Tiberius
Well-Known Member
ok, well we are both scratching away here agreed.
No. You are scractching. I am trying to fix it, but you keep scratching again.
What does this have to do with incest? Are you trying to muddy the issue?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Should incest be banned?
- Thread starter nnmartin
- Start date
No. You are scractching. I am trying to fix it, but you keep scratching again.
What does this have to do with incest? Are you trying to muddy the issue?
McBell
Unbound
And?
Why should YOUR principles take precedent over everyone else's principals?
You keep saying this but never support it with anything other than unsupported claims.
McBell
Unbound
Which "traditional family" are you referring to?
InformedIgnorance
Do you 'know' or believe?
Was that directed at me (because I was the only one who posted prior to your statement)? If so then nothing I stated had anything to do with semantics, nor should you consider my 'waffle' pointless - unless you feel that people who are attempting to identify what your position IS are engaged in a pointless activity? If so, then you posting your position in order to influence others is ALSO a pointless activity, because unless they identify what your position is they can hardly find it pursuasive.
Personally I read your posts and carefully tried to understand your reasoning as well as your position itself (hence my questions); I disagree with it to a large extent, but I have not dismissed anything you have said as being waffle or the like. Some parts I have labelled either inaccurate or subjective - for which I have given explicit reasons why I question the reliability of such reasoning, it is because of those given reasons that I found those subjective arguments to be pointless - not your POSITION (and certainly not you the person), merely ARGUMENTS you used to support that position.
Whether 'psuedo waffle' or just plain 'waffle' you really do seem to have an issue with me asking you questions to clarify what actually is your case, or providing you with suggestions to help your case... Its rather intriguing just how readily you resort to discounting other people's comments when you do not understand what they say - or perceive it to be contrary to your own position.
Last edited:
Tiberius
Well-Known Member
Doesn't seem like Martin has an answer to that...
Zoe Doidge
Basically a Goddess
It's fairly clear that although people like nnmartin don’t agree with incest they have no genuine reason to impose that view on others. It’s not even just him, it’s not like this is a closed thread but nobody else on this rather well populated forum has provided any real reasons beyond their own personal distaste, and we’re now coming up to 450 posts.
In the context of a genuine debate the one and only issue brought up so far that has any relevance is the genetic problems caused by inbreeding, but that’s a problem that can easily be resolved and would not apply at all to cases of homosexual incest or where at least one partner was infertile (when taken to mean conception is impossible as opposed to unlikely).
The other reasons range from the unsourced (a nice way of saying, “invented because it suits the position” like the psychological abuse argument to the patently ridiculous (against nature, immoral, depraved etc).
But society evolves, and slowly such bigoted bans get phased out. We’ve seen it happen with black people, gay people, transgendered etc. Eventually it’ll happen for this too.
In the context of a genuine debate the one and only issue brought up so far that has any relevance is the genetic problems caused by inbreeding, but that’s a problem that can easily be resolved and would not apply at all to cases of homosexual incest or where at least one partner was infertile (when taken to mean conception is impossible as opposed to unlikely).
The other reasons range from the unsourced (a nice way of saying, “invented because it suits the position”
like the psychological abuse argument to the patently ridiculous (against nature, immoral, depraved etc).But society evolves, and slowly such bigoted bans get phased out. We’ve seen it happen with black people, gay people, transgendered etc. Eventually it’ll happen for this too.
rageoftyrael
Veritas
Wait, nnmartin, how is incest with a regular sister wrong, but it's okay with a step-sister? Isn't the supposed morality pretty much the same thing? You are still siblings, even if you aren't related by blood.
I'll be honest, i read the first couple pages, and couldn't even imagine taking the time to actually read all 45 pages of comments, so i'll give my opinion, and try to respond from there.
In my opinion, incest isn't morally wrong. That is of course ignoring any coercion, molestation, ignoring age boundaries, and outright rape. Essentially, as long as the two people having sex are near the same age, aka, teens with teens, adults with adults, and there was no force involved, i don't see how it could be morally wrong.
Now, society views it to be wrong, and i imagine that has something to do with the birth defects that can arise from it, and the fact that most people simply don't look at their family members as people to have sex with. It is, in a way, linked to homosexuality. Essentially, it's two(or more) consenting adults, having their own particular sex. The health issues don't matter, because they are adults, and can do what they want.
It really does seem like most people who are against it aren't looking at it from a purely pragmatic point of view. They are taking a hate mentality to it. They personally don't like it, it disgusts them, and thus it should not exist. You do realize that your hatred of incest, and your desire to ban it, is, in ways, similar to racial extremism, right? How? Well, let's take the klu klux klan as an example. They hate black people. They want them to not exist. Unfortunately, they can't get rid of them, so they will make their lifes miserable, ban them from places, etc. and so forth. This may seem like an extreme comparison, and in reality it is, but there are similarities, are there not?
Now, i will say that keeping teenagers from committing incest is fine, due to the myriad of issues that can arise from it. Honestly, i would expect caring parents to try and keep their children from buggering each other, if they are aware of it, because incest isn't a particularly healthy thing, either physically, or i imagine, emotionally. It's just one more thing that you would try to protect them from.
I repeat though, if two(or more) consenting adults want to have sex, whatever kind that may be, why does it matter whether they are related or not? As it's been said, we do have various types of birth control and condoms, that would help avoid children. With that worry pretty much out of the way, it's just some adults giving each other pleasure. And really, what's so wrong about that?
Is it really so wrong, just because you are personally uncomfortable with it? And before you try and say, "no, it's wrong cause many people are uncomfortable with it" realize that an appeal to the majority does not make your argument sound, by any stretch of the imagination.
So, What i'm looking for here, those who would ban incest, even more so than it already is, lol, is for you to prove what about incest is so wrong, that we need to forbid people, the few who actually do it, from having incestuous sex. I will not deny that there could be birth defects, in the event of a child, or that there could be emotional issues involved, but again, are these issues so big, so important, that we should protect people from themselves? I mean really, it seems to me, that most people accept it as something they shouldn't do, and that to try to ban it or illegalize it, is mostly pointless, and simply a petty action by those who desire some kind of perfect world where what they don't like isn't allowed to exist.
Still sounds kind of like a hate group thing to me.
I'll be honest, i read the first couple pages, and couldn't even imagine taking the time to actually read all 45 pages of comments, so i'll give my opinion, and try to respond from there.
In my opinion, incest isn't morally wrong. That is of course ignoring any coercion, molestation, ignoring age boundaries, and outright rape. Essentially, as long as the two people having sex are near the same age, aka, teens with teens, adults with adults, and there was no force involved, i don't see how it could be morally wrong.
Now, society views it to be wrong, and i imagine that has something to do with the birth defects that can arise from it, and the fact that most people simply don't look at their family members as people to have sex with. It is, in a way, linked to homosexuality. Essentially, it's two(or more) consenting adults, having their own particular sex. The health issues don't matter, because they are adults, and can do what they want.
It really does seem like most people who are against it aren't looking at it from a purely pragmatic point of view. They are taking a hate mentality to it. They personally don't like it, it disgusts them, and thus it should not exist. You do realize that your hatred of incest, and your desire to ban it, is, in ways, similar to racial extremism, right? How? Well, let's take the klu klux klan as an example. They hate black people. They want them to not exist. Unfortunately, they can't get rid of them, so they will make their lifes miserable, ban them from places, etc. and so forth. This may seem like an extreme comparison, and in reality it is, but there are similarities, are there not?
Now, i will say that keeping teenagers from committing incest is fine, due to the myriad of issues that can arise from it. Honestly, i would expect caring parents to try and keep their children from buggering each other, if they are aware of it, because incest isn't a particularly healthy thing, either physically, or i imagine, emotionally. It's just one more thing that you would try to protect them from.
I repeat though, if two(or more) consenting adults want to have sex, whatever kind that may be, why does it matter whether they are related or not? As it's been said, we do have various types of birth control and condoms, that would help avoid children. With that worry pretty much out of the way, it's just some adults giving each other pleasure. And really, what's so wrong about that?
Is it really so wrong, just because you are personally uncomfortable with it? And before you try and say, "no, it's wrong cause many people are uncomfortable with it" realize that an appeal to the majority does not make your argument sound, by any stretch of the imagination.
So, What i'm looking for here, those who would ban incest, even more so than it already is, lol, is for you to prove what about incest is so wrong, that we need to forbid people, the few who actually do it, from having incestuous sex. I will not deny that there could be birth defects, in the event of a child, or that there could be emotional issues involved, but again, are these issues so big, so important, that we should protect people from themselves? I mean really, it seems to me, that most people accept it as something they shouldn't do, and that to try to ban it or illegalize it, is mostly pointless, and simply a petty action by those who desire some kind of perfect world where what they don't like isn't allowed to exist.
Still sounds kind of like a hate group thing to me.
nnmartin
Well-Known Member
Zoe:
you hope it will happen you mean.
Since when did morality count for nothing anyway?
How about obscenity laws for a start.
As far as I know , you are not currently allowed to view pornography in a public place - do you think that should be allowed too?
Most people aren't posting on this thread because they support same-sex marriage and the logic of that little liberal absurdity means that you have to legalise incest also.
They are keeping quiet only because they have to, and will do anything not to derail their position on the main topic (that being ss marriage).
you hope it will happen you mean.
Since when did morality count for nothing anyway?
How about obscenity laws for a start.
As far as I know , you are not currently allowed to view pornography in a public place - do you think that should be allowed too?
Most people aren't posting on this thread because they support same-sex marriage and the logic of that little liberal absurdity means that you have to legalise incest also.
They are keeping quiet only because they have to, and will do anything not to derail their position on the main topic (that being ss marriage).
nnmartin
Well-Known Member
I think you must have mixed up the words as I was talking about half-siblings with the other poster.
nnmartin
Well-Known Member
It is the blood relation which makes it wrong - brothers and sisters are supposed to look out for each other not have intercourse.
Why do they have to be 'near the same age' - incest is either wrong or it is not.
Is it wrong for a 40 year old man to sleep with his 20 year old girlfriend?
If not , then why is it wrong for middle aged daddy to sleep with his 20 year old daughter?
I can see that you are lacking in consistency already.
Wrong!
Incest and racism are completely unrelated issues.
I fail to see how you equate the restriction of sexual abuse, depravity, immorality, genetically deformed children and psychological abuse to a group hate thing.
I suggest you read some more of the 45 pages before making any more nonsense posts of this kind.
Tiberius
Well-Known Member
Can a person's grandfather on his father's side have sex with the same person's grandmother from his mother's side?
Zoe Doidge
Basically a Goddess
True.
Since it was based on nothing. Inbreeding creates an increased chance of genetic problems, which is a good case to suggest it's immoral. Consensual incestuous sex without reproduction does not, nor does it have any other negative results.
I don't know the exact laws regarding this in the UK, but I imagine it would come under public obscenity laws if you were showing porn in a way that random people were able to see it. And rightly so, because that would essentially be forcing others (including children) to watch it too.
I also agree on a ban on public sex for the same reason, incestuous or not.
What about those who oppose both, or even just have no opinion on gay marriage? Despite this being a pretty controversial topic we've really had little input from those that oppose it for any reason.
I suspect the reason is much simpler, like you they oppose incest purely based on how they feel about it (either instinctively or as a result of conditioning by society) but they cant think of any way to actually show why its wrong. To someone like myself that holds logic in high regard thats a warning bell that the way I think about something is wrong and needs to be re-examined, and why I changed from what would have been complete opposition to incest to complete support.
Most people dont seem to think like that, and that is what makes this similar to racism.
nnmartin
Well-Known Member
of course, the thing with racism is that it's just an extension of Mans' natural xenophobia - ie: it's xenophobia un-tamed.
Incest is the same here.
Most people have an inbuilt mechanism that opposes it because we know intrinsically it is wrong - thus a restriction is needed (ie: banning)
Incest is the same here.
Most people have an inbuilt mechanism that opposes it because we know intrinsically it is wrong - thus a restriction is needed (ie: banning)
McBell
Unbound
:biglaugh:
nnmartin
Well-Known Member
I think we've been over this point already.
How would it be possible to ban sex only between those who do not choose to reproduce?
It is hardly possible therefore a blanket ban on all incest makes sense.
Homosexual incest especially because it is the height of depravity.
It's a clear slippery slope this one - if two brothers have sex then what is going to stop one of them from raping his sister when she turns down his advances?
Once the animal beast of lust and immorality is risen in some people they find it very hard to control themselves.
McBell
Unbound
Are you serious?
You really do not know the difference between incest and same sex marriage?
