Should incest be banned?

[nnmartin]

This topic has been mentioned in passing in a few threads recently so I thought it would be time to address the issue head on.

Should incest be banned and is it wrong?

I'd say yes and yes.

All the supposed logical fallacies apply here:

It's depraved, immoral, leads to retardation, God forbids it, its unnatural and is just out and out weird. Many more issues of course as well.

Subjective, objective or whatever type of reasoning - it is wrong and should be banned.

When I say incest I'm really talking about close family members.

I'll try to be open minded here but I can't really see any justification for legalisation.


Anyone have anything to say on this?

 

[ChristineES]

I have heard that it can cause problems. I don't think it is a good idea for brothers and sisters to have children. There is a chance of birth defects. I also think the same would be for parents and their children. Most people I know are really turned off by this kind of thing, whether it is a natural, inborn revulsion, or just something that is learned from society- I couldn't tell you. I hate to say it, but it does creep me out a bit.

Are you talking about first cousins, as well? There have been many cousins who marry- Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Eleanor Roosevelt were first cousins. And Jerry Lee Lewis married his 2nd or 3rd cousin back in 1959.

 

[Zoe Doidge]

The only problem is the issue of potential birth defects in children, and therefore a contamination of our future genetic pool.

If that is sufficient cause to ban people from an intimate relationship then anyone with inheritable and incurable problems should also be banned.

My conclusion is that banning the production of children within incest is an acceptable solution (although it should be applied more equally), but banning sex is a massive overreaction based on that alone.

 

[Gjallarhorn]

I see no problem with it aside from the repeatedly stated chance of birth defects.

And as for your reasons against it:

It's depraved, immoral, leads to retardation, God forbids it, its unnatural and is just out and out weird.

...most of these are you just saying "EW!", especially the one about God.

 

[Mathematician]

If I recall correctly, women past 40 who have children are just as likely to produce infants with birth defects.

I think incest between a parent and child is almost always exploitative, but siblings or cousins?

 

[Iti oj]

I thought it was banned...

 

[JacobEzra.]

I never knew such a thing would need a thread. I think most people know that incest is bad and wrong and should be banned.

 

[nnmartin]

well I thought that until I joined the recent thread about bestiality over in the Sexuality section.

Many people seem to favour libertarian free will over commonsense.

Apparantly commonsense doesn't actually exist - it's all just subjective moralising.

I beg to differ however - I'd say that incest being what it is should be banned.

It's clearly against the order of nature and not necessary in any way.

why not just go out and find a normal partner or remain celibate?


I'd say that brothers and sisters shouldn't be able to have sex legally regardless of reproduction issues.

 

[nnmartin]

I see no problem with it aside from the repeatedly stated chance of birth defects.

And as for your reasons against it:

...most of these are you just saying "EW!", especially the one about God.

This the same old story as the bestiality debate.

Surely saying 'ew' is a good enough reason to ban such behaviour?

Public opinion, consensus, morality issues - doesn't that mean anything to you?

 

[Tiberius]

This topic has been mentioned in passing in a few threads recently so I thought it would be time to address the issue head on.

Should incest be banned and is it wrong?

I'd say yes and yes.

Oh, alright, just because I like jerking your chain...

All the supposed logical fallacies apply here:

Do you even know what a logical fallacy is? Here you seem to be using it as a synonym for "argument", but it doesn't actually work like that.

It's depraved, immoral,

Prove it.

leads to retardation,

Only after several generations, so I've heard. If you want I'll try to find a source, but if a brother and sister have a child together, that child won't have three arms or have mental problems or anything. It takes several generations for that.

God forbids it,

What about atheists?

And where did Cain and Abel's wives come from? Or did they do it with Eve? And what about Noah's family? There weren't enough people on the ark to avoid having sex with close family members.

its unnatural

If I can find an instance of incest in the animal kingdom, will you drop that argument?

and is just out and out weird.

So is climbing into a metal tube and flying through the sky at the speed of sound, yet people do that. And I assume you don't have a problem with it.

Many more issues of course as well.

Many more? Then I assume you won't have a problem naming ten more issues about the harm/disadvantages of incest that you haven't already mentioned.

Subjective, objective or whatever type of reasoning - it is wrong and should be banned.

lol, only you could acknowledge something as your own subjective opinion and then turn around and present it as objective fact in the same sentence. It's not something to be proud of.

When I say incest I'm really talking about close family members.

So like brothers and sisters, not cousins?

I'll try to be open minded here but I can't really see any justification for legalisation.

I'll believe it when I see it...

 

[nnmartin]

The only problem is the issue of potential birth defects in children, and therefore a contamination of our future genetic pool.

If that is sufficient cause to ban people from an intimate relationship then anyone with inheritable and incurable problems should also be banned.

I disagree there because that's only an analogy.

With an inherited disease issue the couple could simply use a condom to prevent birth.

Brother and sister is a no no in any situation though.

 

[nnmartin]

Are you talking about first cousins, as well? There have been many cousins who marry- Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Eleanor Roosevelt were first cousins. And Jerry Lee Lewis married his 2nd or 3rd cousin back in 1959.

I'm not really talking about cousins here.

I think 1st cousins are a bit close to the bone as well but maybe in some primitive cultures this kind of neandarthal behaviour is still necessary to an extent.

 

[Koldo]

All the supposed logical fallacies apply here:

It's depraved, immoral, leads to retardation, God forbids it, its unnatural and is just out and out weird. Many more issues of course as well.

And where are the logical fallacies?

Anyone have anything to say on this?

The main reason for it being banned is that it is regarded as morally wrong.

Is it morally right to ban what is regarded as morally wrong?

 

[nnmartin]

I think it is right to ban something that is morally wrong - of course.

Others think differently though.

I will discuss in more detail later.........

 

[Zoe Doidge]

There's a difference between something that is morally wrong and something that's regarded as morally wrong.

Aside from the children issue which we've covered, you've given no reason that actually makes incest morally wrong.

 

[Mathematician]

well I thought that until I joined the recent thread about bestiality over in the Sexuality section.

Many people seem to favour libertarian free will over commonsense.

Apparantly commonsense doesn't actually exist - it's all just subjective moralising.

I beg to differ however - I'd say that incest being what it is should be banned.

It's clearly against the order of nature and not necessary in any way.

why not just go out and find a normal partner or remain celibate?


I'd say that brothers and sisters shouldn't be able to have sex legally regardless of reproduction issues.

90% of what humans do in this point in history is "against" the order of nature, though.

 

[JacobEzra.]

There's a difference between something that is morally wrong and something that's regarded as morally wrong.

Aside from the children issue which we've covered, you've given no reason that actually makes incest morally wrong.

Um, how about that the partner would be your sister, brother, or could be your mom or dad or aunt or uncle.

Sorry, but that is completely disgusting. But sure, go on and say "to each their own"

 

[cablescavenger]

This topic has been mentioned in passing in a few threads recently so I thought it would be time to address the issue head on.

Should incest be banned and is it wrong?

I'd say yes and yes.

All the supposed logical fallacies apply here:

It's depraved, immoral, leads to retardation, God forbids it, its unnatural and is just out and out weird. Many more issues of course as well.

Subjective, objective or whatever type of reasoning - it is wrong and should be banned.

When I say incest I'm really talking about close family members.

I'll try to be open minded here but I can't really see any justification for legalisation.


Anyone have anything to say on this?

If by Close family members you just mean brothers sisters and parents, then you are not going far enough, cousins should be too.

There is a real problem in the Muslim community with birth defects, and it should be addressed.

 

[beenie]

There is a real problem in the Muslim community with birth defects, and it should be addressed.

Do you have any proof of this or is the "ew factor" enough proof for you?

 

[Badran]

Surely saying 'ew' is a good enough reason to ban such behaviour?

What about the fact that your opinions make me say 'ew'?

I find them disgusting, so why should you be allowed to say them?