Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: June 25, 2022, 7:58 am

Poll: .
This poll is closed.
A
46.88%
15 46.88%
B
21.88%
7 21.88%
C
15.63%
5 15.63%
D
15.63%
5 15.63%
Total 32 vote(s) 100%
* You voted for this item. [Show Results]

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
INCEST
#1
INCEST
Word, biotches. [Image: 29dz8zk.gif]

So I saw this thread (http://atheistforums.org/thread-33548.html) and was curious to know what the prevailing position is amongst you guys. 

PLEASE ONLY VOTE IF YOU ARE ATHEIST  

Poll question/answer:

Should it be legal for a brother and sister (not step, not half) to get married if they are 2 consenting adults?

A. Yes, with no restrictions 
B. No (please explain why not)
C. Yes, but with a no pregnancy restriction (example: if one of them is sterile) 
D. Other (please explain)
"Of course, everyone will claim they respect someone who tries to speak the truth, but in reality, this is a rare quality. Most respect those who speak truths they agree with, and their respect for the speaking only extends as far as their realm of personal agreement. It is less common, almost to the point of becoming a saintly virtue, that someone truly respects and loves the truth seeker, even when their conclusions differ wildly." 

-walsh
Reply
#2
RE: INCEST
Seems like everyone is avoiding being "the first one" so I'm just gonna say what I think.

I see it as something that doesn't affect me. Personally, I find the thought gross, but that's why I'm not doing it. However, because it doesn't affect me I don't think it should be illegal.

I say "don't think it should be illegal" rather than "it should be legal" because I still think it shouldn't be encouraged.
"Adulthood is like looking both ways before you cross the road, and then getting hit by an airplane"  - sarcasm_only

"Ironically like the nativist far-Right, which despises multiculturalism, but benefits from its ideas of difference to scapegoat the other and to promote its own white identity politics; these postmodernists, leftists, feminists and liberals also use multiculturalism, to side with the oppressor, by demanding respect and tolerance for oppression characterised as 'difference', no matter how intolerable."
- Maryam Namazie

Reply
#3
RE: INCEST
(September 1, 2015 at 6:29 pm)Yeauxleaux Wrote: Seems like everyone is avoiding being "the first one" so I'm just gonna say what I think.

I see it as something that doesn't affect me. Personally, I find the thought gross, but that's why I'm not doing it. However, because it doesn't affect me I don't think it should be illegal.

I say "don't think it should be illegal" rather than "it should be legal" because I still think it shouldn't be encouraged.

Exactly my opinion.
[Image: Bumper+Sticker+-+Asheville+-+Praise+Dog3.JPG]
Reply
#4
RE: INCEST
No.  Because the biology indicates a serious increase in the rate of birth defects.

I realize this position would de-populate large parts of Arkansas and West Virginia.
Reply
#5
RE: INCEST
Sure, let adults do as they wish, as long as it doesn't harm anyone.
If it's good enough for Adam and Eve (not to mention Noah and Co...)
[Image: rySLj1k.png]

If you have any serious concerns, are being harassed, or just need someone to talk to, feel free to contact me via PM
Reply
#6
RE: INCEST
When the only counter argument is "eww gross," I always say if they are two consenting adults, it's none of my business.

I have the same reaction to poop play. I don't like it, don't want any part of it, disgusts me. But if two grown up people want to do it, they should not be hampered by the law.
"There remain four irreducible objections to religious faith: that it wholly misrepresents the origins of man and the cosmos, that because of this original error it manages to combine the maximum servility with the maximum of solipsism, that it is both the result and the cause of dangerous sexual repression, and that it is ultimately grounded on wish-thinking." ~Christopher Hitchens, god is not Great

PM me your email address to join the Slack chat! I'll give you a taco(or five) if you join! --->There's an app and everything!<---
Reply
#7
RE: INCEST
I voted A (Yes, with no restrictions) because I don't believe the government should restrict two consenting adults from doing something which is victimless, or which only harms the two participants themselves.

The act of marriage itself has nothing to do with bearing children, so citing that as a reason for prohibiting it is the exact same line of reasoning that bigots used against gay marriage (and is invalid).

Now, whether there should be separate restrictions on siblings from procreating is an entirely separate issue, and should be treated as such, because it has the potential to harm another person (the child). However, saying that, prohibiting people from procreation because their child may be harmed is a slippery slope; should we for instance prohibit two people with a deadly genetic disorder from procreating, since their child will in all likelihood also inherit the condition? It's a difficult question and one that needs proper thought before answering (a bit like my position on abortion).

The question of marriage however is easier to answer. Yes, absolutely, with no restrictions.
Reply
#8
RE: INCEST
(September 1, 2015 at 6:32 pm)Minimalist Wrote: No.  Because the biology indicates a serious increase in the rate of birth defects.

But marriage isn't about procreation Min, and in fact I'm sure you've argued against this type of argument in the past when it comes to gay marriage (though I may be wrong, but most pro gay marriage people on these forums have).

Why does the argument work for gay people but not for siblings?
Reply
#9
RE: INCEST
Can't see a problem with two consenting adults doing what they want.

In terms of children, you open up a complete minefield when you start talking about birth defects. If you don't allow siblings to have children because of potential problems, do you allow disabled people or even those with harmful genetic traits that are passed down to have kids? I wouldn't hold a position either way.
Reply
#10
RE: INCEST
Because it is black-letter law in every state in the union. 


Quote:In all states, close blood-relatives that fall under the incest statutes include father, mother, grandfather, grandmother, brother, sister, aunt, uncle, niece, nephew, and in some states, first cousins. Many states also apply incest laws to non-blood relations including stepparents, step-siblings, and in-laws.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_letter_law

Quote:In common law legal systems, black letter laws are the well-established technical legal rules that are no longer subject to reasonable dispute. Some examples are the "black-letter law" of contracts or the "black-letter law" of trademarks. Black-letter law can be contrasted with legal theory or unsettled legal issues.
I would submit that gay marriage fell under the unsettled legal issues doctrine if only because jesus freaks thought they could vote to deny other people their civil rights.
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Responding to "Homosexuality is wrong, the same way incest is wrong" JewishAthiest 106 21958 February 9, 2016 at 3:48 pm
Last Post: robvalue
  Atheist Professor rationalizes incest CriticalBen 34 9657 June 2, 2013 at 7:07 pm
Last Post: little_monkey



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)