Incest "a fundamental right", says German Ethics Council

Status
Not open for further replies.
StayDead said:
If there's no pregnancy involved, then what's the big deal?

Also if you're banning incest on genetics grounds, are we then going to ban anyone who has a risk of passing on a disease from having sex too?
Click to expand...

How is banning a person from having kids with relatives the same as telling a person they can't have kids with anyone?
 
crazygambit said:
While I can understand being against it (I certainly am), do we really think as a society that the best course of action in this case was to separate a family, send the parents to jail and leave the children in the care of foster parents? 'Cause to me that sounds like a horrible solution.
Click to expand...

You mean the same brother, and sister(or father, and daughter)that bumped uglies? Yes I'm sure the kid going into foster care would be a better situation.
 
Rembrandt said:
How is banning a person from having kids with relatives the same as telling a person they can't have kids with anyone?
Click to expand...

Because of genetic defects, which is being braught into the argument as the reason as to why incest should be illegal. There are tons of people out there with genetic defects which they probably carry over to their children of even grandchildren, should they be prevented from having children as well?
 
Of course its a fundamental right, making something illegal that two consenting adults want to do and who aren't harming anyone else is infringing on their rights, I don't give a crap how gross someone thinks it i.
 
The Smoking Bun said:
Who are you to judge though? Maybe we should have a "Mind your own business" law
Now if there is any form of abuse occurring or if they have children they could be taken to court. Incestuous couple shouldn't be allowed to have children simply because of the high susceptibility to genetic disorders which affects the gene pool
and the possibility the child might grow up to be Joffery Baratheon

Conversely my argument almost sounds like eugenics. Couples where a partner has a genetic disorder not allowed to reproduce.
So we are back to the "It's icky and eww" reason. Bestiality would be a bad comparison since animals can't give consent and no rubbing against you does't mean consent
Click to expand...

Who am I to judge? Well, this is a discussion board for one. So I'm giving an opinion.

-Incest is wrong. I hope it stays that way...
 
CSX said:
So a lot of Germans realized that their little sisters couldn't be this cute?
Click to expand...

Just a question and a thought. Hearing about German porn could suggest a lot of those fake German pornos could actually be the real thing? Are they that comfortable with incest that they would somehow sneak it into their porn industry? If someone has the right answer, feel free to share it.

I am pretty much against it. I don't know what that would be like at all. I come from a close family. It all seems bizarre. If Cindy Crawford was my cousin.. hmm It feels like it is immoral and that it goes against Natural Selection. We lessen the chances of a child to inherit good genes, thus making it difficult for a child to survive. If they took the child bearing aspect away from it, then there might be a better case for legalizing it.
 
Ultimately I think it's nasty as hell, but I also have a firm belief that if your actions aren't harming anyone then your behaviour shouldn't be criminalized. And frankly, i fail to see why an activity between two consenting adults is a criminal act in any way.
 
"Two of the couple’s children are disabled, and it is believed that incest carries a higher risk of resulting in children with genetic abnormalities."

It's almost as if those "ignorant" ancients, when drafting up those laws knew full well what a fucking rabbit hole this shit lead down.
 
My view is that normalizing incest can change how a society views sexual relations down the road, since society itself deemed it as "eeew, gross and immoral". Such was the case in Ancient Egypt when siblings married each other inside the royalty to protect bloodlines. If such a thing becomes the norm, I really hope 50 years from now we dont have neighbors that introduce themselves as "Hi, I am John Doe and this is my wife Jane Doe. Jane is also my sister! I knew I loved her the moment I saw her changing pants when she was 13. And this is our kid Dewey Doe. Dewey say Hi to the nice gentleman!"
 
IAmRandom31 said:
Dude the chance of a woman in her 30s giving birth to a child with a disability is damned minuscule compared to the gigantic chance incest has of producing that result. Not even in the same stratosphere.

Ignoring this seems purely selfish and careless and childish to me. Almost like some people are speaking for certain things simply because it's an established rule. Fight the Establishment mentality almost. No matter how ridiculous




Well we are all adults here ... I mean why not right?
Click to expand...

because..the animals aren't consenting adults ...that might be issue one...of many
 
I'm absolutely against incest, especially if they're having kids, but I don't see why we let non-siblings have children who are known to have defects either. It's hypocritical. We should either go one way or the other imo. Either a tolerant society or one that weeds out chaff.
 
backslashbunny said:
I suppose that it should be legal, even despite the higher chance of abnormality in genetic expression (aka more defects), as long as other people aren't forbidden to have relations in the fear that the offspring might also be genetically abnormal.




IOW, just because a brother and sister child might have higher chances of mental/physical problems, that can't be stopped any more than someone with mental/physical problems can be stopped from reproducing.

If it's going to be illegal for incest due to the fear of children being abnormal, then all couples that want children can't have that risk as well.
Click to expand...

The difference is that people with disabilities have no workaround.

People having incest have billions of other mate options available to them.
 
RustyNails said:
My view is that normalizing incest can change how a society views sexual relations down the road, since society itself deemed it as "eeew, gross and immoral". Such was the case in Ancient Egypt when siblings married each other inside the royalty to protect bloodlines. If such a thing becomes the norm, I really hope 50 years from now we dont have neighbors that introduce themselves as "Hi, I am John Doe and this is my wife Jane Doe. Jane is also my sister! I knew I loved her the moment I saw her changing pants when she was 13. And this is our kid Dewey Doe. Dewey say Hi to the nice gentleman!"
Click to expand...

"He has six arms and six legs. You see he was the only one to survive"

He reaches over with the hand attached to his head to shake his hand. That's how I imagined incest growing up.
 
Servbot24 said:
The difference is that people with disabilities have no workaround.

People having incest have billions of other mate options available to them.
Click to expand...
"BUT THEY LOVE EACH OTHER!"

Northeastmonk said:
"He has six arms and six legs. You see he was the only one to survive"

He reaches over with the hand attached to his head to shake his hand. That's how I imagined incest growing up.
Click to expand...

According to "Honey Boo Boo" you can be born with a toe for a head.
 
Incestral breeding can cause cause birth defects,
so maybe breeding should be illegal, as it's not fair to the child born.

Though if protection is used, who cares what 2 consenting adults do in their private time.
Wasn't too long ago people frowned on other sexual acts/preferences that are seen as normal now.
 
Gonzalez said:
"BUT THEY LOVE EACH OTHER!"



According to "Honey Boo Boo" you can be born with a toe for a head.
Click to expand...

6a00e55214ffbe8834017d3c81819d970c-pi
 
MutFox said:
Incestral breeding can cause cause birth defects,
so maybe breeding should be illegal, as it's not fair to the child born.

Though if protection is used, who cares what 2 consenting adults do in their private time.
Wasn't too long ago people frowned on other sexual acts/preferences that are seen as normal now.
Click to expand...

Ironically, proponents of change during this time largely decried slippery-slope-to-legalizing-incest arguments as ridiculous and unfounded.
 
While I'm hard pressed to say I have a moral objection, I also don't have one to eating shit, but anyone who would choose to do so is a truly sickening individual.
 
Deified Data said:
I can't think of a single legitimate reason to outlaw incest between consenting adults in any way, shape, or form. We don't regulate any other relationships by the damaged offspring they may have (people with inheritable, congenital defects), or for their potential of abuse (Ray Rice is still with his fiance, right?), and we're currently in the process of dismantling the notion that you should be allowed to keep people apart because some people in society think their union is "gross" (increasing access to gay marriage). Let them be. We have bigger things to worry about.
Click to expand...

The issue is that there is an incredibly fundamental difference in power between a parent and child. Incest in this form is abhorrent because it's abusive by nature. A parent should never have sex with their child for a same reason that a teacher should never be with a student, or why a doctor should never be with a patient. This is a very sensitive relationship that needs to stay platonic, because any sexual contact is abusive almost by nature.

If a mother trains her son to be attracted to her, flirting with him throughout his teenage years, and regularly sleeping with him as soon as he comes of age, do you really think that is a consenting relationship? What if he doesn't want his mom to fuck him anymore, and she kicks him out?
 
Valhelm said:
The issue is that there is an incredibly fundamental difference in power between a parent and child. Incest in this form is abhorrent because it's abusive by nature. A parent should never have sex with their child for a same reason that a teacher should never be with a student, or why a doctor should never be with a patient. This is a very sensitive relationship that needs to stay platonic, because any sexual contact is abusive almost by nature.

If a mother trains her son to be attracted to her, flirting with him throughout his teenage years, and regularly sleeping with him as soon as he comes of age, do you really think that is a consenting relationship? What if he doesn't want his mom to fuck him anymore, and she kicks him out?
Click to expand...

I think that's why the distinction of "between consenting adults" is important.
 
Corronchilejano said:
I think that's why the distinction of "between consenting adults" is important.
Click to expand...

What I'm arguing is that there are very few circumstances in which a parent-child relationship is fully consensual. It should be illegal for the same reason that officers of the military aren't allowed to have sex with people under their command.
 
Sketchbag said:
If two grown adults even if they're be siblings want to have sex then you are in no position to tell them no.
Click to expand...

I agree even though I find it repulsive, however they should not be allowed to have children IMO... so how do you control that? Probably easier to forbid their union in the first place.
 
Valhelm said:
The issue is that there is an incredibly fundamental difference in power between a parent and child. Incest in this form is abhorrent because it's abusive by nature. A parent should never have sex with their child for a same reason that a teacher should never be with a student, or why a doctor should never be with a patient. This is a very sensitive relationship that needs to stay platonic, because any sexual contact is abusive almost by nature.

If a mother trains her son to be attracted to her, flirting with him throughout his teenage years, and regularly sleeping with him as soon as he comes of age, do you really think that is a consenting relationship? What if he doesn't want his mom to fuck him anymore, and she kicks him out?
Click to expand...

So arrest them if it happens when they are children. When they are consenting adults, nothing they can do at that point.
 
Azula said:
So arrest them if it happens when they are children. When they are consenting adults, nothing they can do at that point.
Click to expand...

What are you defining by "it"? There are tons of circumstances in which actual sex doesn't happen until age 18, but the abuse begins well before that.
 
Valhelm said:
What I'm arguing is that there are very few circumstances in which a parent-child relationship is fully consensual. It should be illegal for the same reason that officers of the military aren't allowed to have sex with people under their command.
Click to expand...

I posted something about that on page two. What I neglected to mention was that my gf found no problems with said family arising from the incest taking place. For them it was normal.
 
I bet we gonna treat this the same as homosexual relationship in less than 20 year. So maybe I should try to being "open-minded" from now before in future the witch hunt for the bigot started.
 
Valhelm said:
What are you defining by "it"? There are tons of circumstances in which actual sex doesn't happen until age 18, but the abuse begins well before that.
Click to expand...

The whole thing is problematic, and I don't see how a law can really stop it. Unless it's reported. My point is, arrest them based on abuse when they are children (if reported).

But you can't really do anything about it once their both adults and consenting. Unless the person consenting decides to press charges for past abuse. Laws outlawing incest when you are adults (marriage for instance) really makes no sense. Outlawing under age incest, makes more sense.
 
Learn to math people. For a specific gene, sure a sibling or random stranger could have the same chances of being a carrier. But multiply that for every recessive gene (or dominant for that matter) you share within your family, then birth defects would exponentially rise.

Legally I'm iffy on jailing people, but let's not pretend incest can only "indirectly" result in defects.
 
kingkitty said:
I would look down on anyone who would fuck their own sister. But I don't think it should be outlawed. Just don't reproduce.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't. I think it would be weird to me personally. But if they are both in love and the relationship wasn't born outside of a one sided abuse (that led to their current relationship), why the fuck not. I say, good for them for finding someone they love and want to spend their life with.

Again, to me it's gross. I couldn't comprehend it. But I can still step back and see it as two people being in love. I dunno. Not really sure that's something worth condemning someone over, or seeing them as a terrible person.
 
Gonzo The Great said:
This. As long as they don't reproduce, who cares what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their own home?
Click to expand...

What if, someone had a high probability for having offspring that had autism or some other kind of mental handicap (due to their genes). Would you be for banning them from having offspring? Isn't it their right to attempt to have a normal child? Who's right is it to stop them from trying?

I dunno. I used to agree that Incest breeding should 100% be illegal. But I kind of feel strange about telling who should and shouldn't have kids due to a probability of bad offspring.
 
Not my cup of tea, but if it's between consenting adults I don't have a problem with it being legal, as long as reproduction isn't involved.
 
I see it as a sexual preference. Like beeing straight, gay or bi.
If its consenting adults there is no problem in my opinion.
Just use protection.
 
Seems wrong to mandate such law overall but as long as they use protection and don't reproduce I guess it's ok...id hate to see a kid suffering from genetic defects from it all...
 
Volimar said:
Of course we're all forgetting the real consequences of brother-sister incest.
Click to expand...
joffrey_3x2.jpg


>.>

Valhelm said:
What are you defining by "it"? There are tons of circumstances in which actual sex doesn't happen until age 18, but the abuse begins well before that.
Click to expand...
Indeed. Same-age sibling incest is iffy enough, but parent/child, never. I don't care if the child is 30 and the parent is 55, there's just no way this can happen without an abusive past.
 
OldAsUrSock said:
No, it was this too but because people are so caught up in extremes, pedophillia was used more often than incest.
Click to expand...
&PogiJones : I did say mostly. I know it was used with many other thing among pedophilia ( the one I read the most ), polygamy or even bestiality.

And I would still call ridiculous and unfounded the idea that same sex mariage could lead in a way or another to unpunished pedophilia or bestiality. Polygamy and incest on the other hand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
Getting ads for a far-right party before the election in Germany
17
1K
EviLore replied
German RPGs
12
1K
Hudo replied
Council Estate glory days were INSANE
2
82
6K
Nostalgic Nightmare replied
Dragon Ball will continue for decades, says producer
News  2
76
3K
NahaNago replied
Breaking: US Treasury says it was hacked by China
2
75
4K
Lord Panda replied
Top Bottom