Incest: an age-old taboo

[notrepetiteashley 0]

IMHO, feeling bad for the problems children of incest have and being against it is a far cry from pro-Eugenics. Personally, I'd be pissed if my parents were married and I had deformities because of it or some other problem.

[Ban Hammer 13,458]

Anything goes these days. PC dictates that we judge no one and prohibit little.

It's not a bad dictat to live by, judge no one. As for prohibition, it's value is certainly over rated. Education is a far more reliable way to actually stop people from doing things that are harmful to both themselves and other people.

May I have your address and computer passwords, please? I would like to take all your good stuff when you're not home. You won't judge me as I break another longstanding prohibition by robbing you blind; said so yourself. Judge no one. BTW, I'm educated, but that won't stop me from doing what the hell I want.

pwned!

[mawilson 2,133]

Incest is and has always been a social taboo. Homosexuality used to be too - but its more socially accepted these days than incest. I dare say that homosexuality is much more common than incest or beastiality.

There's an important difference between homosexuality and incest -- people don't

"choose" to be homosexual, any more than they choose their gender or race.

We all can choose our partners, however.

[Alex+R 0]

Incest is and has always been a social taboo. Homosexuality used to be too - but its more socially accepted these days than incest. I dare say that homosexuality is much more common than incest or beastiality.

There's an important difference between homosexuality and incest -- people don't

"choose" to be homosexual, any more than they choose their gender or race.

We all can choose our partners, however.

The man has a point!

[Peikko 1,575]

How do you jump from not judging people to lawlessness?

As for this statement 'I'm educated, but that won't stop me from doing what the hell I want' I have absolutely no clue what you are trying to convey.

[Alex+R 0]

IMHO, feeling bad for the problems children of incest have and being against it is a far cry from pro-Eugenics. Personally, I'd be pissed if my parents were married and I had deformities because of it or some other problem.

Yeah, that's what I was trying to convey, but it got overshadowed by my poor choice of language. Genetic disorders are not ideal, but there is a difference between unknowingly passing one to your child and knowingly increasing those chances by breeding with someone from your exact same gene pool. I also think it's unfair to the children to have to deal with the social stigma of being from an incestuous union and the confusing family situation which will undoubtedly be treated as shameful by those around the child.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Incest is and has always been a social taboo. Homosexuality used to be too - but its more socially accepted these days than incest. I dare say that homosexuality is much more common than incest or beastiality.

There's an important difference between homosexuality and incest -- people don't

"choose" to be homosexual, any more than they choose their gender or race.

We all can choose our partners, however.

It's not always true that people don't choose to be gay. There are actually societies that encourage straight children to adopt gay lifestyles. It's also a fact that gay men and lesbians marry and behave like straights and straight men haev been known to go on the "down low". Sexuality is not so cut and dried anymore than a preference for buxom blondes or tall, dark men is.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Incest is and has always been a social taboo. Homosexuality used to be too - but its more socially accepted these days than incest. I dare say that homosexuality is much more common than incest or beastiality.

There's an important difference between homosexuality and incest -- people don't

"choose" to be homosexual, any more than they choose their gender or race.

We all can choose our partners, however.

It's not always true that people don't choose to be gay. There are actually societies that encourage straight children to adopt gay lifestyles. It's also a fact that gay men and lesbians marry and behave like straights and straight men have been known to go on the "down low". Sexuality is not so cut and dried anymore than a preference for buxom blondes or tall, dark men is.

Which societies do this?

[Sofiyya 1,687]

How do you jump from not judging people to lawlessness?

As for this statement 'I'm educated, but that won't stop me from doing what the hell I want' I have absolutely no clue what you are trying to convey.

Is it not against the law to marry your sibling? They are breaking the law, and you say don't judge. Be consistant; either law breaking and non-judging is good, or you have to accept the fact that setting boundaries in law requires judging and you're willing to accept that.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

How do you jump from not judging people to lawlessness?

As for this statement 'I'm educated, but that won't stop me from doing what the hell I want' I have absolutely no clue what you are trying to convey.

Is it not against the law to marry your sibling? They are breaking the law, and you say don't judge. Be consistant; either law breaking and non-judging is good, or you have to accept the fact that setting boundaries in law requires judging and you're willing to accept that.

I think a lot of people question the law when it seems unfair. In certain contexts the "law of the land" often doesn't reflect the diversity of a person's own moral/ethical code. It doesn't follow that what is legal is necessarily right.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

I'm sure that's true if you're into anarchy. Otherwise, someone is going to be offended by the limits imposed upon them by the less than anarchic.

Edited March 13, 2007 by Green-eyed girl

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I'm sure that's true if you're into anarchy. Otherwise, someone is going to be offended by the limits imposed upon them by the less and anarchic.

Not really - why do you think all those people get up in arms about a story in the news where rigid interpretation of the law seems unfair? For instance, there's no shortage of people angry that those border patrol agents were jailed for shooting and injuring a Mexican drug dealer. Similarly there's no shortage of outrage that child sex offenders get lenient prison sentences, and are released into society to offend again.

Anarchy is always taken to imply some sort of violent Mad-Max-style lawless society. In its purest sense it means "self-rule", and there's a bit more to it than people living in mud huts, stockpiling food and defending their homes from lawless bandits with an assortment of firearms. And no - I'm not into it, but there are some interesting ideas.

Edited March 13, 2007 by erekose

[Sofiyya 1,687]

I have a very good idea of what anarchy means, and lawlessness is not the definition I'm alluding to. I'm responding to the notion that all people have to do is want the law changed to suit themselves and that's enough reason for some to want it changed. That is not analygous to your examples. In those cases, the laws have been relaxed to allow for more law breaking. Law breaking is certainly not what I'm advocating.

Edited March 13, 2007 by Green-eyed girl

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I have a very good idea of what anarchy means, and lawlessness is not the definition I'm alluding to. I'm responding to the notion that all people have to do is want the law changed to suit themselves and that's enough reason for some to want it changed. That is not analygous to your examples. In those cases, the laws have been relaxed to allow for more law breaking. Law breaking is certainly not what I'm advocating.

Sure - but the law isn't 'fixed'. It changes over time - for all number of reasons.

And as I said, what is legal isn't necessarily right.

Edited March 13, 2007 by erekose

[Sofiyya 1,687]

What's legal isn't necessarily wrong either. Morality, as defined by society, should be an element, and that is lost when the law is changed to reflect hedonism rather than reason.