Is it right to imprison people for incest?

[DrunkenBeard]

The big difference between incest and homosexuality, which I see brought up a lot, is that forbidding homosexuality is forbidding someone to find a life partner, it is forbbiding someones personality. Incest on the other hand is just about atraction, you have plenty of other options, being atracted to someone have never been part of me as a person.

If I love my sister, and she loves me, and we want to be married, start a family and adopt, why should society decide that we can't do that ?

[Dezerte]

If I love my sister, and she loves me, and we want to be married, start a family and adopt, why should society decide that we can't do that ?

Because someone somewhere is uncomfortable with that and won't be able to sleep at night.

/sarcasm

[Maruii]

No, of course not. Sure it's fucked up, but who does it hurt?

The children they bring to the world, you know there is a reason people shouldnt have kids with their own family members..
In a country like pakistan inbreed is such a huge problem
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hN-zHKTtdsA

[Deleted]

No? And I would not think this was ok even if it was socialy accepted. I fail to see your point?

Right. So you've just contradicted yourself. Obviously when you said:

It's not about his standars, mine or yours. It's about societys. If society decides that this should be accepted then I will bown down to the idea since my only objection, if you remove kids from it, is moraly.

Yet if society made apostasy and homosexuality punishable by death, you would disapprove. So my point is that just because society thinks that X should be immoral does not mean they are right.

[blib]

Yes, it is. The attraction that caused it though can be genuine.


And you're content to decimate people's lives over it.


Uh, what.

You're still forbidding someone's life choice by forcing them away from their partner. It is also worth pointing out that others might make an extensive argument for why homosexuality should be illegal and base their argument on how they think it will effect society negatively in the long run. Why are they wrong and you right on incest?

You really dont see the difference between a sexuality and a singel case of atraction? Do you think people that commit incest are only atracted to theire relatives? Decimate theire lives? Really?:P There have been plenty of people I have wanted to have sex with which I didn't without it ruining my life.

Incest is not a life choice:P Me having sex with the girl next door is not a life choice.. neither is having sex with your sister, its a case of atraction leading to sex.

Banning homosexuality is banning them from ever finding a partner, banning incest is stoping people from fucking theire sister...

[Shiny212]

We probably would, though it wouldn't be significant and would decline over time. I don't agree with throwing people's lives under a bus just because others like them could cause problems. That's using them.


You said as an argument for it being illegal that the general public frowns on it.

Well the general public also frown on death metal. Should death metal be illegal? Why or why not?

I really don't believe that incest has a greater following than death metal but ok, let's accept the premise. Is death metal a health risk to your newborns? Not directly, no.

And by the logic that we're "using them" by imposing laws on them, ok we're USING everyone who ever submitted to a law! We've imposing are vicious norms and ideas on people that did nothing but be born in our country; how awful.

[Grimfrost]

In our culture it's seen as gross and I do think it isn't right but in many cultures it's concidered normal having sex with your relatives. I think it is idiotic he got locked up as they both agreed and technically he didnt do anything wrong but morally in our eyes he did something horrible.

[blib]

Right. So you've just contradicted yourself. Obviously when you said:



Yet if society made apostasy and homosexuality punishable by death, you would disapprove. So my point is that just because society thinks that X should be immoral does not mean they are right.

You do realise you are not making sense here?

"So my point is that just because society thinks that X should be immoral does not mean they are right." It means you doesn't think they are right.

Just as I find stoning homosexuals wrong.

Just because I accept that something that is purely a moral choice is left to society to decide wheather or not it should be legal does not mean I agree with the outcome. You cannot understand this nuance? You should also put a little emphasis on the part where I said "that is PURELY a moral choice".

[Deleted]

You really dont see the difference between a sexuality and a singel case of atraction?

Oh, I do.

I see no difference between a knight templar state legislating against a sexual preference and who someone is attracted to.

Do you think people that commit incest are only atracted to theire relatives? Decimate theire lives? Really?:P

You sneer and yet I'd like to see how you'd feel if some authority came to your house and told you that you're no longer allowed to see your girlfriend/wife forever.

There have been plenty of people I have wanted to have sex with which I didn't without it ruining my life.

So you're comparing the fact that you chose not to sleep with some people as the same as the state seperating a couple by force.

What?

Incest is not a life choice:P Me having sex with the girl next door is not a life choice.. neither is having sex with your sister, its a case of atraction leading to sex.

It is their choice to have a relationship. Not yours. Not the governments. Not mine. No-one's but theirs.

Banning homosexuality is banning them from ever finding a partner, banning incest is stoping people from fucking theire sister...

Not true: it is banning homosexuals from having partners of the same sex (since of course, many deny that attraction towards the same sex is biological).

[blib]

It is socialy acceptable in Saudi Arabia?

And I still dont find it ok so the point is?

[Puntar]

It hurts our species, it's the same reason prostitution is illegal.

It's a crime aginst humanity. Sounds overly epic but it's true if you think about it. One spreads bad genes, the other spreads disease.

The same is true about usury, yet the prime motive force of (current) banking IS EXACTLY that! AND NONE EVEN TALK ABOUT IT! And it is the prime reason of every crisis and war ever made / fought!

"It spreads poverty and slavery, while at the same time denying the "truth" and freedom to the people!"

// sorry for hijacking the thread


Rather unusual that in every mythology incest between gods was quite a common and frequent theme.

[Deleted]

I really don't believe that incest has a greater following than death metal but ok, let's accept the premise. Is death metal a health risk to your newborns? Not directly, no.

Whether it has a larger following than incest is irrelevent.

How is two siblings having sexual intercourse with each other a health risk to anyone but themselves?

And by the logic that we're "using them" by imposing laws on them, ok we're USING everyone who ever submitted to a law! We've imposing are vicious norms and ideas on people that did nothing but be born in our country; how awful.

No, you're tearing people apart just because of what other siblings might do.

[blib]

If I love my sister, and she loves me, and we want to be married, start a family and adopt, why should society decide that we can't do that ?

Because you can find someone else to have sex with. The notion of love.. people get divorced every day. I fall in love every weekend. It is all about compatability and atraction.

[Tokru]

I think it's an absolute shame that people think it's ok to be put in jail just for having consensual sex with your sibling.

All those arguments concerning the health of unborn children are nothing but void and pathetic. If that really was the concern then everyone who has a genetic desease shouldn't be allowed to procreate too. I would love to see the uproar when something like this was announced because that's exactly what the Nazis were trying to do.

[Deleted]

You do realise you are not making sense here?

"So my point is that just because society thinks that X should be immoral does not mean they are right." It means you doesn't think they are right.

No, it means that just because society thinks X is wrong does not mean it actually is wrong.

Just as I find stoning homosexuals wrong.

Saudi Arabian society and civil law disagrees and considers it dangerous. What is your advice to a homosexual stuck under that system?

[Makronette]

No, of course not. Sure it's fucked up, but who does it hurt?

The kids, kids that come from an incestuous relationship are more likely to be handicapped or have problems due to the fact that both parents have the same genes, other than that no it doesn't harm anyone else but that doesn't mean it's right.

I don't think he should be imprisoned for this but then they knew the risks when they found out they were Brother and Sister... why the Grandad didn't go to the police before they had kids is beyond me =/

[Deleted]

Ok, I've only read a few pages of this, and this topic is all over the place....



Let me ask a few questions first:

What was the crime they were charged with?

Unlike the arbitrary common law prevailing in english speaking countries, the continental law (which in case of almost all states in Europe was in some way influenced by the German Law and they evolved based on their initial theories about everything) always has a strictly defined Legal Value (so to say, donno how to translate it to english terms) whose damage is punishable. No criminal act can be arbitrarily invented if it has nothing to to with a particular legal value, so which one did they damage?

You also can't be punished for inflicting damage on something that doesn't exist in the first place (for all those people saying ''it's the children that are harmed''). This isn't my opinion, this is the common agreement and understanding of criminal law in continental laws. You can't punish a ''potential'' other than a potential do cause mass damage to some legal value (such as destroying road signs which could then lead to car crashes, even if no car crash yet happened, destroying those signs is punishable).

So which legal value did they harm?

About the incest being legalized and stuff, you really have to distinguish the situations when there is a child involved from those that aren't. A child in the legal term is someone under the age of 14, and a minor is from 14 to 16 according to the usual criminal law of continental states (even though that's not the so called ''legal age'' which is somewhere 18 and in other countries 21). If consensual sex between a non-family related couple of 25 years and 17 years isn't punishable, why is it punishable when it involves incest? Unless this whole story really has absolutely nothing to do with incest and strictly to do with the age of participants.

About drinking pregnant women and social services - their children aren't taken away because drinking is bad - they are taken away from them because every child has their personal non-commercial right of free and undisturbed development and growth, which is harmed by the mother not fulfilling her legal obligations of providing the best possible care according to her abilities. Not because ''drinking is bad'' -.-


Also for those comments ''I think it's wrong and therefore it should be illegal'', seriously....

Criminal law exists to prevent the harm of those legal values without which social life (or living normally in a society) would be impossible. NOT because something is ''disgusting'' or just plain ''wrong''. There are very strict rules about what is legally punishable and what isn't. You don't send someone to prison for theft of 1 cigarette.

[Dezerte]

And I still dont find it ok so the point is?

Different societies have different ideas of what is acceptable, that is the point.

[Deleted]

I love my close relatives very much, but the idea of being in sexual relationships with any of them is disgusting beyond belief, and I think it's a good thing that we as a society do not try to legitimize it.

What would you do, if you had such feelings for example for your sister (I don't know your gender, I guess male)? And fshe reciprocrates them.
You can't control your sexual affection to someone. If you are in love, you are in love. That the society hates yoi for that, doesn't not generally kill these feelings.
It would be nice, if you try not to be so ignorant a la: "I think it's wrong, they should end in hell" (I know you didn't say it that way, I know that I'm exaggerating right now, but you show off a quite intolerant attitude)

[Deleted]

The kids, kids that come from an incestuous relationship are more likely to be handicapped or have problems due to the fact that both parents have the same genes, other than that no it doesn't harm anyone else but that doesn't mean it's right.

Disabled people have a great risk of having disabled children as well, should we ban them from having children as well?
And who are you to judge what's right and wrong?