View Full Version : Incest Law
connieb19
07-Mar-07, 21:29
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6424937.stm
Should this couple be allowed to be together? :confused
Given that they admit that they knew what they were doing...
It's hard to apply the soft option that they love each other and so all normal rules are out the window...
No. Not right.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6424937.stm
Should this couple be allowed to be together? :confusedNo, we have enough to try and be 'tolerant' of what with homosexuals wanting to adopt, lets draw the line somewhere.[disgust]
It must be difficult for them to recognise each other as brother/sister when they weren't brought up as such, but as they knew they were related its a definite no no!!
Its slightly more difficult if they'd met without realising they were related, but I still wouldn't agree with it.
I'm not sure its right to have their children taken off them either, but I don't know what the solution for that is - they are mum/auntie and dad/uncle all in one!!
They say you can't help who you fall in love with, but I think common sense has to come in. If I'd been attracted to someone, started a relationship with him then found out he was my sibling, I'd be repulsed enough to put an end to it!!
The worry for the children is health issues - heredity risks are doubled when the parents are related. Its them that will suffer in the end.
The other aspect to think about is, in some states, its legal to marry animals - I'd rather see a brother and sister get married!!
The other aspect to think about is, in some states, its legal to marry animals - I'd rather see a brother and sister get married!!
God help us!
The other aspect to think about is, in some states, its legal to marry animals - I'd rather see a brother and sister get married!!
God help us!
I think I'm right in saying that, maybe not though!!! I've never had reason to research into it!!
My point was, there are worse things going on in the world!! (but I still don't condone a brother/sister relationship)
I have read similar stories with it being father/daughter or mother/son relationships - again, they are worse because for anyone to look at their own child and choose to have them as a lover is too wrong for words!!!
Whos right is it to say 2 people who are in love cannot be together, related or not ?? who makes the rules ?
This is so difficult because they're starting off in the wrong place. I agree that the relationship should have ended as soon as they discovered they were brother and sister. Trouble is now they have four children who are going to lose everything and will be pretty traumatised anyway when they are old enough to know what's happened. But is it better for the children to be taken away from loving parents? What will that do to them. I think they have already had two children taken away. It's a mess. The couple have been selfish and the children will suffer.
Whos right is it to say 2 people who are in love cannot be together, related or not ?? who makes the rules ?
It's a taboo which is pretty universal and goes back a long long way, to a time when we lived in tribes and man first discovered the effects of inbreeding.
This is so difficult because they're starting off in the wrong place. I agree that the relationship should have ended as soon as they discovered they were brother and sister. Trouble is now they have four children who are going to lose everything and will be pretty traumatised anyway when they are old enough to know what's happened. But is it better for the children to be taken away from loving parents? What will that do to them. I think they have already had two children taken away. It's a mess. The couple have been selfish and the children will suffer.Where do we draw the line, people marrying animals, homosexuals adopting, incestuous couples having children?
Seems to me the fabric of society is slowly being ripped apart.
connieb19
07-Mar-07, 23:04
I can't really see why it's any different to a homosexual couple, they are two consenting adults, surely it's up to them how they choose to live?
I can't really see why it's any different to a homosexual couple, they are two consenting adults, surely it's up to them how they choose to live?What if it was a father and a daughter or a mother and a son?
connieb19
07-Mar-07, 23:12
What if it was a father and a daughter or a mother and a son?
Personally I think it is wrong, I also think gay adoption is wrong but like you say, where do you draw the line. All these people will shout about their human rights and the government will give in to them.
I can't really see why it's any different to a homosexual couple, they are two consenting adults, surely it's up to them how they choose to live?
Do you really want to throw all the rules out the window???
No a bad idea in some respects, but where in hell do we draw the line!!
An thats a serious comment.
connieb19
07-Mar-07, 23:17
Do you really want to throw all the rules out the window???
No a bad idea in some respects, but where in hell do we draw the line!!
An thats a serious comment.I agree totally, but then again who ever thought they'd see the day when a gay couple were allowed to adopt?
I agree totally, but then again who ever thought they'd see the day when a gay couple were allowed to adopt?I never thought I'd see the day when humans married animals or men appeared on television with nappies on being bottlefed by their wives or even men sitting at home with a mannequin as their girlfriend. Mind you, the mannequin wouldn't answer back.:lol:
connieb19
07-Mar-07, 23:40
I never thought I'd see the day when humans married animals or men appeared on television with nappies on being bottlefed by their wives or even men sitting at home with a mannequin as their girlfriend. Mind you, the mannequin wouldn't answer back.:lol:All seems to be pretty normal behavior nowadays but we're not even allowed to say we think its not normal or people say we're not normal for thinking its not normal.
:confused
I never thought I'd see the day when humans married animals or men appeared on television with nappies on being bottlefed by their wives or even men sitting at home with a mannequin as their girlfriend. Mind you, the mannequin wouldn't answer back.:lol:
This is what I like about this site...The daft things:cool:
All seems to be pretty normal behavior nowadays but we're not even allowed to say we think its not normal or people say we're not normal for thinking its not normal.
:confused
Ah but, no but, but what is normal?..... Emm.. deja vu....;) ...
yep there are some weirdos in this modern world, folk getiing hitched to animals, now ive heard it all. is,nt there something about that being against the law. [bestiality] pity the poor animal, it will have no say on the matter. but on a more serious note the brother and sister having a family together this must be way out of order. what next mum & son, dad & daughter. no its incest and its just not right .full stop.
its not as if they did,nt know that they were related. as for guy,s going on tv dressed in nappies yuk. but that is the lesser of the two evils were talking about here.
[disgust]
connieb19
08-Mar-07, 00:20
folk getiing hitched to animals, now ive heard it all. is,nt there something about that being against the law. [bestiality] pity the poor animal,
Eugh!!! I think Tiddles is banned from the bed tonight. :eek:
sassylass
08-Mar-07, 03:27
They never knew each other as youngsters however you'd think the second they found out they were siblings, they would have said NO/WRONG/STOP/UGH/TABOO!
And if they just couldn't help the chemistry, you'd think they'd have considered the risks of inbreeding.
It is a long established taboo, but so are many other things which have been completely cast aside on the grounds that they were outdated prejudices.
Why should the behaviour of two consenting adults who happen to be closely related be treated differently.
I see no difference between this old-fashioned prejudice and many other such prejudices which have been cast aside in the last few decades.
Metalattakk
08-Mar-07, 05:32
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6424937.stm
Should this couple be allowed to be together? :confused
Eh, no. Nomination for the Daft Question Of The Year, anyone?
It is a long established taboo, but so are many other things which have been completely cast aside on the grounds that they were outdated prejudices.
Why should the behaviour of two consenting adults who happen to be closely related be treated differently.
I see no difference between this old-fashioned prejudice and many other such prejudices which have been cast aside in the last few decades.
What nonsense. In fact, of all the nonsense you've ever spouted on this messageboard JAWS, this has to be up there in in your top 250. Easy.
The Pepsi Challenge
08-Mar-07, 05:46
This kind of thing isn't exactly a non-entity in Caithness, where many second and third cousins marry each other. Thankfully nowt to do with my family.
webbedtoes.org
Metalattakk
08-Mar-07, 05:57
It's not in Caithness you dolt. It's in Germany.
www.druggedupgutterjournalist.org
What nonsense. In fact, of all the nonsense you've ever spouted on this messageboard JAWS, this has to be up there in in your top 250. Easy.
What a narrow-minded, prejudiced point of view, which doesn't surprise me in the least.
"Prejudice is wrong, except when it doesn't fit in with what I think!" There are a lot of people who decry others for being prejudiced for not accepting certain things but scream foul when somebody points out that they are displaying their own prejudices.
"If you disagree with me then you are prejudiced but if I disagree with you it is because you are talking nonsense." Do as I say and not as I do. What an intolerant attitude, but unfortunately not uncommon at all. :roll:
It is a long established taboo, but so are many other things which have been completely cast aside on the grounds that they were outdated prejudices.
Why should the behaviour of two consenting adults who happen to be closely related be treated differently.
I see no difference between this old-fashioned prejudice and many other such prejudices which have been cast aside in the last few decades.
Except this prejudice is based, in part, on very real issues with in-breading. Very real long term medical problems could easily arise if they were to have children.
The Pepsi Challenge
08-Mar-07, 07:59
It's not in Caithness you dolt. It's in Germany.
www.druggedupgutterjournalist.org
Sorry, I do apologise. Allow me to rephrase, "This kind of thing isn't exactly a non-entity in Caithness, either..."
Unlike the Murphy's, you ain't...
i dont know what to think..
im torn in a way..
the whole thought of incest, is well taboo..
i did watcha program on telly about it a while back.. and it said that when you are raised closley with someone.. your brain does something that shuts off sexual feelings for them.. wheter they are blood or not.
that why two non related children raised together.. will look on each other as brother and sister.. and find it distasteful because of it.
again, if they had met as strangers and fell in love.. married and had a family then later found out.. i would be a lot more lenient in the situatuion as it would be a horrible realisation.. but something that would just have to be worked out...
its harder to condone when knowing they were brother and sister that they went into the relationship.
one thing im wondering is are they full brother and sister?
or only half?
as that would have a effect on the inbreeding.
This kind of thing isn't exactly a non-entity in Caithness, where many second and third cousins marry each other.
I believe marriage between 1st cousins is still perfectly legal in the UK though the practice is more prevalent amongst Moslem/Hindu couples.
This is so difficult because they're starting off in the wrong place. I agree that the relationship should have ended as soon as they discovered they were brother and sister. Trouble is now they have four children who are going to lose everything and will be pretty traumatised anyway when they are old enough to know what's happened. But is it better for the children to be taken away from loving parents? What will that do to them. I think they have already had two children taken away. It's a mess. The couple have been selfish and the children will suffer.
Did you not read the news article in the link, they knew they were brother and sister before they became lovers and three of there four children are in care!
You get some sick weirdo's in this world i tell ye!:confused
crashbandicoot1979
08-Mar-07, 11:06
Personally I don't think the incest law should be abolished, I don't think family members who are that closely related should be having relationships. Saying that....this case is a bit different because they didn't grow up together and although they know they are brother and sister, they don't recognise themselves as such, BUT I think it was irresponsible of them to have children because of the known effects of inbreeding. I think the fact they've had children is absolutely gross, regardless of whether they are loving parents or not. Those children, or their offspring, could very well end up suffering because of their parentage.
It is a long established taboo, but so are many other things which have been completely cast aside on the grounds that they were outdated prejudices.
Why should the behaviour of two consenting adults who happen to be closely related be treated differently.
I see no difference between this old-fashioned prejudice and many other such prejudices which have been cast aside in the last few decades.What about a sexual relationship between a mother/son, father/daughter?
What about the genetic implications?
Penelope Pitstop
08-Mar-07, 12:15
It's the poor children who are the victims. They brought none of this on themselves.:~( To them this couple are just Mum and Dad.
Metalattakk
08-Mar-07, 13:34
It is a long established taboo, but so are many other things which have been completely cast aside on the grounds that they were outdated prejudices.
Why should the behaviour of two consenting adults who happen to be closely related be treated differently.
I see no difference between this old-fashioned prejudice and many other such prejudices which have been cast aside in the last few decades.
OK, let's get this straight. You think that laws forbidding incest (brother and sister knowingly having children together) are an 'old-fashioned prejudice'. Do you think that people should be allowed to procreate in such circumstances - despite the moral and medical reasons against it?
What a narrow-minded, prejudiced point of view, which doesn't surprise me in the least.
"Prejudice is wrong, except when it doesn't fit in with what I think!" There are a lot of people who decry others for being prejudiced for not accepting certain things but scream foul when somebody points out that they are displaying their own prejudices.
"If you disagree with me then you are prejudiced but if I disagree with you it is because you are talking nonsense." Do as I say and not as I do. What an intolerant attitude, but unfortunately not uncommon at all. :roll:
Again, rambling on about prejudice when it's a simple straight-forward question, which doesn't need side-tracked like you are attempting to do.
Q: Do you think that brother and sister should be allowed to procreate together? Yes or No.
Okay, I give up, those that partake in incestuous relationships, have fun with your sister, mother, father, brother and if you want to, go marry your horse or dolphin or even if you have a crush on that little greyhound next door, whatever, best of luck to you.
All you guys that like to dress in over-sized baby grows and wear nappies whilst being bottlefed by your partners, have fun.
Even those that go home saying, "mum, I'm getting married to a serial killer, I met him after six months of writing letters back and forth to the prison, he's misunderstood you know and he says he's innocent", all the best to you?
Now I am going to get back to my now 'abnormal' life, job, wife, 3 children, nice wee hoose with a garden.
If I have missed anybody out then I apologise.
I agree with you on this one Penelope. Its the poor children. You hear of inbreeding in animals having problems with health. The mental problems these kids will grow up with will be worse. Knowing that there mother and father were brother and sister. Knowing they were siblings and falling in love they should have NEVER allowed themself to have kids.
rockchick
08-Mar-07, 13:56
Except this prejudice is based, in part, on very real issues with in-breeding. Very real long term medical problems could easily arise if they were to have children.
According to the news report I read, the man in question has undergone a vasectomy, so there's no likelihood of any children coming from this marriage. If you take out the in-breeding factor, where is the harm in it?
crashbandicoot1979
08-Mar-07, 13:58
According to the news report I read, the man in question has undergone a vasectomy, so there's no likelihood of any children coming from this marriage. If you take out the in-breeding factor, where is the harm in it?
I thought they already had 4 children???
According to the news report I read, the man in question has undergone a vasectomy, so there's no likelihood of any children coming from this marriage. If you take out the in-breeding factor, where is the harm in it?
They have already had two kids.
danc1ngwitch
08-Mar-07, 14:01
incest does nothing for me, it's up to them.
Who are we to judge, tho it really feels wrong to me
No to me it is totally wrong. I totally agree with what henry20 said - I'm not sure its right to have their children taken off them either, but I don't know what the solution for that is - they are mum/auntie and dad/uncle all in one!!
My friend married her cousin and they tried for a baby they had to terminate the first pregnancy as babies brain did not develop correctly and was badly diformed due to incest but I am glad to say they now have a lovely healthy boy. I do not agree with it but there is not much anyone can do about it.
Whos right is it to say 2 people who are in love cannot be together, related or not ?? who makes the rules ?
Genetics!!!!
j4bberw0ck
08-Mar-07, 16:02
I think brandy's right; somewhere in a child's normal upbringing with siblings, sexual attraction between them gets switched off.
These two didn't get that and so when they met as adults I imagine they each saw someone with whom they identified and with whom they had many things in common. Which is what most of us look for in a life partner.
I'm not so sure children are a good idea - not at least without some genetic screening - but he's had a vasectomy and hopefully the four children the article talks about (that was four, darkman, not two) are in good health. What's done the kids the most harm, I wonder? Their parents relationship, or being separated from their parents? And if two men can have a relationship which doesn't harm children why can't a heterosexual couple who are really the parents but who happen to be related?
As for they sleeping together.... who cares? Mrs J has some knowledge in this area (no, I'm not her brother :lol: ) and says that brother / sister incest where they weren't brought up as siblings is certainly the commonest form, certainly the least harmful as it's rarely abusive, and probably more common than the raw figures suggest because most people are too sensible to draw attention to themselves.
Sorry to all those who are scandalised, but IMO it's almost a non-story.
changilass
08-Mar-07, 16:16
As far as I am concerned what they do in the privacy of their own home is thier own business, however, 2 of thier children have learning disabilities and 3 out of 4 are in care. Had they simply decided to live together as man and wife and not have children this would IMHO have been ok, but having kids and all that those kids will have to go through in the future is a step to far. There is a reason behind this law, that of the higher chances of abnormality, and as such they should not have had kids.
They have already had two kids.
My mistake, they have four, cheers jabberwock.http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b104/voltarol/77.gif
Sleep with your own sister??? No way!! I would not and could not sleep with my sister. The very thought is stomach wrenching :eek:
I'm inclined to agree that this is a non-story except for the children, who will suffer whatever the outcome. It was irresponsible of the couple to have children, knowing the law and the possible genetic complications, but having done it they should be left alone. Family relationships come in all sorts of varieties and always have - the "nuclear" family (father, mother, 2.4 children) which is being held up by some here as the norm, has not always been so. Other times, other civilisations have had different customs. In some, e.g. Egypt, marriage between siblings was customary, partly to maintain wealth within the family. In others love between men was the only "real" love and sex between man and woman was simply to produce children. Many cultures and religions still have polygamous marriage - although as far as I know it's always the men who have several wives, not vice versa.
I believe children should be brought up in a loving relationship ideally with a loving extended family. That has never, however, been the norm and probably never will be. If there was more tolerance of unusual relationships, so long as neither party is abused or controlled, I'm sure everyone would be much happier.
Someone on the radio yesterday was saying how she was abused in the street years ago because she was white and had one white and one black child. Her reaction was to remove the children from the filth being poured over them. Mixed race relationships were considered unacceptable not so long ago but few people would condemn them now.
I believe marriage between 1st cousins is still perfectly legal in the UK though the practice is more prevalent amongst Moslem/Hindu couples.
So if the children in question lived in England their father would be their uncle, their mother their aunt and brothers and sisters would be cousins therefore legal for them to marry.
j4bberw0ck
08-Mar-07, 17:40
Sleep with your own sister??? No way!! I would not and could not sleep with my sister. The very thought is stomach wrenching :eek:
That's because you grew up with her, presumably, and the conditioning kicked in? :lol:
j4bberw0ck
08-Mar-07, 17:58
Another piece of coverage (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2007/03/08/do0805.xml)
whether true or not, this was posted below the article you posted the link to j4bberw0ck ..........................If they bothered to read the German press they would know that Susan is retarded - mentally
if true, do people still think the relationship is right???
I note it doesn't say where the 5th child is - the one from another partner.
So if the children in question lived in England their father would be their uncle, their mother their aunt and brothers and sisters would be cousins therefore legal for them to marry.
No because they would still be brother and sister.
No, we have enough to try and be 'tolerant' of what with homosexuals wanting to adopt, lets draw the line somewhere.[disgust]
You're kidding, right??
As far as the OP...although the idea gives me the heebie jeebies it's up to them how they live their life. I do feel sorry for their children though.
You're kidding, right??
Kidding about what?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6424937.stm
Should this couple be allowed to be together? :confused
one word...............
Halkirk
(heed doon)
one word...............
Halkirk
(heed doon)
Is it true then about the family trees without branches?
I'd heard the rumours.
rockchick
09-Mar-07, 01:12
They have already had two kids.
yes, I knew they'd already had kids...but that's already done and can't be undone. They can't have anymore, so the future genetic inbreeding issue doesn't apply now. so again I ask...where's the harm?
I realize I'm being hypocritical, cuz there's no way I could condone that kind of relationship between my kids, even if they're only half-siblings. Not a chance! But, outside of my back-yard (BOMBY?) I could see it, in theory being allowed if there were no future kids involved.
changilass
09-Mar-07, 01:19
Why have any laws at all if we are gonna go on the basis that whats already done cant be undone.
j4bberw0ck
09-Mar-07, 01:31
Seems to me it's far from an ideal situation but here we have two unfortunate people getting some sort of comfort from each other.
It could be worse. They could be getting their emotional satisfaction from suicide bombings, child abuse, mugging old ladies or espousing CO2 = global warming. :lol:
Changilass, there have always been restrictions place on sexual activity and quite often very extreme restrictions. Over time, and especially more recently there has been a massive change in that attitude.
Many forms of previously illegal sexual activity, if not exactly encouraged, have been subjected to enforced acceptance. The laws which formerly prohibited such acts have altered to ensure that society should be made to accept them.
In view of the insistence that Society should accept that which was taboo in previous times and the law changed to accommodate that attitude why should incest be any different. The answer is simple, change the law and put an end to the intolerant attitude displayed towards consenting adults engaged in a private matter.
For those who have insisted that other sexual taboos between consenting adults should be abolished to single out consensual adult incest for special prejudice is hypocritical to say the least.
Let's just turn the world into a perverts paradise.[disgust]
Seems to me it's far from an ideal situation but here we have two unfortunate people getting some sort of comfort from each other.
It could be worse. They could be getting their emotional satisfaction from suicide bombings, child abuse, mugging old ladies or espousing CO2 = global warming. :lol:
In my opinion I think it is child abuse. If it was just them getting whattever kicks then I would be so bothered - even though I still think its wrong.
Let's just turn the world into a perverts paradise.[disgust]
I have no idea what you get up to in the privacy of your own bedroom (and couldn't be less interested) but no doubt someone in the world, due to their different culture, would find it perverted. Different cultures have different attitudes. Times change. I have one simple rule on this - if somebody, either directly or indirectly, is harmed/violated/abused it's wrong.
I think brandy's right; somewhere in a child's normal upbringing with siblings, sexual attraction between them gets switched off.
Mmmmm......... ever visited Alabama?
Definition of an Alabama virgin........................... a 13 year-old who can run faster than her brothers! :)
They do, however - produce some stunning banjo players.
I have no idea what you get up to in the privacy of your own bedroom (and couldn't be less interested) but no doubt someone in the world, due to their different culture, would find it perverted. Different cultures have different attitudes. Times change. I have one simple rule on this - if somebody, either directly or indirectly, is harmed/violated/abused it's wrong.Come on now, you can't honestly tell me that a brother and sister being together doesn't disgust you, what if it was a mother/son, father/daughter sexual relationship or a combination of them all, would that be okay as long as no one is harmed or abused?
sassylass
09-Mar-07, 16:27
Do you recall that scene in The Color Purple? It was enough for me to turn off the dvd and go for a long walk.[evil]
Kidding about what?
Your ridiculously narrow-minded view on homosexuals adopting...
Do you recall that scene in The Color Purple? It was enough for me to turn off the dvd and go for a long walk.[evil]
What scene? I haven't watched it in years.
Naefearjustbeer
12-Mar-07, 01:20
It is sick they should be locked up. How the hell were they allowed to carry on and have more kids after the first one was born.
OMG I cannot believe that some folk in this thread appear to condoning what has happened. What is the world coming too next thing you know folk will be allowed to have relations with animals. [evil]
Blazing Sporrans
12-Mar-07, 12:48
Seems to me it's far from an ideal situation but here we have two unfortunate people getting some sort of comfort from each other.
It could be worse. They could be getting their emotional satisfaction from suicide bombings....
At least they'd only do that once instead of procreating four times... [disgust]
It is sick they should be locked up. How the hell were they allowed to carry on and have more kids after the first one was born.
OMG I cannot believe that some folk in this thread appear to condoning what has happened. What is the world coming too next thing you know folk will be allowed to have relations with animals. [evil]
Personally I'm a lot more worried about all the people who seem to have sex with animals so close to mind...
Naefearjustbeer
13-Mar-07, 00:15
I only mentioned it as I find the thought of incest as abhorrent as sex with animals. Both are crimes that deserve a severe punishment.
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.