• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should incest be illegal?

Incest should be kept within the family.
 
Wan said:
Hello. This thread is inspired by Dixon01767's exchange with certain posters in the gay marriage thread here.

I believe that in some jurisdictions, incest is illegal. My questions to you, are 1. should incest be illegal and 2. are laws that forbid incest discriminatory?

Let's share our thoughts.
Click to expand...

Wow. I started a 51 page thread and didnt know. Just for clarification, 49 states prohibit incest. AND Ive never suggested the laws should change. I was only speaking of marriage between closely related couples, NOT incest. Likely the most common example would probably be the single mother and single grandparent who join together to raise the children.
 
ecofarm said:
So you want 40 year old fathers claiming consent with 20 year old daughters. Because you like turning our justice system into a circus of idiots? If we unleash patriarchy on its children, perhaps the South does rise again with an army of deformed inbreds.
Click to expand...

In Rhode Island a 40 year old father can begin boning his daughter when she reaches 16yrs old. And when they legalized same sex marriage, they had to enact new marriage laws prohibiting closely related couples of the same sex from marrying because their marriage statutes only prohibited a man from marrying a closely related woman and prohibited a woman from marrying a closely related man.
 
dixon01767 said:
In Rhode Island a 40 year old father can begin boning his daughter when she reaches 16yrs old. And when they legalized same sex marriage, they had to enact new marriage laws prohibiting closely related couples of the same sex from marrying because their marriage statutes only prohibited a man from marrying a closely related woman and prohibited a woman from marrying a closely related man.
Click to expand...

People who don't understand family power dynamics and how sex within that dynamic is sick and abusive are scary.

Blaming gay people for one not being able to legally rape family members is abhorrent. It's banjo plucking ****ed up.

No raping family. That's the law. Southern trailer parks and hill-towns lost in time gotta learn.

Don't let a reactionary cult convince you that raping family members is okay.
 
Last edited:
Yes, blood relationship sibling and parental incest should be illegal.
 
ecofarm said:
People who don't understand family power dynamics and how sex within that dynamic is sick and abusive are scary.

Blaming gay people for one not being able to legally rape family members is abhorrent. It's banjo plucking ****ed up.

No raping family. That's the law. Southern trailer parks and hill-towns lost in time gotta learn.

Don't let a reactionary cult convince you that raping family members is okay.
Click to expand...

Did someone do any of the above?
 
dixon01767 said:
Did someone do any of the above?
Click to expand...

Let's not pretend incest laws are about strangers or DNA. They're about the rape inherent to sex in family power dynamics. Advocating family rape is not okay; incest laws are justice.

And there's no blaming any of it on gay people. Let's be clear on that.
 
Last edited:
ecofarm said:
Let's not pretend incest laws are about strangers or DNA. They're about the rape inherent to sex in family power dynamics. Advocating family rape is not okay; incest laws are justice.

And there's no blaming any of it on gay people. Let's be clear on that.
Click to expand...

It also is against good social policy - and for good reasons - some of which overlap with what you posted.
 
Has anybody posted a legit reason for it to be illegal between consenting adults yet?
 
I've seen many silly and stupid threads here, over the years. This one is a strong contender for the bottom 50.
 
HumblePi said:
Yes, it should be illegal everywhere. Incest is considered bad in every culture for good reasons since the beginning of history. This naturally leads to laws and regulations against it everywhere in the world. Consider it as evolution and natural selection. It’s well known that having offsprings with close relatives increases risk of genetic and birth defects by significant amount in just one family. Incest families would not survive in the wild back in the cave man era because they would not be the fittest to survive. In a world of over seven billion people, there’s no reason for blood relatives to be sleeping together and risking all these things.
Click to expand...

What if they don't procreate?
 
HumblePi said:
Are you suggested that somehow incest shouldn't be illegal unless there's insemination?
Click to expand...

What I'm saying is that your argument against incest only holds water if it results in a baby which would automatically exclude homosexual incest or incest where one or both parties are infertile.
 
ecofarm said:
Let's not pretend incest laws are about strangers or DNA. .
Click to expand...

DNA is exactly what they are about. Thats why a few states allow cousins to marry if they are beyond a certain age and unable to procreate.
 
ecofarm said:
People who don't understand family power dynamics and how sex within that dynamic is sick and abusive are scary..
Click to expand...

Thats why 49 states have laws against such sexual relations. No one is suggesting those criminal laws be changed.
 
dixon01767 said:
DNA is exactly what they are about. Thats why a few states allow cousins to marry if they are beyond a certain age and unable to procreate.
Click to expand...

No. It's about it being inherently rape. You're gas-lighting for Southern family-rapists.
 
ecofarm said:
No. It's about it being inherently rape. You're gas-lighting for Southern family-rapists.
Click to expand...

We have laws against rape and incestuous sexual relations. I was speaking of marriage
 
ecofarm said:
Even that is about rape.
Click to expand...

Actually, all 50 states have laws that prohibit it. Reality seems to be frequently the opposite of what you have imagined.
 
dixon01767 said:
Wow. I started a 51 page thread and didnt know. Just for clarification, 49 states prohibit incest. AND Ive never suggested the laws should change. I was only speaking of marriage between closely related couples, NOT incest. Likely the most common example would probably be the single mother and single grandparent who join together to raise the children.
Click to expand...
By law, marriage is included in the definition of incest, whether or not sex occurs.

Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk
 
ecofarm said:
Let's not pretend incest laws are about strangers or DNA. They're about the rape inherent to sex in family power dynamics. Advocating family rape is not okay; incest laws are justice.

And there's no blaming any of it on gay people. Let's be clear on that.
Click to expand...
Rape is rape. What does blood or legal relationship have to do with it? Is non consanguineous rape less abhorrent than consanguineous rape?

Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk
 
dixon01767 said:
Actually, all 50 states have laws that prohibit it. Reality seems to be frequently the opposite of what you have imagined.
Click to expand...

It's prohibited because it's inherently rape. The DNA crap has never been a threat to society. It's an insignificant number of people.

Being pro legal incest and marriage is being pro family rape. It's a southern thing.
 
maquiscat said:
By law, marriage is included in the definition of incest, whether or not sex occurs.

Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...


Nope. That would be an incestuous marriage. You just make this stuf up as you go along, dont you?


Sec. 25.02. PROHIBITED SEXUAL CONDUCT. (a) A person commits an offense if the person engages in sexual intercourse or deviate sexual intercourse with another person the actor knows to be, without regard to legitimacy:

(1) the actor's ancestor or descendant by blood or adoption;

(2) the actor's current or former stepchild or stepparent;

(3) the actor's parent's brother or sister of the whole or half blood;

(4) the actor's brother or sister of the whole or half blood or by adoption;

(5) the children of the actor's brother or sister of the whole or half blood or by adoption; or

(6) the son or daughter of the actor's aunt or uncle of the whole or half blood or by adoption.

(b) For purposes of this section:

(1) "Deviate sexual intercourse" means any contact between the genitals of one person and the mouth or anus of another person with intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person.

(2) "Sexual intercourse" means any penetration of the female sex organ by the male sex organ.

(c) An offense under this section is a felony of the third degree, unless the offense is committed under Subsection (a)(1), in which event the offense is a felony of the second degree
 
dixon01767 said:
We have laws against rape and incestuous sexual relations. I was speaking of marriage
Click to expand...

ecofarm said:
Even that is about rape.
Click to expand...

dixon01767 said:
Actually, all 50 states have laws that prohibit it. Reality seems to be frequently the opposite of what you have imagined.
Click to expand...

ecofarm said:
It's prohibited because it's inherently rape. The DNA crap......... .
Click to expand...

We are talking about marriage. Rape is prohibited in all 50 states. Try to focus.
 
dixon01767 said:
We are talking about marriage. Rape is prohibited in all 50 states. Try to focus.
Click to expand...

That marriage is banned because it's rape. Not because .000001% of people marrying a relative is a DNA threat to society. It's not a DNA threat to society. Never was. Never will be. The law is about rape.

You don't understand why we have the law. That's pathetic.

Your entire BS narrative, excusing southern family rape and pretending DNA is a concern, is heading toward interracial marriage. And you don't even know that. Take a look around you. Who's telling you that BS. Can't you see they're leading you down a path? "If DNA is a concern, what about..." That's where they're taking you. But DNA is not a concern; the narrative employs false premise.


One cannot marry family because it's rape. End of story.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom