Should incest be banned?

[nnmartin]

Because the reason behind it no longer applies to us anymore. That makes using that response to enforce a ban a form of tyranny.

tyranny - come on , you can't be serious!

 

[nnmartin]

Not to mention incest, divorce, beastiality, necrophilia, pre-marital sex....

gotta nip that slippery slope in the arse as hard and as fast and as often as we can!!!

I can't really see where divorce and pre-marital fit into the picture.

 

[Zoe Doidge]

tyranny - come on , you can't be serious!

Why not? The government is suppressing the rights of individuals when there's no need to.

And I'm always serious.

 

[Tiberius]

yes, I would have thought so because they are not blood related in any close degree.

So it seems that your claim that incest within a traditional family unit needs further clarification.

Homosexual incest especially because it is the height of depravity.

Yeah, because homosexual incest is MOST likely to result in reproduction!

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?

You've gotta be kidding me.

Are you seriously so deluded as to think a gay man will rape a woman? And do you really think that any man is likely to rape a woman if she turns down his advances?

Do you routinely rape women who turn you down? I didn't think so.

Now, take the case of possession of child pornography.

One of the reasons for this is in fact a slippery slope type factor.

That is , to prevent people from being encouraged in acting out their depraved fantasies which they see on their screen.

this logic clearly ties in with other forms of perversion - eg: bestiality and incest.

There really is quite a significant chance of someone's mind being warped to such an extent (even if not specifically noticeable) that acts of seemingly mild deviance can escalate into far more serious ones - ones which actually cause real objective harm.

Of course, in the case of child pornography, it can easily be demonstrated that the child is harmed by it, either physically, emotionally, or both. You have consistently failed to show any specific example of harm that stems from consensual incest.

 

[McBell]

I can't really see where divorce and pre-marital fit into the picture.

That is because you cherry pick your Bible verses.

 

[nnmartin]

I don't recall putting forth any Biblical quotes on this thread.

but anyway, how can you tie in pre-marital and divorce to the incest issue?

 

[rageoftyrael]

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.

Okay, so i'm gonna take a moment, and essentially explain why almost everything you say here is wrong.

First thing, you say that apparently sex between step-brothers and step-sisters is okay, cause it isn't blood. But you then proceed to say that brothers and sisters are supposed to be watching out for each other, not having sex. Again, why is this not the case with step siblings? If it's wrong one way, why isn't wrong the other way? Is the blood the only thing that's important?

Next, you spend several lines pointing out my mistake in stating they should be near the same age. I felt it was pretty obvious i was saying, teens with teens, adults with adults. I wasn't specifying age of adults. I also went on to say that i didn't feel that incest between teens was okay, but more as a kids don't need to be having sex in general thing, rather than having much to do with the incest issue.

I'm not really sure how i'm an inconsistent person, considering the argument that would make me inconsistent was brought forward by you. Or am i wrong. Anyone, did i really imply what he said?

Next, you simply say that racism and incest hatred aren't related at all, even though i explained why it was. You then proceed to say that i posted nonsense, which is kind of ridiculous, considering you cherry picked 4 sentences out like a hundred, and couldn't be bothered to actually adress what i was really getting at.

You dodged the issue by finding some small points that you could find flaw with. My primary points were that there isn't anything actuallly wrong with incest. You simply find it to be disgusting, and think it should be banned. Please, combat this point. What is wrong with incest, other than that you find it disgusting? Don't use birth defects, molestation, rape, or emotional issues, because they don't hold up.

Birth defects are easily avoided with contraception use and birth control. Molestation, rape, coercion, anything like that, are different issues entirely, where incest may simply be what is committed.

Essentially, i'm against rape, molestation, and etc. so the fact that you throw incest in there means nothing. As for emotional issues, again, if consensual adults decide they want to have incestuous sex, any emotional issues that may come up, are their problem, and certainly not enough reason to ban something. So, you can't use any of these arguments. They are invalid. So, again, what is wrong with incest?

 

[nnmartin]

Again, why is this not the case with step siblings? If it's wrong one way, why isn't wrong the other way? Is the blood the only thing that's important?

Yes, blood relation is the thing that makes it clearly wrong.

It's an abomination against the Order of Nature.

What is wrong with incest, other than that you find it disgusting? Don't use birth defects, molestation, rape, or emotional issues, because they don't hold up.

You allege they don't hold up; that means nothing.

How could you possibly prove this?

Birth defects are easily avoided with contraception use and birth control.

How can you enforce contraception use?

Think about the morality aspect as well.

 

[Tiberius]

Yes, blood relation is the thing that makes it clearly wrong.

As others have mentioned, this is only the case if children are produced. In this day and age, such is easily preventable.

It's an abomination against the Order of Nature.

You keep using this as an argument, but you NEVER define what "order of nature" is.

You allege they don't hold up; that means nothing.

How could you possibly prove this?

Because incest does not require ANY of them.

How can you enforce contraception use?

How can you enforce seat belt use?

Anyway, the Catholic church seems to think that contraception usage (or lack of such) is something they can enforce.

Think about the morality aspect as well.

I have, and morally I don't have a problem with it. Sure, you do, but that's because everyone's morals are different, and it is unfair for the morality of one person to be used to dictate laws for everyone.

 

[9Westy9]

do you think anything should be banned is the important question here.

murder, rape and the usual associates.

what do you think of Zoe's idea of imprisoning parents who have children through incest?

I'd disagree. Unless she, or you, can provide a legitimate moral reason why incest committing parents should be imprisoned.

 

[9Westy9]

I agree. I like incense. I often burn a stick or two of it while posting on RF, and it's really done me no harm at all.

Frubals

 

[nnmartin]

You keep using this as an argument, but you NEVER define what "order of nature" is.

there is an entire thread on the matter in this very section.

have you not seen it?

How can you enforce seat belt use?
Anyway, the Catholic church seems to think that contraception usage (or lack of such) is something they can enforce.

that implies then, that many people will not use contraception properly so we will end up with some undesired mutant babies. Then what?

 

[McBell]

there is an entire thread on the matter in this very section.

Yes, there is an entire thread on the matter.
Problem is that you never define what it is in that thread either.

 

[nnmartin]

A lot of it is about how are bodies were designed to work - mainly in the reproductive sphere.

We are not meant to have incest because of the results with the offspring - Nature's way of telling us no.

Tab A fits into Slot B - Nature's way of telling us how to reproduce.

that's easy enough to understand even for you right?

 

[McBell]

A lot of it is about how are bodies were designed to work - mainly in the reproductive sphere.

I am willing to bet that you have absolutely no clue "how our bodies are supposed to work".

We are not meant to have incest because of the results with the offspring - Nature's way of telling us no.

How does this "logic" apply to all the genetic diseases that non-incest relationships still produce?

Tab A fits into Slot B - Nature's way of telling us how to reproduce.

that's easy enough to understand even for you right?

Except that tab a also fits into slot c and d...

 

[nnmartin]

Yes, but the coupling with slot C or D does not produce children.

big difference.

A healthy brother and sister having a child could well lead to retardation.

But those with inheritable traits have something wrong with them already, and it is hence passed on.

Can you see the difference yet?

 

[rageoftyrael]

You also seem to be ignoring the fact that incest is actually completely normal amongst animals. i have personal experience with dogs. I have seen a female dogs have pups, and then later on down the line, one of the pups impregnated her. Interestingly enough, there wasn't anything wrong with any of those puppies.

So, based on that alone, it would seem that the nature example doesn't hold up to terribly well. Course, that is the same with homosexuality, but i digress.

Now, it has been explained to you, repeatedly by now, why none of your arguments work, and it was actually just said a few posts back that every argument you have brought forth, doesn't actually have to have anything to do with incest. If you can avoid having children, then genetic birth defects and such don't really mean much, do they?

As for rape, molestation, so on and so forth, incest can be involved, but these acts are wrong in and of themselves, perhaps more so because they are being committed by a close family member, but incest doesn't inherently have to be forced to happen.

And again, any mental health issues can be ignored, simply cause it is up to the people who are doing it whether or not they care about that. If, and i say if, because i haven't seen any proof that there is any mental health issues that arise from consensual incestous sex, there are mental health issues, why would we ban it? Just cause it MIGHT give them mental health issues? There are any number of things that can give people mental health issues, and i bet some of them you'd be up on the stadium pole, hollering that they are people's rights.

And please, nnmartin, don't say a thing about my comment about homosexuality, or i will know that you really don't have an argument. Don't change the subject. What is wrong with consensual incestuous sex between two adults? I've explained why none of the arguments you have put forward are particularly valid. So, either come up with something new, or admit that you simply think it's gross, and that the bible told you to hate it.

 

[rageoftyrael]

Yes, but the coupling with slot C or D does not produce children.

big difference.

A healthy brother and sister having a child could well lead to retardation.

But those with inheritable traits have something wrong with them already, and it is hence passed on.

Can you see the difference yet?

Lol, but didn't you say earlier that the worst possible thing would be gay incest? Where procreation is literally impossible? Now you are saying incest is wrong simply cause a child could result. Which is it?

 

[McBell]

Yes, but the coupling with slot C or D does not produce children.

big difference.

Then your comment "Tab A fits into Slot B - Nature's way of telling us how to reproduce" is not accurate, is it?

A healthy brother and sister having a child could well lead to retardation.

"could well lead"?
Seriously?
That is the best you got, "could well lead"?

But those with inheritable traits have something wrong with them already, and it is hence passed on.

Are you pretending to be that ignorant?

Can you see the difference yet?

I can see that your "argument" is so inconsistent as to be worthless.

 

[nnmartin]

Then your comment "Tab A fits into Slot B - Nature's way of telling us how to reproduce" is not accurate, is it?

How else can humans reproduce naturally without taking the Tab A and Slot B routine?