Incest.

[Atonement]

Okay, so, seperation of Church and State. Okay?

LEV 18:6 "'No one is to approach any close relative to have sexual
relations. I am the LORD."

Basically, no incest.

yet...

"In the United States, every state and the District of Columbia have some form of codified incest prohibition. However, individual statutes vary widely. Rhode Island repealed its criminal incest statute in 1989, Ohio only targets parental figures, and New Jersey does not apply any penalties when both parties are over the age of 18. Yet Massachusetts issues a penalty of up to 20 years imprisonment for those engaging in "sexual activities" with relatives closer than first cousins and Hawaii up to 5 years in jail for "sexual penetration" with certain blood relatives and even in-laws.

In all states, close blood-relatives that fall under the incest statutes include father, mother, grandfather, grandmother, brother, sister, aunt, uncle, niece, nephew, and in some states, first cousins. Many states also apply incest laws to non-blood relations including stepparents, step-siblings, and in-laws."

- Wikipedia.

---------------------

I believe that yes, incest is morally improper and wrong, but... I just seem to draw an interesting line.

Opinions?

[theOperaGhost]

John and I had a debate about this a while ago when were discussing morals and law. Because laws aren't based on morals because morals are aspects of religion. People argue that laws are there to protect people. If this is the case, why is incest illegal? If in is non-consentual, it would be rape, of course, but incest is often performed with consent by both individuals. No one is being hurt, so why is it illegal? Because it is immoral? Because the Bible says so? Brings up many questions...

[ThatCanadianGuy]

I do think that these sort of laws were influenced by religion, much like the Blue Laws. I don't think it should be illegal if it is consentual (as long as both people are old enough to understand what it is that they are doing). Of course rape is bad and taking advantage of younger family memebers is terrible, but I don't condone incest as being a good idea either. A big reason why its bad on just a natural level is due to the genetic disorders that are bound to result in children between close relatives. That is something that could have been prevented, either by safe sex or choosing to adopt a kid instead. If you KNOW that the child you are going to have will experience some sort of deficiency due to inbreeding then don't have the child. Like if your doctor told you that %100 sure your baby would be severely retarded... would you have that baby? I know I wouldn't because it wouldn't be fair to that child.

[Sapphire]

Incest between two adult relatives is illegal because conception of a child in these circumstances can lead to deformities and disabilities. It is there to protect the children that could be brought into this world like this. What sense is there in making the act of sex between relatives legal if one of the outcomes isn't?

It also protects the individuals. There can be an imbalance of power (real or percieved) between the two people, even if they both consent to it. In cases like this, it is the imbalance between the two that causes an issue. What other laws are there that protects these individuals?

[theOperaGhost]

Incest between two adult relatives is illegal because conception of a child in these circumstances can lead to deformities and disabilities. It is there to protect the children that could be brought into this world like this. What sense is there in making the act of sex between relatives legal if one of the outcomes isn't?

It also protects the individuals. There can be an imbalance of power (real or percieved) between the two people, even if they both consent to it. In cases like this, it is the imbalance between the two that causes an issue. What other laws are there that protects these individuals?

If it is protecting a child that isn't born yet, why is abortion still legal? Laws against incest are protecting a child that isn't even conceived yet, but we can go ahead a kill an unborn child just because we don't want to have them? Doesn't make any sense to me...kind of sounds like bullshit.

Why doesn't pro-choice come into this? Women can choose to kill an unborn child, but two consenting adults can't choose to perform incestual acts? Sounds like discrimination to me.

[Sapphire]

If it is protecting a child that isn't born yet, why is abortion still legal? Laws against incest are protecting a child that isn't even conceived yet, but we can go ahead a kill an unborn child just because we don't want to have them? Doesn't make any sense to me...kind of sounds like bullshit.

Why doesn't pro-choice come into this? Women can choose to kill an unborn child, but two consenting adults can't choose to perform incestual acts? Sounds like discrimination to me.
Would you rather it was legal for them to have children despite the fact that they will be deformed? It is irresponsible for people to do so and would be ridiculously so if it was legalised.

Abortion is completely different to incest. Abortion is the ending of an unwanted pregnancy for whatever reason (rape, mother-to-be's health etc). Pregnancy stemming from an incestuous relationship results in a child with weakened DNA structure and a high likelihood of deformities and incidences of mental and physical illnesses. It is bad for the child, bad for the family, bad for society.

[The Resurrected One]

Okay, so, seperation of Church and State. Okay?

LEV 18:6 "'No one is to approach any close relative to have sexual
relations. I am the LORD."


Haha, what the f-


Ok, so, I personally do not find the idea of incest appealing, but Jared is right.

If this is the case, why is incest illegal? If in is non-consentual, it would be rape, of course, but incest is often performed with consent by both individuals. No one is being hurt, so why is it illegal? Because it is immoral? Because the Bible says so?


If I remember correctly, there were people in ancient times who, like, killed their fathers and married their mothers. But that could be completely different.

[Sapphire]

If I remember correctly, there were people in ancient times who, like, killed their fathers and married their mothers. But that could be completely different.
Are you talking of Oedipus the king in Greek mythology?

[Antares]

Well, I recently learned some new things (you do learn things in school) about one of the major reasons why incest is illegal at the government level. The reason is that the chance of mutations and other medical issues are signifigantly increased if a family member were to reproduce with a relative.

So now that I have learned that, I have a new light on it and I know understand why it is illegal.

[The Resurrected One]

Are you talking of Oedipus the king in Greek mythology?

Could be. I don't know.

[Underground_Network]

Johnny, I'm pretty sure there was an ancient civilization where there was the tradition of killing your father and marrying your mother, or at least taking the place of your father [and that included "in bed"] after he passed away. I know there was definitely a civilization where the latter was true, but the first part I am unsure of. I am sure that there have been instances of this that were more than mere mythology, but actual historical occurrences. But I don't really have a stance on this issue. It's one of those that I don't really care about. I can't say incest is 100% morally or legally wrong, but I can't go ahead and say everyone should be doing it. It's one of those that I could end up arguing either sides of, and I'm not sure which side to take, because again, I'm not sure where I stand.

[theOperaGhost]

What I don't see is why we are protecting what isn't even conceived yet, but it is alright for abortions to occur. I know the two are different, but if incest is illegal to stop what could happen to a child that is a product of incest, why is abortion legal.

I feel there should be something similar here. Either both should be legal or both illegal since both have the purpose of protecting something that is unborn. I would prefer if both were illegal.

[Sapphire]

What I don't see is why we are protecting what isn't even conceived yet, but it is alright for abortions to occur. I know the two are different, but if incest is illegal to stop what could happen to a child that is a product of incest, why is abortion legal.If we were all inbreeding then society would literally fall to pieces. Look at what the royal families did in the past centuries with frequently marrying first cousins. Look at what happened to them and diseases like hemophillia.

I say it again, abortion is completely different because it doesn't increase the rate of diseases and deformities.

I understand that you are pro-life. But there is no way that you can honestly and rationally compare abortion and incest regardless of how pro-life you are.

[Atonement]

Like if your doctor told you that %100 sure your baby would be severely retarded... would you have that baby? I know I wouldn't because it wouldn't be fair to that child.

People have AIDS and still have sex and conceive. Or maybe something less extreme like just some terrible combo of genetic traits like cystic fibrosis, cancer, and throw diabetes int here. Idk. Maybe anemia.

Okay, so its practically certain that the child will live with these defects, so... do you still have sex? Do you still have children? People do.

[theOperaGhost]

If we were all inbreeding then society would literally fall to pieces. Look at what the royal families did in the past centuries with frequently marrying first cousins. Look at what happened to them and diseases like hemophillia.

I say it again, abortion is completely different because it doesn't increase the rate of diseases and deformities.

I understand that you are pro-life. But there is no way that you can honestly and rationally compare abortion and incest regardless of how pro-life you are.

Alright...It is rational in my head, but I understand that I'm not being rational to anyone else...I don't want to argue here. I do understand the difference, but I still feel there isn't that large of a difference.

[Hyper]

Meh your rational to me..

But I don't think this should just be looked at as protecting the child..

Look at the social aspect and think for awhile what sex actually means and does ( especially mentally )

Now think about brothers & sisters, mothers, fathers & children and beep knows what else going on

TO put it simply its not right! Religiously, socially and neither is it normal by genetics

So the end conclusion is that incest is not meant to be by nature and it is not approved of by the majority of society and it is not approved of by pretty much every major religion on the planet

Summary: Incest should be illegal everywhere..

Abortion is a different subject I don't like the thought of it but I see the possible reasons behind it however as a un-necessary ( possible irritating ) side comment I definately disagree with the arguement of ''its my body''

[theOperaGhost]

So the end conclusion is that incest is not meant to be by nature and it is not approved of by the majority of society and it is not approved of by pretty much every major religion on the planet



Ok, first, this isn't attacking you in any way, I agree with everything you posted, including this statement.

This statement just brought an interesting question to my mind. Now I'm not saying this is how I feel, but since incest should be illegal because it is not meant to be by nature, shouldn't homosexuality be the same? It's considered to be unnatural. THIS IS NOT HOW I FEEL, I'M JUST POINTING IT OUT TO INCREASE DISCUSSION. And since this is a rather heated issue with some people, no arguments.

[Hyper]

Ok, first, this isn't attacking you in any way, I agree with everything you posted, including this statement.

This statement just brought an interesting question to my mind. Now I'm not saying this is how I feel, but since incest should be illegal because it is not meant to be by nature, shouldn't homosexuality be the same? It's considered to be unnatural. THIS IS NOT HOW I FEEL, I'M JUST POINTING IT OUT TO INCREASE DISCUSSION. And since this is a rather heated issue with some people, no arguments.



Homosexuality, I'll problably never think of it as something that is right or normal however it is something that people have the freedom to do in their own privacy and I wont judge anyone for doing it

With incest you have the same thing except you can have children and the emotional psychological factor in it is just so wrong for me

Its hard to put in words but most simply put.. Love you can love someone as a friend, sibling, parent, family member in general and then the top of the list ( if you can even make a ranking ) love for a (sexual)partner

These are distinctively different I'd say I love my best friend for the person he is and for the loyalty we have with eachother being that we would help eachother out no matter what, this love has developed out of years of friendship, events etc

Love for a family member.. The family member has ''always been there'' he is someone who has cared for you instinctively so to speak, you and him are part of a deep bond that is nearly impossible to explain, you are connected differently than anybody else you love. Family: parents care instinctively, siblings care for eachother instinctively and teach & compete with eachother, all family members protect eachother instinctively purely looking at it by logic its instinct that ''becomes/is'' love throughout your life

Loving a partner. Love for a partner is the most unique you & your partner in a sense are two people who complement & perfect eachother and you can/have sex which by itself bears a huge meaning on a deep psychological level. And eventually your partner can become a part of Your family making him/her especially unique & special to you..

Well I have again made no result to keep format but relationships are all different and I believe a ''family bond'' is unique and special and involves an element of trust that is unique to itself

You trust certain things to your friends, family & lovers maybe you trust all of them equally but still your love for them is different in how its expressed or how it became

[theOperaGhost]

Homosexuality, I'll problably never think of it as something that is right or normal however it is something that people have the freedom to do in their own privacy and I wont judge anyone for doing it

With incest you have the same thing except you can have children and the emotional psychological factor in it is just so wrong for me

Its hard to put in words but most simply put.. Love you can love someone as a friend, sibling, parent, family member in general and then the top of the list ( if you can even make a ranking ) love for a (sexual)partner

These are distinctively different I'd say I love my best friend for the person he is and for the loyalty we have with eachother being that we would help eachother out no matter what, this love has developed out of years of friendship, events etc

Love for a family member.. The family member has ''always been there'' he is someone who has cared for you instinctively so to speak, you and him are part of a deep bond that is nearly impossible to explain, you are connected differently than anybody else you love. Family: parents care instinctively, siblings care for eachother instinctively and teach & compete with eachother, all family members protect eachother instinctively purely looking at it by logic its instinct that ''becomes/is'' love throughout your life

Loving a partner. Love for a partner is the most unique you & your partner in a sense are two people who complement & perfect eachother and you can/have sex which by itself bears a huge meaning on a deep psychological level. And eventually your partner can become a part of Your family making him/her especially unique & special to you..

Well I have again made no result to keep format but relationships are all different and I believe a ''family bond'' is unique and special and involves an element of trust that is unique to itself

You trust certain things to your friends, family & lovers maybe you trust all of them equally but still your love for them is different in how its expressed or how it became

Yeah...I had to throw that question out there. I like to find as much to debate as possible and when you said it was unnatural, that question hit me like a ton of bricks.

There are so many contradictions to this kind of thing though, it's kind of unbelievable.

Yeah, sorry, that was off topic...back on topic...:P

[Hyper]

No no I had to write it!

And if you quote it comment it atleast ( otherwise you are creating unnecessary wall of text and making some people possibly loose a bit of IQ points by reading my post 2x in a row )

[theOperaGhost]

No no I had to write it!

And if you quote it comment it atleast ( otherwise you are creating unnecessary wall of text and making some people possibly loose a bit of IQ points by reading my post 2x in a row )

sorry... :P

Anyway...you made a good post. I would have repped you if I could have, but I can't yet. You did a good job of saying way incest is more unnatural then homosexuality. Actually, quite a good job...

Better? :D Why am I still quoting what you said though?

[Avalikia]

Perhaps I can shed some light on this; learning about genetics is a hobby of mine. To oversimplfy a lot:

Everyone has a very large number of bad genes that do everything from making parts of your body run inefficiently to killing you before birth. In fact, most scientist estimate that the average person has 6 genes that would have killed them before birth. However, the vast majority of these genes are recessive, meaning you have to have two bad copies for them to change anything. But, fortunately for you, your parents are (probably) unrelated and they don't share very many bad genes and you probably only have a few mild genetic defects.

However, say you decide to marry your sibling. You share about half of your genes with your siblings, which means that any children you have with your sibling has a lot of bullets to dodge. If you and your sibling are average, each of you has 6 potentially lethal genes, and since you share half of your DNA with your sibling, about three will be the same. For each shared lethal gene, there's a 25% chance that your child will get two bad copies and die before birth - three genes means that only about 42% of your children will survive to be born. But that doesn't include nonlethal bad genes you may have hiding in your DNA, and though the number of those varies widely you share about half of them with your siblings and every single one of them has a 25% chance of showing up in your child.

If that's sounds risky, what if it's your cousin? With another generation separating both of you, that reduces the shared genes to 12.5%. Of the six lethal genes you probably share only 1, and may not share any. For every shared gene your children still have a 25% chance of getting two bad copies, but it becomes much less likely that you'll happen to share the same gene for something particularily bad. Still, there's a definate increased risk. It isn't until you move on to your second cousin (who shares about 3% of your genes) that the risk starts being roughly the same as marrying someone completely unrelated.

All but the mildest of genetic abnormalities end up costing society somehow; Many genetic problems are untreatable, others are expensive, some cause mental problems, others cause physical problems, some result in a early death, and others mean a lifetime of struggle. Many require lots of resources to treat that could have been used elsewhere. Many can't be diagnosed in a fetus, so abortion wouldn't prevent it from happening.

In summary, making incest illegal is very effective at reducing the number of genetic defects in the population, which reduces costs for both the affected family and society. And all of this completely neglects to factor in any social/emotional effects caused by such relationships.

[Hyper]

Yay someone eloquently explaining the genetics factor, hail Avalikia.. I definately wasn't going to try and explain genetics at 7 am yesterday