in the TITLE OF THE THREAD is consenting ADULTS.

You really cannot be that oblivious.

a child can say I want sex, and my point is if you can fuck your siblings why not kids?

[teen.jpg]

no if all that matters is wether theyre consenting pedophilia should be made legal also

a child can say I want sex, and my point is if you can fuck your siblings why not kids?

You're ridiculous.

[britishboy]

You're ridiculous.

is that the best argument?

[teen.jpg]

is that the best argument?

Why should I even bother? You're whole arguement (or lack thereof) has just been nonsense.

[Rina]

You're ridiculous.

Honestly, while he's using ages vastly different and wouldn't be up for argument, I kinda get what he's saying.

Someone who's fourteen knows the risks of sex and knows about the precautions, so technically saying anyone can do whatever they want as long as it does not affect another can be applied to this situation. Does the person understand? Yes. Do they know the risks? Yes. Can a fourteen year old have sex with a thirty year old? According to people in this thread, yes. Because she consented. Why put an age on it? It's seen as wrong for a 14 year old and a 30 year old to be together, but it's okay for a mother and a son as long as they're 18 or older? There's less risk, even if by a measly two percent, than there is with a mother and son relationship.

[teen.jpg]

Honestly, while he's using ages vastly different and wouldn't be up for argument, I kinda get what he's saying.

Someone who's fourteen knows the risks of sex and knows about the precautions, so technically saying anyone can do whatever they want as long as it does not affect another can be applied to this situation. Does the person understand? Yes. Do they know the risks? Yes. Can a fourteen year old have sex with a thirty year old? According to people in this thread, yes. Because she consented. Why put an age on it? It's seen as wrong for a 14 year old and a 30 year old to be together, but it's okay for a mother and a son as long as they're 18 or older? There's less risk, even if by a measly two percent, than there is with a mother and son relationship.

We've been focusing on the adults this whole time, I don't see how people went off-topic into children in the first place. Thats not what the thread was asking.

[britishboy]

Why should I even bother? You're whole arguement (or lack thereof) has just been nonsense.

interesting how you cant counter the argument

Honestly, while he's using ages vastly different and wouldn't be up for argument, I kinda get what he's saying.

Someone who's fourteen knows the risks of sex and knows about the precautions, so technically saying anyone can do whatever they want as long as it does not affect another can be applied to this situation. Does the person understand? Yes. Do they know the risks? Yes. Can a fourteen year old have sex with a thirty year old? According to people in this thread, yes. Because she consented. Why put an age on it? It's seen as wrong for a 14 year old and a 30 year old to be together, but it's okay for a mother and a son as long as they're 18 or older? There's less risk, even if by a measly two percent, than there is with a mother and son relationship.

thank you!

[Rina]

We've been focusing on the adults this whole time, I don't see how people went off-topic into children in the first place. Thats not what the thread was asking.

It's because the main argument for incest being legalized is because it's people's private relationships and people shouldn't get involved, and as long as it's consensual, it's okay. And if we're gonna speak about private relationships and consent, then it could broaden the field to things like a sister falling in love with her younger brother, but because he's not legal and she is, people would probably start calling it wrong. He's old enough to know, understand, and thus consent, but apparently it won't be legal unless he's an adult? Also, if both the sister and brother are underage but in love is another thing to be considered...because by thread title, that'd still be illegal, apparently.

That's just how I see it...

[teen.jpg]

It's because the main argument for incest being legalized is because it's people's private relationships and people shouldn't get involved, and as long as it's consensual, it's okay. And if we're gonna speak about private relationships and consent, then it could broaden the field to things like a sister falling in love with her younger brother, but because he's not legal and she is, people would probably start calling it wrong. He's old enough to know, understand, and thus consent, but apparently it won't be legal unless he's an adult? Also, if both the sister and brother are underage but in love is another thing to be considered...because by thread title, that'd still be illegal, apparently.

That's just how I see it...

We could only push so far with accepting something like incest before people call us crazy, which is why it would be legal for adults. That should be a fair enough deal for incestuous people.

interesting how you cant counter the argument



thank you!

You never started an arguement? I'm just not going to acknowledge you because honestly you're kind of all over the place.


-merged double post. -Emerald Dream

[saea97]

oh if theyre both consenting it must be fine! what about a 5 year old and a 65 year old?

A five year-old doesn't give consent in the same way a 65 year-old does, and you know it.

It is precisely to prevent such exploitation that an age of consent even exists. Of course, it's not an exact science to say "Well, because you're 15 your consent for this 19 year old is illegitimate and you can't be trusted to give consent" whereas a 16 year old (in Britain) would be legally able to give consent, but there has to be a cutoff point. Arguing for the legality of incestuous relationships between consenting adult individuals is different, because those people are judged old enough for their consent to be "legitimate". You could train a 5 year old to say "I consent to sex" but that doesn't mean s/he necessarily does, which is why there has to be a legal limit.

Personally, I'm in favour of lowering the age of consent (although not so radically low as your reductio ad absurdum implies), but that's an entirely separate issue. These are not analogous arguments.

[britishboy]

We could only push so far with accepting something like incest before people call us crazy, which is why it would be legal for adults. That should be a fair enough deal for incestuous people.


you can only push so far? incest has hardly any support, Nazis are more common than those who support incest! if concent is all that matters, why cant 60 year olds have sex with 10 year olds?

I dont know if you like incest and its your fetish or whatever so im sorry if im offending you but it cant be legal, and thankfully its illegal and its not going to become legal

[Jess]

you can only push so far? incest has hardly any support, Nazis are more common than those who support incest! if consent is all that matters, why cant 60 year olds have sex with 10 year olds?

Because 10 year olds aren't ADULTS

[Emerald Dream]

You could train a 5 year old to say "I consent to sex" but that doesn't mean s/he necessarily does, which is why there has to be a legal limit.


On the same note, a person who is raised with an incestual relationship as their "norm"....when they are an adult, are they actually giving consent?

This is the problem I have with the whole idea of some adults giving "consent" in an incestual relationship. They may have been programmed since young children to believe that these types of relationships are normal.

[Moondust]

I disagree, I'm all for the expression of sexuality but incest will usually (98% of the time) create a genetic disorder or mutation because both the child's inherited gene pools are extremely similar and will clash, creating a chromosomal deletion or translocation. It is illegal to bring a mutated child intentionally or an extremely-likely mutated child (90% or higher) into the world according to the Humanitiy &. Genetics act of 1982. It's a measure to protect the unborn children.

Homosexuality is different as it is unlikely to result in deformed babies.

I agree.

[britishboy]

Because 10 year olds aren't ADULTS

and siblings are not potential partners why can a 10 not have sex with who they want? incest must be a social barrier, if we make that legal, why mot pedophilia?

On the same note, a person who is raised with an incestual relationship as their "norm"....when they are an adult, are they actually giving consent?

This is the problem I have with the whole idea of some adults giving "consent" in an incestual relationship. They may have been programmed since young children to believe that these types of relationships are normal.

yeah I agree

[saea97]

On the same note, a person who is raised with an incestual relationship as their "norm"....when they are an adult, are they actually giving consent?

This is the problem I have with the whole idea of some adults giving "consent" in an incestual relationship. They may have been programmed since young children to believe that these types of relationships are normal.

True enough. Age of consent is useful, but not flawless. There's no easy solution to that problem, but I really don't think that illegalising all incestual relationships is the answer, especially given that cases would be very rare and could probably be detected somewhere along the line as grooming. (Given that the age of consent laws would only make the incest legal when the child was in their late teens - that's a lot of time investment..)

and siblings are not potential partners

According to you.

why can a 10 not have sex with who they want? incest must be a social barrier, if we make that legal, why mot pedophilia?

CONSENT. Most 10 year olds haven't even undergone puberty yet, they don't "want" to have sex with anyone, and even if they do, their consent does not factor in the risks and considerations that adults take into account when providing consent. Pedophilia is illegal for reasons of keeping unsuspecting children safe. The arguments are not analogous, there is no "slippery slope" correlation to be drawn.

[teen.jpg]

You guys act like incest is a common thing. It really isn't. The fact that they made it illegal in the first place is kind of pointless.

[Gigablue]

I personally find the thought of family actually being together disgusting. And the arguments for it are mostly, "People can do what they want!" Which is rather stupid because no people can't do what they want. Then again, there isn't much of a case against it either except a slightly higher chance of genetic issues. It's just the way most Americans have been raised and thus we are meant to find it disgusting. Just like age gaps and the like.

There was a time when most people thought racism was right. The thought of equality was inconceivable. I'm sure that people of that time would have thought interracial marriage was disgusting. We can't limit personal freedoms just because people think its disgusting.

This is purely something about morals and you can't really decide if it's right or wrong...

You can't make laws based solely on people's feelings. If no one can give a good reason for banning something, it shouldn't be banned.

Also, comparing Homosexuality to Incest isn't correct, imo. Sexuality isn't a choice. Incest is something you have to consent to and thus you are choosing to do so.

You can't choose who you love. This applies whether they are the same gender as you, or part of your family. The two situations are analogous.

But acting on it is. I can fall for someone, but acting on that love is something you choose to do.

This would be like telling homosexuals that they shouldn't act on their feelings. It's wrong to tell people that they can't be with someone who they love and who loves them.

oh if theyre both consenting it must be fine! what about a 5 year old and a 65 year old?

Five year old can't consent.

a child can say I want sex, and my point is if you can fuck your siblings why not kids?

That isn't consent. They don't understand the consequences and they lack maturity to make an educated decision.

Someone who's fourteen knows the risks of sex and knows about the precautions, so technically saying anyone can do whatever they want as long as it does not affect another can be applied to this situation. Does the person understand? Yes. Do they know the risks? Yes. Can a fourteen year old have sex with a thirty year old? According to people in this thread, yes. Because she consented. Why put an age on it? It's seen as wrong for a 14 year old and a 30 year old to be together, but it's okay for a mother and a son as long as they're 18 or older? There's less risk, even if by a measly two percent, than there is with a mother and son relationship.

I would argue that a 14 year old can't really consent, at least not in the same way as an adult. However, that is completely irrelevant.

you can only push so far? incest has hardly any support, Nazis are more common than those who support incest! if concent is all that matters, why cant 60 year olds have sex with 10 year olds?

Ten year old can't consent. Also, argue based on the facts. Your post is a thinly veiled ad hominem. You are trying to characterize the opposition as being extremist, especially by invoking the nazis.

I dont know if you like incest and its your fetish or whatever so im sorry if im offending you but it cant be legal, and thankfully its illegal and its not going to become legal

Another ad hominem. Also, don't just say that it can't be legal without justifying why. What would happen if it were to be made legal?

[britishboy]

According to you

so you like incest?...

[britishboy]

That isn't consent. They don't understand the consequences and they lack maturity to make an educated decision.


10 year olds understand, and what about 14 year olds? like you? do you understand?

and to be honest anyone doing incest lacks maturity

[saea97]

so you like incest?...

That's not relevant. Got any actual arguments to provide? "Incest should be illegal because bleeeeergh ew I could never do that. And also it's disgusting because reasons." surprisingly enough is not an argument.

[Gigablue]

so you like incest?...

Complete non sequitur. Even if he likes incest, that woud be completely irrelevant. Do you have any facts as to why invest should remain illegal? If so, please state them. If not, then don't expect anyone to take you seriously.

[teen.jpg]

There was a time when most people thought racism was right. The thought of equality was inconceivable. I'm sure that people of that time would have thought interracial marriage was disgusting. We can't limit personal freedoms just because people think its disgusting.



You can't make laws based solely on people's feelings. If no one can give a good reason for banning something, it shouldn't be banned.



You can't choose who you love. This applies whether they are the same gender as you, or part of your family. The two situations are analogous.



This would be like telling homosexuals that they shouldn't act on their feelings. It's wrong to tell people that they can't be with someone who they love and who loves them.



Five year old can't consent.



That isn't consent. They don't understand the consequences and they lack maturity to make an educated decision.



I would argue that a 14 year old can't really consent, at least not in the same way as an adult. However, that is completely irrelevant.



Ten year old can't consent. Also, argue based on the facts. Your post is a thinly veiled ad hominem. You are trying to characterize the opposition as being extremist, especially by invoking the nazis.



Another ad hominem. Also, don't just say that it can't be legal without justifying why. What would happen if it were to be made legal?

You said this way better then I ever could've.

[britishboy]

That's not relevant. Got any actual arguments to provide? "Incest should be illegal because bleeeeergh ew I could never do that" surprisingly enough is not an argument.

1) deformed children
2) the child will be an inbred
3) you share the same mother and father
4) its your family, you should be a unit and protect them

[Gigablue]

10 year olds understand, and what about 14 year olds? like you? do you understand?

and to be honest anyone doing incest lacks maturity

Ten year olds don't understand all the repecussions and risks of sex. Even with fourteen year olds, consent is a difficult issue. A fourteen year old can understand the physical risks, but probably not all the emotional impacts. I don't really think a fourteen year old can consent to sex. Either way, I don't see the relevance of this. How does the ability of a fourteen year old to consent relate to the legality of incest?

Also, do you have any evidence to support you statement that incest is a sign on immaturity, or is it just another irrelevant, unproven statement?

1) deformed children

See my earlier post for a detailed explanation as to why this is not the case. You would only have a slight increase in recessive genetic diseases, and this can be avoided with genetic testing. Also, if we wanted to prevent birth defects, we would ban women over 35 from having children. Would you support that ban, or do you support there being an unnecessary double standard.

2) the child will be an inbred

This is the first point phrased differently.

3) you share the same mother and father

Non sequitur.

4) its your family, you should be a unit and protect them

If two consenting adults want to have a relationship, why shouldn't they be able to? This last point isn't even coherent.

[Ballboy]

Exactly. Hey, doesn't the British monarch sometimes do incest to keep power in the family? Are you oppose to them doing that? Just curious.

Um... The Irish aren't much known for defending monarchs of the United Kingdom, but this is an accusation I've never heard before.

[britishboy]

Ten year olds don't understand all the repecussions and risks of sex. Even with fourteen year olds, consent is a difficult issue. A fourteen year old can understand the physical risks, but probably not all the emotional impacts. I don't really think a fourteen year old can consent to sex. Either way, I don't see the relevance of this. How does the ability of a fourteen year old to consent relate to the legality of incest?

Also, do you have any evidence to support you statement that incest is a sign on immaturity, or is it just another irrelevant, unproven statement?

its a basic social standard! ok sure lets fuck our mothers, have 10 wives and then cheat on them!

its imature because if a baby is created, it will be bullied for being a inbred and probably defected

[Harry Smith]

1) deformed children
2) the child will be an inbred
3) you share the same mother and father
4) its your family, you should be a unit and protect them

As Giga blue said if both adults use protection or don't engage in vaginal sex then this isn't an issue, what if it happens to be two male cousins? Be a unit? Have you seen Jeremy Kyle?

[britishboy]

As Giga blue said if both adults use protection or don't engage in vaginal sex then this isn't an issue, what if it happens to be two male cousins? Be a unit? Have you seen Jeremy Kyle?

its a social standard, should adultery be legal? 10 wives?

[teen.jpg]

its a basic social standard! ok sure lets fuck our mothers, have 10 wives and then cheat on them!

its imature because if a baby is created, it will be bullied for being a inbred and probably defected

What in the hell are you saying?

I have a bad feeling that he's trolling us for our reactions. Either that or he has a serious fear of change.

[Gigablue]

its a basic social standard! ok sure lets fuck our mothers, have 10 wives and then cheat on them!

This doesn't even deserve a response. The issue being debated here is incest and whether it should be legal. Polygamy and infidelity aren't relevant.

its imature because if a baby is created, it will be bullied for being a inbred and probably defected

Do you have any evidence? The child of two related parents would likely have the same phenotype as the child to two unrelated parents. They would likely not have birth defects. Unless they specifically told people that their parents were related, no one would know. Also, if bullying were to occur, that would indicate a problem with society, not the child. This is like saying we should ban same sex marriage because it would cause problems for the couples children. Don't punish people just because society is bigoted.

[britishboy]

What in the hell are you saying?

I have a bad feeling that he's trolling us for our reactions. Either that or he has a serious fear of change.

if love is love which is the general argument, why can I not have 10 wives?

[teen.jpg]

if love is love which is the general argument, why can I not have 10 wives?

I feel like you're saying that just to be obnoxious, but ok.

If you want to, I woudn't be against it. As long as your wives would be okay then that, then why not?

[Harry Smith]

its a social standard, should adultery be legal? 10 wives?

40 years ago homosexual relations were breaking social standards, also adultery isn't illegal in the UK, it hasn't been since 1857.

I love how your argument just mentions social standards and other subjects such as the multiple wives

[britishboy]

I feel like you're saying that just to be obnoxious, but ok.

If you want to, I woudn't be against it. As long as your wives would be okay then that, then why not?

well I respect you for not having double standards:) but personally I am for social codes

[Emerald Dream]

Since this thread is obviously not going to get back to the original topic, and STAY there....I am locking it.

If you want to gripe at each other off-topic, take it to PM. Don't ruin it for others.

:locked: