Incest

  • Esmo wrote:

    What evidence is there that the child of a close incestuous relationship will not have any greater likelihood of birth defects?

    I'm sure I've read (somewhere?) that incest only increases the likelihood of birth defects by a couple percent. So, there is a greater chance, it's just not that much. However, I've never found any compelling studies about it (not that I've really looked), and it'd be a difficult thing to study anyway because I'm guessing family history would be a pretty big variable.

    Studies aside, if you look at it purely by probability, then yes, the probability of birth defects or that even a "bad" recessive gene is passed on increases quite dramatically. But like I said before, defects might not actually start showing up until a few generations later, so one isolated case of incest may not be a big deal if their children don't have incestuous relationships.
  • adamEcstacy wrote:

    The question is whether or not to have incest legalized. If it were to be legalized, it doesn't mean you must go out and have sex with your sister or brother or mother or father.

    If gay marriage was legalized, would you go out and marry some other guy, while being a straight male?


    Its a good point, but honestly; I doupt congress would vote it in, it would just get bad publicity and all that junk..

    If someone wants to fuck a sibling, they'll do it.. Aslong as there is consent between the two, there really is point to get the law involved.. u kno?
    "I'm gods lonely man"
  • Treebark2268 wrote:

    Its a good point, but honestly; I doupt congress would vote it in, it would just get bad publicity and all that junk..

    If someone wants to fuck a sibling, they'll do it.. Aslong as there is consent between the two, there really is point to get the law involved.. u kno?

    So on the flip side, you're saying the law outlawing it shouldn't exist either.
    Just like the sodomy laws that no longer are in effect.
    Golden Enterprises, Inc. - CEO
    Iconiplex, LLC - Managing Member
    Emerald Summit Capital Group, LLC - President
  • Treebark2268 wrote:

    Well yeah, because people do it anyway.. I don't think the law will ever be flipped around to make it legal, but its going to happen nonetheless..

    There's also laws against theft, rape, and murder, but people do that anyway.

    I know the differing factor here is consent, but laws aren't made or repealed based on "people are going to do it no matter what, so why should we care?"
  • Scaredycrow wrote:

    There's also laws against theft, rape, and murder, but people do that anyway.

    I know the differing factor here is consent, but laws aren't made or repealed based on "people are going to do it no matter what, so why should we care?"


    So, there should be a law that will not allow two people who love each other?

    How is that right?

    Where have I heard this before again? :rolleyes:
    [CENTER][/CENTER]
  • THUNDERSTRUCK wrote:

    So, there should be a law that will not allow two people who love each other?

    How is that right?

    Where have I heard this before again? :rolleyes:

    I don't think they were debating over whether or not there should be a law that will not allow two people who love each other to do what they will.

    I think they were debating over whether or not "people are going to do it no matter what, so why should we care?" is a worthy argument.
    [CENTER]i found jesus
    [SIZE=1]...
    in a gay bar.
    [/SIZE]
    [/CENTER]
  • Treebark2268 wrote:

    Its not exactly enforceable.. LIke what, the incest police??

    When sodomy laws were in place, all the police needed was a phone call from a neighbor warranting concern that you may be performing acts of homosexual affection, so the police would come knocking on your door. It can be assumed that the same thing would take place for other laws, such as the ones against incest.
    Golden Enterprises, Inc. - CEO
    Iconiplex, LLC - Managing Member
    Emerald Summit Capital Group, LLC - President
  • Scaredycrow wrote:

    There's also laws against theft, rape, and murder, but people do that anyway.

    I know the differing factor here is consent, but laws aren't made or repealed based on "people are going to do it no matter what, so why should we care?"

    In your own words (with a little something I added) fits in this thread so it doesn't sound so hypocritical

    Scaredycrow wrote:

    I think what everyone is missing here is that gay marriage [and incest], if consensual, isn't hurting or bothering anyone. They're both happy, and if their [acts] gross you out, ignore them like you would any other two people. Whether gay marriage/incest is legalized or not, [it's] still going to happen.
    [CENTER]
    [/CENTER]
  • THUNDERSTRUCK wrote:

    So, there should be a law that will not allow two people who love each other?

    How is that right?

    Where have I heard this before again? :rolleyes:


    jerry wrote:

    In your own words (with a little something I added) fits in this thread so it doesn't sound so hypocritical

    I wasn't contesting incest, just his argument. You can't base laws around "well, everyone's going to do it anyway" or "we can't enforce that".

    I just mentioned consent because I know that comparing incest to theft/rape/murder is a little extreme, and obviously in cases like that, you're not going to consent to me stealing from you.
    With incest it's the opposite - consent would be required between both parties, so if it was legalized it wouldn't (or shouldn't) be as nearly as big of an issue than if theft was legalized. The point still being that consent is playing the biggest role here, not "people are going to do it no matter what".

    (I don't think I've ever said I'm against incest, just that I don't necessarily agree with it myself and there may potentially be some scientific concern surrounding it.)

    Sorry for being unclear guys, I hope that explains it!