Switzerland might make incest legal.

[Doctor VonSexMachine]

We even let alcoholics have children even though we know having alcohol during pregnancy can cause severe disability.

In some states (South Carolina, to name one) it is illegal to cause harm to a viable fetus through neglect, which includes the abuse of drugs and alcohol.

We can't stop people from having kids (although a small, angry part of me wishes we could) but we can persecute those who harm them.

 

[ramboondiea]

this is so wrong, the chances of any child being born with no problems is minute. and legalising it is paramount to encouraging it.
come on Switzerland, get your crap together

This is such a fallacy. This is akin to saying that endorsing contraception encourages promiscuity. Anal Sex is legal, does that mean the state is encouraging it? Farting, I'm pretty sure, is also not a crime. Why would the government want us to do that?

Making something legal does NOTHING MORE than say there is nothing directly harmful or unfair about it. Which is true.

no this is not a fallacy, its roughly 3 time more dangerous when same family parents conceive. also its harmful to the child psychologically, can you imagine what what happen if children at there schools ound out?
and your right, encourage was a strong word, iv already had to address it by about 5 others who have quoted it, but removing the deterrent of punishment is dangerous, alot of peoples only reason for commiting certain crimes is the chance of punishment

Of course, it isn't a crime right? And I think you put a little too much stock into 'children at school finding out'. That is like saying adoption should be illegal. Or just heaving a dead beat dad/mom. Inbreeding can become a problem, but is not inherently one. Also, who says they will get pregnant? What if she's on the pill? What if they correctly use a condom? Your arguments against this require a whole lot of assumptions that aren't realistic.

and just what assumptions arent realistic? and your notion that just using protection solves all problems is very optimistic. people forget to take pills (which dont work 100% anyway) same with condoms, your applying unrealistic assumptions that everyone is clearly as sensible as you and considers protection

 

[Xojins]

I'm usually pretty open minded (especially when it comes to issues of sex/sexuality), but I think incest is pretty disgusting. If inbred offspring isn't proof enough of that, then... wait a second... *vomit*

 

[Dags90]

In some states (South Carolina, to name one) it is illegal to cause harm to a viable fetus through neglect, which includes the abuse of drugs and alcohol.

We can't stop people from having kids (although a small, angry part of me wishes we could) but we can persecute those who harm them.

Incest laws, as they currently exist, attempt to stop people from having kids. If we're going to start punishing people for things that might be a small increase in danger to their kids, we're entering sketchy territory. I think incestuous couples should have the right to try and have children, the same as I can choose to put my child at risk by driving them to youth football.

 

[NeutralDrow]

...okay. I mean, it's already legal in a boatload of places for first cousins to marry.

And it's not like it would be common, anyway. Incest taboos in most places are the result of biological factors discouraging it. No real point in criminalizing the exceptions.

 

[NeutralDrow]

Good.

Should be legal everywhere.

are you serious?

if inbreeding spreads, evolution could go backwards.

(Inevitable statement along the lines of "that's not how evolution works")

Also, you seem to be under the very weird impression that only legal sanctions keeps people from boning their close relatives.

 

[Zechnophobe]

this is so wrong, the chances of any child being born with no problems is minute. and legalising it is paramount to encouraging it.
come on Switzerland, get your crap together

This is such a fallacy. This is akin to saying that endorsing contraception encourages promiscuity. Anal Sex is legal, does that mean the state is encouraging it? Farting, I'm pretty sure, is also not a crime. Why would the government want us to do that?

Making something legal does NOTHING MORE than say there is nothing directly harmful or unfair about it. Which is true.

no this is not a fallacy, its roughly 3 time more dangerous when same family parents conceive. also its harmful to the child psychologically, can you imagine what what happen if children at there schools ound out?
and your right, encourage was a strong word, iv already had to address it by about 5 others who have quoted it, but removing the deterrent of punishment is dangerous, alot of peoples only reason for commiting certain crimes is the chance of punishment

Of course, it isn't a crime right? And I think you put a little too much stock into 'children at school finding out'. That is like saying adoption should be illegal. Or just heaving a dead beat dad/mom. Inbreeding can become a problem, but is not inherently one. Also, who says they will get pregnant? What if she's on the pill? What if they correctly use a condom? Your arguments against this require a whole lot of assumptions that aren't realistic.

and just what assumptions arent realistic? and your notion that just using protection solves all problems is very optimistic. people forget to take pills (which dont work 100% anyway) same with condoms, your applying unrealistic assumptions that everyone is clearly as sensible as you and considers protection

No, I am not assuming they use it, but what you are worried about is:

1. Incest occurs
2. No successful protection is used
3. The woman actually gets pregnant
4. No day after pill or abortion is done
5. Child has psychological trauma due to being taunted by kids at school.

Not only is it a bit of a flimsy stance to say that being an incest baby will be traumatic (without some pretty beefy backup), but all of the above can be true for so many different possible 1. conditions that it would clearly be silly to pull incest out as the problem. Should naming your kid something sorta silly be illegal? I mean, THEY MIGHT GET TAUNTED.

This is just ridiculous.

 

[Mikester1290]

LOL

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gk3Dt9HVDac

 

[YukoValis]

Wow, this thread just made The Escapist feel a lot dirtier. Incest just feels... gross.

But why? could it be backwords thinking? I mean it's just love that happens between family members. Is that so wrong I wonder? Hmm

Just love between family members? So the love between family members is the same as me wanting to stick my penis in my mother's or grandmother's vagina? Sorry to be blunt but my opinion on the matter is that wanting to sex up your family warrants some concern.

Not really. It's love. I didn't say anything of mother/son, father/daughter. I am talking brother and sister mainly. If you generally fall in love with a person it doesn't matter their relation. There are stories of old where two people fall in love and get married without even knowing they were related. Why must it make such a difference in knowing? As I said before, getting kids with disorders is rare unless it's been done in the same family over and over again.

What if someone falls madly in love with someone else, but that someone else is a corpse. Is right that the person in question wants to have sex with that corpse? It's a consenting adult and someone who doesn't say no.

Well obviously two people aren't consenting right there Is ANY relationship healthy when only one side loves the other? dead or alive.

 

[McNinja]

The problem with incest is the fact that there is no diversity in the genes. It would be the same thing over and over, and eventually it would lead to mutations, and we don't want that, because that is bad.

 

[ramboondiea]

this is so wrong, the chances of any child being born with no problems is minute. and legalising it is paramount to encouraging it.
come on Switzerland, get your crap together

This is such a fallacy. This is akin to saying that endorsing contraception encourages promiscuity. Anal Sex is legal, does that mean the state is encouraging it? Farting, I'm pretty sure, is also not a crime. Why would the government want us to do that?

Making something legal does NOTHING MORE than say there is nothing directly harmful or unfair about it. Which is true.

no this is not a fallacy, its roughly 3 time more dangerous when same family parents conceive. also its harmful to the child psychologically, can you imagine what what happen if children at there schools ound out?
and your right, encourage was a strong word, iv already had to address it by about 5 others who have quoted it, but removing the deterrent of punishment is dangerous, alot of peoples only reason for commiting certain crimes is the chance of punishment

Of course, it isn't a crime right? And I think you put a little too much stock into 'children at school finding out'. That is like saying adoption should be illegal. Or just heaving a dead beat dad/mom. Inbreeding can become a problem, but is not inherently one. Also, who says they will get pregnant? What if she's on the pill? What if they correctly use a condom? Your arguments against this require a whole lot of assumptions that aren't realistic.

and just what assumptions arent realistic? and your notion that just using protection solves all problems is very optimistic. people forget to take pills (which dont work 100% anyway) same with condoms, your applying unrealistic assumptions that everyone is clearly as sensible as you and considers protection

No, I am not assuming they use it, but what you are worried about is:

1. Incest occurs
2. No successful protection is used
3. The woman actually gets pregnant
4. No day after pill or abortion is done
5. Child has psychological trauma due to being taunted by kids at school.

Not only is it a bit of a flimsy stance to say that being an incest baby will be traumatic (without some pretty beefy backup), but all of the above can be true for so many different possible 1. conditions that it would clearly be silly to pull incest out as the problem. Should naming your kid something sorta silly be illegal? I mean, THEY MIGHT GET TAUNTED.

This is just ridiculous.

actually my major worry is this the biological issues a child could have. but yet again which child will suffer more? the one with a unusual name, or the one whos mom is also his sister? and theres plenty of backup for traumatised children, we covered it in psychology at collage we we had a lengthy debate on incest effect, its the only reason iv posted on here in the first place is because i remember much of what i read then.
and your the one being ridiculous, you trivialising what can be a very serious issue by comparing it to relatively minute things

 

[Fleaman]

I'm for this, but everyone who says kids are out is right, and everyone who says inbreeding doesn't traumatize the genome is ass wrong. Aristocrats and royals across history and nationality have practiced inbreeding, and the results are pretty consistent. It basically destroyed the Hapsburgs, and made them look stupid while it was doing it.

But yeah, I say otherwise go for it. I'm interested in what happens to sex mores if the next generation can have intra-family sex, though I hypothesize that family dynamics will actually remain pretty much the same.

 

[Aphroditty]

Actually, no, it's not a 'misconception'. It's a deep seated biological response. It's not something you can 'educate' because women actually imprint at birth to their babies. This isn't to say that you can't love an adopted baby but it is to say that for a woman it's a big deal to lose their ability to give birth.

Sure it's a big deal to lose childbirth--if you believe the only way to have offspring that are "yours" is through childbirth. If you're saying that it is biologically impossible to love a child not associated with the process of childbirth as much as a child associated with childbirth (I say associate because babies switched out for other babies grow and are loved just as much as the one that's "imprinted" on), then you are wrong.

Indeed, the intense trauma and that many women associate and can experience when it comes to childbirth, which certainly would certainly tend to crowd out that "imprinting," and the fact that babies are often born through Cesarean section, would certainly seem to harm the idea that the act of childbirth is seriously necessary to developing a bond with the child. More than that, many women do not instantly bond with their child, at time of birth or even longer afterward; but later on they often do. Now, unless all of these cases are cases where the child is, again, loved less than a child born without incident, they definitely suggest that this "biological response" is not important enough to seriously consider.

Childbirth is only vital to those who maintain the misconception that it actually is vital. Childbirth is not unimportant, but it is a misconception that childbirth is of paramount importance in developing a relationship with a child, or with making that child legitimately "ours."

 

[The Wykydtron]

Meh whatevs I don't particularly care...

 

[GothmogII]

The problem with incest is the fact that there is no diversity in the genes. It would be the same thing over and over, and eventually it would lead to mutations, and we don't want that, because that is bad.

That assumes the children of an incestuous relationship would also be into incest. You know, how children of a gay parent are always born gay? One would also assume, taking this solid line of reasoning, the children of parents who are into bestiality would therefore also partake, or S&M for that matter.

Makes sense, given how children of religious parents are likely to also be religious due to their up-bringing. Right?

/end sarcasm.

My point being, that while I'm not discounting the fact that yes, parents pass on ideas to their children, it's a little silly to assume that just because the parents are okay with it means that the children are somehow going to be beholden to the same lifestyle. Then again, maybe you're right, and that is a sad thing, but it's not because of the incest, it because of the parent who would try to force that on their offspring.

I'm for this, but everyone who says kids are out is right, and everyone who says inbreeding doesn't traumatize the genome is ass wrong. Aristocrats and royals across history and nationality have practiced inbreeding, and the results are pretty consistent. It basically destroyed the Hapsburgs, and made them look stupid while it was doing it.

But yeah, I say otherwise go for it. I'm interested in what happens to sex mores if the next generation can have intra-family sex, though I hypothesize that family dynamics will actually remain pretty much the same.

There's two words for that: GENERATIONAL INBREEDING.

As in, in-breeding that takes place over several generations, over many years, within the same family. A single instance of in-breeding as has been mentioned several times, is unlikely to cause significant genetic damage or deformity over regular breeding.

 

[One of Many]

I'm for this, but everyone who says kids are out is right, and everyone who says inbreeding doesn't traumatize the genome is ass wrong. Aristocrats and royals across history and nationality have practiced inbreeding, and the results are pretty consistent. It basically destroyed the Hapsburgs, and made them look stupid while it was doing it.

But yeah, I say otherwise go for it. I'm interested in what happens to sex mores if the next generation can have intra-family sex, though I hypothesize that family dynamics will actually remain pretty much the same.

Ah but things like the Habsburg Jaw take generations of family members with the same condition breeding to really mess them up. The first few generations of in-family breeding should turn out fine.


As for my option on the whole incest matter, its not really my cup of tea but if you have consenting adults, who wants to have a sex and they happen to be related, fine. I don't want to hear about it but I wont stop you.

 

[TaboriHK]

While it's creepy, I don't think the government has any business telling people who they can and can't marry.

 

[Leftyrem]

just no your of the same blood and its messed up anyway.