Is it right to imprison people for incest?

[connor778]

Most of you guys seem to forget that there's a thing called CONDOMS. Nobody is getting hurt, INCLUDING the non existent baby if you use a condom.
And on the other side of this, the pregnant lady alcohol quote was a very good point.

[Digglett]

If you can't take morality out of pedophilia why can you take it out of incest?

They do? You actually want to make the case that people having sex for the first time really understand every implication of it?

Did I say that? They are more aware of it than a child, that's for sure, a child almost always has no way of knowing and is completely impressionable, adults aren't, or shouldn't be.

[Deleted]

It's not right for people to go to prison because of incest. It might be morally wrong but it doesn't hurt society. Instead of being busy with these things they better go catch some real dangers for society like thiefs, rapers, murderers, molesters, ...

[Deleted]

unless you're suggesting america should legalize the notion of a young girl "SO LONG SHE AGREES" to be able to have sex with whomever she wants ,regardless of the age?

The problem as I stated earlier is that young boys or girls are not fully capable of making these decisions and they are vulnerable for exploitation. This is not the case when there are two consenting adults.

Pedophilia is closer to rape than activities that have two consenting adults like incest or homosexuality.

[Deleted]

It's against nature.

[obdigore]

Because some people have grown past the stage where we must use government force to apply our set of morals on others. I mean, there are many people that find homosexuality disgusting, unnatural and immoral. Why shouldn't we treat it like incest as well?

If they have no kids of their own then I have no problem with a brother and sister getting all busy, if they want to. If they want to adobt, more power to them.

The issue is that they, were they to have children, are consciously taking a step that amounts to drinking massive amounts while pregnant. Neither is acceptable behavior. They both greatly increase the chance that your child is born with massive disabilities.

Now, at the people talking about Parent-Child incestuous relationships, it is all age of consent I suppose. I don't like it but I can see the argument for age of consent being there.

[Deleted]

Actually I would. Frankly if you are willing to put your own selfish desires ahead of the well being of a child then you deserve to go to jail, but preferably they should just neuter them.

And it is fairly obvious you don't understand the damage incest does to the gene pool, whether that damage manifests itself in an easily recognized way such as retardation in irrelevant, the FACT that incest damages the gene pool is a well understood fact, even if we can't expect people with low IQs to understand it, they are still required to follow the laws set down by the people who do.

damages gene pool, huh? you remind me of Hitler

It's against nature.

yeah, so is homosexuality...

[blib]

Did I say that? They are more aware of it than a child, that's for sure, a child almost always has no way of knowing and is completely impressionable, adults aren't, or shouldn't be.

You did not answear my first question. If you disregard the law and morality then you have no basis for making anything illegal which is what you are arguing should be the case here. If they rule in favoure of inncest being legal it would probably become more widespread which would severly fuck up our dna pool.

Some adults are more like kids mentaly and some kids are more adult mentaly, should the kid that ahve a adult mind be allowed to start having sex earlier and the adult with the younger mentality later?

[Kulanae]

Well since it seems people are more interested in discussing the moral implications rather than the facts of the case, I'll just move along.

[obdigore]

damages gene pool, huh? you remind me of Hitler...

Oh fabulous. Godwin the thread. That should make things clearer!

Yes, it does 'damage' the gene pool. I suggest you read up on European Nobility and all the problems a small closed gene pool has.

[connor778]

If you can't take morality out of pedophilia why can you take it out of incest?

They do? You actually want to make the case that people having sex for the first time really understand every implication of it?

Who says its their first time?

Just because you and many people find it morally wrong and disgusting, doesn't mean people should go to jail for it. Especially if no child is being made. Who are you to tell someone that they can love someone else? If they both love each other, and they aren't hurting anyone, then why not?

*edit* i'm talking about incest, not pedophilia. Obviously because children don't know any better, and they should be older before making decisions like that, even if they "think" the love someone who is over 18 and said person loves them back.

[Deleted]

Unfortunately, the logical incline of this discussion will lead to other “morally questionable” sexual practices such as fetish, bestiality, paedophilia, homosexuality, oral and anal sex coming under consideration. I’m not going to condemn any of these practices; I can’t really relate to them because I think most are repulsive.

You mixed several legal "morally questionable" acts with illegal sexual acts. Homosexuality, oral and anal sex are legal in the western world (or where they aren't, they're unenforced) and fetishes in and of themselves are not illegal, though acting upon some of them might be.

Clearly, however, there are people who find such activities to be sexually appealing. Society at large has no right to judge them as individuals they don’t understand, but that’s where the process of law takes root. Society at large DOES have a say from the Hobbesian point of view because these individuals are part of that society.

This is difficult for people to accept, but if you elect to live as part of a society for its benefits (education or health care, say) then you are coming under its more intrusive facets as part of the bargain – in this case, the practice of law. Laws are often specifically designed to promote certain activity as “good for the society” and to deter certain activity as “bad for society”. If something is deemed bad for society, and people get involved in it, legal punishment MUST follow.

So, yes, the individuals concerned should have been punished by law (and incarceration if appropriate) for engaging in illegal sexual practices.

The above here is contemptible and invites tyranny of the majority as rule of law. Your argument is the worst kind of relativism that effectively grants any law anywhere as being valid. Islamic apostates and homosexuality executed in Saudi Arabia and Iran? Entirely appropriate according to you because that is what the society insists upon. Ethnic and religious persecution and segregation in other parts of the world (Baha'i in Iraq, Ahmadiyya in Indonesia)? Perfectly valid. Political persecution in China? Entirely acceptable.

Why is an infringement on personal liberty appropriate just because its existence is codified into the nation's civil law?

[Theodon]

In a free society, people are allowed to do things that other percieve as immoral. What they're not allowed to do, is to harm others.

Offending someone's feelings or morality is not "harming others" by the way.

This varies greatly from people to people. You're bound to find other non-relatives around the world as well, whom with you have a much larger chance of giving your child genetic defects because you and your partner have a certain gene that "matches" in a negative way.

If I understand what I've read correctly about recessive allele then the chances of a genetic "weakness" passing on to the child is much, much higher due to incest reproduction.

If the protein in the mum that dictates how your liver functions, for example, is faulty, then the one from the father being dominant will ensure that it functions correctly. The chances of that happening for an incest infant are far smaller, as it's more likely both parents will have the same recessive allele and more problems during fetal development will likely occur.

At least that it what I have read and assumed a little from the website I viewed.

After considering it a little more down the line (as in after a generation or 5) genetic abnormalities that occur due to random mutations from the environment (which have nothing to do with incest) can be corrected by a healthy coupling with someone from outside of your genepool due to them having the 'normal' protein. If you continue to breed from within your own genepool however you simply copy that mutation over to the genetation you birth, and more occur, more are passed on, etc...

[starlord]

It's not right for people to go to prison because of incest. It might be morally wrong but it doesn't hurt society. Instead of being busy with these things they better go catch some real dangers for society like thiefs, rapers, murderers, molesters, ...

the prison is a deterrant. prison is a punishment, not just for keeping people away from others.

[blib]

Who says its their first time?

Just because you and many people find it morally wrong and disgusting, doesn't mean people should go to jail for it. Especially if no child is being made. Who are you to tell someone that they can love someone else? If they both love each other, and they aren't hurting anyone, then why not?

Will you accept the answear that it is moraly wrong? If not and you are willing to remove moral from the equation how can you argue for anything being illegal?

The second answear is that it severly hurts our gene pool.

[Deleted]

If they have no kids of their own then I have no problem with a brother and sister getting all busy, if they want to. If they want to adobt, more power to them.

The issue is that they, were they to have children, are consciously taking a step that amounts to drinking massive amounts while pregnant. Neither is acceptable behavior. They both greatly increase the chance that your child is born with massive disabilities.

But we're not talking about what you think is socially acceptable. I would certainly be disgusted by the notion of incest. I simply do not want to ban things just because I personally feel it's disgusting.

Drinking while waiting for a child is something i seriously look down upon and find absolutely appalling. Yet I'm not necessarily ready to throw people into jail for that. And having a child out of incest does not guarantee any problems with that child. It merely increases the chances slightly, but so does a lot of other things.

[Deleted]

Depends, if everything in the bible is right we should all be in prison right now..

OT: they shouldn't be in prison as long as both people wanted it, but I personally think they need help. and with locking them up you don't help them you just get rid of the problem.

[Deleted]

If I understand what I've read correctly about recessive allele then the chances of a genetic "weakness" passing on to the child is much, much higher due to incest reproduction.

Yes it's shitloads higher than what you're likely to have with a partner that isn't related to you. But there's always the chance that your non-relative partner happens to have certain genes that together with yours cause some serious risk to the child.

And I'm not saying having a child from an incest relationship is smart. I simply do not think it's right to throw peopel in prison for that. I don't mind imposing "social sanctions" on people like that though. I probably wouldn't want to be friends with folks like that.

[Redasurc]

In Norway cousins are allowed to marry

[Digglett]

You did not answear my first question. If you disregard the law and morality then you have no basis for making anything illegal which is what you are arguing should be the case here. If they rule in favoure of inncest being legal it would probably become more widespread which would severly fuck up our dna pool.

Some adults are more like kids mentaly and some kids are more adult mentaly, should the kid that ahve a adult mind be allowed to start having sex earlier and the adult with the younger mentality later?

Because you're assuming in every single situation a baby is even going to be made, and if it had indeed happened, sure it'd fuck our dna pool, jail still seems really harsh.

So by that case, we should be throwing alcoholic mother's in jail as well, correct?

Also, it doesn't matter if a child is smarter/more adult than average, it is still a child, they still never are mentally prepared or mature enough to handle those things.