• 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!

NY Post - ‘Consensual incest’ should be decriminalized, advocates say

calamity said:
Cousins...no problem
Siblings....yeah, Ewww! But, it probably shouldn't be illegal, as long as no one procreates
Parent-Child...No way.
Click to expand...
why not the latter?

And why the no procreation rule for the second? We already allow people like blacks with sickle cell anemia to procreate, and Ashkenazi Jews with all sorts of genetic issues to procreate. So why the limit on no procreation for siblings even though they are less likely to (unless it's been going on for generations) pass on any genetic abnormalities?
 
CLAX1911 said:
Why limit it to just adults? Why can't say sometime a year under the age of majority consent?

The age across the country isn't even the same so why support that rule that's far more arbitrary?
Click to expand...
Okay so ocome back when you grasp what consenting adults means.
 
So any cousins should be able to marry. There is no reason to restrict such relationships, particularly since the vast majority of cousins are not raised in the same households and they have a relatively low risk of birth defects.

That being said, laws should remain on the books to prevent parents from marrying offspring, any children they raise at some point before adulthood, or having sex with them. Laws should also prevent other related adults within a child's "early" life (any time before adulthood) from having intimate relationships for the same reasons as parent/child relationships should be stopped here, grooming and imbalance of power within such relationships being the reasoning. Also, siblings raised together should have such restrictions as well.

However, I do believe that an allowable defense for such a relationship should exist if they can show that they did not know each other as parent/child or siblings before reaching adulthood. The relationship described in this article is a rare case, but I can see how it would be wrong to prosecute people for this sort of relationship. They didn't meet until after both were adults. And there have been other cases where siblings were already dating before they even knew they were siblings. The intimate relationship was established prior to any knowledge of a familial relationship.
 
Deuce said:
I've read some stuff suggesting the probability of issues really isn't that high until you start doing multigenerational stuff.
Click to expand...
It's pretty high in 1st tier and even 2nd tier consanguinity relationships. But after that level, it tends to be much closer to the already low levels, under 10% chance.


I am trying to find a chart I used to use to show the risks. It was years ago though, so it may take a while. It is one of the reasons that I started accepting that first cousins should not be prevented from dating. The research shows that, while they do have an increased risk of birth defects, and it is about a 100% increase, that only puts it from a 3% risk "normally" (for non related couplings) to a 6% for first cousins. That is just about the same increase in risk for women over 40 having children. I don't think it is right to restrict one for that increase but not the other (and there is no way I would tell women over 40 they can't be having sex, getting married because they have an increased risk of their offspring have birth defects).

Consanguineous marriages

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Now, multigenerational relationships does increase that much more, but such multigenerational relationships usually develop within certain cultural traditions or conditions that are not "normal" in the US.
 
Gondwanaland said:
I.... agree. Consensual incest should not be illegal. Change My Mind.

I've yet to come across an actual, valid argument for them being illegal - every argument against it that I've seen, quickly falls apart or shows flagrant double standards, and typically just ends up being a complicated excuse to say "eww, it grosses me out, so it should be illegal" (plenty of things gross me out, including incest, yet I don't think the government has any place telling people not to do it - incest, guys having sex with guys, transgender people having sex with anyone, fat people having sex with anyone, eating cilantro, etc.).

If some grown adult wants to marry, or have a romantic/sexual relationship with another grown adult who happens to be related to them, they should be able to.

nypost.com

‘Consensual incest’ should be decriminalized, advocates say

Consensual incest advocates are rooting for an anonymous New York parent who wants to marry their own adult child. Australian Richard Morris, who is pushing to change incest laws in about 60 countr…
nypost.com nypost.com
Click to expand...

Wait what? lol
Thread title, terminology and a link from the nutty ny post dont really line up so ill just give my t2 cents on the various topics

uhm, not familiar with the topic but yes consensual sex among adults should never be illegal 🤷‍♂️
is incest SEX illegal in some/most places? I have no idea

thats vastly different than marriage and children though

Currently, the law applies to everybody equally and close relatives to varying degrees can not participate in a marriage contract.

My understanding on incest procreation is the risk of defects/deformities and that increases with repeated generations per science has influenced the decision to limit that. But again never looked into it.

I doubt this is a real movement but people are free to try for it all they want. Seems they'll have to overcome science and since theres no illegal discrimination, civil rights or equal rights violations here doesnt seem like theres a real path for this.,.
 
AmNat said:
I remember when social conservatives were called crazy for predicting this would happen.
Click to expand...
rightfully so (based on the reason why they said it) and thats still the case as far as i can see lol 🤷‍♂️
 
roguenuke said:
So any cousins should be able to marry. There is no reason to restrict such relationships, particularly since the vast majority of cousins are not raised in the same households and they have a relatively low risk of birth defects.
Click to expand...
Definitely agreed.
roguenuke said:
That being said, laws should remain on the books to prevent parents from marrying offspring, any children they raise at some point before adulthood, or having sex with them. Laws should also prevent other related adults within a child's "early" life (any time before adulthood) from having intimate relationships for the same reasons as parent/child relationships should be stopped here, grooming and imbalance of power within such relationships being the reasoning. Also, siblings raised together should have such restrictions as well.
Click to expand...
But why? Grooming can occur and is much more common outside of parent/child relationships.

And what about, say, a family where the parents are deadbeat and the kid is largely raised by, say, a family friend, neighbor, etc.? We don't stop such relationships when they are adults if they choose to enter into them, despite having similar 'imbalance of power'.

And why should there be such restrictions on siblings raised together? What is the reasoning there?


roguenuke said:
However, I do believe that an allowable defense for such a relationship should exist if they can show that they did not know each other as parent/child or siblings before reaching adulthood. The relationship described in this article is a rare case, but I can see how it would be wrong to prosecute people for this sort of relationship. They didn't meet until after both were adults. And there have been other cases where siblings were already dating before they even knew they were siblings. The intimate relationship was established prior to any knowledge of a familial relationship.
Click to expand...
Okay. But why only if they did not know each other before becoming adults? There's no reason to limit it there. I grew up with my next door neighbor spending most of their time at our farm. Essentially a sibling type relationship. I would not be prevented from entering into a relationship with her. So why is it different for blood siblings? And what about unrelated siblings (stepsiblings)? Are you okay with those?
 
AGENT J said:
Wait what? lol
Thread title, terminology and a link from the nutty ny post dont really line up so ill just give my t2 cents on the various topics
Click to expand...
Unsure what isn't lining up.
AGENT J said:
uhm, not familiar with the topic but yes consensual sex among adults should never be illegal 🤷‍♂️
is incest SEX illegal in some/most places? I have no idea
Click to expand...
Yes, it is in many places in the US.
AGENT J said:
thats vastly different than marriage and children though
Click to expand...
How so?
AGENT J said:
Currently, the law applies to everybody equally and close relatives to varying degrees can not participate in a marriage contract.
Click to expand...
And not long ago it applied to everyone equally and men could not marry men and women could not marry women.
AGENT J said:
My understanding on incest procreation is the risk of defects/deformities and that increases with repeated generations per science has influenced the decision to limit that. But again never looked into it.
Click to expand...
After multiple generations it can, yes. But then, we allow black people to marry and procreate despite the high risk of passing on sickle cell anemia. We allow Ashkenazi Jews to marry and procreate despite a VERY high likelihood of passing on a number of debilitating genetic disorders. So that's not really a valid reason to prevent incestuous marriage/procreation (not to mention any gay and lesbian incestuous couples would not have that procreation issue).
AGENT J said:
I doubt this is a real movement but people are free to try for it all they want. Seems they'll have to overcome science and since theres no illegal discrimination, civil rights or equal rights violations here doesnt seem like theres a real path for this.,.
Click to expand...
It's a real movement. And there'y certainly illegal discrimination, if you hold that there was against gays and lesbians.
 
Gondwanaland said:
I.... agree. Consensual incest should not be illegal. Change My Mind.

I've yet to come across an actual, valid argument for them being illegal - every argument against it that I've seen, quickly falls apart or shows flagrant double standards, and typically just ends up being a complicated excuse to say "eww, it grosses me out, so it should be illegal" (plenty of things gross me out, including incest, yet I don't think the government has any place telling people not to do it - incest, guys having sex with guys, transgender people having sex with anyone, fat people having sex with anyone, eating cilantro, etc.).

If some grown adult wants to marry, or have a romantic/sexual relationship with another grown adult who happens to be related to them, they should be able to.

nypost.com

‘Consensual incest’ should be decriminalized, advocates say

Consensual incest advocates are rooting for an anonymous New York parent who wants to marry their own adult child. Australian Richard Morris, who is pushing to change incest laws in about 60 countr…
nypost.com nypost.com
Click to expand...
Someone's having a little trouble in the mainstream dating world <shaking my head>
 
Gondwanaland said:
1.) Unsure what isn't lining up.
2.)Yes, it is in many places in the US.
3.)How so?
4.)And not long ago it applied to everyone equally and men could not marry men and women could not marry women.
5.) After multiple generations it can, yes. But then, we allow black people to marry and procreate despite the high risk of passing on sickle cell anemia. We allow Ashkenazi Jews to marry and procreate despite a VERY high likelihood of passing on a number of debilitating genetic disorders. So that's not really a valid reason to prevent incestuous marriage/procreation (not to mention any gay and lesbian incestuous couples would not have that procreation issue).
6.) It's a real movement.
7.) And there'y certainly illegal discrimination
8.) if you hold that there was against gays and lesbians.
Click to expand...

1.) should be obvious, sex, marriage, conception dont line up.
2.) well it shouldn't be IMO, no reason why any consensual sex between adults should
3.) already explained
4.) and that was a civil rights, equal rights, illegal discrimination issue. Not the same at all.
5.) What? wait . . is this not a real thread . . .is this a joke thread LMAO those are not the same at all and completely inane LMAO. Also understand you arent arguing against me, this is what is established
6.) I doubt it
7.) no theres not, name what it is
8.) What? gays are lesbians LMAO and NO this is not the same by any means 😂
 
CLAX1911 said:
Someone can't explain their claims.

I can't even shake my head over that one I've come to expect it.
Click to expand...
Explain what? What are you even talking about now?
 
AGENT J said:
1.) should be obvious, sex, marriage, conception dont line up.
Click to expand...
They line up quite a bit.
AGENT J said:
2.) well it shouldn't be IMO, no reason why any consensual sex between adults should
Click to expand...
Agreed
AGENT J said:
3.) already explained
Click to expand...
See above
AGENT J said:
4.) and that was a civil rights, equal rights, illegal discrimination issue. Not the same at all.
Click to expand...
This, similarly, is a civil rights, equal rights, illegal discrimination issue. These are consenting adults being denied the right to marry just like gays and lesbians were.
AGENT J said:
5.) What? wait . . is this not a real thread . . .is this a joke thread LMAO those are not the same at all and completely inane LMAO. Also understand you arent arguing against me, this is what is established
Click to expand...
No, this is not a joke thread. THose are not only the same, but in the case of Askhenazi Jews, genetic defects are MORE likely than your average incestuous couple. Yet we don't prevent them from marrying.


AGENT J said:
6.) I doubt it
Click to expand...
Your doubts don't make reality disappear.
AGENT J said:
7.) no theres not, name what it is
Click to expand...
They are consenting adults not allowed to marry the person they love. No different at all from gays and lesbians.
AGENT J said:
8.) What? gays are lesbians LMAO and NO this is not the same by any means 😂
Click to expand...
I'm unsure what this is supposed to mean.
 
lurchadams said:
No, I read it fine. You want to **** your sister because you can't get a date in the real world.
Click to expand...
And now we get to the personal attacks because you can't come up with a rational argument. And you show again you can't read the OP. No one invited you here. If you can't formulate an argument, get lost.
 
Gondwanaland said:
And now we get to the personal attacks because you can't come up with a rational argument. And you show again you can't read the OP. No one invited you here. If you can't formulate an argument, get lost.
Click to expand...
Is this thread some sort of attempt to say homosexual relationships should be discouraged just like we do with incestuous ones or are you really an advocate for incest?
 
Gondwanaland said:
1.)They line up quite a bit.
2.)This, similarly, is a civil rights, equal rights, illegal discrimination issue.
3.) These are consenting adults being denied the right to marry just like gays and lesbians were.
4.)No, this is not a joke thread. THose are not only the same, but in the case of Askhenazi Jews, genetic defects are MORE likely than your average incestuous couple. Yet we don't prevent them from marrying.
5.)Your doubts don't make reality disappear.
6.) They are consenting adults not allowed to marry the person they love. No different at all from gays and lesbians.
7.)I'm unsure what this is supposed to mean.
Click to expand...
1.) since they are not the same they actually dont
2,.) but its not hence the reason you cant name how and what illegal discrimination it is
3.) again those are factually not the same. Name the illegal discrimination
4.) then you should say hilarious shit that will get laughed and not taken seriously y because of how absurd they are
5.) you haven't provided any reality, so the doubt remains LOL
6.) factually different since thats not reality, nice try but a complete failure. Again . .name the illegal discrimination you cant hence why you dodge the question
7.) thats very telling, I have no idea how to explain it if you are confused
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom