Incest, homosexuality

[lrh9]

Anyone with the power to do so can 'forbid' anything under the sun. The real questions are what are the punishments of violating that prohibition, and who is going to administer them? The people who favor prohibition of a behavior are usually the last ones with the guts to hunt down and punish the people doing it. Don't send a patsy; get your hands dirty. Else spare me your righteous fury.

About the only reason I would concern myself with incestuous relationships between consenting adults is if I valued healthy familial relationships enough to want to intervene. I'd try to do a little more than stand on a soap box. Maybe I'd run for political office and make policy. Maybe I'd be a police officer. Maybe I'd be a lobbyist. Maybe I'd be a therapist. The point is, I wouldn't play a fucking game by arguing about it in the one place where it won't do anything to make a difference.

Peace.

[CarinaS]

The point is, I wouldn't play a fucking game by arguing about it in the one place where it won't do anything to make a difference.

I wasn't playing a game, and I'm not really arguing about it, or intending to. To be honest, I'm not trying to make a difference. I just like to hear other people's opinions on this.

[ib.me.ub]

I'd try to do a little more than stand on a soap box.

So what do you call your little rant above.

[TheDarkestOfAngels]

I'm interested to know what people have to say about why homosexuality should be allowed/accepted in society, and incest should not. This is under the assumption that the incestuous couple will NOT procreate if they get legally married, and of course are consenting adults.

I don't approve of incest when
1) It has any chance of being due to or resulting in psychological trauma, more than non-incestuous relationships
1A) Gay relationships start and end with all the stops, whistles, and breaks that all other relationships have and there is no evidence to my knowledge that a gay relationship is any more damaging psychologically than heterosexual relationships (very different from incestuous relationships)
2) No gay relationships damage other people. Incestuous relationships (to a point) have a far higher chance than average of resulting in genetically disfigured children that can result in permanent and serious complications.
2A) Gay relationship never result in children, except through adoption. There is no evidence that gay relationships damage children at a higher average than heterosexual relationships (very different from incestuous relationships) when children are involved.
3) Incestuous relationships are far more damaging to familial ties to all involved family members. By the very nature of such a relationship and depending of the kind of relationship, it even has the potential to destroy an entire family.
3A) Gay relationships don't always have any affect on familial relationships and are irrelevant to the immediate family at best and destructive to the gay individual's relationship to his family at worst and rarely threatens an entire family unit (think of a married father porking his own daughter and the effec that has on - the father's wife and other children). At worst, a parent-turned gay becomes estranged to the rest of the family and turns the other parent into a single parent.

This is, of course, excepting major taboos and even ignoring the fact that incest is far more taboo than homosexuality and largely for the above reasons. Certain kinds of incest are illegal for those reasons and other kinds of incest where all three (or at least the first two) are not the case are actually legal - such as between two first cousins in many US states.

Homosexual relationships have not been proven to be any better or worse, overall, than heterosexual relationships and can be just as healthy or destructive.

[CarinaS]

3) Incestuous relationships are far more damaging to familial ties to all involved family members. By the very nature of such a relationship and depending of the kind of relationship, it even has the potential to destroy an entire family.

I do not agree that is a fair point to use. A family's destruction doesn't warrant a law...I don't feel that sort of harm is relevant when deciding what should and shouldn't be legal.

that being said, I do have a lot of disgust for parent-child relationships, but I have no fair explanation for that other than My own ick factor. I also don't agree with those who engage in incestutous relationships outside of their own marriages. I am mainly talking about first cousin or sibling relationships.

I also want to reinforce that I never said homosexual relationships were more destructive or less healthy than heterosexual ones.

[Anomalocaris]

I think forbidding others from doing things that "doesn't feel right" is morally exactly equivalent to forcing other to do something that "feels right". Those who would forbid homosexual sex because it doesn't feel right forfeits the right to complain if they in turn are forbidden to have any type of sex other than homosexual sex by other people who feels that is right.

Incest is somewhat different because it does create potential for harming other, namely the offspring from such a sexual union. This is not nature trying to tell you something anymore than congenital defect is nature trying to tell you that you don't deserve to live. It is just an artifact of the our DNA's evolutionary heritage and the mechanics of sexual reproduction.

[ib.me.ub]

I think forbidding others from doing things that "doesn't feel right" is morally exactly equivalent to forcing other to do something that "feels right".

Who said anything about forbidding others from doing things that "don't feel right". Did you just decide to pluck that out of thin air.

[TheDarkestOfAngels]

I do not agree that is a fair point to use. A family's destruction doesn't warrant a law...I don't feel that sort of harm is relevant when deciding what should and shouldn't be legal.

that being said, I do have a lot of disgust for parent-child relationships, but I have no fair explanation for that other than My own ick factor. I also don't agree with those who engage in incestutous relationships outside of their own marriages. I am mainly talking about first cousin or sibling relationships.

I also want to reinforce that I never said homosexual relationships were more destructive or less healthy than heterosexual ones.

Before I address your points, I do have to point out that the tone I got from your initial post has to do with the arguement I've seen from conservative circles that state that allowing gay marriages is the slippery-slope to allowing incest despite all three points.

Your first point:
There are many laws involved with familial relationships. Great pains and measures in terms of the letter of the law are given to care for children in damaged, disintegrating, or wildly changing domestic conditions, particularly when harm - potential or immediate - is involved. This includes things like divorce and domestic abuse because of how these things can seriously harm all involved.
There are also laws here and there in the US that attempt to take measures to keep marriages from breaking up for any number of reasons because a happy family is often a healthy family.

Given the above and thinking about the more destructive forms of incest (parent-child and sibling) and ignoring what you call the 'ick' factor, there is no positive or benign outcome of either relationship. Either relationship can and will destroy an entire family unit for any number of reasons before causing one or both of my first two points in some manner or another.

Depending on the other people involved, it can even have more serious complications with the uninvolved family members more often than not.

There is a good enough reason alone for the law to get involved, even when those involved are consenting adults even if the involvement is only mild (such as through state-ordered counseling). If children are involved (not direclty of course) then my first point becomes an issue and the law has every reason to become really involved.

Your second point:
The studies I'm vaguely aware of done on first cousin relationships and the reason they are not illegal in most places, from my limited understanding, is because two such consenting adults don't necessarily result in either the first or second points (though the third obviously becomes a factor because it's still a stigma) I've made.
A couple who fell for one another who don't necessarily realize that they're first cousins (for whatever reason) might not even have to deal with any of those problems.

Your third point:
I make the comparisons with homosexual relationships (as I said at the start of this post) because I've seen the comparison made, along with pedophilic relationships, which are always extremely destructive and bestiality.
I don't mean to insinuate anything in regards to your opinion, but I made the connection from your post and I thought it important to point out.

[CarinaS]

Your third point:
I make the comparisons with homosexual relationships (as I said at the start of this post) because I've seen the comparison made, along with pedophilic relationships, which are always extremely destructive and bestiality.
I don't mean to insinuate anything in regards to your opinion, but I made the connection from your post and I thought it important to point out.

I understand why you may have thought that, but it is not the case. I am also not discussing children at all.
I would never compare either incest or homosexuality with bestiality or pedophilia. These are things that should never be allowed because legitimate consent cannot be given by children or animals.
it makes Me angry when incest is used to debase homosexuality because it is implying that, without a doubt, incest is always disgusting and should not be tolerated. I am in an incestuous relationship. it's interesting for Me to see what other people think, and I do think it can be talked about alongside homosexuality. obviously, they are not exactly the same, nothing is. but they are (or were) taboos, and both do happen with consenting adults (I am not talking about pedophilic incest, obviously), and I think they can be discussed together.

[downbeatplumb]

I saw a programme on tv recently were there was a german brother and sister couple with three healthy children.

The point they made to defend there union was that there was no such stigma with retarded, deformed or otherwise disabled couples who were not related breeding.

It really does seem to be a cultural thing, not something I'm into myself but I could see their point.