NATION

PASSWORD

Should incest be legal?

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

Should incest be legal?

Family members should be allowed to have sexual relationships.
51
12%
Family members should be allowed to have sexual relationships and get married.
49
12%
Family members should be allowed to have sexual relationships, get married and have children.
107
26%
No, absolutely not.
204
50%
 
Total votes : 411

User avatar
Ifreann
Post Overlord
 
Posts: 163884
Founded: Aug 07, 2005
Iron Fist Socialists

Postby Ifreann » Tue Dec 11, 2012 12:24 pm

Chinamerica wrote:In response to a thread questioning the legality of polygamous marriages, I ask you: should incestuous relationships be legal? It seems a lot of libertarian-minded folk think that any consenting adult should do what they want in the privacy of their homes. Do you think that two adult family members should be able to have a sexual relationship/get married/have kids?

I think the idea of incest being legal is absolutely ridiculous. Generations of inbreeding limits the gene pool and highly increases the risk of disease. It should never be legalised. What do you guys think?

I think if you want to ban people from reproducing based on genetics, then please go get yourself tested so we can determine whether you're fit to contribute to the gene pool.
He/Him

beating the devil
we never run from the devil
we never summon the devil
we never hide from from the devil
we never

User avatar
Scandza
Envoy
 
Posts: 330
Founded: Oct 30, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Scandza » Tue Dec 11, 2012 12:25 pm

Ifreann wrote:
Chinamerica wrote:In response to a thread questioning the legality of polygamous marriages, I ask you: should incestuous relationships be legal? It seems a lot of libertarian-minded folk think that any consenting adult should do what they want in the privacy of their homes. Do you think that two adult family members should be able to have a sexual relationship/get married/have kids?

I think the idea of incest being legal is absolutely ridiculous. Generations of inbreeding limits the gene pool and highly increases the risk of disease. It should never be legalised. What do you guys think?

I think if you want to ban people from reproducing based on genetics, then please go get yourself tested so we can determine whether you're fit to contribute to the gene pool.

It applies to everyone but him, obviously.

User avatar
Of the Quendi
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15447
Founded: Mar 18, 2010
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Of the Quendi » Tue Dec 11, 2012 12:25 pm

Chinamerica wrote:
Great Nepal wrote:Yea, no.
What ever two consenting organisms do is their business.
This whole nonsense about genetic disease is nonsense firstly because we don't ban marriage between two people with faulty DNA that increase chances of disease (or else human race would go extinct quite fast) and secondly because it is over hyped.

In the end, it comes down to "I find it icky".

You didn't get As in science, did you?

Science has shown that it takes repeated inbreeding for there to be an effect comparable to having a forty year old mother. Will you ban middle aged women from procreating?
Nation RP name
Arda i Eruhíni (short form)
Alcarinqua ar Meneldëa Arda i Eruhíni i sé Amanaranyë ar Aramanaranyë (long form)

User avatar
The Holy Twig
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1553
Founded: Mar 20, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby The Holy Twig » Tue Dec 11, 2012 12:25 pm

Great Nepal wrote:
Chinamerica wrote:You didn't get As in science, did you?

I did and also in English.
Thus, I can read study that states that excess mortality at the first cousin level was 4.4%.

You had a monolithic "science" class?

Hell, here we have "Biology," "Chemistry," and "Physics." Sounds like your school had it way streamlined.
Last edited by The Holy Twig on Tue Dec 11, 2012 12:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The most inept invader in Nationstates!

Economic issues: +5.3 left
Social issues: +2.63 libertarian
Foreign policy: +7.28 non-interventionist
Cultural identification: +7.23 liberal
New Freedomstan wrote:What is a little purging and gulag between friends?
They said I could do anything I wanted to do, so I argue with strangers on the internet.
Ceannairceach wrote:I am looking for a girl with >5% genetic relation to me. Must be dtf, blond, big butt.

User avatar
Tunasai
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1053
Founded: Apr 06, 2011
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Tunasai » Tue Dec 11, 2012 12:26 pm

Great Nepal wrote:
Tunasai wrote:
Thats discrimination, now if I said I was part of an ethnic group that wasn't white, this would really backfire on you

Mind explaining how what I said is in any way different logically to what you said.
You find incest disgusting so it should be banned.
I find you disgusting so you should be banned.

Tunasai wrote:Fine, go participate in incest sex,

No thanks.

Tunasai wrote:when your children are all defective.

With exception of parent-child or sibling-sibling relation: chances of genetic disease on offspring is 4.4%.


Since you aren't intelligent enough to figure it out yourself, I'll guide you

1. Incest is an act, right now, its also a crime, like murder. Murder is an act considered immoral, as is incest. Since I doubt you would advocate murder being legalized you should just shut up since both murder and incest are found on common ground. (As in both incest and murder are moral issues considered to be wrong and disgusting)

2. Banning a person (though it has no logic and no specifics on what I would be banned FROM) is discrimination since it highlights a specific person and dis-permits said person from participating in the same activities and or having the same rights someone of equal footing would have. For example, you ban me from drinking Soda. But a person of the same nationality and standing can drink Soda legally. Thats called Discrimination

Think before you type
Last edited by Tunasai on Tue Dec 11, 2012 12:27 pm, edited 2 times in total.
God invented beer so the Irish wouldn't rule the world...

Economic Left/Right: 6.25
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 2.87

Pro: America, Patriotism, Social Conservatism, Christianity, Liberty, Neoliberalism

Anti: Gay Marriage, Homophobia (Yes I can be both), Discrimination, Communism, Liberalism, Socialism, the entire Democratic Party, Donald Trump

User avatar
Chinese Regions
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 16326
Founded: Apr 24, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Chinese Regions » Tue Dec 11, 2012 12:26 pm

Depends how close, sibling and sibling, parent and offspring etc. is no go area
Fan of Transformers?|Fan of Star Trek?|你会说中文吗?
Geopolitics: Internationalist, Pan-Asian, Pan-African, Pan-Arab, Pan-Slavic, Eurofederalist,
  • For the promotion of closer ties between Europe and Russia but without Dugin's anti-intellectual quackery.
  • Against NATO, the Anglo-American "special relationship", Israel and Wahhabism.

Sociopolitics: Pro-Intellectual, Pro-Science, Secular, Strictly Anti-Theocractic, for the liberation of PoCs in Western Hemisphere without the hegemony of white liberals
Economics: Indifferent

User avatar
Corrian
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 74847
Founded: Mar 19, 2011
New York Times Democracy

Postby Corrian » Tue Dec 11, 2012 12:27 pm

Meh, realistically, this subject kinda depends for me. I would by no means participate in anything close to it personally, but I don't really feel like I should strongly be against it.

Specifically, a story once that didn't trigger any bad reaction from me. These 2 siblings were separated at birth, but met again yeeeaaars later, and fell in love with each other. Then got married (Supposedly, not sure), and had kids. For whatever reason, that didn't bother me. Them meeting at that point is pretty much like me meeting the 'girl of my dreams' at some point in my life (If that happens, and if I care for it to happen, that is). Your friendship with them wouldn't feel so much like a sibling relationship anymore, and could more easily lead to what happened. I dunno, I'm mixed on the whole thing.
My Last.FM and RYM

Look on the bright side, one day you'll be dead~Street Sects

User avatar
Gaveo
Post Czar
 
Posts: 32070
Founded: Jun 02, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Gaveo » Tue Dec 11, 2012 12:28 pm


:rofl:


But to answer the question, no it shouldn't. Mainly because it would mess up the child. That and we all know what happened to the Ancient Egyptians.
Bruh.

User avatar
Smartass alcoholics
Diplomat
 
Posts: 976
Founded: Sep 07, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Smartass alcoholics » Tue Dec 11, 2012 12:28 pm

Honestly, i don't approve because of genetic issues. Would you like to marry a sister/brother, have children, then watch your children grow up, they have children with another sibling (if it were legal), and the child has a high chance of defection?
Forget all of the science, and focus on emotions for a second. Would you want anyone, especially a child/grandchild of yours, to grow up different, and obviously so? Brain defects, organ defects, missing limbs... Corrupted genetics would ruin a child's life - physically, mentally, socially, and otherwise.
Nation RP details: United Dominion of Caustancia
Leader: Ketsueki Maru
Current RPing military officials:
-Captain Nile Skorge
-Commander Connor Jakoby
-Warrant Officer Selena Polaski

"When life gives you lemons, ask it for lemonade instead"

User avatar
Tunasai
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1053
Founded: Apr 06, 2011
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Tunasai » Tue Dec 11, 2012 12:29 pm

Gaveo wrote:

:rofl:


But to answer the question, no it shouldn't. Mainly because it would mess up the child. That and we all know what happened to the Ancient Egyptians.


Same thing can really be said about the European Royal Line, as they all interbred with eachother for hundreds of years.
God invented beer so the Irish wouldn't rule the world...

Economic Left/Right: 6.25
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 2.87

Pro: America, Patriotism, Social Conservatism, Christianity, Liberty, Neoliberalism

Anti: Gay Marriage, Homophobia (Yes I can be both), Discrimination, Communism, Liberalism, Socialism, the entire Democratic Party, Donald Trump

User avatar
The Holy Twig
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1553
Founded: Mar 20, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby The Holy Twig » Tue Dec 11, 2012 12:29 pm

Tunasai wrote:
Great Nepal wrote:Mind explaining how what I said is in any way different logically to what you said.
You find incest disgusting so it should be banned.
I find you disgusting so you should be banned.


No thanks.


With exception of parent-child or sibling-sibling relation: chances of genetic disease on offspring is 4.4%.


Since you aren't intelligent enough to figure it out yourself, I'll guide you

1. Incest is an act, right now, its also a crime, like murder. Murder is an act considered immoral, as is incest. Since I doubt you would advocate murder being legalized you should just shut up since both murder and incest are found on common ground.

2. Banning a person (though it has no logic no specifics on what I would be banned FROM) is discrimination since it highlights a specific person and dis-permits said person from participating in the same activities and or having the same rights someone of equal footing would have. For example, you ban me from drinking Soda. But a person of the same nationality and standing can drink Soda legally. Thats called Discirmination

Think before you type


Point 1: "LOOK AT MY STRAW MAN"
Incest is not, in fact, murder. Murder is considered immoral on different grounds from incest.
One could equally say "Because murder is illegal and blacks marrying whites is illegal, we can't legalize blacks and whites marrying"

Point 2: Get back to me when the words in your head begin coming out onto the page in a coherent, logical manner. You seem to be defining discrimination as banning people from drinking soda pop unless they're standing and the same nationality as yourself.
The most inept invader in Nationstates!

Economic issues: +5.3 left
Social issues: +2.63 libertarian
Foreign policy: +7.28 non-interventionist
Cultural identification: +7.23 liberal
New Freedomstan wrote:What is a little purging and gulag between friends?
They said I could do anything I wanted to do, so I argue with strangers on the internet.
Ceannairceach wrote:I am looking for a girl with >5% genetic relation to me. Must be dtf, blond, big butt.

User avatar
Great Nepal
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 28677
Founded: Jan 11, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Great Nepal » Tue Dec 11, 2012 12:30 pm

Tunasai wrote:Since you aren't intelligent enough to figure it out yourself, I'll guide you

1. Incest is an act, right now, its also a crime, like murder. Murder is an act considered immoral, as is incest. Since I doubt you would advocate murder being legalized you should just shut up since both murder and incest are found on common ground.

2. Banning a person (though it has no logic no specifics on what I would be banned FROM) is discrimination since it highlights a specific person and dis-permits said person from participating in the same activities and or having the same rights someone of equal footing would have. For example, you ban me from drinking Soda. But a person of the same nationality and standing can drink Soda legally. Thats called Discirmination

Think before you type

1. No, murder is illegal because it deprives a non-consenting indivudal of their life. Incest is illegal because people find it disgusting as only people affected are two consenting people.
2. You implied that finding something disgusting is legitimate reason to ban something. Thus, me finding you disgusting is legitimate reason to ban you. Not that hard to figure out.

The Holy Twig wrote:

You had a monolithic "science" class?

Hell, here we have "Biology," "Chemistry," and "Physics." Sounds like your school had it way streamlined.

We have Biology, chemistry and physics as part of sciences. Then iGCSE in specific science.
Last edited by Great Nepal on Sun Nov 29, 1995 7:02 am, edited 1 time in total.


User avatar
Zottistan
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14894
Founded: Nov 26, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Zottistan » Tue Dec 11, 2012 12:30 pm

The Emerald Dawn wrote:
Zottistan wrote:No, they were human. They were humans who existed in circumstances that no longer exist.

Right. The children they had, and the issues those children faced are completely different, because those children are not human. Or something.

That's not the point. Of course the kids would face similar issues. But generations of inbreeding probably wouldn't occur, because social conditions have changed.
Ireland, BCL and LLM, Training Barrister, Cismale Bi Dude and Gym-Bro, Generally Boring Socdem Eurocuck

User avatar
Wilgrove
Post Czar
 
Posts: 38647
Founded: May 08, 2006
Ex-Nation

Postby Wilgrove » Tue Dec 11, 2012 12:30 pm

I support incest being legal simply because I don't really care who fucks who in the privacy of their own home.

User avatar
Norstal
Post Czar
 
Posts: 41465
Founded: Mar 07, 2008
Ex-Nation

Postby Norstal » Tue Dec 11, 2012 12:30 pm

Trotskylvania wrote:
Chinamerica wrote:I think the idea of incest being legal is absolutely ridiculous. Generations of inbreeding limits the gene pool and highly increases the risk of disease. It should never be legalised. What do you guys think?

Then it's a good thing that incest being legal or not has no effect on its incidence.

Seriously, this is a basic biological imperative. It doesn't need to be legislated against. People are already naturally averse to fucking their siblings. Hell, anyone who they grew up in close proximity to. It's called the Westermarck effect.

Those people who do end up falling in love with their biological siblings are usually in tragic situations. Criminalizing it isn't going to make things any better. It's just callous and heartless. You can make the case for criminalizing sexual relationships between parents and children (whether biologically related or not) because it's inherently an unequal relationship and abusive, but you can't make that sort of blanket claim for sibling relationships, or cousin relationships.

I just realize that you're like CTOAN, with the exception that no one ever reads your post.
Toronto Sun wrote:Best poster ever. ★★★★★


New York Times wrote:No one can beat him in debates. 5/5.


IGN wrote:Literally the best game I've ever played. 10/10


NSG Public wrote:What a fucking douchebag.



Supreme Chairman for Life of the Itty Bitty Kitty Committee

User avatar
Saiwania
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 22269
Founded: Jun 30, 2008
Ex-Nation

Postby Saiwania » Tue Dec 11, 2012 12:31 pm

I don't really have any problem with incest, so long as it is consensual and there are no children resulting from those relationships.
Sith Acolyte
Peace is a lie, there is only passion. Through passion, I gain strength. Through strength, I gain power. Through power, I gain victory. Through victory, my chains are broken!

User avatar
The Emerald Dawn
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 20824
Founded: Jun 11, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby The Emerald Dawn » Tue Dec 11, 2012 12:31 pm

Of the Quendi wrote:
The Emerald Dawn wrote:Right. The children they had, and the issues those children faced are completely different, because those children are not human. Or something.

Because there is no reason to believe that legalizing incest today would lead to generations of interbreeding. Incest is legal in many jurisdictions and it doesn't seem a problem. Pointing out a highly specific group from a historic period of a particular class and calling it evidence of anything is laughable.

Pointing them out as the only documented evidence of interbreeding and saying this is all we have is the only honest thing to do. Unless you have some hidden trove of documented evidence of health issues faced by generations of interbreeding.

Oh, that's right, you're too busy projecting.

User avatar
The Kal Empire
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 103
Founded: Nov 20, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby The Kal Empire » Tue Dec 11, 2012 12:31 pm

How disgusting.

User avatar
Gaveo
Post Czar
 
Posts: 32070
Founded: Jun 02, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Gaveo » Tue Dec 11, 2012 12:31 pm

Tunasai wrote:
Gaveo wrote: :rofl:


But to answer the question, no it shouldn't. Mainly because it would mess up the child. That and we all know what happened to the Ancient Egyptians.


Same thing can really be said about the European Royal Line, as they all interbred with eachother for hundreds of years.

This explains everything! Now I know why Europe is so screwed!
Bruh.

User avatar
The Holy Twig
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1553
Founded: Mar 20, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby The Holy Twig » Tue Dec 11, 2012 12:32 pm

Zottistan wrote:
The Emerald Dawn wrote:Right. The children they had, and the issues those children faced are completely different, because those children are not human. Or something.

That's not the point. Of course the kids would face similar issues. But generations of inbreeding probably wouldn't occur, because social conditions have changed.

It's unfortunate when people making good argumentative points (e.g. Zottistan) are drowned out by NSG's endless stream of straw men and slippery slopes. It's like NSG isn't even creative enough to find new ways to be incorrect.
The most inept invader in Nationstates!

Economic issues: +5.3 left
Social issues: +2.63 libertarian
Foreign policy: +7.28 non-interventionist
Cultural identification: +7.23 liberal
New Freedomstan wrote:What is a little purging and gulag between friends?
They said I could do anything I wanted to do, so I argue with strangers on the internet.
Ceannairceach wrote:I am looking for a girl with >5% genetic relation to me. Must be dtf, blond, big butt.

User avatar
Norstal
Post Czar
 
Posts: 41465
Founded: Mar 07, 2008
Ex-Nation

Postby Norstal » Tue Dec 11, 2012 12:32 pm

Gaveo wrote:
Tunasai wrote:
Same thing can really be said about the European Royal Line, as they all interbred with eachother for hundreds of years.

This explains everything! Now I know why Europe is so screwed!

Cause they turned to democracy? What?
Toronto Sun wrote:Best poster ever. ★★★★★


New York Times wrote:No one can beat him in debates. 5/5.


IGN wrote:Literally the best game I've ever played. 10/10


NSG Public wrote:What a fucking douchebag.



Supreme Chairman for Life of the Itty Bitty Kitty Committee

User avatar
Gravlen
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 17261
Founded: Jul 01, 2005
Father Knows Best State

Postby Gravlen » Tue Dec 11, 2012 12:32 pm

Tunasai wrote:1. Incest is an act, right now, its also a crime, like murder.

Depends on where you are in the world. Cross a border, and that status might change.
EnragedMaldivians wrote:That's preposterous. Gravlens's not a white nationalist; Gravlen's a penguin.

Unio de Sovetaj Socialismaj Respublikoj wrote:There is no use arguing the definition of murder with someone who has a picture of a penguin with a chainsaw as their nations flag.

User avatar
The Emerald Dawn
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 20824
Founded: Jun 11, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby The Emerald Dawn » Tue Dec 11, 2012 12:33 pm

The Holy Twig wrote:
Zottistan wrote:That's not the point. Of course the kids would face similar issues. But generations of inbreeding probably wouldn't occur, because social conditions have changed.

It's unfortunate when people making good argumentative points (e.g. Zottistan) are drowned out by NSG's endless stream of straw men and slippery slopes. It's like NSG isn't even creative enough to find new ways to be incorrect.

Absolutely. What I was doing was a strawman. Instead of it being me pointing out that this is all the evidence we have to go off of, and everything else is really supposition.

Special little snowflake, aren't you?

User avatar
Nidaria
Senator
 
Posts: 3503
Founded: Mar 30, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Nidaria » Tue Dec 11, 2012 12:33 pm

No, it is a perversion and causes genetic problems.
"He who denies the existence of God has some reason for wishing that God did not exist." --St. Augustine
"There is only one difference between genius and stupidity: genius has limits." --Albert Einstein
"When statesmen forsake their own private conscience for the sake of their public duties... they lead their country by a short route to chaos." --St. Thomas More
Anti-gay, Pro-life, Traditionalist, Libertarian, Non-interventionist, Loyal Roman Catholic
Cosmopolitan/Nationalistic 25%
Secular/Fundamentalist 67%
Visionary/Reactionary 21%
Anarchistic/Authoritarian 6%
Communist/Capitalist 41%
Pacifist/Militaristic 7%
Ecological/Anthropocentric 52%

User avatar
Gaveo
Post Czar
 
Posts: 32070
Founded: Jun 02, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Gaveo » Tue Dec 11, 2012 12:33 pm

Norstal wrote:
Gaveo wrote:This explains everything! Now I know why Europe is so screwed!

Cause they turned to democracy? What?

Never mind. I was trying to be funny. I guess that failed.
Bruh.

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ethel mermania, Loeje, Page, Senkaku

Advertisement

Remove ads