Same-Sex Marriage, Polygamy, and Incest

[Hydesland]

As a wise philosopher once said, "incest is wincest", or was it "incest is best"? I forget.

[Robarya]

Incest isn't a problem. Incestual rape is a problem. Its kinda like how sex isn't a problem, but rape is. I would be disappointed to have to spell out the difference.

Are you seriously comparing incest to normal sex, and saying that it is not bad? Wow, that is fucking sick.

[The Cat-Tribe]

Incest has come up several times on NSG. IMS its a fairly even split between people whose understanding of genetics is limited enough to think incest = retards and people who figure consenting adults should be allowed fuck in whatever combination or configuration they life.

I'm curious as to where the real world fact that incest rarely involves consenting adults fit into this picture.

Incest is an actual problem. Not a test of one's open-mindedness.

Incest isn't a problem. Incestual rape is a problem. Its kinda like how sex isn't a problem, but rape is. I would be disappointed to have to spell out the difference.

Incest defined purely as consenting sex between two adults that are mentally and intellectually stable but are somehow related to each other is one thing and is mostly theoretical.

Incest as it usually occurs is rape.

I have no problem with the former, but am usually suspicious as to the degree it actually involves consenting adults that are mentally and emotionally stable.

[Ifreann]

As a wise philosopher once said, "incest is wincest", or was it "incest is best"? I forget.

Incest is best, put your family to the test. Let your mother fuck your brother and your father do the rest.

[Poliwanacraca]

The big problem with both polygamy and incest is that, in the overwhelming majority of cases, they consist of situations that don't so much involve happy, equitable, freely-consenting adults. In the rare but real cases where they DO consist of happy, equitable, freely-consenting adults, I have no problem with them - it may squick me out, but "it squicks me out" isn't a good justification for banning something. "It almost always seems to end up with one guy marrying three scared fourteen-year-old girls" is a better one, though whether or not it's sufficient to require a blanket ban is something that I honestly can't decide. Gay marriage, however, carries no such problems, and I can support it unequivocally.

[Hydesland]

As a wise philosopher once said, "incest is wincest", or was it "incest is best"? I forget.

Incest is best, put your family to the test. Let your mother fuck your brother and your father do the rest.

Lovely.

[Ifreann]

I'm curious as to where the real world fact that incest rarely involves consenting adults fit into this picture.

Incest is an actual problem. Not a test of one's open-mindedness.

Incest isn't a problem. Incestual rape is a problem. Its kinda like how sex isn't a problem, but rape is. I would be disappointed to have to spell out the difference.

Incest defined purely as consenting sex between two adults that are mentally and intellectually stable but are somehow related to each other is one thing and is mostly theoretical.

Incest as it usually occurs is rape.

I have no problem with the former, but am usually suspicious as to the degree it actually involves consenting adults that are mentally and emotionally stable.

Incest, to the best of my knowledge, is nothing more than sexual relations between family members, generally cousins or siblings. If consent is lacking, then its rape. To suggest that incest is a problem because many cases of it are also rape is to confuse correlation with causation. Incest isn't the problem. Rape is the problem. Much like how wandering through a dark alleyway isn't the problem, but rape is.

[Hydesland]

Incest, to the best of my knowledge, is nothing more than sexual relations between family members, generally cousins or siblings. If consent is lacking, then its rape. To suggest that incest is a problem because many cases of it are also rape is to confuse correlation with causation. Incest isn't the problem. Rape is the problem. Much like how wandering through a dark alleyway isn't the problem, but rape is.

Dark alleyways are a problem, they are bloody creepy, and they always smell like dog shit.

[The Cat-Tribe]

I'm curious as to where the real world fact that incest rarely involves consenting adults fit into this picture.

Incest is an actual problem. Not a test of one's open-mindedness.

Incest isn't a problem. Incestual rape is a problem. Its kinda like how sex isn't a problem, but rape is. I would be disappointed to have to spell out the difference.

Incest defined purely as consenting sex between two adults that are mentally and intellectually stable but are somehow related to each other is one thing and is mostly theoretical.

Incest as it usually occurs is rape.

I have no problem with the former, but am usually suspicious as to the degree it actually involves consenting adults that are mentally and emotionally stable.

Incest, to the best of my knowledge, is nothing more than sexual relations between family members, generally cousins or siblings. If consent is lacking, then its rape. To suggest that incest is a problem because many cases of it are also rape is to confuse correlation with causation. Incest isn't the problem. Rape is the problem. Much like how wandering through a dark alleyway isn't the problem, but rape is.

Other than your viewing incest as a purely theortical exercise rather than a real issue, we don't disagree.

http://www.ncvc.org/ncvc/main.aspx?dbNa ... ntID=32360
http://www.rainn.org/get-information/ty ... ult/incest

[Rhodmhire]

In the way that cousins and siblings were married by guardian figures or other adults to preserve family blood isn't tolerable to me. In the way that a brother and sister really have love for each other, and want to get married--I don't tolerate/disapprove, but I can't get in the way in any way shape or form myself. I am not obligated to.

I didn't fully understand what you wrote. Are you saying that you tolerate brother and sister having a relationship if they love each other, or are you saying that you don't?

My bad, I used tolerated instead of approved. My approval is different from my toleration, I tolerate every form of marriage to some extent, but I don't approve or disapprove of them, it's kind of weird, it's just that I'm not in support or hatred, it's just not that big of an issue to me, so I just say tolerable.

Sorry for making you not understand it, my bad on that one.

[Ifreann]

Other than your viewing incest as a purely theortical exercise rather than a real issue, we don't disagree.

http://www.ncvc.org/ncvc/main.aspx?dbNa ... ntID=32360
http://www.rainn.org/get-information/ty ... ult/incest

I can sense a debate of semantics looming on the horizon, largely between "Incest literally means X" on my part and "Realistically incest means Y" on yours(forgive me if I'm misrepresenting your position). And I will concede that I'm unaware of a statistically significant number of people who have had a healthy incestuous relationship. Really I just think we should keep the terms strictly separate, to ease societal acceptance of healthy incestuous relationships without also accepting incestuous relationships that amount to little more than rape.

[Dyakovo]

1. Homosexual marriages should be allowed and they should enjoy all the benefits (and downfalls) of "Traditional" marriage.

2. I don't see any reason to not allow it, the only real problem I see would come about if/when the marriage ends.

3. As long as its consensual I don't see any problem.

[Tubbsalot]

Same-sex marriage: we've been over this plenty of times, I'm all for it.

Polygamy: just a larger version of ordinary marriage. For it.

Incest: personally this one weirds me out, but that's no basis for the laws of society. For incestuous marriage, but I don't believe close family members should be allowed to reproduce together, due to the (admittedly only slightly higher) risk of genetic problems.

[Tmutarakhan]

And I will concede that I'm unaware of a statistically significant number of people who have had a healthy incestuous relationship.

Do you know of any?

Really I just think we should keep the terms strictly separate, to ease societal acceptance of healthy incestuous relationships without also accepting incestuous relationships that amount to little more than rape.

I'm not sure we need a separate term for, or any concern about acceptance for, "healthy incestuous relationships" until we have some evidence that such things ever happen.

[Muravyets]

I agree with TCT that these topics are so entirely different from each other that lumping them in one thread is bound to create confusion and muddy discussion. That said:

1) Gay Marriage - no different from hetero marriage and should be fully legalized in the US. Now.

2) Polygamy - not as clear an issue for several reasons. (A) In most countries it inevitably involves coercion and abuse. Trying to separate things from their real world contexts is a pointless exercise. (B) Even in an ideal condition of full consent among informed, competent, adult participants, multiple marriage legalization would require much more complicated legal constructs for such things as child custody, next of kin status, property/inheritance rights, spousal privilege, taxation, insurance, etc, etc, etc, than two-person marriage, regardless of gender. (C) The fact that the OP specifies polygamy, totally forgetting about such a thing as polyandry, reflects the fact that there is a motif of sexism involved in the question of multiple marriage in most western countries, which is another mark against it.

3) Incest - I fail to see what incest has to do with either of the others. (A) Incest is definitely a case in which it is disingenuous at best to try to separate the idea of incest as just a particular kind of sexual relationship from the reality that incest almost always involve rape/abuse. That is so much the case that to pretend otherwise is just intellectually dishonest, in my opinion. (B) I also do not believe that any kind of incest, even the supposedly non-abusive kind some people like to theorize about, reflects an emotionally and psychologically healthy relationship. Everything I have read about incest makes me think it is a behavioral aberration, at best.

[Tubbsalot]

(C) The fact that the OP specifies polygamy, totally forgetting about such a thing as polyandry, reflects the fact that there is a motif of sexism involved in the question of multiple marriage in most western countries, which is another mark against it.

Uh? Polygamy encompasses polyandry.

[Imota]

I don't have any problems with any of the three, as long as all parties involved know what they're getting into and it's consensual all around.

[Wakomania]

1. Same-Sex Marriage- ONLY females should be allowed to marry each other.
2. Polgamy - Creepy, but should not be allowed.
3. Incest- Creepier, it should be jail for those who do this.


Seriously:

1. Same Sex Marriage- NO. They should not allowed to be married. But that "Do Not ask, Don't tell" law is bullshit. If you're in the military you should be thanked not stopped from saying you're personality or beliefs. Also, they should always remain allowed to adopt. IT SHOULD NEVER BE LEGAL IN THE US OR WE WILL BECOME LIKE FRANCE.

2. Polgamy- I'll edit this part later.

3. Incest- You can not find any other partner? I don't care if it's a religious belief like in the old days (1700's). If you do it, you should be in jail.

[Tubbsalot]

IT SHOULD NEVER BE LEGAL IN THE US OR WE WILL BECOME LIKE FRANCE.

Guess who just lost all credibility?

[Capitalistliberals]

1. Homosexual marriages should not be allowed. However, homosexuals should be allowed to have relationships in private; in other words, no Gay pride shit and decadence like that. They should also not be allowed to adopt or have children.

so was reading through this forum and i saw this and decided i needed to respond to this... what the hell is wrong with you... i understand you think your probably an accepting person b/c you allow it but still wtf this makes people into second class citizens for something they cant control

[The Alma Mater]

I don't have any problems with any of the three, as long as all parties involved know what they're getting into and it's consensual all around.

This. While I do foresee some practical problems with legal recognition of polygamy, I do not believe they amount to anything a good lawyer or notary would be unable to solve.

Three entirely different subjects. Lumping them together is deliberately inane.

Don' t be silly. All of these are examples of relationships that some people frown upon and would rather not see legalised. The OP could have thrown in "interracial" marriage, marriage between different social castes, arranged marriage, relationships between human and nonhuman, legal recognition of relationships with fictional characters and so on and the lumped together poll would still be fine.

[Galloism]

(C) The fact that the OP specifies polygamy, totally forgetting about such a thing as polyandry, reflects the fact that there is a motif of sexism involved in the question of multiple marriage in most western countries, which is another mark against it.

Uh? Polygamy encompasses polyandry.

We have a winner, and in case anyone doesn't believe him, here's a few sources:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polygamy

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/polygamy

http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/polygamy?view=uk


I was about to respond, but saw you did, so I'm merely expanding upon your response.

[The Alma Mater]

1. Homosexual marriages should not be allowed. However, homosexuals should be allowed to have relationships in private; in other words, no Gay pride shit and decadence like that. They should also not be allowed to adopt or have children.

so was reading through this forum and i saw this and decided i needed to respond to this... what the hell is wrong with you... i understand you think your probably an accepting person b/c you allow it but still wtf this makes people into second class citizens for something they cant control

Why is the control or noncontrol even relevant ? Why should the government care if the reason for loving someone of the same gender/ 20 other people / your sister is biological, a choice or a combination ?

They are adults. If they have a consensual relationship - kudos. If they want to formalise that so they form a single tax unit and take legal responsibility for another - kudos again.

[The Cat-Tribe]

Three entirely different subjects. Lumping them together is deliberately inane.

Don' t be silly. All of these are examples of relationships that some people frown upon and would rather not see legalised. The OP could have thrown in "interracial" marriage, marriage between different social castes, arranged marriage, relationships between human and nonhuman, legal recognition of relationships with fictional characters and so on and the lumped together poll would still be fine.

And we could try to lump together all the other things/types of behavior/activities that some people from upon and would rather not see legalized. Which would be the entire penal code (without even considering the fact that your categories confuses "legalized" and "recognized as a civil institution")

But that would make perfect sense, right?

Murder, possession of marijuana, rape, speeding, tax evasion, bigamy, underage drinking -- all the same thing, right?

[Dyakovo]

Three entirely different subjects. Lumping them together is deliberately inane.

Don' t be silly. All of these are examples of relationships that some people frown upon and would rather not see legalised. The OP could have thrown in "interracial" marriage, marriage between different social castes, arranged marriage, relationships between human and nonhuman, legal recognition of relationships with fictional characters and so on and the lumped together poll would still be fine.

And we could try to lump together all the other things/types of behavior/activities that some people from upon and would rather not see legalized. Which would be the entire penal code (without even considering the fact that your categories confuses "legalized" and "recognized as a civil institution")

But that would make perfect sense, right?

Murder, possession of marijuana, rape, speeding, tax evasion, bigamy, underage drinking -- all the same thing, right?

No-one said Incestuous, polygamous and same-sex marriages were all the same thing, just that they were related, which they are, if rather tenuously.