Is it right to imprison people for incest?

[Deleted]

The case:

A man met his sister for the first time when he was 25 and she was 17. They fell in love. Later they found out, they were sister and brother. But they didn't care and became a couple. Later they had 4 children. 2 of them have a mental handicap.

Some time their grandfather reported their relationship to the police. The man was arrested for a total of 3 years. The mother wasn't, as she has a mild mental disorder, too. Some time when he was in prison they ended their relationship. One child stayed with the mother. Three were took from her.

Now this guy and his attorney went to higher courts, as they thnk that the law, which criminalizes incest is unlawful. But they failed court.

In Germany the paragraph 173 charges sexual (only vaginal) intercourse between relatives (first degree) with up to 3 years. It is justified with the amorality and that children have a higher chance to be born with disabilities.

The arguments of the lawyer (which I actually agree with, as they are rational):

-The sex had been mutually agreed on by both
-Noone was harmed by this (you can't really count the offended moralizers)
-It is ridiculous to only criminalize vaginal intercourse and not for example anal or oral intercourse
-If you condemn it, because there is a higher chance, that children become born with disabilities, you would have to forbid other groups of people to have children, too (for example people older than 40, having congenital diseases or people with other disabilities) That would be the same nazis tried to do, when they sterilized diabled people.
-If you say that the children are harmed by this, because they may be born with a disability you should ask the children, if they prefer to live with a disability or to have never lived at all
-Some people say incest is often not committed mutually and that this law protects family. But forced sex is already criminalized by the "usual" laws.

Of course it is weird, to know that people being brother and sister do love each other. But who do they harm by this? Noone. It is also quite rare, as there is some biological mechanism, which prevents relatives to fall in love with other usually. So it's not like that, that all brothers and sisters would fuck their brains out, if this law is lifted.

So what do you think?

Edit: Regarding the information about the couple some facts are not 100% accurate, as I was reciting from my mind. They met at the funeral of a relative and she was 16 and he 23 by then. One year later she had her first child. The other information are as far as I know right. Though the inaccuracies aren't really essential to the discussion.

Edit: Well, now I'm going to enjoy my weekend... I really enjoyed this diskussion :-) Didn't think, that there are so many people interested in such a case.

[Zavri]

Yes its disgusting.

[Nerph-]

A little offtopic, but this reminded me of Arrested Development and George Michael having the hots for what he thought was his cousin. That always gave me a weird boner.

[RandomAustralian]

If they knew that imprisonment was the punishment for that act, and continued regardless, IMO the right thing was done. I'm also of the opinion that incest is very, very wrong, so my opinion will definitely be biased on this one :P

[Tierbook]

i remember a movie it was on comedy central with harold and kumar, when they were in... Alabama i think. they met a couple that was brother and sister and in thier basement was a cyclops. That is why incest is bad

[Gansta]

are u mad bro o_O?
Incest is disgusting. Isn't it better to find normal boy/girl, not your sister or cousin?
Whats the prob?

Mod Warning: Don't post "U mad bro?". It's trolling.

[wariofan1]

Imprison? No. It's morally wrong though, and as disgusting as it is, I don't think it's a thing you should be imprisoned for, especially not for 3 years.

Let the odd ones have their good time, not like I care what they do, why would I? It's not like it's hurting anybody at all, as disgusting and wrong as it is, I just don't see any reason to interfere in that, it's their own damn responsibility to raise a mentally handicapped child after that. Again, their problem, and they would know it very well themselves before they got the child, so it's their troubles, still not hurting anyone (whether it hurts the child or not is arguable though).

i remember a movie it was on comedy central with harold and kumar, when they were in... Alabama i think. they met a couple that was brother and sister and in thier basement was a cyclops. That is why incest is bad

Movies =/= Reality, learn to differ, there's no such thing as a cyclops baby being born because of incest.

[bals]

Imprison? No. It's morally wrong though, and as disgusting as it is, I don't think it's a thing you should ne imprisoned for, especially not for 3 years.

agreed with this guy. It's fucked up but you really shouldn't be thrown in jail for it.
@people talking about horrible mutations - that wouldn't happen for a couple generations of inbreeding

[Kalyyn]

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

[FuxieDK]

If they had stopped, when they found out, no charges could be pressed, but they chose to ignore it, thus making them guilty..


Bonus info: Consensual sex between closely related people, IS NOT Incest.. It's bloodshame..
Incest basically rape of a relative.

[starlord]

the prison acts a deterrent.

[Kulanae]

They did not fall in love before they knew they were brother and sister. They knew full well their lineage prior to having sex. From BBC news:
"The pair did not grow up together. Patrick, the brother, had been adopted by a couple from Potsdam while his sister, Susan, grew up with their mother.

But when he reached adulthood he wanted to track down his biological parents. He found his mother, and he met Susan.

About six months later, the mother died, and Patrick moved in with Susan."

[Polarthief]

Hey, whatever floats your boat.

In this case, I'd say it's fucked up that he got sent to jail.

Provided the following 2 points are true, I think it should be legal to have sex between two (or more :P) parties: (PS: no idea why I chose "parties" as the term for "people")

- Mutually agreed and consensual by all parties in EVERY situation, including weird/hardcore fetishes. (e.g., no rape/forced stuff)
- All parties are over the age of 18. If 1+ of the parties are under 18, then all other parties must also be under 18, but above the age of 12. (e.g., either everyone's legal or not legal. If people are going to have sex pre-18, then they better do it with someone their age, not younger. Also, 12 or younger is too young to have sex imo)

I'm probably forgetting a few other points that are super important, but it's almost 4AM, and my mind's not in the right place.

But yeah, whether incest, bestiality, shit any fetish or weird form of sex, who cares. Provided people (and the animals? /shrug) are all consensual to it and legal, then why the fuck not? If people want to love (literally) their family/pets, why should we force them apart? In a way, it's almost as wrong to not legalize homosexuality as it is to not legalize anything that's consensual/age-legal.

[herpecin]

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

most of the reasoning about who it hurts is the younger person in the situation.

most times real incest is between a parent and an underage child, usually well underage.

it doesnt work out like how you see in the "movies" where a daughter comes home from college and gets an idea to sleep with her father/brother.

usually the "consent" is due to stockholm syndrome.

[obdigore]

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

The children who have an extreme chance of being mentally retarded when born. That is like saying 'drinking and smoking crack is ok when a woman is pregnant, who does it hurt?'

[SpaceJam]

Some say incest is healthy. The majority of us think it is gross. I could really care less if you bang your sister. I don't think it's a crime just really nasty.

[Deleted]

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

their kids? i agree with most of u it is disgusting but throwing them in jail wont change much, considering they didnt knew in the first place.

[Azivalla]

The children who have an extreme chance of being mentally retarded when born. That is like saying 'drinking and smoking crack is ok when a woman is pregnant, who does it hurt?'

I don't see smoking or drinking pregnant women getting thrown in jail.

[Kalyyn]

most of the reasoning about who it hurts is the younger person in the situation.

most times real incest is between a parent and an underage child, usually well underage.

it doesnt work out like how you see in the "movies" where a daughter comes home from college and gets an idea to sleep with her father/brother.

usually the "consent" is due to stockholm syndrome.

That is a good point.

The children who have an extreme chance of being mentally retarded when born. That is like saying 'drinking and smoking crack is ok when a woman is pregnant, who does it hurt?'

This, I'm not entirely sure. Has it been scientifically proven that this is the case, or is it just one of those things that everyone assumes? I could understand the child having a weaker immune system due to less genetic diversity possibly, but what specific mechanic causes the child to be retarded?

[JohnBrown1917]

If no babies are born out of it, nobody will get hurt. Why lock somebody up who isen't hurting anybody?

Yes its disgusting.

Thats a stupid reason to lock somebody up.