Poll: Is incest wrong if it's consensual?

[Navvan]

Incest is not morally reprehensible. Anyone saying so must have the moral and logical comprehension of a child.

Why? Because being against incest boils down to "ew, I wouldn't do my sibling/cousin/parent! so it's wrong!". You guys know that 99% of homophobes oppose gay marriage for that very reason, and that you are likely to oppose them for it?

Anyway, you literally cannot support homosexuality without supporting incest, because all of the arguments that apply to homosexuality support also apply to incest.

Except for the genetic defects it can produce and the fact that we develop a metal block that prevents us from being attracted to our immediate family.

The extent of genetic birth defects/detriment to the children is being a bit overblown on both sides of this argument. It is neither completely risk less or an absolute detriment to the child. The reason we have a predisposition to incest is because diversity in offspring is a selected for not because of child birth defects. There is a difference.

Detrimental alleles are more likely to be passed onto the offspring of those with incest. Using basic genetics puts this at 25% chance of becoming homozygous for any particular allele. That means you have 25% chance of passing on the same alleles to your child, and if those alleles are detrimental in some fashion your child will exhibit that trait. Individual detrimental alleles are statistically unlikely to impact the quality of life of the child, and in one generation this is unlikely to accumulate to any serious problems. That is unless the parents are a carrier for a recessive disorder, such as the one that can cause cystic fibrosis or any other problematic recessive disorder.

However, serious cases like this are on the same order of likelihood as individuals passing down a problematic detrimental dominant allele. No one would advocate that anyone with a dominant detrimental allele should be forbade from having children, with lethal/torturous disorders like Huntington's Disease being the exception. The effect can be almost completely eliminated if you opt for expensive embryo gene screening. Thus the argument that it can have a negative effect on the offspring as having sex with a smoker. Less risk than a 40 year old woman having a child I believe.

That is of course under normal circumstances. For example if you know your family carries the gene for cystic fibrosis you defiantly are putting your potential child at risk.

Moral of the story, if you have the money get your genes screened people. And I mean all people, for the children. Also arguments about biological diversity being good for the species are moot. Not because it isn't true, but because as a society we have already set the precedent that what is good for the species isn't a prerogative.

 

[Brian Hendershot]

Each to their own. A few inbreed morons is not going to really speed up the rate of humanity's destruction. It's chugging along just fine by itself.

 

[Flunk]

Yes, it's gross. I can't believe anyone who posted that they would screw their sister/brother if they were attractive. I couldn't imagine sleeping with my sister (who is cute).

Attractiveness doesn't factor in to this equation. The incest taboo is there for a reason, to prevent inbreeding.

 

[Johann610]

Two separate things on the table here: Incest implies that A) Adults who are blood related are involved, or B) **Children** who are blood related are involved.
(B) is definitely illegal (and should be), because INFORMED consent cannot be given until 18, yadda yadda yadda.
Adult incest implies that some sort of Westermarck effect [wherein brothers, sisters, etc. in a family count each other as friends, but are repulsed sexually] did NOT take place, which IMPLIES either that the siblings did not KNOW one another as children [where the effect is built], or (B) that as kids they were involved.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imprinting_%28psychology%29#Westermarck_effect
From a genetic standpoint, now, no. Humanity has a gene pool, we're relatively safe, etc. But the implications of (B) are, to me, icky.

Freud couldn't see it because he never was part of a "family", and spent most of his time with his nurses, so his Westermarck imprinting never took place--in case you were wondering.

 

[witness51]

If I had a sister that I thought was sexually attractive and she was accepting of the advances, I'd screw her.

People are people, if you like them then do as you wish with them but you have to be aware of the consequences whatever they be.
Nobody should stop anyone from being together.

Yeah, you wouldn't say that if you had a sister.

 

[CLC Akira]

So my family and I were eating, and incest became, albiet briefly, the subject. So that got me thinking: is incest wrong if it's consensual?

EDIT: A lot of people think that something like that is going on in my family. No. Just... No. The thought is just... *vomits*

In a morally non bias world no it isn't. If both parties are consenting adults and willing to understand the possible after affects. It seems a lot of people don't remember that Egypt, Rome, China and a few other cultures practiced incest regularly. The royal families of ruling families thought that marrying your brother/sister (because they were of the same status) was a must. Inter-breeding does however come with some physical problem for offspring though. Really the only thing that makes it "wrong" is a moral judgment.

 

[Darkguy89]

It is wrong in so many ways unless you live in Tasmania.

 

[Joseph Valdez]

I find sex in general to be a disgusting thing. inbreeding makes it even worse.

Can't tell if serious or imitating Bender *motions towards your avatar*

 

[Sovvolf]

Also on a psychological level this has been talked about before hasn't it? Was it Freud who said that all boys want to sleep with their mothers secretly? or something like that... I need to stop watching late night documentary television.

If I remember correctly (I don't) I'm sure I heard somewhere that Freud's psychological theories have been either debunked or are out dated. Can't remember which.

Anyway on to the topic as hand. Maybe I'm a bit of a prude but honestly... The idea of having sex with a family member to be is very creepy and well... EEEeeeeeeewwwwwwww!!!! However this is my personal opinion on the matter. Though I've never had a sister (only brothers) I've had plenty of female cousins and such... I can't imagine ever sleeping with them... only I have now because of this article... HO GOD THE THOUGHTS THEY WON'T GO AWAY... HAAAAAAA!!!!

However, objectively, I can't see what is wrong with it. I don't think there's many-a-arguments that I could put up about it. This is talking, again, objectively. In the end of the day, its your own species and well... There's a hole there to fit it in. Though I don't like to look at the world objectively because that leads to a lot of problems which I won't really go into here.

Honestly though... You know, I'm no one to tell people what to do and if you* want to (sexually) destroy your sister than go for it but honestly... Ewwww. Now excuse me while I throw up.

*The OP.

 

[Odbarc]

I'd be worried about which family member brought this up and why.

 

[Loop Stricken]

If I had a sister that I thought was sexually attractive and she was accepting of the advances, I'd screw her.

People are people, if you like them then do as you wish with them but you have to be aware of the consequences whatever they be.
Nobody should stop anyone from being together.

Yeah, you wouldn't say that if you had a sister.

I have a sister and I said much the same thing. Thanks for playing.

 

[PureIrony]

There's nothing morally wrong with consensual incest. It's when the biological implications come into play that things start getting creepy.

 

[Mordwyl]

This is why we have idiots rampant in the world. Yes, it is.

 

[JambalayaBob]

It's not wrong if it's consensual. It happens, mostly to siblings who don't see each other in their formative years. If a child comes out of it, that's their own damn problem, and plenty of incestuous couples have still had healthy children. Why should two people in love with each other ever be considered wrong?

 

[witness51]

If I had a sister that I thought was sexually attractive and she was accepting of the advances, I'd screw her.

People are people, if you like them then do as you wish with them but you have to be aware of the consequences whatever they be.
Nobody should stop anyone from being together.

Yeah, you wouldn't say that if you had a sister.

I have a sister and I said much the same thing. Thanks for playing.

Then you don't have an attractive sister. I take it you've seen Yosuga no Sora.

 

[Soviet Steve]

Nonconsensual intercourse is wrong. Intercourse with a minor is wrong. Bunking with close relatives is unappealing to me but I don't see anyone's rights violated.

 

[Animyr]

Sure it's subjective, but since incest is a taboo in almost every human society, ever (especially parent-child) I think there's a good biological reason for it.

Socially, accepting consensual incest but not forced incest means you accept incest but not rape, so that's a different issue.

As for me....with the squick factor, the only way I'm really okay with it is in those rare cases where siblings are seperated at a young age and hook up as adults, oblivious to the connection. Can't really blame anyone for that.

 

[Loop Stricken]

If I had a sister that I thought was sexually attractive and she was accepting of the advances, I'd screw her.

People are people, if you like them then do as you wish with them but you have to be aware of the consequences whatever they be.
Nobody should stop anyone from being together.

Yeah, you wouldn't say that if you had a sister.

I have a sister and I said much the same thing. Thanks for playing.

Then you don't have an attractive sister. I take it you've seen Yosuga no Sora.

No I don't and no I haven't. I've said as much. Betting you never read the rest of the thread - Eight pages full of words?! No thanks guv!

Edit: Sounds pretty cool. Not sure why you brought it up though.

 

[Shadeovblack]

No. Their bodies, Their choice.

 

[Princess Rose]

So my family and I were eating, and incest became, albiet briefly, the subject. So that got me thinking: is incest wrong if it's consensual?

Parent/Child incest is always wrong (even if both adults and consensual) because there is always some sort of current of authority - in one direction or another. Parent/Child usually indicates abuse.

Sibling incest is a lot fuzzier. Siblings can be very close.

Is incest ever a good idea? No. Is it wrong if it's between siblings? Eh... depends.