Jump to content

What makes incest wrong?


Renegade

Recommended Posts

Father and son = children. ya sure?

...I tell ya its gold jerry, gold !

Is that like the riddle....

father and his son are involved in a car accident, as a result of which the son is rushed to hospital for emergency surgery. The surgeon looks at him and says "I can't operate on him, he's my son".
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 190
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

No one seems to have anything intelligent to add to this discussion.

From what I can see, if two consenting adults from the same family wanted to marry, they could probably go to the courts to get the laws overturned, and make this happen.

It won't happen, though, for the same reason that same-sex marriage wasn't allowed for twenty years after it could have been: people will not stand for it.

In the end, after all the baying you hear about the constitution and judges making laws, the fact is that the people ultimately allow or disallow these things to happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kengs (or the new guy Don Cherry), being you're the ones espousing "morals" please answer...

If no one is harmed, is an action considered immoral?

If no harm occurs during an action is it still immoral?

And if so, what makes it immoral?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it is okay for two men to marry one another then why is it not okay for a 30yo son to marry his 50yo dad? Of course its illegal. Homosexuality used to be illegal to. Why is one group any more moral than the other? Why not do the multiple marriage thing. Why cant 6 guys marry each other? Why not marry a horse? Thats what you liberals want isnt it? A big party? On what moral ground can you say one group is better than the other?

Don, why should a 30yo son marrying his 50yo dad be illegal? Simply because you and others don't like it. Similarly why should 6 adults marrying each other be illegal? Marrying a horse is more problem because you need some way of knowing that the horse is capable of and is giving informed consent.

By your logic there is not basis for denying a father and a son to marry, seeing that both would be consenting to the marriage and the possible sexual relationship between the two would (not)produce any genetically deformed offspring.

That is true. There should be no basis for denying an adult father and son from marrying.

I would like to marry my sister so that she could receive my CPP survivor benefit in order to raise her standard of living. It's another kind of love but love nevertheless. Would this be wrong?

Wrong is a subjective assessment. Should it be illegal, no.

No one seems to have anything intelligent to add to this discussion.

From what I can see, if two consenting adults from the same family wanted to marry, they could probably go to the courts to get the laws overturned, and make this happen.

It won't happen, though, for the same reason that same-sex marriage wasn't allowed for twenty years after it could have been: people will not stand for it.

In the end, after all the baying you hear about the constitution and judges making laws, the fact is that the people ultimately allow or disallow these things to happen.

One of the more thoughtful post in this thread I've seen. Ultimately I think you are right, this is illegal simply because enought people "don't like the idea" but are unable to provide sufficient other justification.

It bring up the interesting discussion of if enough people are repulsed by it, perhaps only because it invokes an emotional reaction, should that be sufficient critieria to ban an activity?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What makes incest wrong, if one needs to ask that question this country has gone to the dogs.

Absolutely we should always examine an re-examine what we permit and disallow to make sure that there are real and jutified reasons for doing so. Only by questioning and not take it as an assumption do we evolve.

Children rarely or happyly agree to have sex with their fathers or brothers, it's called sexual abuse for a reason.

It is easy to answer the question of why children having sex with their parents is "wrong". It is because they are incapable of giving informed consent, however incest spans much more than child-parent relations. Specificly what shoudl be addressed is why we disallow adults from making their own decisions about their sexual partners if there is mutual informed consent.

To assume that one would willing sleep with a direct family member is beyond repulsive to me, has society sunk to that level of deprevation that having sex with a sibling/parent could be deemed OKAY.

Indeed, it shouldn't matter if it is repulsive to YOU. You can set a standard of behaviour well beyond what is legal. The question is should it be illegal? Making it legal doesn't mean saying it is "OKAY". What is deemed "OKAY" is a personal assessment.

-------------------------------

BTW, while it may have offended you to even be asked the question, you still have not answered it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Absolutely we should always examine an re-examine what we permit and disallow to make sure that there are real and jutified reasons for doing so. Only by questioning and not take it as an assumption do we evolve.

Interestingly enough, our attitudes towards family marriages have hardened over the years, not theother way around. I can assure you that 300 years ago marrying a 3rd cousin wouldn't have raised an eyebrow....or even a 2nd cousin.....and I believe there is no law in Canada to prevent 1st cousins marrying....although few would find it normal now, in the 17th or 18th century it happened all the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Absolutely we should always examine an re-examine what we permit and disallow to make sure that there are real and jutified reasons for doing so. Only by questioning and not take it as an assumption do we evolve.

It is easy to answer the question of why children having sex with their parents is "wrong". It is because they are incapable of giving informed consent, however incest spans much more than child-parent relations. Specificly what shoudl be addressed is why we disallow adults from making their own decisions about their sexual partners if there is mutual informed consent.

Indeed, it shouldn't matter if it is repulsive to YOU. You can set a standard of behaviour well beyond what is legal. The question is should it be illegal? Making it legal doesn't mean saying it is "OKAY". What is deemed "OKAY" is a personal assessment.

-------------------------------

BTW, while it may have offended you to even be asked the question, you still have not answered it.

If you think incest is acceptable we have nothing to discuss, it's repulsive to me. Do you understand that??

If it were legal for brother and sister to marry it is I as a member of Canadian Society that would be expect to pay into yet another social program to aide the children born of incest. We have enough broken unwanted children in this world we do not need children being born as a result of incest burdening our healthcare system or our social service system.

In closing it's repulsive to me, morally absolutely repulsive that any SANE individual could consider incest NORMAL between two consenting adults. I cannot phanthom a thought process that can justify something so repulsive. Homosexuality has been around since the dawn of time, the act of incest within familys is just as old but it's called "Sexual Abuse" now for a reason. Not love but abuse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you think incest is acceptable we have nothing to discuss, it's repulsive to me. Do you understand that??

I understand it is repulsive to you. FWIW it is repulsive to me too. However, I don't think what is repulsive to either of us is sufficient criiteria to make it illegal.

If it were legal for brother and sister to marry it is I as a member of Canadian Society that would be expect to pay into yet another social program to aide the children born of incest. We have enough broken unwanted children in this world we do not need children being born as a result of incest burdening our healthcare system or our social service system.

So your objection is based upon the cost to the health and social system? Can I then assume that you have no objection to cases of incest where no children can be borne? Can I also assume you have the same repulsion to partners who marry and and have genetic disorders which they may pass on to their children?

In closing it's repulsive to me, morally absolutely repulsive that any SANE individual could consider incest NORMAL between two consenting adults. I cannot phanthom a thought process that can justify something so repulsive. Homosexuality has been around since the dawn of time, the act of incest within familys is just as old but it's called "Sexual Abuse" now for a reason. Not love but abuse.

It is not a question of what is "NORMAL" it is a question of what shoudl be illegal. Many consider sodomy in opposite-sex relationships ABNORMAL, yet not illegal.

It is clear what your standard of morality is. What is not clear is why your standard shoudl be forcefully imposed on everyone.

Edited by Renegade
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interestingly enough, our attitudes towards family marriages have hardened over the years, not theother way around. I can assure you that 300 years ago marrying a 3rd cousin wouldn't have raised an eyebrow....or even a 2nd cousin.....and I believe there is no law in Canada to prevent 1st cousins marrying....although few would find it normal now, in the 17th or 18th century it happened all the time.

Of course. There was a time when spousal abuse was tolerated, even expected. We can't evolve our system unless we constantly ask why.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes it should be illegal, if we stop making incest illegal it allows them to breed. In order to protect society from these repulsive persons they cannot be allowed to breed ergo producing off spring with IQ's as low as 65. A liberal social experiment at the expense of society will not be tolerated by us Cons. I cannot see society ever accepting Incest as a norm, never. We as a society deem what is acceptable and this type of behavior should remain illegal to protect society from being victimized by a small morally bankrupt segment of society. If one can't control their sexuality and feels compelled to have sex with their sibling or parent, society is better off if they breed with Lassie not a human being.

There are limits to what the far left can inflict apon society in the name of tolerance, it's not tolerance to me it's lack of morals and ethics. Morally corrupt souless human beings that will force their perversions onto society. We won't allow it, or we shall fight the grand fight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes it should be illegal, if we stop making incest illegal it allows them to breed. In order to protect society from these repulsive persons they cannot be allowed to breed ergo producing off spring with IQ's as low as 65.

Protect society???? How on earth is society threatened? You don't avoid the question of why you don't have the same revulsion of two carriers of genetic diseases procreating. You also avoid the question of if procreating weren't an issue, wouild it make incest ok?

Finally what about the case where the participants aren't genetically related (eg adopted kids), would that still be considered repulsive by your criteria.

A liberal social experiment at the expense of society will not be tolerated by us Cons. I cannot see society ever accepting Incest as a norm, never. We as a society deem what is acceptable and this type of behavior should remain illegal to protect society from being victimized by a small morally bankrupt segment of society. If one can't control their sexuality and feels compelled to have sex with their sibling or parent, society is better off if they breed with Lassie not a human being.

There are limits to what the far left can inflict apon society in the name of tolerance, it's not tolerance to me it's lack of morals and ethics. Morally corrupt souless human beings that will force their perversions onto society. We won't allow it, or we shall fight the grand fight.

It would seem you are very comfortable imposing your standard of morality on everyone else. I am not. IMV, the separation of church and state, morality and law is a fundamental principle of our society.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is ridiculous. We in a Democratic society have decided that incest is to be illegal. It is the will of the people. If some people do not like the laws the majority has laid out, don't let the door hit your ass on the way out. Maybe in a few decades or so the majority of people will decide that incest is okay and it won't be illegal anymore and it's T.S. for the other side. This is about setting rules and following them and we have done so in the most fair way possible by a democratic government run by the people for the people. It is much more fair than being held hostage to some parchment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is ridiculous. We in a Democratic society have decided that incest is to be illegal. It is the will of the people. If some people do not like the laws the majority has laid out, don't let the door hit your ass on the way out. Maybe in a few decades or so the majority of people will decide that incest is okay and it won't be illegal anymore and it's T.S. for the other side. This is about setting rules and following them and we have done so in the most fair way possible by a democratic government run by the people for the people. It is much more fair than being held hostage to some parchment.

I suppose you are right. The majority has decided it should be illegal simply because they say so, and they are the majority.

IMV that is poor justification. Majorities decided that slavery was ok because they said so.

I guess we have not evolved enough to a level of thinking that does not depend upon the emotional reaction of the majority to decide on the legality or illegality.

It would be interesting to see a court challenge on this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice feminist myth.

For many years, societal responses to domestic violence excluded legal intervention. Advocates for battered women claimed that male batterers were rarely arrested, prosecuted, or sentenced as severely as other violent offenders. Research showed that these claims were accurate. Police often exercised discretion in avoiding arrest in responding to domestic violence incidents where there was probable cause (Black and Reiss, 1967). In many departments, policies for domestic “disputes” actively discouraged arrest, focusing instead on alternative responses such as family crisis intervention or counseling for batterers with alcohol abuse problems (Bard and Zacker, 1971). Prosecutors failed to actively pursue cases where victims and offenders had intimate relationships, fearing that women might drop charges (Parnas, 1967). Sentences often were less serious for males convicted of domestic violence.

The Criminalization of Domestic Violence: Promises and Limits

Now go prove why you think this is a myth.

Edited by Renegade
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No "morals pushers" have answered these questions... I will continue to repeat them until I get an answer....

If no one is harmed, is an action considered immoral?

If no harm occurs during an action is it still immoral?

And if so, what makes it immoral?

Got any answers there folks?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

'guyser' said]

It is illegal because the gene pool gets very murky. Marry your offspring, who is asking for that? NO one is and to introduce it as the same as gay marriage is fruitless.

Reply

30YO son with 50 YO Dad has nothing to do with passing on genetics. Again on what moral ground can you say yes to same sex marriage and not to a father son marriage?

Guyser said

The bible has nothing to do with this. It is a book, a book for christians, and has many wonderful stories and ten commandments that are pretty good for people to follow.

But it is irrelevant in this discussion.

Reply

The Bible is what this countries legal system was built on and based on. The far left since the 60s seems to want to base our legal system on "whatever floats your boat".

Drea asked

Kengs (or the new guy Don Cherry), being you're the ones espousing "morals" please answer...

If no one is harmed, is an action considered immoral?

If no harm occurs during an action is it still immoral?

And if so, what makes it immoral?

Reply

Children are harmed from incest regardless of their age.

Children are harmed by multiple partners being married at the same time.

Children are harmed from gay marriage because they can go out and adopt children.

If you ever become a parent your view of the world will change. BTW I dont even go to church but the way our society is headed down the toilet scares the hell out of me. We were a lot better off when we were a Christian Nation. Now we are just a sad joke. No wonder so many in the world looks at us as infidels. Heck im even disgusted at us. We are a Joke.

Haha We used to look down on Commie Pinko you know whats. Haha Now I wonder what they call us? Were worse right now than they ever were. Boy that Bay Booming Generation that had everything given to them sure made a mess out of our country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,712
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    nyralucas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
    • babetteteets earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...