Poll: I know I'm probably going to hell for this, but...

[PurplePlatypus]

Well the problem with incest is the potential for another person getting involved that may end up being harmed. Interbreeding does cause problems, first generation, not too bad but once you start getting past that point, problems start to happen. And that?s best case scenario and there isn?t already a hereditary medical problem present in the family.

If the two could reasonably grantee a pregnancy wouldn?t occur, then ok. It?s not really the incest; it?s the possibility of interbreeding and the increased risks that come with it, it's the child that will have to live with the consequences after all.

 

[Deadyawn]

I don't like the idea of incest, and it's for a reason that I guarantee you've never heard before.

Siblings are nice and all but I see enough of them as it is. I kind of got over the whole "sharing my life" thing with them when I was growing up, I wouldn't want to be emotionally tied to them in adulthood as well. Seems to defeat the entire purpose of becoming an adult, which is to break away from the family unit and forge your own path. That, to me, is the real damage that incest does - it keeps people emotionally stunted. It's against growth and change, but in an ever-growing, ever-changing world it's good to learn to adapt to those things and not live in a bubble.

That's all very well and good but it's not a reason to make it illegal. I mean, WoW does the exact same thing AND makes you waste your life away but it's not illegal is it? Personally I don't think it's much of an issue. If people want to do potentially stupid and life ruining things who are we to stop them? Smoking and alchohol isn't illegal now is it?

 

[RedEyesBlackGamer]

Having a sexual relationship? Knock yourself out.
Having children? No.

 

[Vault101]

I'm a fan of the saying "what consenting adults get up to behind closed doors is their own buisness." I don't particularly care either way, and even if I did feel strongly it wouldn't be any more my buisness because of those feelings.

Now the children though, that's different. Until society as a whole gets over its 'omg science is teh evilz!!!' stage and is OK with commonplace genetic screening for children (if you don't know what this means, it's a process which checks an unborn embreo for genetic diseases within the first weeks of pregnancy and allows an abortion of embreos doomed to be born with an illness) these couples shouldn't be legally allowed to have children, because then it's not just the consenting adults who knew the risks who suffer the consequenses, it's all their kids too. Once genetic screening is common (and I'm sure that it one day will be) then hey go ahead; the child won't be inflicted with any illness because of (arguably) poor choices from its parents.

(P.S. Um OP? The thread title kinda makes it seem like you're in an incestual relationship. Just thought I'd let you know.)

Now THAT sounds controversial..what kind of diseases are we talking about?

Because the Idea that I couldnt exist due to somthing like that....is terrifying

 

[Revolutionary]

If I sound like a bigot for saying this...so be it, but I seriously would be concerned if it was legalised. Not only is it unethical, but it's also highly detrimental to our race (Genetically)... Shit...this is all very Freudian.

Incest doesn't always lead to offspring (which, for the sake of human kind, could still be enforced), also why do you deem it immoral?

Good question, I believe it is immoral because it seems inherently unatural )I'm not religious, in fact I'm a raving liberal atheist). However it just seems that having sex with a blood relative is completely pointless...besides which legalisation would serve to create a moral ambiguity amongst those partnerships (Especially in younger age groups). All I'm saying is I think this would lead to some disturbing precedents (I may be wrong,).
As I said, this is all very Freudian.

 

[Jordi]

I assume we are talking about consenting adults here, so I think it should be legalized. They are not harming anyone with it (except maybe their offspring, but as the OP pointed out, many other people do that too). However, I think that some special attention may need to be paid to abuse in these situations as I can imagine that even at age 18 (or 21) a child may still very much be under the power of their parent(s) (or perhaps other family members as well).

I don't like the idea of incest, and it's for a reason that I guarantee you've never heard before.

Siblings are nice and all but I see enough of them as it is. I kind of got over the whole "sharing my life" thing with them when I was growing up, I wouldn't want to be emotionally tied to them in adulthood as well. Seems to defeat the entire purpose of becoming an adult, which is to break away from the family unit and forge your own path. That, to me, is the real damage that incest does - it keeps people emotionally stunted. It's against growth and change, but in an ever-growing, ever-changing world it's good to learn to adapt to those things and not live in a bubble.

Do you think that that is reason enough for it to be illegal? This still seems like something that two adults should be able to decide for themselves. Furthermore, I'm thinking that the rest of the family is probably not going to be very accepting of this, so you would still get to break away from them (perhaps a little more than most even). Also, do you think this is also the case when you end up marrying someone you know (and maybe even loved) since kindergarten?

 

[Veldt Falsetto]

According to the bible, any sex is somewhat incestuous (sp?)

We are all related to the same person, it's just how incestuous that sex is, either way, you make incest illegal you make sex illegal

 

[SanguineSymphony]

Shouldn't have children... At least not biologically but otherwise sure. As long as both parties consent and are of age to give said consent go ahead.

 

[kurupt87]

Polygamy suffers harshly from that comparison, I feel. It's like comparing homosexuality to paedophilia. Neither is a choice but one is emminently more understandable and permissive than the other.

Trouble with incest is that it usually takes the form of child abuse; technically that's already protected by other things though, so I guess consenting adults can bonk their, consenting adult, family members silly. I'd equate it to willingly getting addicted to heroin though, or something else as personality influencing. It's going to do some nasty things to you, emotionally and otherwise.

 

[floppylobster]

I don't think there's a problem if everyone involved gives consent to the situation.

I think there's a problem if you're talking close-close family.

Think how much a child wants to please a parent when they are growing up, and how easily children can be led to believe whatever their parents instil in them at an early age, and how those feelings might be confused or manipulated as they grow into adulthood and are looking for love and acceptance. Then I think there's a problem because it's difficult to separate those feelings for a teenager with little experience. But between cousins and such, I don't really have a problem. It's most likely how most families started way back in the day.

 

[Project_Xii]

Wow. The results of this poll really really scares me. FOr once I'm hoping there's just an awful lot of trolls in this place.

 

[Angerwing]

I forget what it's called, but there's a psychological phenomenon where the male brain doesn't see females raised with him in a family unit in a sexual way. So basically, your family, mother, sisters, etc, aren't recognised by you as a means to propagate the species. There's more to anti-incest than social stigma; people also are naturally averse to the concept of two siblings boning. I can't be bothered to look up the biological reason behind this evolutionary trait, but these things are usually a good idea to follow.

With modern technology this might seem redundant, like many other instincts, but it's still a part of the human psyche. So generally, the people who want to sleep with their biological siblings are either a little odd in the head, or they haven't grown up with them. If they were separated at birth, I don't really see any ethical reasons why it shouldn't be allowed, barring the (suspect) birth defect issue.

But if you're talking about parent/child relationships as well, there are a huge amount of ethical issues to take in to account. Brainwashing/conditioning, for example, as well as the ever-present issue of paedophilia.

In my opinion, the amount of ethical issues to consider far outweigh the benefits of allowing incest. The amount of cases where ethical concerns wouldn't be a factor would be tiny compared to the obvious abuse that would happen. The groups who would engage in incest would basically consist of: parent/child, sibling/sibling, and two biological family members who didn't grow up together. The first would be almost impossible to be void of moral and ethical concerns. That's out. The second (and likely the majority) would pretty much consist of people who have some sort of chemical or hormone imbalance. It's a biological directive that we don't mate with our family. To go against that is not something a healthy brain does. And the last group would be such a minimal demographic that it's barely worth noting. It doesn't justify the other possible cases.

As for cousins? I don't really see any reason otherwise. Depends on how close you are.

 

[Leg End]

Wow. The results of this poll really really scares me. FOr once I'm hoping there's just an awful lot of trolls in this place.

But, we know not of you opinion on this matter, so we know not which side you refer to as trollolololololol.

 

[savandicus]

According to the bible, any sex is somewhat incestuous (sp?)

We are all related to the same person, it's just how incestuous that sex is, either way, you make incest illegal you make sex illegal

I believe that in the majority of countries that it only counts as incest if you share the same grand parents. If your related by great grand parents then your free to procreate to your hearts desire. There is enough genetic diversity with two people related by great grand parents that the chances of offspring with genetic deformities is effectively no higher than two people more seperated.

Also if your going to bring up the bible you might also want to know that it doesnt say incest is wrong but it specifies all the relationships up to second generation as wrong. And it only takes a basic history + maths lesson to know that if you go back to the middle ages and pick any person who had several offspring then they are almost certainly related to everyone. So you dont even have to believe the bible to believe that everything is a little bit incestuous.

 

[Lieju]

Well, I might find it icky, but it doesn't mean it's wrong or moreover, should be illegal.
With siblings, (and cousins too I guess. Here in Finland cousins can get married, but it's frowned upon) as long as they are adults, why not. But with parents/aunts/uncles, and the kids, no. Because the older person would be in a position where they have the power over the kid, and can take advantage of it.

As for children, are there any countries that make it illegal to have kids with close relatives? Actually, I suppose there are(or have been, for example US had all kinds of wacky laws about what kind of sex is lawful), but would it be enforced? Unless it's one of those countries that beheads women who get pregnant outside of marriage or something.

And well, the issue here is, to what extent the people should be able to choose who they have kids with. And it's tricky, but I don't think the goverment has the right to tell people they can't.

It is, after all, both useless in a biological sense and, I think, on the point of lesbians is also unnatural no matter which way you slice it (because from the male side it can be argued that it occurs in nature therefore is natural)[footnote]Or I'm ignorant[/footnote].

I'm not making any argument about this(and the whole "natural" argument won't get us anywhere anyways), but lesbianism occurs in other animals as well. Some deer do it quite a bit, and monkeys, at least.

Biologically speaking, gay couples will still take part in taking care of the children, even if they would be those of the near relatives, thus indirectly helping related genes to survive.

The same could be said about incestuous relationships as well, but there is the risk of inbreeding. But to what extent should the people have the right to choose their mate is the ethical question here.

 

[figday]

i'll go with the yes option. for me, incest is just.. creepy.
but with consent, then i hope they are mature enough to decide. and i am against incest breeding, since it would likely cause issues with the offspring.

PS : the result is very2 surprising O:

 

[Legion]

It's a tricky one but I can think of one example where I wouldn't say it is wrong per say.

Someone who grew up separated from a family member (in other words, they never met them until they were both adults) and then fell in love with them when they met. While they are closely biologically related, and so should never have children, who is to say it is wrong for them to love each other? They haven't lived as though they are family.

Obviously this isn't exactly common, but it's a little cruel to deny people what would have been a happy relationship had they not known they were relatives.

On the subject of cousins: America is one of very few countries that actually bans relationships between them. In Japan it is common and in most other countries the stigma is purely social and not legal.

 

[Korolev]

Okay - if incest results in children, it's really bad. If you know even the slightest bit of genetics, you'd realize that inbreeding is NOT a good thing. Members of the Royal Family in Egypt routinely interbred, and... well, you can read up yourself what effect that had on the family.

Incest that results in no children? And with consent? Okay, it's still incredibly sick but I can't actually think of anything that would warrant jail time. If the two..... parties.... are consenting and of legal age..... as much as this sickens me to say so...... they haven't actually done anything wrong to anyone else.

If they had children, then that would be morally wrong, since interbreeding significantly raises the likelihood of genetic diseases amongst the offspring. But if they are sterile and can't have children..... well, then... go ahead. It's still sick though.

 

[Wondermint13]

50/51 closest poll I have seen so far.

I'm pretty light-hearted with this whole insest thing. I'd never do it myself due to the risks when having children and having to explain everything to my family the same day I announce my love for one of my older sisters. Call me sensible or lazy for not looking into the thought of ínsest too much but I am me and doing the no pants dance with family is not my thing.

But I wont boo and hiss and spit at somebody for getting freaky with their brother or sister.
Just a choice aint'it? A risky one but we all know we can not always choose who we fall in love with, or end up sleeping with at the matter.. f***ing Smirnoff Black Ice offer... drinks should never be THAT cheap! I was drunk and peeing every 5 mins and ended up weeping into some 40 year olds lap.. she did things to me... *shiver*