Incest Debate

Now all we need is someone to break godwin's law to complete this thread.

 

I think you'll find that the proper completion of this thread will involve baby images.

 

Well Hitler loved animals and children. Something something. Bestiality and pedophilia should be legalised!

 

Incest is a mindblown thing. This shit always affects on you psychically. In a bad way.
I just avoided incest like a week ago from my father. He was drunk and he wanted to kiss me. Like you know, "hard" kiss. I understand that he doesn't have a woman like for many years and he was drunk so he couldn't to think what he is doing. But fuck. I couldn't talk with him normally like for 3 days after that. And still feeling some shit about that.
Maybe it's ok when both sides are ok with it. But when it's suddenly coming from one side - it is always just killing you mentally.

 

It's been discussed before that this is being discussed based on both parties being consenting.

 

But that's exactly what happened though. You don't see people getting to jail for having gay sex in countries where homosexuality is "legal".
If no "safe-age" would be associated with the issue and incest would be given a go-ahead, it would be abused in a multitude of ways. So before you go on a rampage in favor of legalizing incest, think about what things should be considered as well.

"Incest is legal" = Abuse.
"Incest is legal, here's a list of things you can do and can't do" = Leads to far less abuse.

Also, homosexuals have nothing to do with incest in most of the cases and they are extremely irrelevant in regards of the topic. Stop pulling them and "genetically handicapped" people as you so like to call them into this.

Having babies through incest is WRONG. Using legalized incest as an excuse for inbreeding and pedophilia is WRONG. Incest where both parties involved are both willing, of the proper age, remember to use protection and don't get kids is "acceptable". End of story.

 

I wasn't saying that homosexuals did have anything to do with incest in particular; you've completely misunderstood the analogy. The point of the analogy was in fact to draw parallels between legalisation of sexual and romantic expressions in the cases of incest and homosexuality. I could have used any example, but homosexuality happens to be the only example I can think of of a sexual/romantic behaviour that was relatively recently legalised.

No one ever for a moment suggested that incest should be legalised for underage people. You seem to have invented the idea that we were planning to just make underage sex legal as long as it was incest. The "safe age" would almost certainly be the same age as the current age of consent, though there would be an argument for raising it a bit higher or putting requirements on living situations or so forth.

Also when you quote someone as saying something ("genetically handicapped") you should really make sure that they actually ever said it.

Your last paragraph shows that we actually agree completely on the issue and this was a misunderstanding of what we meant be legalising incest. Pedophilia should never have actually entered this discussion; it's wrong, it will remain wrong, and it will remain illegal.


One final note: you should never declare something "end of story" in a debate. It comes across as ridiculously arrogant and close-minded.


Still, I'm glad that after all that we've actually discovered that we agree on this

 

End of story.

 

/thread

 

I see it multiple times in this thread that people are talking about family having sex and get babies.

While I am against this entirely I don't see why stopping two consenting adults (whether they are family or not and emphasis on ADULT) from having sex would be a good thing to make laws about.

 

im far too wasted rigt now yuo seriously talk aboutt his

but imagine that my a\rguement hd a lot to do with the social and psychological effects of wincest opposed to all this fucking shit about the scientific and genelogical results of it

expect a post from me wheb im no longer spinnning you shits

 

You were literally just talking perfectly fine and coherently in Mumble

 

we;; yeah

id be using my mouth, not my fingers

unless that's what you like you lovely piece of liverpudlian shit

 

I can't tell if that was intentional or not.

I'm not even going to read through this thread though, jesus.

 

no most of it is funny, i promise.

 

deep thoughts, deep thoughts man

 

Read that deep throat first time round.

 

why did i miss this thread

 

I'm staying on the fence for the moment. I read everything last night, and I need to read it again

 

That's a terrible comparison, as homophobia mostly stems from religious influences as far as I know. The reason it's been such a taboo subject in the Western world is because of it "defiling" traditional Christian values which have shaped it. America would be the prime example of homosexuality being considered taboo, as you can make a very valid argument that opposition to it stems all the way back to its predominantly Christian and Catholic settlers. In contrast, incest isn't a taboo defined by social values but almost natural values which vaguely exists in the psyche of humanity's mass-psychology. Homophobia is a social taboo which stems from a number of mostly externally created values, while incest is damned due to internal values seemingly held by the vast consensus of our species. If you look at the closest species to us, you'll see this is even reflected there; despite not having any social values to tell them not to, apes will naturally avoid breeding with siblings and 'family' if possible.

If you do a quick google swim about various civilizations, you find that there's a clear consensus among these strikingly different societies, all with hugely differing values and codes of ethics, on this subjects. Roman society, which could be seen as 'liberal' compared to the predominately Christian-based societies which would later replace its influence in the Western world, had no problem at all with homosexual relations between men and seemed to even expect it, with the only causes of disapproval being men acting in ways which went against Roman expectations of men; no punishment as far as I can find existed though, and from the sounds of it they permitted gay-marriage, despite how much the typical Roman may not approve. However, their equivalent of pedophilia was a capital offense (sex with a person under the age of 12, so I guess they're viewed sexual matureness as coinciding with puberty) and incest was considered an abomination, apparently used by politicians to accuse and slander one each other with accusations of it. Interestingly Caligula, whose mainly known as the "perverted tyrant emperor guy", reportedly did it with his sisters, so there's been a clear attempt to tie him with incestual acts to portray him as hugely perverse. And across history, the major civilizations which seemed to not explicitly punish incest were those which predominantly used it amongst royalty - obviously unlikely for love-related reasons, as opposed to keeping bloodlines pure (Ancient Egypt and Japan, for example).

What I'm saying is that among regular people throughout history, incest has been a natural taboo which resonates to this day, with the majority of reported acts of it seemingly about royalty, who obviously would for the most part largely considered themselves above the laws of men. This is even reflected in how history chooses to remember the significant people who shaped it; Alexander of Macedon reportedly had romantic feelings for men, yet history paints him as a valiant and generally great (huehue) guy - opposed to Caligula, whose become synonymous with all things considered perverse.

So there's clearly a consensus in the human psyche that incest is a hugely abhorrent act, perhaps mostly due to very notion our psyche holds that the family unit should fulfill. The family should be a source of platonic love; unbiased and unjudging support, regardless of how we choose to live our lives. The family seems to exist so that, regardless of our failures in friendship and romance, we still have a source of companionship to fall back on to prevent us from believing that we've reached a state of utter alienation. And I believe any act of incest warps the platonic nature of that support and, by twisting it into either romantic love or sexual interest, an individual will lose that source of uncompromising support that they should naturally have for their entire lives. I can't even guess how screwed up a person's psychology could be when they're utterly unable to tap into that natural pool of emotional support simply because they acted on sexual or romantic desire they might've had, only for it to fail to grow into anything substantial.

Incest itself in my opinion is the failing of the family unit to instil natural values into its kids about the roles of its respective members. The father is naturally a symbol of masculinity for both the son and daughter, and subconsciously they use their perception of him to govern how they see and judge other men, while the mother is the opposite. But when the platonic nature of such a relationship is shattered, I cannot believe that the love which results from it is as 'pure' as that which normally develops between adults - when a daughter sees her father as symbol of desire, not what she should desire, the feelings she has for him are going to have a lot to do with the psychological effects of being raised by him. And it's the same vice-versa with a son and mother and sibling for sibling; they're not developing 'natural' emotions for each other stemming from normal stimuli, but instead from the psychological element of being raised and growing up aside these people; a feeling of awe, idolization, dependency etc. I personally can not see an argument justifying incest ever really being made, because it seems to be a perversion of the nature of family, and any desire which fuels it is fueled hugely by so many psychological elements and complications, not to mention the damage that can be caused by entering a sexual relationship with someone who should naturally be a symbol of support and trust for a person.

 

This thread gave me cancer.