Switzerland might make incest legal.

[theultimateend]

interesting..
http://www.thestatesman.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=352040&catid=37

I honestly believe between two adults if consent is given from each, and you don't physically harm another person it should be ok.. situation pending of course. but that's my opinion. What about everyone else here?

I honestly don't care.

Genetically it's a terrible idea, but we already throw caution to the wind.

It's always felt like the human race was like "I'm kinda into Eugenics. But don't tell anybody."

No incest folks, but if both of you have a disorder that causes your knees to lose their cartilage...well that's ok. Fuck your kids right?

Me personally? I'd never have any sort of sexual relation with any woman or man in my family. No offense to any of them.

I believe it's illegal in many places (here included) so it's not exactly surprising that the Switzerland government is following the 'government knows best' trend.

This made my head turn sideways like a confused kitten. It sounds like you are trying to say Switzerland acts like it knows best, but this is preceded by saying every other government acts like they do.

 

[ShadowsofHope]

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.

 

[Thundero13]

Yay, just don't have children if you're closely related, adopt instead.

 

[theultimateend]

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.

Humans aren't big on murdering other humans when no psychological problems are present and they aren't put in an extremely stressful situation (which usually makes the former requirement now present).

Takes a lot of training to make a normal kid murder someone on the battle field.

Yay, just don't have children if you're closely related, adopt instead.

Then sex the adopted ones?

j/k

 

[ziggy161]

I think the guys at the end of the report have a good point
'A spokesman for the party said: ?Murder is also quite rare in Switzerland but no one suggests that we remove that as an office from the statutes.'

Besides if the swiss wanna bone each other into inbreds, why should we care? we all have our own laws to be fixing...

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

interesting..
http://www.thestatesman.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=352040&catid=37

I honestly believe between two adults if consent is given from each, and you don't physically harm another person it should be ok.. situation pending of course. but that's my opinion. What about everyone else here?

Yes but it does harm people. Whether directly or indirectly. For example, suicide, there's a reason why you can't let people just fling themselves of bridges or building, or decide to take a bath with a toaster ... in this case, what if there were children?

 

[omicron1]

2040: The year the Swiss mutants start World War IV. Destroying the bank accounts of their foes, they quickly take over most of Northern Europe, Spain, France, and Italy, even conquering Great Britain before they are stopped by the IAF - including the pilots of the seven-days' war, come out of retirement just for this purpose. The US stays out of the war until 2043, when a group of radical hillbillies tries to take over Washington, D.C. - at which point it nukes Switzerland, levels the Alps, and everyone goes home happy.

 

[TerribleAssassin]

Why was there an actual *law* about this made in the first place?

I'm not sure to be honest, maybe the Goverment didn't see it as Legally Moral?

But, it should be legal, two people given consent to have sex, nothing more to it.

 

[SpaceSpork]

If they're in a relationship, fine. But if they have sex, that's another story. Have you seen inbred children before? They can hardly fuckin' stand up.

 

[Frozen Donkey Wheel2]

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.

 

[drosalion]

While i rekn incest is generally speaking morally wrong, i really see no reason for it to be illegal tbh. A (possible) minute increase of risk in birth defects isnt a valid reason either, that'd be like making it illegal for people with hereditary deseases to have sex or something like that. Fact is there is ALWAYS a risk of birth defects even between 2 perfectly healthy, non-related, adults. Also, sex doesnt always = pregnancy - in fact statistically speaking i would assume it'd probably be pretty rare - it is more often used for enjoyment and there are numerous contraception methods readily available.

There is literally no reason for incest to be illegal imho. That being said though, i _personally_ find it incredibly wrong, but not worthy of being illegal.

 

[Arehexes]

the problem is, inevitably, it will harm somebody. That's why it's illegal, not because it's creepy, or out of the norm, but because serious harm can come to the child if it is born of familial relationship.

See I don't like that reason for anything. By that logic you could say inevitably me driving a car could cause a crash which could cause someone to lose a arm destroying their way of life so we should outlaw it. Now I don't agree with incest at all it's just weird, but you can't just say that inevitably this bad thing will happen so we should ban it if that's the case we should ban: Guns, Cars, Writing Objects, any rope like object, bats and other heavy blunt objects, knifes or and object ment to cut and or stab, and our bare hands. But yes close nit breeding can cause...issues i agree.

 

[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.

 

[ShadowsofHope]

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.

Humans aren't big on murdering other humans when no psychological problems are present and they aren't put in an extremely stressful situation (which usually makes the former requirement now present).

Takes a lot of training to make a normal kid murder someone on the battle field.

Because clearly, incestuous siblings are evidently by default psychologically unhealthy, and general society is a battlefield, right? /sarcasm

Human beings in general have a little bit more self-control and common sense than you might realize, here.

 

[ziggy161]

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.

 

[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.

 

[YukoValis]

Wow. I am honestly surprised of all the open minded people here. I applaud you all as well, while shaking my head at the closed minded. Sadly a few of you might have your facts messed up. Inbreeding is sort of like cloning. The first time, two times you do it nothing to little could go wrong (unless you get really unlucky) It's when those people did it generation after generation that it all went to heck. Now a days that wouldn't likely happen. The kids would be fine and they will most likely find others outside their line, and that breaks the minor deteriation. It's such a small price to pay for love.

 

[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

 

[ziggy161]

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