Should Incest be banned?

[Tiberius]

Eh, I'm more interested in the real world than in hypotheticals that will never happen. That said, there's psychological dangers involved with incest as well, like the example I gave from my earlier post. Incest between parents and their children is grooming and child abuse at it's very worst, imo

As I said, I'm, talking ONLY about incest involving consenting adults.

I agree that an adult having sexual contact with a child - ANY child - is wrong. But that's not what I'm talking about.

 

[Tiberius]

Sure, but the excellent and rational driver would know where that limit is and keep within it.

How about, if we're working on an assumption of fully consenting adults, wouldn't that also be an argument against rape laws too?

Rape laws wouldn't apply to a situation that involves only consenting adults.

Rape, by its very definition, means that at least one person is NOT consenting to the sexual activity.

I get that, but you're asking about changing the law, and the law doesn't only apply to a defined subset of hypothetical situations, it has to apply to any possible situation.

No it doesn't.

We don't have a single speed limit. We have one for small suburban roads, one for highways, and one for express motorways. The law is broken up so we can have different laws that apply to different situations.

My point with this thread is to show that if we talk about incest between consenting adults, there is no justification to have a law to forbid it. Any situation where you could claim there IS a justification to forbid it can be covered by a law which does not mention incest. For example, the case of a parent having sexual contact with a five year old child is covered by laws that forbid any sexual contact with children under the age of consent. If the incest is between two adults, but one of them has been pressured into it, again, there are laws which cover that situation without needing to mention incest.

You could make an argument about the moral objections to incest in certain circumstances, and you could even argue for relaxation or mitigation round the existing laws in different jurisdictions, but if you're talking about a simple question of legalising any and all consensual adult incest, you need to consider all of the possibilities.

Such consideration is impossible. When it comes to the age of consent, for example, the law here in Sydney Australia is 16 years. This age was set to try to make sure that people aren't having sex before they are mature enough to deal with it and properly understand it. But the simple fact is that there are some people who may have the level of emotional maturity at 15 to deal with it. And there are plenty of people who can be much older and still not have the mature to do it.

Same thing with drink driving laws. Here, the legal limit is 0.05%. Any higher than that and you are considered too intoxicated to safely drive your car, but under that is fine. But there are some people who could be at 0.03% and be too impaired, and others that could be at 0.07% and drive just fine.

Laws have to deal with a situation that applies on average. That's why the law is broken up into specifics. Because trying to get an average that works in a specific situation is much easier than trying to get one that works in many situations. That's why different roads have different speed limits. That's why different license classes have different blood alcohol limits.

So while an all out ban of incest might be the immediate conclusion if you are trying to make a single law that covers every single possible case of incest, if we look at a specific case of two consenting adults, I don't see that such a ban can be justified as easily.

If birth control was easy and effective, there wouldn't be so many unwanted or unexpected pregnancies. Plus, you assume your hypothetical couples want to use birth control. They could want to have children, either not knowing or not caring about the associated risks.

Birth control IS easy and effective. It's not that hard to put a condom on.

 

[Tiberius]

It's self-evident. I'm not explaining what should be elementary, why you shouldn't **** your relatives. Plus, others have already said why. I'm wondering why you need it explained to you. You should be the one telling us why you think it should be acceptable.

If you can't even back up your claim, then why should I accept it as true?

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

If you can't even back up your claim, then why should I accept it as true?

Excuse you, but you're the one who apparently thinks ****ing your relatives is acceptable. I'm not the one with bizarre, disturbing opinions that has some explaining to do. (If you don't, please correct me.) Why would you even bring this up? You live in a reality dominated by people like me, not the other way around. I'm not going to pretend that this is a serious discussion worthy of debate. I've reached my limit with degenerate crap. Are you going to ask if it's okay to have sex with animals next?

 

[Debater Slayer]

Yes, I believe incest should be banned. It involves the warping of relationship dynamics between family members to the point where I don't think consent between adults in an incestuous relationship could make it allowable either. Allowing it would open a Pandora's box of abuse, rape, and grooming.

 

[dybmh]

It's interesting how many responses seem to be unable or unwilling to address the specific carefully worded and qualified relationship described in the OP.

I also think it's interesting that consent seems to irrelevant to some people regardless of age.

 

[Tiberius]

Yes, I believe incest should be banned. It involves the warping of relationship dynamics between family members to the point where I don't think consent between adults in an incestuous relationship could make it allowable either.

How do you determine if it is consensual or not?

Allowing it would open a Pandora's box of abuse, rape, and grooming.

As I said, the scenario I'm talking about is not one where any of these things is taking place. Can you show that one or more of these things ALWAYS takes place?

 

[Tiberius]

Excuse you, but you're the one who apparently thinks ****ing your relatives is acceptable.

And you're the one claiming it isn't.

I've given my reasons whjy it would be permissible in some situations - specifically, that everyone is a consenting adult.

You can't give any justification for your claim.

I'm not the one with bizarre, disturbing opinions that has some explaining to do. (If you don't, please correct me.) Why would you even bring this up? You live in a reality dominated by people like me, not the other way around.

Actually, there have been quite a few people in here who have said that if they are consenting adults, they don't really have a problem with it, even if they themselves don't understand it.

You're one of the few people who have reacted so violently to it.

I'm not going to pretend that this is a serious discussion worthy of debate.

You came in here to scream your opinion, and now you are running away when asked to support your opinion.

You didn't come here to debate, you came to have a little rant.

 

[Soandso]

As I said, I'm, talking ONLY about incest involving consenting adults.

I agree that an adult having sexual contact with a child - ANY child - is wrong. But that's not what I'm talking about.

Even if the parent waits for the child to become an adult, the question of grooming is still there

 

[Tiberius]

Even if the parent waits for the child to become an adult, the question of grooming is still there

I would argue if that's truly consensual.

But in any case, what about if the child had been put up for adoption and only met the parent as an adult?

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

And you're the one claiming it isn't.

I've given my reasons whjy it would be permissible in some situations - specifically, that everyone is a consenting adult.

You can't give any justification for your claim.

Actually, there have been quite a few people in here who have said that if they are consenting adults, they don't really have a problem with it, even if they themselves don't understand it.

You're one of the few people who have reacted so violently to it.

You came in here to scream your opinion, and now you are running away when asked to support your opinion.

You didn't come here to debate, you came to have a little rant.

This board is hardly representative of the real world. People have all kinds of bizarre, uncommon views here. We used to have a guy who obsessively made thread after thread supporting beastiality. Yes, I am going to leave my opinion here and I don't live in bizarro world, so I'm not the one who needs to explain why it's bad. It's elementary, like I said. You're the one supporting something that is widely viewed as taboo and disgusting. It's a product of maladaption, abuse and/or mental illness. There is no healthy incest, especially between close relatives.

Also, individuals don't live in a bubble. What we do has wider societal effects. We do not need to be opening the floodgates to allow for incest, especially since history shows that when you give an inch, people will take a mile. The bar will keep getting pushed until we're allowing for all kinds of depravity. We're already at this point, hence why some people - who probably need to get offline for a bit - feel it's okay to seriously support such things. No, we need to keep the bar where it is. There is no compelling reason to allow or approve of incest. There's 8 billion of us, like @Shaul said. You're not being deprived if you can't bang a relative. Plenty of other fish in the sea. I'm not interested in your ridiculous hypotheticals ("well, what if this...what if that.."). No. The end.

Honestly, I also don't give a toss what you think. I'm not a debate junky. This is just entertainment when I'm bored at work. Some things need to be said, though.

 

[Tiberius]

This board is hardly representative of the real world. People have all kinds of bizarre, uncommon views here. We used to have a guy who obsessively made thread after thread supporting beastiality. Yes, I am going to leave my opinion here and I don't live in bizarro world, so I'm not the one who needs to explain why it's bad. It's elementary, like I said. You're the one supporting something that is widely viewed as taboo and disgusting. It's a product of maladaption, abuse and/or mental illness. There is no healthy incest, especially between close relatives.

Also, individuals don't live in a bubble. What we do has wider societal effects. We do not need to be opening the floodgates to allow for incest, especially since history shows that when you give an inch, people will take a mile. The bar will keep getting pushed until we're allowing for all kinds of depravity. We're already at this point, hence why some people - who probably need to get offline for a bit - feel it's okay to seriously support such things. No, we need to keep the bar where it is. There is no compelling reason to allow or approve of incest. There's 8 billion of us, like @Shaul said. You're not being deprived if you can't bang a relative. Plenty of other fish in the sea. I'm not interested in your ridiculous hypotheticals ("well, what if this...what if that.."). No. The end.

Honestly, I also don't give a toss what you think. I'm not a debate junky. This is just entertainment when I'm bored at work. Some things need to be said, though.

Doesn't matter. You still have made a claim and you are refusing to provide any support for it.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Doesn't matter. You still have made a claim and you are refusing to provide any support for it.

I gave my opinion. Take it or leave it. I dgaf.

 

[Debater Slayer]

How do you determine if it is consensual or not?

Given the dynamics of family relationships, I don't think one could reliably determine that such "consent" is given without some form of manipulation, grooming, or abuse.

As I said, the scenario I'm talking about is not one where any of these things is taking place. Can you show that one or more of these things ALWAYS takes place?

Then the scenario you're talking about is such a starkly rare exception, if it could even reliably be said to occur in reality, that it can't be the basis for a law. These things don't have to always occur for incest to be banned and treated as a malignant practice; they just have to occur in enough cases, which they do even when incest is banned. I can only imagine the can of worms that would be opened if there were no ban in place.

 

[Tiberius]

Given the dynamics of family relationships, I don't think one could reliably determine that such "consent" is given without some form of manipulation, grooming, or abuse.

Can you support this position?

Then the scenario you're talking about is such a starkly rare exception, if it could even reliably be said to occur in reality, that it can't be the basis for a law. These things don't have to always occur for incest to be banned and treated as a malignant practice; they just have to occur in enough cases, which they do even when incest is banned. I can only imagine the can of worms that would be opened if there were no ban in place.

I'm talking about ANY case where adults who are closely genetically related are engaging in consensual sexual activity. On what basis do you claim that this is a rare exception?

 

[Soandso]

I would argue if that's truly consensual.

But in any case, what about if the child had been put up for adoption and only met the parent as an adult?

I'm sorry, but the whole conversation is masturbatory. Anything can be made to be acceptable/less awful if you split it finely enough. The reason it's illegal is extremely obvious as the fruits of inbreeding and the psychological damage incest creates on the whole are what we see manifest in the real world time and time again. Simple as

 

[Tiberius]

I'm sorry, but the whole conversation is masturbatory. Anything can be made to be acceptable/less awful if you split it finely enough. The reason it's illegal is extremely obvious as the fruits of inbreeding and the psychological damage incest creates on the whole are what we see manifest in the real world time and time again. Simple as

I don't think looking at incest between consenting adults is splitting it finely. Seems to me that it could be a rather large segment of it.

Of course, if you have some source that incest is usually forced, or with underage kids, then by all means, share your source.

 

[Soandso]

Of course, if you have some source that incest is usually forced, or with underage kids, then by all means, share your source.

Where did I claim this?

 

[Tiberius]

Where did I claim this?

You said that I'd have to split the issue pretty finely to get to what I described in the OP, which was two consenting adults.

This suggests that you think that incest is usually not with consent, not with adults, or both.

 

[Soandso]

You said that I'd have to split the issue pretty finely to get to what I described in the OP, which was two consenting adults.

This suggests that you think that incest is usually not with consent, not with adults, or both.

That's not what I said. I was referring to the specific situation you proposed to me about a mother and her child who, as an adult, met for the first time and they fell in love. Of course that would be less awful than if a mother had groomed her child when they were a minor into being their lover when they became an adult, which was what I had talked about in the previous post. You then jumped to this conclusion and assumed I was making claims, or something

I'm kind of confused about the conclusions you're jumping to. Maybe if I were to be more clear that when I say "child" I mean offspring as the context of this discussion is incest, not pedophelia