Switzerland might make incest legal.

[ShadowsofHope]

I can personally guarantee that anyone who doesn't have a problem with this is either an only child, or a very creepy person. Or both.


Besides, the whole argument of "It's OK if they don't have kids" doesn't make sense anyway. It's impossible to actually enforce. How can anyone make sure they use birth control once it's legal? And once they DO have a kid, it's too late to do anything about it, so the whole thing just becomes a big mess.

Come on, people, think. And stop thinking that incest is OK. That's just not.....No. Even animals are hard-wired not to do it. Seriously, look it up.

Clearly sir, you are the final arbitrator on what human beings all over the planet should and should not find acceptable. /sarcasm

I guarantee you, I am neither. And you do realize humans are biologically animals, right?

 

[Aanorith]

Funny considering I discuessed this with two friends the other day just randomly. I see no problem with it. It is not for the government to decide who you can and can't love, but they can most certainly not have children.

 

[ShadowsofHope]

That's like saying if murder was legalized (yes, just as hyperbolic as your own statement), everyone would start murdering each other because there is no legal deterrent to stop you if you end up performing the act.

Now, as we all know that is utterly ludicrous considering the powerful social taboo on these subjects already, and from said taboo the strong influence it has upon one's innate human morality (not to mention, it is generally known that murder has an obviously well inclined negative reaction to the cohesion of society) that one could logically assume without absurdity everyone would suddenly start screwing their siblings simply because legal deterrent is not there anymore.

I do love the flourishing of the slippery slope fallacy in this thread, really.

Really? You think that of murder where legalised, people wouldn't start killing each other? I think that at least for the less-sane ones out there, heads would roll...literally.

Sociopathic tendencies are also in less than 10% of the general human population.

And yes, I do. I generally give human beings more slack than to believe in the absurdity that murder could ever be legalized, or even if it was, everyone would end up simply acting like a murderous monster.

 

[ramboondiea]

this is so wrong, the chances of any child being born with no problems is minute. and legalising it is paramount to encouraging it.
come on Switzerland, get your crap together

No, social pressure prevents it from happening in virtually all cases. Still, if two adults want to have sex, who am I to tell them they can't?
It's just strange that Switzerland would do that, considering their track record as far as social progressiveness goes. Women couldn't vote until the early 1970s...

if they want to have sex they can, i literally dont care, but this is encouraging the act which could lead to children, and yeah you;ll read a million times on here about how it wont effect the child but it does, the lickelyhood of a child from same family parents is about 3 times that of different family parents.

also the social stigma attached with it, what child should be put throu that?

Sorry, I guess I wasn't clear: yes, the risk of genetic damage is rather high in cases of incest, which is why I would strongly discourage family members from procreating, and would also like to encourage the entire south of the US to stop doing so.
Anyway, the stigma associated with incest usually prevents children being born in cases of consensual sex, which is what I meant. The legalization hardly encourages the act, but it removes legal penalties for people being idiots.

exactly! if you remove the deterrent then whats stopping them. people are more likely to do something if they know theres no punishment. and social stigmas can be ignored, like you said; people being idiots, you think everyone of them will decide to be safe?

That's like saying if murder was legalized (yes, just as hyperbolic as your own statement), everyone would start murdering each other because there is no legal deterrent to stop you if you end up performing the act.

Now, as we all know that is utterly ludicrous considering the powerful social taboo on these subjects already, and from said taboo the strong influence it has upon one's innate human morality (not to mention, it is generally known that murder has an obviously well inclined negative reaction to the cohesion of society) that one could logically assume without absurdity everyone would suddenly start screwing their siblings simply because legal deterrent is not there anymore.

I do love the flourishing of the slippery slope fallacy in this thread, really.

for starters if you did legalise murder, i would guarantee people would start going out murdering, law is one of the massive deterrents that make people do as they should.
and people IGNORE taboos, infact thats why things like incest exist in the first place,
and just what part of my argument is is so exaggerated? that you can compare it to randomly talking about murder?

 

[DSQ]

If your in love your in love, just don't br majorly offened when people are a bit creeped (but y'know on't take any shit for it but yeah.....)

 

[fgdfgdgd]

Whatever floats your boat, as has been said, what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their own home is none of my buisness.

 

[ShadowsofHope]

for starters if you did legalise murder, i would guarantee people would start going out murdering, law is one of the massive deterrents that make people do as they should.

Uh, no. They would not, I'm sorry. Perhaps the individuals already psychologically inclined to do so, but they do it anyways without regret. It is absurd, either way you try to rationalize such argument.

and people IGNORE taboos, infact thats why things like incest exist in the first place

Incest exists because of biological inclinations. Taboo's are effective in society on a public scale, what people do in private is their own business. Not yours.

and just what part of my argument is is so exaggerated? that you can compare it to randomly talking about murder?

You said that if incest is legalized, everyone would start committing incest. I called absurdity on that, and compared it to the equally absurd assumption that everyone would go into a murderous spree if murder was legalized. It is called the slippery slope fallacy for a reason, now.

 

[TheBoulder]

Wow, this thread just made The Escapist feel a lot dirtier. Incest just feels... gross.

 

[Valkyrie101]

This is fucked up, and not something we should be encouraging. It doesn't get any more depraved than this.

One word. Necrophilia. Guess it got more depraved. Considering the sheer amount of fetishes and social taboos, I'm sure you could find one alot worse than incest. Hey, I just gave you one of the top of my head.

Necrophiliac incest? Ok, it can get slightly more depraved. My point still stands.

"NOT GRANDMA!" T_T

Congratulations, you've delayed dinner by a couple of hours.

 

[YukoValis]

Wow, this thread just made The Escapist feel a lot dirtier. Incest just feels... gross.

But why? could it be backwords thinking? I mean it's just love that happens between family members. Is that so wrong I wonder? Hmm

 

[thethingthatlurks]

this is so wrong, the chances of any child being born with no problems is minute. and legalising it is paramount to encouraging it.
come on Switzerland, get your crap together

No, social pressure prevents it from happening in virtually all cases. Still, if two adults want to have sex, who am I to tell them they can't?
It's just strange that Switzerland would do that, considering their track record as far as social progressiveness goes. Women couldn't vote until the early 1970s...

if they want to have sex they can, i literally dont care, but this is encouraging the act which could lead to children, and yeah you;ll read a million times on here about how it wont effect the child but it does, the lickelyhood of a child from same family parents is about 3 times that of different family parents.

also the social stigma attached with it, what child should be put throu that?

Sorry, I guess I wasn't clear: yes, the risk of genetic damage is rather high in cases of incest, which is why I would strongly discourage family members from procreating, and would also like to encourage the entire south of the US to stop doing so.
Anyway, the stigma associated with incest usually prevents children being born in cases of consensual sex, which is what I meant. The legalization hardly encourages the act, but it removes legal penalties for people being idiots.

exactly! if you remove the deterrent then whats stopping them. people are more likely to do something if they know theres no punishment. and social stigmas can be ignored, like you said; people being idiots, you think everyone of them will decide to be safe?

What is stopping you from drinking yourself to death? What is stopping you from smoking a carton of cigarettes every day? What is stopping you from running around in a pink jumpsuit and shouting "look at me, I'm totally flaming gay" (disregard if that happens to be true, no judgments from me)? None of those are illegal, sans the drinking age bit, yet you don't see too many people partaking in those activities.

your right i dont do any of them, mainly because i dont have a desire too smoke/drink/offend. but i know people who drink riducolus amounts, i knew people who have developed lung cancer from smoking packs at a time. (and the flaming gay part is exactly what my cousin does) but people who do have the desire to undertake incestuous relationships also undertake the possibility of procreating. it does happen, if they legalise it thats one less thing preventing this possibility

Great, you've made my point for me
You don't drink/smoke (good for you, btw), yet other people do despite some legal barriers. Is a drinking age going to stop anybody from drinking? Well, hell no. Same for smoking, of course. Laws set out to limit or prohibit behavior have no effect, so what would laws banning incestuous relationships accomplish? Your point about procreation is entirely valid, of course, but you shouldn't underestimate just how much social pressure curtails such things. Besides, the risk of damage to the child is about equal to that if the mother had it in her 40s, which is also frowned upon in society for that reason.

 

[The Stonker]

I mean why not?

 

[Virus0015]

Sounds like a good step. As long as they ban direct reproduction through incest (and strictly enforce abortions) to allow a decent quality of life for future children I don't see a problem. Yes you may see it as horrible/crime against nature etc. but homosexuality was once outlawed, look where it is now.

 

[ramboondiea]

for starters if you did legalise murder, i would guarantee people would start going out murdering, law is one of the massive deterrents that make people do as they should.

Uh, no. They would not, I'm sorry. Perhaps the individuals already psychologically inclined to do so, but they do it anyways without regret. It is absurd, either way you try to rationalize such argument.

and people IGNORE taboos, infact thats why things like incest exist in the first place

Incest exists because of biological inclinations. Taboo's are effective in society on a public scale, what people do in private is their own business. Not yours.

and just what part of my argument is is so exaggerated? that you can compare it to randomly talking about murder?

You said that if incest is legalized, everyone would start committing incest. I called absurdity on that, and compared it to the equally absurd assumption that everyone would go into a murderous spree if murder was legalized. It is called the slippery slope fallacy for a reason, now.

(i aint going to address your arguments one by one only because i dont know how to seperate the quotes on here)
People are violent, and saying peopel have to be inclined to commit murder is ridicolus, you might like to think people would be all happy and friendly but if you know you could kill somebody and face no punishment for it you would, plus without the punishment people would also believe that someone will come and kill them thus leading to pre-emptives strikes,

so aslong as i do something behind closed doors thats okay? NO its not, and if you want to argue whos business it is, then thats the governments job, dont like it? then tough

and at no point did i say that EVERYONE would start committing incest, i was clearly talking about those who want to.
and im not saying that every perso is going to go and have incestous children, im saying its a possibility and to ignore that idiotic, to compare it to the camel's nose argument is just wrong i was merely putting forward a possibility i was not saying it was a certainty

 

[4173]

I do not like where this is heading. You can say what two consensual adults do is their business, but developmentally challenged children drain government resources. Also, there open up risk of abuse. A little girl could be abused / manipulated by her father / brother in secret and when she turns 18 that abusive family member could take full advantage.

But child abuse and rape are already illegal, so what added protection does an incest law offer?

 

[drisky]

I'm honestly surprised how many people jump on the "every things ok with two consenting adults", I mean honestly people you don't have to approve of everything to be tolerant. What if there was a talking dog that could consent to sex, is there now no moral problems with having sex with it?

 

[Hashime]

I do not like where this is heading. You can say what two consensual adults do is their business, but developmentally challenged children drain government resources. Also, there open up risk of abuse. A little girl could be abused / manipulated by her father / brother in secret and when she turns 18 that abusive family member could take full advantage.

But child abuse and rape are already illegal, so what added protection does an incest law offer?

I am talking about an uncaught attacker abusing the damaged mental state of the victim.

 

[Bloodstain]

Good.

Should be legal everywhere.

This, a thousand times this.

Good luck, world, trying to stop people who love each other. Besides, those couples will most likely have perfectly normal children...only after multiple generations of incest children could be slightly deformed, for example, having an additional finger.
I'm not engaged in an incestuous relationship, I just like freeeeeeeedom, yeah.

 

[ramboondiea]

this is so wrong, the chances of any child being born with no problems is minute. and legalising it is paramount to encouraging it.
come on Switzerland, get your crap together

No, social pressure prevents it from happening in virtually all cases. Still, if two adults want to have sex, who am I to tell them they can't?
It's just strange that Switzerland would do that, considering their track record as far as social progressiveness goes. Women couldn't vote until the early 1970s...

if they want to have sex they can, i literally dont care, but this is encouraging the act which could lead to children, and yeah you;ll read a million times on here about how it wont effect the child but it does, the lickelyhood of a child from same family parents is about 3 times that of different family parents.

also the social stigma attached with it, what child should be put throu that?

Sorry, I guess I wasn't clear: yes, the risk of genetic damage is rather high in cases of incest, which is why I would strongly discourage family members from procreating, and would also like to encourage the entire south of the US to stop doing so.
Anyway, the stigma associated with incest usually prevents children being born in cases of consensual sex, which is what I meant. The legalization hardly encourages the act, but it removes legal penalties for people being idiots.

exactly! if you remove the deterrent then whats stopping them. people are more likely to do something if they know theres no punishment. and social stigmas can be ignored, like you said; people being idiots, you think everyone of them will decide to be safe?

What is stopping you from drinking yourself to death? What is stopping you from smoking a carton of cigarettes every day? What is stopping you from running around in a pink jumpsuit and shouting "look at me, I'm totally flaming gay" (disregard if that happens to be true, no judgments from me)? None of those are illegal, sans the drinking age bit, yet you don't see too many people partaking in those activities.

your right i dont do any of them, mainly because i dont have a desire too smoke/drink/offend. but i know people who drink riducolus amounts, i knew people who have developed lung cancer from smoking packs at a time. (and the flaming gay part is exactly what my cousin does) but people who do have the desire to undertake incestuous relationships also undertake the possibility of procreating. it does happen, if they legalise it thats one less thing preventing this possibility

Great, you've made my point for me
You don't drink/smoke (good for you, btw), yet other people do despite some legal barriers. Is a drinking age going to stop anybody from drinking? Well, hell no. Same for smoking, of course. Laws set out to limit or prohibit behavior have no effect, so what would laws banning incestuous relationships accomplish? Your point about procreation is entirely valid, of course, but you shouldn't underestimate just how much social pressure curtails such things. Besides, the risk of damage to the child is about equal to that if the mother had it in her 40s, which is also frowned upon in society for that reason.

the drinking age prevents SOME people from drinking, and to say that these limiting laws have no effect is ludicrous . if that was the case why not just be done with laws alltogether as that is what the majority of them do.
and i think yourgiving to much credit to social restraints, il admit that they are effective but you cant give them more weight then the law. its a social stigma for underage pregnancies, that didnt stop nearly 20% of my highschool year getting pregnant?. infact the danger to the child is slightly higher (at about 45-50) thats why doctors advise against pregnancies at this age and offer additional care, but alot of this care cant be use on incestuous children