• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Freedom brother and sister charged with incest

JacksinPA

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Dec 3, 2017
Messages
26,290
Reaction score
16,771
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive

FREEDOM — A brother and sister have been charged after their sexual relationship came to light.

According to a criminal complaint, the 30-year-old woman and 37-year-old man, both of Freedom, are each charged with incest after the woman told officers about their intimate relationship, which resulted in a child. They are not being named by The Times due to the nature of the crime.
=========================================
From wherever Beaver County is, here is a case of good old down home incest. The man just became overly fond of his sister.
 
All they have to do is the man say he is gay and the woman say she is a lesbian.Liberals will adore them.
 

FREEDOM — A brother and sister have been charged after their sexual relationship came to light.

According to a criminal complaint, the 30-year-old woman and 37-year-old man, both of Freedom, are each charged with incest after the woman told officers about their intimate relationship, which resulted in a child. They are not being named by The Times due to the nature of the crime.
=========================================
From wherever Beaver County is, here is a case of good old down home incest. The man just became overly fond of his sister.
Pennsylvania, the Alabama of the north
 

FREEDOM — A brother and sister have been charged after their sexual relationship came to light.

According to a criminal complaint, the 30-year-old woman and 37-year-old man, both of Freedom, are each charged with incest after the woman told officers about their intimate relationship, which resulted in a child. They are not being named by The Times due to the nature of the crime.
=========================================
From wherever Beaver County is, here is a case of good old down home incest. The man just became overly fond of his sister.
At least both were charged in this case. But why is her bail so much lower than his?
 
At least both were charged in this case. But why is her bail so much lower than his?
As a society we usually defer to females when the hammer comes down.
 
Which translates to we let them get away with crimes more than we let men get away with crimes.
Lincoln's assassination was a bigger shock to this country than 9/11. When they hung Mary Sarrat her minister held an umbrella to shield the poor woman from the rays of the D.C. sun. As I said, deferrence to a degree.

When I worked in sales it was common knowledge that a female sales person could get a meeting with the right person in a big company more easily than a man could. When it came to closing any deal it was usually her boss etc who handled that part.

Men are curious about women in business especially. For one thing, they smell better than guys & they are more interesting to look at. Men always fall for the attractive head & outstanding pectorals. But they can only get as far as their brains can take them.
 
At least both were charged in this case. But why is her bail so much lower than his?
I would assume it's because of this:

"During the investigation, the woman told police her brother attacked her and then fled as officers arrived, a report said."

and also

"Her brother remains in jail for the incest charge as well as simple assault and harassment, online records show"

He's not just in for incest, but also a violent crime.
 
I've not idea what the fascination is with incest here lately and since we're already off the moral deep-end and we're all going to Hell anyway...

...have you ever heard the old adage, "If you can't keep it in the family keep it in your pants"? 😁

I bet that's from West Virginia.
 
I would assume it's because of this:

"During the investigation, the woman told police her brother attacked her and then fled as officers arrived, a report said."

and also

"Her brother remains in jail for the incest charge as well as simple assault and harassment, online records show"

He's not just in for incest, but also a violent crime.
Fair enough.
 
I've not idea what the fascination is with incest here lately and since we're already off the moral deep-end and we're all going to Hell anyway...

...have you ever heard the old adage, "If you can't keep it in the family keep it in your pants"? 😁

I bet that's from West Virginia.
On a 'slow' news day there's always some academic getting busted or sentenced for some deviant sexual behavior.
 
The “sexual deviancy” of incest doesnt really get me as much as the objective harm it often causes to a child born from the pairing.
 
The “sexual deviancy” of incest doesnt really get me as much as the objective harm it often causes to a child born from the pairing.
That harm is over played. There have been several cases in the recent past where siblings who had no idea they were such for years, have married and had kids with no issues. First generation inbreeding does not do as much harm as is often touted. In fact it is a method breeders use often, albeit only once every 5 generations at the shortest interval for any given line. It is repeated inbreeding over generations where the real damage occurs. But the social pressure for such things is no longer there, not even among royalty anymore, which is where such multigenerational was almost exclusive.
 
The “sexual deviancy” of incest doesnt really get me as much as the objective harm it often causes to a child born from the pairing.

Assuming there is no genetic malformity, what is the objective harm - social stigma? Are siblings guaranteed to be inherently unfit parents, to such a significant degree that it stands out in comparison to when Mom and Dad aren't swimming in the same bloodline?

Don't get me wrong, subjectively I have a visceral reaction to these stories, and admittedly I even look askance at pairings of first cousins. But why? The only reason I can think of is I've been socially conditioned to react negatively.

But taking the squick factor out of it, let's assume the pairing is between consenting adults and there is no abuse. What is the objection that justifies criminalizing the relationship? Why can't we all just mind our own business, provided it doesn't hurt or otherwise infringe on others?

I must be getting more libertarian/anarchist leanings in my advancing age.
 
Assuming there is no genetic malformity, what is the objective harm - social stigma? Are siblings guaranteed to be inherently unfit parents, to such a significant degree that it stands out in comparison to when Mom and Dad aren't swimming in the same bloodline?

Don't get me wrong, subjectively I have a visceral reaction to these stories, and admittedly I even look askance at pairings of first cousins. But why? The only reason I can think of is I've been socially conditioned to react negatively.

But taking the squick factor out of it, let's assume the pairing is between consenting adults and there is no abuse. What is the objection that justifies criminalizing the relationship? Why can't we all just mind our own business, provided it doesn't hurt or otherwise infringe on others?

I must be getting more libertarian/anarchist leanings in my advancing age.
My opposition wasnt really based on the sick factor of it, but the harm that continuous inbreeding tends to cause.
 
My opposition wasnt really based on the sick factor of it, but the harm that continuous inbreeding tends to cause.
Continuous inbreeding would certainly be a potential issue. Someone up above mentioned spacing such pairings in a bloodline out by 5 generations? No idea if that would bring the risk of genetic disorders down to the level of a non-relational pairing.
 
Continuous inbreeding would certainly be a potential issue. Someone up above mentioned spacing such pairings in a bloodline out by 5 generations? No idea if that would bring the risk of genetic disorders down to the level of a non-relational pairing.
I havnt heard that before which is why i brought up continuous.
 
My opposition wasnt really based on the sick factor of it, but the harm that continuous inbreeding tends to cause.
Continuous inbreeding would certainly be a potential issue. Someone up above mentioned spacing such pairings in a bloodline out by 5 generations? No idea if that would bring the risk of genetic disorders down to the level of a non-relational pairing.
I havnt heard that before which is why i brought up continuous.
That was me that mentioned it. 5 generations is the minimum separation so that it is not considered inbreeding. I learned that when I ran across the tidbit that animal breeders would sometimes do a single generation inbreed to reenforce a trait.

As to continuous inbreeding among humans, most of it occurred among the nobility, and it was all but forced on them by the rest of the nobility. Of course that was also a period where marriages were not about love, but power and connections and wealth. The risk of multigenerational inbreeding today is practically nil, since that pressure is no longer present.
 
That harm is over played. There have been several cases in the recent past where siblings who had no idea they were such for years, have married and had kids with no issues. First generation inbreeding does not do as much harm as is often touted. In fact it is a method breeders use often, albeit only once every 5 generations at the shortest interval for any given line. It is repeated inbreeding over generations where the real damage occurs. But the social pressure for such things is no longer there, not even among royalty anymore, which is where such multigenerational was almost exclusive.
Full siblings share half their DNA. If your parents are full siblings you're getting ~6 duplicate chromosomes.
Assuming there is no genetic malformity, what is the objective harm - social stigma?
If you don't know why you shouldn't have sex with your sister there's not much hope for you.
 
Full siblings share half their DNA. If your parents are full siblings you're getting ~6 duplicate chromosomes.

Not necessarily. It can range from all DNA (identical twins) to none (possible if improbable) and everywhere in between. Remember that each chromosome pair splits into two with both parents, so it's possible to have two eggs have no same chromosome halves between them and highly likely to have two sperm which do not, since there will be several such pairs. Further, in order for the inbreeding to have a negative effect, both would have to carry a recessive gene that causes a birth defect AND both pass it on. This is why first generation inbreeding isn't as dangerous as subsequent generations of inbreeding. If a birth defect comes from a dominant gene, it doesn't matter whether or not the other gene is the same. Such a dominant gene will cause the defect even with the partner not being blood related.
 
All they have to do is the man say he is gay and the woman say she is a lesbian.Liberals will adore them.
Na

Brother and sister being intimate, sounds like something straight from Trump country.
 
Not necessarily. It can range from all DNA (identical twins) to none (possible if improbable) and everywhere in between. Remember that each chromosome pair splits into two with both parents, so it's possible to have two eggs have no same chromosome halves between them and highly likely to have two sperm which do not, since there will be several such pairs.
The odds of a full blood brother and sister not being genetically related are less than one in thirty five trillion. It's unlikely that such a pair has ever existed in the entire history of mankind.
Further, in order for the inbreeding to have a negative effect, both would have to carry a recessive gene that causes a birth defect AND both pass it on. This is why first generation inbreeding isn't as dangerous as subsequent generations of inbreeding. If a birth defect comes from a dominant gene, it doesn't matter whether or not the other gene is the same. Such a dominant gene will cause the defect even with the partner not being blood related.
Most people carry recessive defective genes. Even a single duplicate chromosome is dangerous, and the average offspring of full sibling incest gets six of them.
 
The odds of a full blood brother and sister not being genetically related are less than one in thirty five trillion. It's unlikely that such a pair has ever existed in the entire history of mankind.

Given the number of people throughout history, I'd say the odds were very good that several have existed. But I did note that such a person would be extremely rare. What I was countering was your number 6, because you initially wrote it more as an actual number than an average number, as you did in the later part of this post I am responding to.

Most people carry recessive defective genes. Even a single duplicate chromosome is dangerous, and the average offspring of full sibling incest gets six of them.

Both parents have to have the same recessive gene and then both have to pass it on. Yes the odds are greater on that when you are talking genetically related within 1 or 2 steps. I haven't denied that. What I have denied is that the risk is as great as it is made out to be. There is about as much risk on first generation inbreeding as a woman getting pregnant after 40. Those odds keep increasing as successive generations inbreed, but the initial is really not all that great. Higher than average, but then there are plenty of dominant defective genes that hold as much of a risk even without inbreeding.
 
Na

Brother and sister being intimate, sounds like something straight from Trump country.
Like two men married adopting a baby is something straight from Biden country.
 
Back
Top Bottom