Incest laws: just a matter of the "ick" factor?

[EnemyPartyII]

By this poster's logic, if a father has had a vasectomy and his daughter consents, then there's nothing wrong with that.

I've made my views clear back on the last page... but why don't you tell us, without appeal to tradition or "everyone knows" type arguments... what exactly IS wrong with the above scenario?

 

[BlackSabb]

I've made my views clear back on the last page... but why don't you tell us, without appeal to tradition or "everyone knows" type arguments... what exactly IS wrong with the above scenario?

Well sister, if you don't know what is wrong with that, you are as sick as Washington. I'll tell you plainly, that you're both a disgrace for even asking that, let alone harbouring such thoughts. Here's a better idea, why don't you both go to a psychiatrist and ask him/her that same question? Because you both need a professional to brief you in the basic facts of life, such as:

"You don't have sex with your mother/father".

Asking "what is wrong with a father having consensual sex with his daughter if the daughter has no chance of getting pregnant?" shows that you have deep, deep mental issues that only a specialised medical professional can help you with, and way beyond the scope of someone like myself. I am not even going to attempt to give you an answer if that is how badly disturbed you are.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

Well sister, if you don't know what is wrong with that, you are as sick as Washington. I'll tell you plainly, that you're both a disgrace for even asking that, let alone harbouring such thoughts. Here's a better idea, why don't you both go to a psychiatrist and ask him/her that same question? Because you both need a professional to brief you in the basic facts of life, such as:

"You don't have sex with your mother/father".

Asking "what is wrong with a father having consensual sex with his daughter if the daughter has no chance of getting pregnant?" shows that you have deep, deep mental issues that only a specialised medical professional can help you with, and way beyond the scope of someone like myself. I am not even going to attempt to give you an answer if that is how badly disturbed you are.

TRANSLATION: I can't provide you with a logical explanation, so rather than admit that just maybe my response to the subject has more to do with ick factor and indoctrination, have a large helping of ad hominem attack.

Yeah, that "without appeal to tradition or "everyone knows" type arguments" could have confused anyone.

 

[BlackSabb]

TRANSLATION: I can't provide you with a logical explanation, so rather than admit that just maybe my response to the subject has more to do with ick factor and indoctrination, have a large helping of ad hominem attack.

Yeah, that "without appeal to tradition or "everyone knows" type arguments" could have confused anyone.

I can't provide you with a logical explanation because your mind is so degraded that it won't appeal to any sense of decency or right or wrong. I can only be "logical" to a reasonable person. A person who thinks it's okay to have sex with their mother/father is anything but reasonable. No more reasonable in fact than a paedophile. I wouldn't use a normal sense of logic on a paedophile, and I won't use one on you, because your mind is just as warped.

You are diseased. Go and seek some professional help. That's the only portion of logic that I feel you are capable of understanding.

I'm prepared to stand up in front of a group of people, such as my work collegues or university classmates, and say "I believe that a father and daughter having consensual sex is sick".

I bet you any money that if I asked you to stand up openly in the same situation and say "What is wrong with a father having consensual sex with his daughter?", you wouldn't do it. You're all big and tough and bold as brass here on an anonymous forum, where you can play the gutless perverted wonder.

Prove the courage of your convictions sister! Stand up in front of all your work collegues or amongst a group of people and say "What is wrong with a father having consensual sex with his daughter?" You only have the gall to do it in cyber space, not out in the real world where you will get a reality check.

I'll stand up in front of others and say how I feel. Will you?

 

[EnemyPartyII]

I can't provide you with a logical explanation because your mind is so degraded that it won't appeal to any sense of decency or right or wrong. I can only be "logical" to a reasonable person. A person who thinks it's okay to have sex with their mother/father is anything but reasonable. No more reasonable in fact than a paedophile. I wouldn't use a normal sense of logic on a paedophile, and I won't use one on you, because your mind is just as warped.

You are diseased. Go and seek some professional help. That's the only portion of logic that I feel you are capable of understanding.

I'm prepared to stand up in front of a group of people, such as my work collegues or university classmates, and say "I believe that a father and daughter having consensual sex is sick".

I bet you any money that if I asked you to stand up openly in the same situation and say "What is wrong with a father having consensual sex with his daughter?", you wouldn't do it. You're all big and tough and bold as brass here on an anonymous forum, where you can play the gutless perverted wonder.

Prove the courage of your convictions sister! Stand up in front of all your work collegues or amongst a group of people and say "What is wrong with a father having consensual sex with his daughter?" You only have the gall to do it in cyber space, not out in the real world where you will get a reality check.

I'll stand up in front of others and say how I feel. Will you?

As has been explained to you, considering the possibility that the topic should be discussed does not mean supporting it. 2 pages ago I think I pretty firmly came out and said I'm not a big supporter of the idea...

However, that said, I like to base my beliefs on logic and empiricism, not just "eww, its SICK, SICK I TELLS YA!" type statements. And I'd be more than happy to offer my opinions in public should the topic ever come up.

I'm not going to condemn to people doing what they want without a logical reason. Condemning people without a reason, simply because you find something distasteful... well, thats how bigotry starts, you know?

Now, to refresh... I don't think incestuous relationships are likely to be a good idea in most cases, because I don't think they can be genuinely consentual.

But (and its a BIG but) in the exceedingly rare cases where they ARE consentual... whats wrong with them? And no, posing the question doesn't mean I want to have sex with my parents, it means that I'm asking for a valid explanation of your position beyond ad homs.

Or you could admit that your immediate visceral reaction was purely emotional, and that you can't actually come up with a logical reason to support your initial position. You don't even need to be so angry about it.

 

[BlackSabb]

As has been explained to you, considering the possibility that the topic should be discussed does not mean supporting it. 2 pages ago I think I pretty firmly came out and said I'm not a big supporter of the idea...

However, that said, I like to base my beliefs on logic and empiricism, not just "eww, its SICK, SICK I TELLS YA!" type statements. And I'd be more than happy to offer my opinions in public should the topic ever come up.

I'm not going to condemn to people doing what they want without a logical reason. Condemning people without a reason, simply because you find something distasteful... well, thats how bigotry starts, you know?

Now, to refresh... I don't think incestuous relationships are likely to be a good idea in most cases, because I don't think they can be genuinely consentual.

But (and its a BIG but) in the exceedingly rare cases where they ARE consentual... whats wrong with them? And no, posing the question doesn't mean I want to have sex with my parents, it means that I'm asking for a valid explanation of your position beyond ad homs.

Or you could admit that your immediate visceral reaction was purely emotional, and that you can't actually come up with a logical reason to support your initial position. You don't even need to be so angry about it.

You just don't get it, do you? Right and wrong and common decency etc are not "logic" driven. We are not talking about a maths or physics problem here. Many things in life are not approached by "logic". There are a whole host of things that are right/wrong or good/bad or wise/unwise etc that cannot be determined by "logic".

What if a person hates black people? Oh, I'll hear you say, "but that's different because you are harming others". But what if I give you the scenario of a man who hates blacks but doesn't harm them. He however refuses to associate with blacks, refuses to buy goods from any store that is owned by a black person, refuses to have any black friends etc. He hates them but doesn't harm them.

And if I said to you, "well, explain to me by logic what is wrong with someone hating blacks but does not actively do any harm against them?", you would be at a "logical" loss to explain it. Any reasonable, moral person instinctively reacts against that type of scenario. It is instinctive in decent human nature, not logical.

What about if I said what about a serial killer that can kill time and time again without getting caught? If I said to you that if you could have had 1 hr to talk to such a person, what "logic" could you use on him to stop killing?

"Oh, but he's killing people, therefore harming them". So what I ask? If he is guaranteed to get away with it time after time, there is no "logic" I could present him to stop killing. He does what he feels like and if he can get away with it, so be it. The only "logic" that counts is his, not yours. By his "logic", if he can get away with it, that's all that counts.

Thus, the only reason that you can use on such people is decency and the sense of right or wrong.

Is it "logical" for a father/mother to work like dogs to give everything for their children? Surely, logic says to do whatever is best for you. Doing what is best for someone other than you is not "logical". Yet many parents give of themselves everything so their kids can have a much better quality of life that they never had. There is no "logic" in this.

What about those people who give of themselves their whole lives for people not even their own families? What about countless people like Mother Teresa who sacrificed everything for someone else not related? Is that "logical?" How do you explain that?

The reverse situation is true, as I said before. If I knew you personally, there is no "logic" why I should not mistreat, threaten, abuse etc you. "But it harms me". As I said, if I harm you, I say "so what?" Why should I treat you right?

"Because it's the right thing to do". By who's standard? You? Society? The law? There is no logic why I should not abuse you if I want to do so. Only one thing stands in the way, and that is getting caught and reprimanded. But apart from that, there is no more "logical" argument for me to not abuse you than there is for a father to not have consensual sex with his daughter.

It is not by a sense of logic that you can explain why it's wrong for a father to have consensual sex with his daugher. It is common human decency, and it's not decent nor normal for a father to desire his own daughter for sex, nor for a daughter to desire her own father for such. It is a gross perversion of human nature and sexuality.

 

[wanderingone]

It is common human decency, and it's not decent nor normal for a father to desire his own daughter for sex, nor for a daughter to desire her own father for such. It is a gross perversion of human nature and sexuality.

Can you define common human decency?

Can you explain why "common human decency" would drive the legal system?

I believe it would be extremely rare for incest to not be a product of at the least a manipulative relationship. Incest seems to most often be linked to an abusive situation and those that make the news and appear to be consensual situations between 2 adults (usually not having lived as family for most or all of their lives) usually demonstrate some serious dysfunctional life stories.


Despite this I can't say I find a reason to be involved legally with the goings on between adults in their private lives unless some abuse exists. Even then adults who are not compromised due to mental health issues or developmental delays have to make decisions to remove themselves from abusive situations, the state should not enter into that household and force individuals to leave a volatile household.

 

[BlackSabb]

Can you define common human decency?

No, and neither can you. Also, you continue to keep emphasising the point of not harming or abusing others. But again, that's your personal morality I can argue.

"You shouldn't harm others" is no different to "you shouldn't have sex with your mother/father". As you say, who is to say that you shouldn't have incestual relations? And who is to say I shouldn't harm someone? If I can get away with it, that's all I would care about.

You say to give a logical reason for not having sex with your mother or father. I say in the same manner to give me a logical reason why I shouldn't harm/abuse/mistreat others. There is no logic for either. As human beings, we should know by instinct, instruction and consicence what is right or wrong with both situations. If someone is free in your opinion to have sex with their parents, I am free to do whatever I like to anyone. I don't have to abide by your sense of right or wrong, only mine.

 

[wanderingone]

No, and neither can you. Also, you continue to keep emphasising the point of not harming or abusing others. But again, that's your personal morality I can argue.

I'm talking legal issues here. If common human decency can not be defined then it can not be applied effectively legally. I asked why "common human decency" should drive the legal system. How should something you can't define drive our laws?

"You shouldn't harm others" is no different to "you shouldn't have sex with your mother/father". As you say, who is to say that you shouldn't have incestual relations? And who is to say I shouldn't harm someone? If I can get away with it, that's all I would care about.

I'm not sure where you see me saying "you shouldn't harm others" Consent does not necessarily mean no harm is involved. Adults who are capable of discerning potential fallout, injury and emotional harm cannot be protected from those things for every action in their lives.

You say to give a logical reason for not having sex with your mother or father. I say in the same manner to give me a logical reason why I shouldn't harm/abuse/mistreat others. There is no logic for either. As human beings, we should know by instinct, instruction and consicence what is right or wrong with both situations. If someone is free in your opinion to have sex with their parents, I am free to do whatever I like to anyone. I don't have to abide by your sense of right or wrong, only mine.

I have never said someone is "free" to do any particular act, what I'm asking of you is does it have to be a legal matter.

Of course you can logically explain various notions of harm. We know certain behaviors result in people who need financial, material, medical, emotional support. It's logical to attempt to limit the actions of people that will result in society footing the bill in the some way or another.

Myself and another poster pointed out known issues that incest is often a result of an abusive and manipulative relationship. It would be logical for a culture to discourage relationships rooted in such things. The recent example of the man who was raping his adult daughter and producing multiple children, some of whom he raised and others he left in his basement with their mother/sister indicates the negative impact of such an abusive situation. Mother and children require socially supported medical care and therapy. The long term impact on the children will not be known for ages.

Is that reason enough to legally be involved in the sexual relationships of grown ups- or is it better to ignore (legally) the goings on of those relationships that appear to consensual in favor of focusing the effort and energy on people in NEED of legal assistance?

 

[jcook922]

No, and neither can you. Also, you continue to keep emphasising the point of not harming or abusing others. But again, that's your personal morality I can argue.

"You shouldn't harm others" is no different to "you shouldn't have sex with your mother/father". As you say, who is to say that you shouldn't have incestual relations? And who is to say I shouldn't harm someone? If I can get away with it, that's all I would care about.

You say to give a logical reason for not having sex with your mother or father. I say in the same manner to give me a logical reason why I shouldn't harm/abuse/mistreat others. There is no logic for either. As human beings, we should know by instinct, instruction and consicence what is right or wrong with both situations. If someone is free in your opinion to have sex with their parents, I am free to do whatever I like to anyone. I don't have to abide by your sense of right or wrong, only mine.

Such common sense.. I thought I was the only one who believed in the universal moral compass of consequence versus reward.

 

[Washington]

I note blacksabb has nothing but ridicule and derision as his arguments...

The ferocity with which BlackSabb has attacked this subject, and most importantly, the mere posting of it, is a bit disturbing. I have never seen a reaction quite like this, and I've been posting on various web sites for some years now. The reason the ferocity disturbs me is that it's indicative of someone who has had an old wound suddenly opened up and revisited. I'm not saying BlackSabb has necessarily ever had a personal incestuous relationship, but it appears one has been part of his past at some time, perhaps between two of his relatives. Whatever the case, I want him to know my sympathies are with him in this struggle, and hope he can resolve his anger before it does him any harm. My suggestion to you, BlackSabb, and it's only a suggestion, is to avoid discussions about incest until you get a better grip on your response to it. No one should have to go through the personal emotional uproar and anger you've displayed here.

 

[cantata]

Laws are not usually made on the basis of what most people find icky, BlackSabb.

 

[wanderingone]

Such common sense.. I thought I was the only one who believed in the universal moral compass of consequence versus reward.

How does this translate into LAW? If your universal moral compass tells what to do or not to do that's just lovely (particularly if it means you leave me out of your expectations for your own behavior) but how does that translate into creating laws?

 

[pgp_protector]

both several hundred years before G-d said "No"
...snip..

So God changed his mind ?
After all he designed us for incest by only creating one couple at the start.

 

[pgp_protector]

But we do insist on blood tests and other medical screenings andthe government will not sanction marriages when one or both partners fail the screening for certain medical conditions. But they will not even suggest counseling (whether genetic counseling, or the more common "psychological" counseling) for people at real risk for passing on genetic defects.
...snip....

Me & the Wife never got any blood test for our marriage.

 

[DarkCoffeeJazz]

*coughcoughinbreedingcausesbirthdefectscoughcough*
Sorry, excuse me.

 

[Washington]

*coughcoughinbreedingcausesbirthdefectscoughcough*
Sorry, excuse me.

The possibility is simply greater, which is a fact of science.

 

[pgp_protector]

*coughcoughinbreedingcausesbirthdefectscoughcough*
Sorry, excuse me.

*coughcoughpeoplewithgeneticdefectscausecancausegeneticdefects*

you're excused.

 

[DarkCoffeeJazz]

*coughcoughpeoplewithgeneticdefectscausecancausegeneticdefects*

you're excused.

*coughyou'reimplyingi'msayingallpeoplewithgeneticdefectsaretehresultofinbreedingcough*
I seem to have a cold today. Oh well.

I was referring to what Washington so expertly said there.
Long time no see.

 

[Sojourner1]

Mod Hat On​

Thread closed for staff review.

Mod Hat Off​