Should incest be banned?

[Tiberius]

I'm sorry, but didn't I specifically say in my earlier hypothetical that Billy and Sally used contraception when they had sex and that Sally DID NOT become pregnant?

I've asked you several times now to provide SPECIFIC issues that are caused, and you have failed to. So, do you have anything more than vague claims and your own opinion? Or are you done?

 

[Zoe Doidge]

I have provided facts though - genetic abnormalities.

do you claim that incest does not cause these?

That is the only objection you have that is actually based on anything factual. But I've already shown that it is not the key issue behind your wish to maintain a ban by comparing it with other unrelated couples who would have at least an equal chance of creating genetic problems in their offspring.

Furthermore, when it comes to a couple who for whatever reason are incapable of producing children that negates that objection entirely, yet you still want to maintain a ban.

Given the amount of posts that have been made now that's got to mean you either have no real objection other than your personal distaste, or whatever the objection is you think it’s acceptable to impose a blanket ban based on something you have no evidence for.

 

[nnmartin]

Morality IS evidence.

 

[nnmartin]

I'm sorry, but didn't I specifically say in my earlier hypothetical that Billy and Sally used contraception when they had sex and that Sally DID NOT become pregnant?

ok, so what if the condom breaks?

 

[McBell]

Morality IS evidence.

How so?

 

[nnmartin]

But I've already shown that it is not the key issue behind your wish to maintain a ban by comparing it with other unrelated couples who would have at least an equal chance of creating genetic problems in their offspring.

and I have already said that this is a separate issue that needs to be dealt with accordingly.

Furthermore, when it comes to a couple who for whatever reason are incapable of producing children that negates that objection entirely, yet you still want to maintain a ban.

yes, because otherwise it would be too hard to enforce the law.

I had a girlfriend once who was told by the doctors that she was infertile - she used to regularly have unprotected sex without the worry of pregnancy.

However, she miraculously became pregnant at the age of 30.

So the doctors were wrong here.

Thus, it is just a lot more straightforward to have a blanket ban here - the morality issue also backs this up.

Given the amount of posts that have been made now that's got to mean you either have no real objection other than your personal distaste, or whatever the objection is you think it’s acceptable to impose a blanket ban based on something you have no evidence for.

Like I have said , many times over - morality and depravity issues are a major concern here and thankfully, out in the real world, most people also agree with me on this.

 

[Zoe Doidge]

I had a girlfriend once who was told by the doctors that she was infertile - she used to regularly have unprotected sex without the worry of pregnancy.

However, she miraculously became pregnant at the age of 30.

So the doctors were wrong here.

That depends on the reason for the infertility, but there are scenarios that would make it impossible. Someone who’d had a hysterectomy would be an obvious example.

Any in any event, it would be a non-issue in the case of homosexual incest, which I would presume you would also say should be banned?

Thus, it is just a lot more straightforward to have a blanket ban here - the morality issue also backs this up.

Like I have said, many times over - morality and depravity issues are a major concern here and thankfully, out in the real world, most people also agree with me on this.

You have indeed said that many times over, but I say there is no moral issue with incest, and you say there is. The fact that there isn’t any evidence to support either side makes it pointless to even consider, let alone take into account when coming to a conclusion.

In short, if a point has nothing to back it up it’s irrelevant in a debate.

 

[Father Heathen]

ok, so what if the condom breaks?

Then they simply get it popped out at the clinic.

 

[nnmartin]

That is a good comment and I think we can work on that.

Nice to have a change of direction.

 

[nnmartin]

Any in any event, it would be a non-issue in the case of homosexual incest, which I would presume you would also say should be banned?

In short, if a point has nothing to back it up it’s irrelevant in a debate.

Incest is incest regardless of orientation - so, yes all forms should be banned.

Morality and opinion most certainly have value in a debate otherwise we would all just be robots.

 

[Father Heathen]

That is a good comment and I think we can work on that.

Nice to have a change of direction.

Was this in responce to my last post?

 

[nnmartin]

yes it was.

It could lead us on to the question: 'Is incest acceptable if we abort any fetuses produced by it?' - or something similar.

Whole new territory being opened up here.

 

[Tiberius]

ok, so what if the condom breaks?

In my hypothetical, it DIDN'T break. Remember, I specifically said that Sally did not become pregnant. Besides, many people use more than one method of contraception. My girlfriend is on the pill, yet I still always use a condom. And there's always the morning after pill just in case.

But nevertheless, you seem to be completely incapable of responding to my specific hypothetical situation.

 

[Tiberius]

It could lead us on to the question: 'Is incest acceptable if we abort any fetuses produced by it?' - or something similar.

Whole new territory being opened up here.

Is sex permissible if we abort any fetuses that have birth defects or genetic abnormalities?

 

[nnmartin]

what is the point of a hypothetical situation?

we are talking about whether a law should exist or not and it's unreasonable to have a law that allows incest only if the condom doesn't break - absurd in fact.

 

[nnmartin]

Is sex permissible if we abort any fetuses that have birth defects or genetic abnormalities?

In the case of incest the answer is NO - sex is should never be possible.

 

[Tiberius]

Martin, answer the question that I actually ASKED, not the one you are twisting it into, okay?

 

[Zoe Doidge]

Incest is incest regardless of orientation - so, yes all forms should be banned.

Morality and opinion most certainly have value in a debate otherwise we would all just be robots.

Not on their own, because in any given debate there are at least as many opinions as there are people in the room.

Any person's opinion is only as valuable as any other persons opinion, which means they cancel each other out. What tips the balance is evidence or logical deduction, and the burden of proof is always on the one making an assertion.

 

[nnmartin]

well for a start, incest is banned - in the outside world anyway.

As for value of opinion, that is for a judge to decide in the final analysis.

but as for this particular debate then, yes, I can agree that each person's opinion has equal weight.

 

[nnmartin]

Okay, here's a hypothetical situation for you.

Billy and Sally are brother and sister in their early twenties. They are very close. They have sex after both agreeing to it. They both enjoy it and they both feel comfortable with what they have done. They use contraception so that Sally will not get pregnant.

In this particular instance, have either of them suffered abuse? If so, please be specific. Have either of them acted immorally? (Remember that morality is subjective!) Can you point to any specific harm that has been done to ANYONE?

What they have effectively done here is destroyed their natural sibling love and warped it into one of self-gratifying lust. Here they have both harmed themselves mentally and the law needs to protect people against themselves in cases like this.

It may be so that your hypothetical pair have the intelligence to deal with it but there are likely many out there that do not.

Incest is a destroyer of families and family values.