should incest be legal?

[blu]

Yes. But not at a federal level. The States should take care of that and do.

why should they outlaw it?

 

[uscitizen]

Should Blu be banned for breaking the family member rule?

 

[Ame®icano]

Saw this discussed somewhere else and I think its a good measure of how much you think the government should be able to control people's life. Of course we are talking about two consenting adults and this has nothing to do with marriage.

EDIT: I voted yes

I don't care if your vote is based on personal preferences, but if you insist to get an explanation why someone voted "no" you should be first to give an explanation why you voted "yes".

 

[blu]

Saw this discussed somewhere else and I think its a good measure of how much you think the government should be able to control people's life. Of course we are talking about two consenting adults and this has nothing to do with marriage.

EDIT: I voted yes

I don't care if your vote is based on personal preferences, but if you insist to get an explanation why someone voted "no" you should be first to give an explanation why you voted "yes".

I voted yes b/c except for what saveliberty brought up (which I hadn't thought of when I voted yes originally) the act affects no other people, including any formed baby and its potential birth defects, as common stuff such as women over 40 having kids, results in much higher rates of birth defect. Since it affects no other people and its between consenting adults, the governmetn has 0 reason or basis to outlaw it.

 

[saveliberty]

Yes. But not at a federal level. The States should take care of that and do.

why should they outlaw it?

It already is outlawed:

Every state today has a statute defining eligibility for marriage, and each and every one prohibits marriages between parents and children, sisters and brothers, uncles and nieces, and aunts and nephews. Some prohibit all ancestor/descendant marriages, regardless of degree. Four states extend the prohibition to marriages between parents and their adopted children.

The modern justifications for incest laws
Today, the justifications given for retaining statutory prohibitions on cousin marriage (and even debating the passage of new ones) are largely based on the fear that such unions will cause genetic problems for the children they produce.

The states that permit cousin marriage only under certain circumstances make this underlying justification clear - since a common thread runs through all their laws. Each requires a showing that the couple will not reproduce (because of age or sterility) or, at the very least, that they have undergone counseling to understand the risks of reproduction.

There are other justifications for incest laws that might be more compelling. Anthropologists Margaret Mead and Claude Levi-Strauss both wrote convincingly in defense of the "incest taboo." Mead characterized the widely held belief that incest is wrong as "among the essential mechanisms of human society."

According to Mead, the taboo has strong benefits: Because certain sexual and marital relationships are categorically forbidden, and the categorical ban is instilled early on in children's minds, children can grow and develop affectionate, close bonds with a wide span of relatives, without the intrusion of "inappropriate sexuality." Children can "wander freely, sitting on laps, pulling beards, and nestling their heads against comforting breasts-neither tempting nor being tempted beyond their years."

Levi-Strauss focused on the benefits of the incest taboo to society at large. The ban on intrafamily marriage forces families to reach outward and connect with other families -- and it is those connections between many different families that make society function.

CNN.com - FindLaw Forum: A genetic report should cause a rethinking of incest laws - April 9, 2002

 

[Ame®icano]

Saw this discussed somewhere else and I think its a good measure of how much you think the government should be able to control people's life. Of course we are talking about two consenting adults and this has nothing to do with marriage.

EDIT: I voted yes

I don't care if your vote is based on personal preferences, but if you insist to get an explanation why someone voted "no" you should be first to give an explanation why you voted "yes".

I voted yes b/c except for what saveliberty brought up (which I hadn't thought of when I voted yes originally) the act affects no other people, including any formed baby and its potential birth defects, as common stuff such as women over 40 having kids, results in much higher rates of birth defect. Since it affects no other people and its between consenting adults, the governmetn has 0 reason or basis to outlaw it.

As first, thanks for the answer.

I kinda get used to questions about morality coming from the left. This is one of those issues that is trying to get pushed last ten years or so. No wonder why liberals wants to legalize abortions when they know that from these kind of sexual relationships you can't get nothing good.

My answer is no. First because of immorality, second because of Darwinism, third because I believe that Incest is one of those "power things" and I don't think it can ever be truly consensual. The blood relation in between the parties would make that almost impossible.

 

[blu]

I kinda get used to questions about morality coming from the left.[/B]

not a leftist

First because of immorality

immoral because I said they weren't married or because all religions that I know of ban it?

third because I believe that Incest is one of those "power things" and I don't think it can ever be truly consensual. The blood relation in between the parties would make that almost impossible.

how would between cousins have to be power play? between father/daughter, mom/son whateverI could definately see that though

 

[uscitizen]

Should Beastiallity be legal?
No deformed offspring.
Consenting adults.
Sheep over 40 have deformed lambs anyway.

 

[blu]

Should Beastiallity be legal?
No deformed offspring.
Consenting adults.
Sheep over 40 have deformed lambs anyway.

can animals consent? no. nice try though

 

[uscitizen]

Should Beastiallity be legal?
No deformed offspring.
Consenting adults.
Sheep over 40 have deformed lambs anyway.

can animals consent? no. nice try though

sure they can. dog hunching leg?

 

[txlonghorn]

have you ever made a copy from a copy of a copy? It begins to look less and less normal...

for me personally, it's REALLY wrong...but if the political control aspect is what you're after, I would rather not see government have control over who you decide to hookup with. If you want to sleep with your cousin, your mom...your brother....whew...gay incest...(shutter)...that's you own sick and demented parogative.

 

[blu]

for me personally, it's REALLY wrong...but if the political control aspect is what you're after, I would rather not see government have control over who you decide to hookup with. If you want to sleep with your cousin, your mom...your brother....whew...gay incest...(shutter)...that's you own sick and demented parogative.

we agree!

 

[Si modo]

Saw this discussed somewhere else and I think its a good measure of how much you think the government should be able to control people's life. Of course we are talking about two consenting adults and this has nothing to do with marriage.

EDIT: I voted yes

No. Incest is one of those universal societal taboos.

 

[CaféAuLait]

You know, incest is legal in Belgium and Brazil where one can start legally fucking their kids at ages 16 and 14 respectively. You can also screw your animals in those countries too.

Laws regarding incest - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The age of consent in the US starts anywhere from the age of 13 up. It would not be long after incest is "legalized" between ‘consenting adults’ before it would be pushed to be legal for minors who have reached the ‘age of consent’---(a mere 13 years old in some states). I do not see how one could stop such. Therefore such would lead to “legalized” coercion of your child.

Disgusting

 

[CaféAuLait]

I kinda get used to questions about morality coming from the left.[/B]

not a leftist

First because of immorality

immoral because I said they weren't married or because all religions that I know of ban it?

third because I believe that Incest is one of those "power things" and I don't think it can ever be truly consensual. The blood relation in between the parties would make that almost impossible.

how would between cousins have to be power play? between father/daughter, mom/son whateverI could definately see that though

(emphasis to address this question)

If one grows up in a close family where cousins interact daily and or have a role in the home as a caregiver or disciplinarian-- it could very well be a ‘power play’ if you want to call it such. In some cases there are large age gaps for cousins and this could lead to coercion or force.

 

[Luissa]

I love how the republicans are answering no.

Stay out of my life, but please tell someone else who they can have sex with.

 

[LuckyDan]

I love how the republicans are answering no.

Stay out of my life, but please tell someone else who they can have sex with.

But did you notice how the most liberal states, at least those mtntioned, like MA and HI had very strict laws?

 

[Luissa]

I love how the republicans are answering no.

Stay out of my life, but please tell someone else who they can have sex with.

But did you notice how the most liberal states, at least those mtntioned, like MA and HI had very strict laws?

We don't pretend to be about limited government.

I just get sick of some republican saying they want the government out of their lies, bthen turning around and telling someone else what to do with their body, and who they should marry.
If someone is 18, one should be able to choose who they have sex with. The tricky part is the offspring.

 

[LuckyDan]

I love how the republicans are answering no.

Stay out of my life, but please tell someone else who they can have sex with.

But did you notice how the most liberal states, at least those mtntioned, like MA and HI had very strict laws?

We don't pretend to be about limited government.

I just get sick of some republican saying they want the government out of their lies, bthen turning around and telling someone else what to do with their body, and who they should marry.
If someone is 18, one should be able to choose who they have sex with. The tricky part is the offspring.

I'm not interested in busting into the bedroom of a couple of relatives going at it. I assume they want to keep it quiet as well.

This really is a non-issue.

You may quote me as the conservative voice here.

 

[JW Frogen]

I'm not interested in busting into the bedroom of a couple of relatives going at it. I assume they want to keep it quiet as well.

This really is a non-issue.

I don't know Cher and her daughter-son Chastity-Chad might make a great reality TV show.