Incest

[Hitro]

Originally posted by IceBlaZe
First of all, aren't we assuming there is nothing wrong with being gay? That it is a perfectly valid sexual orientation, such as heterosexual?
Secondly, no, it doesn't, since you are discussing the effects of education on sexual orientation, and I'm talking about parents using education as a means of exploiting their kids into incest.

Very good point. Gay parents wouldn't have any reason to use education to "make their children gay" (which is hardly possible, as otherwise no heterosexual parents would have gay children).

As said earlier the big difference is that incest is a choice, while homosexuality is not. A sexual orientation is not limited to an individual, so you can be homosexually, heterosexually or for f*cks sake ( ) bisexually oriented, but there's no orientation like "thathotgirlnextdoorsexuality" or - in this case "mydaughtersexuality".

And the genetic problem is reason enough to prohibit it. The reduction of the gene pool will inevitably lead to usually recessive illnesses becoming more common, so incest has to be prevented.

Sure this is no problem as long as they have no children, but what would you do if the woman/girl gets pregnant? Force her to abort?

 

[FredLC]

Originally posted by IceBlaZe
First of all, aren't we assuming there is nothing wrong with being gay? That it is a perfectly valid sexual orientation, such as heterosexual?

Sure, and rightly so. See, democratic environments operates under a principle of freedom, that states that individuals are legitimate and able to do whatever they want, until it is somehow qualified as harmful and outlawed. As all arguments used so far to outlaw homosexual behavior fail to demonstrate why it is harmful, than they are invalid as sources, and the principle of freedom should prevail.

Originally posted by IceBlaZe
Secondly, no, it doesn't, since you are discussing the effects of education on sexual orientation, and I'm talking about parents using education as a means of exploiting their kids into incest.

And how can you assume that a couple of incestuous parents would do it just because they are incestuous? They won’t necessarily brainwash their kids just because their sexual behavior is not the most socially accepted one.

Let’s assume, for the sake of argument, that somehow it gets proven that a incestuous couple is abusing their rights as parents and is brainwashing their kids into doing anything (doesn’t even need to be about incest); Than, I’d support them loosing their parenting privileges… but than again, I’d say the same about any regular average couple which did it.

Simply, assuming they will do so is no legitimate point.

Originally posted by IceBlaZe
No, I didn't mean this concerning brother/sister incest - but cocerning parent/child incest. I don't persume incest as being wrong, I persume parents using their position to drive their kids to sexual relationships with them from early age as wrong.

See above.

Regards .

 

[Hygro]

Other than birth defects, I feel incest encourages clanism--though it might be that clanism encourages incest.

 

[Akka]

Originally posted by Hitro
And the genetic problem is reason enough to prohibit it. The reduction of the gene pool will inevitably lead to usually recessive illnesses becoming more common, so incest has to be prevented.

Sure this is no problem as long as they have no children, but what would you do if the woman/girl gets pregnant? Force her to abort?

I think that, by far, the worst part of incest is the extremely unhealthy relationship, the possible abuse of dominant position, and the eventual "emotional blackmail".

 

[FredLC]

Originally posted by Akka
Do, voted "yes" while wishing voting "no".

Incest is twisting one kind of natural love (family bonds) into another. There is also the fact that parents have authority over their children. It's abuse of power.
And finally, it's a choice, as Ponthius pointed. It's not something you're naturally inclined to.

Well, I do not think that one has the ability to decide who he/she will like. And even it it is a choice, don't we live in a society where people has the right to choose? And even more, this is mixing incest with child abuse and pedophilia, when I have already argued that they are not the same things.

A father/mother imposing his/her will over a daughter/son is wrong, I agree, but not because it's "incest". It's wrong because it's pedophilia/child abuse. It's a rather different than, for example, adults brother and sister, which is also "incest" by all means, but lacks the "imposition of power" and "abuse of underage" aspects.

Anyway, just to reinforce it, I also disagree with it in emotional grounds. Just that I find no logical reason to counter it but tradition, and hence, I can't support laws forbidding it. Please, provide me a good reason.

Regards .

 

[FredLC]

Originally posted by Hitro
And the genetic problem is reason enough to prohibit it. The reduction of the gene pool will inevitably lead to usually recessive illnesses becoming more common, so incest has to be prevented.

Hitro, I adressed that in my first post, on page 2. Would you care to counter my points?

Regards .

 

[Hitro]

Originally posted by Akka
I think that, by far, the worst part of incest is the extremely unhealthy relationship, the possible abuse of dominant position, and the eventual "emotional blackmail".

That's true, but not for all cases of incest. A brother/sister relationship doesn't necessarily have such a structure. On the other hand quite a few non-incest relationships have...

Originally posted by FredLC
And how can you assume that a couple of incestuous parents would do it just because they are incestuous? They won’t necessarily brainwash their kids just because their sexual behavior is not the most socially accepted one.

It is not about the parents having an incestous relationship. It is about them, or one of them, wishing one with his children. He will then teach them that it is the only right thing to do, and that should be prevented, as it is abuse.
But if incest was legal there were no grounds to do that.

 

[FredLC]

Again, this casuism will have to be proven in each case, and cannot be generalized like that. And also, parents that raises their children to work as sex substitutes also happens inside marriages that originally are not incestuous, and in fact, it's more common than one might think. In the small inner towns here in Bahia, it's a true social problem that the police and the public ministry fight with frequency, and I happen to personally know of a case.

So, stating that a incestuous couple is more prone to that than a heterossexual couple is a false argument.

Regards .

 

[Akka]

Originally posted by Hitro
That's true, but not for all cases of incest. A brother/sister relationship doesn't necessarily have such a structure. On the other hand quite a few non-incest relationships have...

All incestuous relationship have unhealthy base, by the very fact they are incestuous.
Family love twisted into sexual relationship feel horribly unhealthy to me.

Ok, I admit I cannot explain it rationnally. I don't know for sure if it's because I'm emtionnally teached from birth that incest is repuslive, or if it's because this twisting of love is by its very nature emotionnally unhealthy.

 

[FredLC]

Originally posted by Akka
Ok, I admit I cannot explain it rationnally. I don't know for sure if it's because I'm emtionnally teached from birth that incest is repuslive, or if it's because this twisting of love is by its very nature emotionnally unhealthy.

My point, exactly.

 

[Hitro]

Originally posted by FredLC
Hitro, I adressed that in my first post, on page 2. Would you care to counter my points?

Allright, but note that I see that there are differences between for example parent/child and sibling/sibling incest.

The first is worse, it is wrong especially for the reason discussed by IceBlaZe and me.

The second itself is not a problem (though I personally find it very strange) as long as we are talking about consenting adults.

The only problem I see with it is the one of genetics when it comes to having a child. And only that matters, the relationship itself can't be sanctioned anyway (in other words, they'll just do it), as Marla said very correctly.

Considering this issue you said:

In that case, the argument that incest should be outlawed because it can generate a genetically defective offspring is invalid. First, because this would demand that the prohibition would lie not in the marriage itself, but in the act of having children, so, a law just prohibiting pregnancy in the union between too close relatives would suffice.

It would suffice in strictly theoretical terms. But practically I would do everything to prevent such a law.
A law like that would be fundamentally opposed to the idea of equality under the law. It would be "second-grade unions", and that is something I am completely opposed to.

For the same reason do I support homosexual marriages and adoptions, because I think that every union that is deemed acceptable by the state should be equal under the law.

If I take this consequently, that only leaves the possiblity to allow everything or nothing. Otherwise it would open the door to prohibit all kinds of people from having children, if their genes are not deemed "good enough".

So in these purely technical terms I am pretty much "on the fence" on the issue. I'd either be in favour of completely legalizing all kinds of unions, no matter the family relations, or to prohibit them. And in that split situation the emotional aspect may come into play.

But it's also simply so that I think an individual has a right to live out his sexual orientation with all rights and resposibilities that come along with it - as long as it doesn't infringe on the rights of others.
But as said above incest I don't regard incest as a sexual orientation but simply as a choice.

 

[IceBlaZe]

And how can you assume that a couple of incestuous parents would do it just because they are incestuous? They won’t necessarily brainwash their kids just because their sexual behavior is not the most socially accepted one.

Say a parent is incestous and has no problem, simply said, screwing his daughter. Say he knows incest is legal in the age of consent. Say he has the ability to manipulate his daughter into believing incest is whats best for her. What makes me think he will do so? Human nature. Experience.
So far we know that regular heterosexual relationship is legal, correct? We also know a boss has the ability to manipulate his employee using his position, into a sexual relationship with him. Of course that is not always the situation. An employee and a boss can have a completely consensual relationship. Still, knowing human nature, knowing society, knowing experience - law is meant to be practical, and the law prohibits this type of a relationship. A commander in the army is forbidden to have any intimate relationship with his soldiers, for the same reason.

Simply, assuming they will do so is no legitimate point.

Actually, it is a very legimiate point. It already exists in law, at least here, one way or another. Boss-Employee, Commander-Soldier, Teacher-Student.

 

[Margim]

Theoretically, if there is nothing ethically wrong with aborting a pregnancy, there are no moral grounds to condemn incest (consenting adult incest - which is as different from child rape as paedophilia is from homosexuality) either, on the basis of the gene-pool defense used in earlier posts. Frankly, the only thing wrong with it is that people find it distasteful (yes, I actually do to).
Lets lose our so called 'enlightened' arrogance in talking about sexuality and admit that we all have our own standards to which none of us will completely agree. We have justifications, but is one person's really any better than anothers?

edit:spelling

 

[Hitro]

Originally posted by Margim
Theoretically, if there is nothing ethically wrong with aborting a pregnancy

What you are missing is that there is something ethically very wrong with forcing someone to abort a pregnancy.

 

[FredLC]

Hitro:

We are down to the purity of the terms, than. I agree with you that incest “qualified” by pedophilia/child abuse is inherently harmful. I am just pointing out that anything qualified by that would be, and, under that light, I see no logical reason to condemn not-qualified incest in the environment of a free society – as much as I do feel repulse for it on an emotional level. I personally don’t feel comfortable with the existence homossexualism or abortion, but I support both on the same grounds as well, the right to think differently from me. Think Voltaire.

In a side note, I’d have the same stance as you in that law about they being able to marry but not have children. I was just pointing out that if that were the problem, than banning it altogether, instead of just addressing the crux of the issue, would not be any more legitimate as solution.

Iceblaze:

My numerous replies to Hitro and Akka pretty much answer your points as well, for, as I stated, you can’t place that blame in the shoulders of the incestuous, as first, you can’t aggravate them all for something that some of them could do (you have to deal with it casuistically) and second, because that happens in family cores that are not originally incestuous as well, more frequently than we would like to believe.

Regards .

 

[Margim]

Hitro

Ok, so its unethical to force someone to abort a pregnancy, and but its fine to forbid a relationship based on personal choice? Either way, someone is enforcing double standards, hence my post above.

 

[Hitro]

Originally posted by FredLC
In a side note, I’d have the same stance as you in that law about they being able to marry but not have children. I was just pointing out that if that were the problem, than banning it altogether, instead of just addressing the crux of the issue, would not be any more legitimate as solution.

Well, and I was pointing out that it is.

Note though what I mean:

I agree with you that there is no reason to prohibit a relationship of consenting adults. But, to reiterate this, that is not practically possible anyway.

The question is not if it should be prohibited (you can't enforce that) but if it should be officially sanctioned.

And my answer to that is no, because all officially sanctioned unions should have the same status (for the reasons given in the last post). That would include the right to have children, and incestous children have to be prevented.

Of course a brother and a sister can have a relationship, what do you think you can do against that?
I just say they shouldn't be officially recognized.

 

[IceBlaZe]

My numerous replies to Hitro and Akka pretty much answer your points as well, for, as I stated, you can’t place that blame in the shoulders of the incestuous, as first, you can’t aggravate them all for something that some of them could do (you have to deal with it casuistically) and second, because that happens in family cores that are not originally incestuous as well, more frequently than we would like to believe.

You must understand that even if the parent doesn't actively educate his children towards such a direction, his psychological role in the child's mind is authoritative (amongst other things). It is simply wrong to allow a parent to exploit his position as a parent for incest, whether it is conscious or not.
This is the same reason for prohibiting boss-employee, commander-soldier, president-intern, teacher-student kind of relationship. Although, the latter is getting more common and accepted.

 

[Hitro]

Originally posted by Margim
Hitro

Ok, so its unethical to force someone to abort a pregnancy, and but its fine to forbid a relationship based on personal choice? Either way, someone is enforcing double standards, hence my post above.

Have you read my longer posts?

Well, the last one should clear it up at least.

 

[Akka]

Originally posted by FredLC
My point, exactly.

Yes, but anyway, be it either my conditionning, either that an incestuous relationship is by itself unhealthy, or most probably a good mix of two (honestly, I doubt that someone who is raised with our values, which hold incest in horror, could have an incestuous relationship and still be mentally healthy, not talking about the twisting of kind of relation that is involved in incest) I'm firmly opposed to it.

Deeply, firmly and strongly.