NSG Senate Coffee Shop: 50% off Americanos [NSG Senate]

[Maklohi Vai]

I have two proposals that link with each other, I'm not sure if they have already been dealt with though so if they have been, I would like to know.

The Bestiality Act | Urgency: High | Drafted by: Rumostan | Sponsors:

Noticing that we have not already banned Bestiality,

Appalled that the violation of animals by mankind is still legal,

Hereby makes bestiality illegal. Bestiality shall from hereon in be an act in which a human either masturbates or performs aural, anal or vaginal sexual intercourse with an animal. Animals shall count as all creatures that are not human.

Bestiality shall be punished with a minimum prison sentence of two years and a minimum fine of £2,000. If the person owns animals then the animals shall be taken away from him and given to more responsible owners. The person who commits such an abhorrent act shall also be banned from keeping animals or going into zoos and places of business that sell animals. The person shall also have an electronic tag put around his or her leg.

The Incest Act | Urgency: High | Drafted by: Rumostan | Sponsors:

Noticing that incest has not been banned in Aurentina,

Knowing the damage that it can cause to a persons mental well being and the damage to a child if it has been created through such an act,

Hereby makes incest illegal. Incest shall be the act of either giving a French kiss or masturbates with or performs oral, anal or vaginal sex with a member of the persons immediate family. The immediate family shall consist of any siblings, parents, grandparents, great grandparents, children, cousins, grand children and great grand children. Marriage between the already mentioned people shall also be made illegal as it would invariably lead to some sort of sexual intercourse.

If a number of people are found to have done such an act, then they will be imprisoned for a minimum of five years and have a minimum fine of £5,000 unless they give the following reason. If one or more of the people who preformed such an act can give evidence that they were forced to have sexual intercourse then that person shall be allowed to go free. If a person is found guilty then they shall be prohibited from going within 200 metres of any member if the immediate family and shall also be forced to wear an electronic tag.

If a child has been created in the unnatural union of two people then the child shall immediately be put into care and monitored for genetic abnormalities. If the woman is pregnant then the baby shall be aborted in all cases where the unborn child can be aborted safely and legally.

What do you think?

I don't like putting electronic tags on people. Not one bit. However, I do like the general intent behind both bills.

[The Grand Republic of Hannover]

I have two proposals that link with each other, I'm not sure if they have already been dealt with though so if they have been, I would like to know.

The Bestiality Act | Urgency: High | Drafted by: Rumostan | Sponsors:

Noticing that we have not already banned Bestiality,

Appalled that the violation of animals by mankind is still legal,

Hereby makes bestiality illegal. Bestiality shall from hereon in be an act in which a human either masturbates or performs aural, anal or vaginal sexual intercourse with an animal. Animals shall count as all creatures that are not human.

Bestiality shall be punished with a minimum prison sentence of two years and a minimum fine of £2,000. If the person owns animals then the animals shall be taken away from him and given to more responsible owners. The person who commits such an abhorrent act shall also be banned from keeping animals or going into zoos and places of business that sell animals. The person shall also have an electronic tag put around his or her leg.

The Incest Act | Urgency: High | Drafted by: Rumostan | Sponsors:

Noticing that incest has not been banned in Aurentina,

Knowing the damage that it can cause to a persons mental well being and the damage to a child if it has been created through such an act,

Hereby makes incest illegal. Incest shall be the act of either giving a French kiss or masturbates with or performs oral, anal or vaginal sex with a member of the persons immediate family. The immediate family shall consist of any siblings, parents, grandparents, great grandparents, children, cousins, grand children and great grand children. Marriage between the already mentioned people shall also be made illegal as it would invariably lead to some sort of sexual intercourse.

If a number of people are found to have done such an act, then they will be imprisoned for a minimum of five years and have a minimum fine of £5,000 unless they give the following reason. If one or more of the people who preformed such an act can give evidence that they were forced to have sexual intercourse then that person shall be allowed to go free. If a person is found guilty then they shall be prohibited from going within 200 metres of any member if the immediate family and shall also be forced to wear an electronic tag.

If a child has been created in the unnatural union of two people then the child shall immediately be put into care and monitored for genetic abnormalities. If the woman is pregnant then the baby shall be aborted in all cases where the unborn child can be aborted safely and legally.

What do you think?

In laws, some of those words cannot be used. I think you should change some to "sexual intercourse"

[Rumostan]

I don't like putting electronic tags on people. Not one bit. However, I do like the general intent behind both bills.

Why not? Surely it would be better because the police can then make sure that they don't do it again.

In laws, some of those words cannot be used. I think you should change some to "sexual intercourse"

Ah ok, I will group everything but masturbation and French kissing into sexual intercourse.

[Yanalia]

I don't like putting electronic tags on people. Not one bit. However, I do like the general intent behind both bills.

Why not? Surely it would be better because the police can then make sure that they don't do it again.

Maybe we should tag everyone who breaks the law? No, that's a large rights violation. People don't lose all of their rights by violating the law.

[The Grand Republic of Hannover]

I don't like putting electronic tags on people. Not one bit. However, I do like the general intent behind both bills.

Why not? Surely it would be better because the police can then make sure that they don't do it again.

In laws, some of those words cannot be used. I think you should change some to "sexual intercourse"

Ah ok, I will group everything but masturbation and French kissing into sexual intercourse.

I believ the word "masturbation" has a legal term. It is something like "Self-induced..." or something like that

[Rumostan]

Why not? Surely it would be better because the police can then make sure that they don't do it again.

Maybe we should tag everyone who breaks the law? No, that's a large rights violation. People don't lose all of their rights by violating the law.

Yes but these people are violating family members and animals, it is very different.

[Britcan]

The Bestiality Act | Urgency: High | Drafted by: Rumostan | Sponsors:

Noticing that we have not already banned Bestiality,

Appalled that the violation of animals by mankind is still legal,

Hereby makes bestiality illegal. Bestiality shall from hereon in be an act in which a human either masturbates or performs aural, anal or vaginal sexual intercourse with an animal. Animals shall count as all creatures that are not human.

Bestiality shall be punished with a minimum prison sentence of two years and a minimum fine of £2,000. If the person owns animals then the animals shall be taken away from him and given to more responsible owners. The person who commits such an abhorrent act shall also be banned from keeping animals or going into zoos and places of business that sell animals. The person shall also have an electronic tag put around his or her leg.

1) Why does it matter is someone wants to masturbate to a picture of an animal? It doesn't hurt the anyone, including the animal.
2) I'm uncomfortable with tagging people. Put them on a database instead.

[Bleckonia]

I have two proposals that link with each other, I'm not sure if they have already been dealt with though so if they have been, I would like to know.

The Bestiality Act | Urgency: High | Drafted by: Rumostan | Sponsors:

Noticing that we have not already banned Bestiality,

Appalled that the violation of animals by mankind is still legal,

Hereby makes bestiality illegal. Bestiality shall from hereon in be an act in which a human either masturbates or performs aural, anal or vaginal sexual intercourse with an animal. Animals shall count as all creatures that are not human.

Bestiality shall be punished with a minimum prison sentence of two years and a minimum fine of £2,000. If the person owns animals then the animals shall be taken away from him and given to more responsible owners. The person who commits such an abhorrent act shall also be banned from keeping animals or going into zoos and places of business that sell animals. The person shall also have an electronic tag put around his or her leg.

The Incest Act | Urgency: High | Drafted by: Rumostan | Sponsors:

Noticing that incest has not been banned in Aurentina,

Knowing the damage that it can cause to a persons mental well being and the damage to a child if it has been created through such an act,

Hereby makes incest illegal. Incest shall be the act of either giving a French kiss or masturbates with or performs oral, anal or vaginal sex with a member of the persons immediate family. The immediate family shall consist of any siblings, parents, grandparents, great grandparents, children, cousins, grand children and great grand children. Marriage between the already mentioned people shall also be made illegal as it would invariably lead to some sort of sexual intercourse.

If a number of people are found to have done such an act, then they will be imprisoned for a minimum of five years and have a minimum fine of £5,000 unless they give the following reason. If one or more of the people who preformed such an act can give evidence that they were forced to have sexual intercourse then that person shall be allowed to go free. If a person is found guilty then they shall be prohibited from going within 200 metres of any member if the immediate family and shall also be forced to wear an electronic tag.

If a child has been created in the unnatural union of two people then the child shall immediately be put into care and monitored for genetic abnormalities. If the woman is pregnant then the baby shall be aborted in all cases where the unborn child can be aborted safely and legally.

What do you think?

What if the incest is consensual? Why should that be illegal? Plus, I don't like the idea of forced abortions.

[Maklohi Vai]

I don't like putting electronic tags on people. Not one bit. However, I do like the general intent behind both bills.

Why not? Surely it would be better because the police can then make sure that they don't do it again.

Right, because the electronic tag would allow the police to preempt and prevent any act of bestiality or incest. [/sarcasm]

Also, human rights violation.

Maybe we should tag everyone who breaks the law? No, that's a large rights violation. People don't lose all of their rights by violating the law.

Yes but these people are violating family members and animals, it is very different.

They are still humans, are they not? Just because they're criminals under these acts doesn't invalidate their species.

[Rumostan]

The Bestiality Act | Urgency: High | Drafted by: Rumostan | Sponsors:

Noticing that we have not already banned Bestiality,

Appalled that the violation of animals by mankind is still legal,

Hereby makes bestiality illegal. Bestiality shall from hereon in be an act in which a human either masturbates or performs aural, anal or vaginal sexual intercourse with an animal. Animals shall count as all creatures that are not human.

Bestiality shall be punished with a minimum prison sentence of two years and a minimum fine of £2,000. If the person owns animals then the animals shall be taken away from him and given to more responsible owners. The person who commits such an abhorrent act shall also be banned from keeping animals or going into zoos and places of business that sell animals. The person shall also have an electronic tag put around his or her leg.

1) Why does it matter is someone wants to masturbate to a picture of an animal? It doesn't hurt the anyone, including the animal.
2) I'm uncomfortable with tagging people. Put them on a database instead.

1) No, I was unclear, I meant doing it to an animal or the animal doing it to a person.
2) I hadn't thought of that, I will adjust the bill.

I have two proposals that link with each other, I'm not sure if they have already been dealt with though so if they have been, I would like to know.

The Bestiality Act | Urgency: High | Drafted by: Rumostan | Sponsors:

Noticing that we have not already banned Bestiality,

Appalled that the violation of animals by mankind is still legal,

Hereby makes bestiality illegal. Bestiality shall from hereon in be an act in which a human either masturbates or performs aural, anal or vaginal sexual intercourse with an animal. Animals shall count as all creatures that are not human.

Bestiality shall be punished with a minimum prison sentence of two years and a minimum fine of £2,000. If the person owns animals then the animals shall be taken away from him and given to more responsible owners. The person who commits such an abhorrent act shall also be banned from keeping animals or going into zoos and places of business that sell animals. The person shall also have an electronic tag put around his or her leg.

The Incest Act | Urgency: High | Drafted by: Rumostan | Sponsors:

Noticing that incest has not been banned in Aurentina,

Knowing the damage that it can cause to a persons mental well being and the damage to a child if it has been created through such an act,

Hereby makes incest illegal. Incest shall be the act of either giving a French kiss or masturbates with or performs oral, anal or vaginal sex with a member of the persons immediate family. The immediate family shall consist of any siblings, parents, grandparents, great grandparents, children, cousins, grand children and great grand children. Marriage between the already mentioned people shall also be made illegal as it would invariably lead to some sort of sexual intercourse.

If a number of people are found to have done such an act, then they will be imprisoned for a minimum of five years and have a minimum fine of £5,000 unless they give the following reason. If one or more of the people who preformed such an act can give evidence that they were forced to have sexual intercourse then that person shall be allowed to go free. If a person is found guilty then they shall be prohibited from going within 200 metres of any member if the immediate family and shall also be forced to wear an electronic tag.

If a child has been created in the unnatural union of two people then the child shall immediately be put into care and monitored for genetic abnormalities. If the woman is pregnant then the baby shall be aborted in all cases where the unborn child can be aborted safely and legally.

What do you think?

What if the incest is consensual? Why should that be illegal?

Umm because of what it is and also the damage that it can do to a child created through that union. Also, it's just not the thing to do, it is not healthy to want to have 'fun' with your siblings like that, it could be the sign of a disorder.

[Rumostan]

Why not? Surely it would be better because the police can then make sure that they don't do it again.

Right, because the electronic tag would allow the police to preempt and prevent any act of bestiality or incest. [/sarcasm]

Also, human rights violation.

Yes but these people are violating family members and animals, it is very different.

They are still humans, are they not? Just because they're criminals under these acts doesn't invalidate their species.

Fine, I will change it to a database.

[Britcan]

1) Why does it matter is someone wants to masturbate to a picture of an animal? It doesn't hurt the anyone, including the animal.
2) I'm uncomfortable with tagging people. Put them on a database instead.

1) No, I was unclear, I meant doing it to an animal or the animal doing it to a person.
2) I hadn't thought of that, I will adjust the bill.

1) Ah, okay then.
2) Awesome.

[Bleckonia]

1) Why does it matter is someone wants to masturbate to a picture of an animal? It doesn't hurt the anyone, including the animal.
2) I'm uncomfortable with tagging people. Put them on a database instead.

1) No, I was unclear, I meant doing it to an animal or the animal doing it to a person.
2) I hadn't thought of that, I will adjust the bill.

What if the incest is consensual? Why should that be illegal?

Umm because of what it is and also the damage that it can do to a child created through that union. Also, it's just not the thing to do, it is not healthy to want to have 'fun' with your siblings like that, it could be the sign of a disorder.

Just because something is gross doesn't mean it should be illegal. I think nose picking is gross, but I don't think it should be illegal. Also, I know that there could be genetic damage to a child in the union, but that's not the parents' fault, that's biology's fault. And just because something isn't healthy doesn't mean you should have to spend 5 years in prison for doing it. We don't ban smoking because it's unhealthy, so why incest? And if it's a disorder, they don't need prison, they need therapy.

[Rumostan]

1) No, I was unclear, I meant doing it to an animal or the animal doing it to a person.
2) I hadn't thought of that, I will adjust the bill.



Umm because of what it is and also the damage that it can do to a child created through that union. Also, it's just not the thing to do, it is not healthy to want to have 'fun' with your siblings like that, it could be the sign of a disorder.

Just because something is gross doesn't mean it should be illegal. I think nose picking is gross, but I don't think it should be illegal. Also, I know that there could be genetic damage to a child in the union, but that's not the parents' fault, that's biology's fault. And just because something isn't healthy doesn't mean you should have to spend 5 years in prison for doing it. We don't ban smoking because it's unhealthy, so why incest?

The genetic damage is not biology's fault, it is the fault of the two people deciding to engage in sexual activities with each other. The damage caused is like that because they are doing something which is not intended to be done, nature has not given us the ability to have sexual relations with our siblings and not have a damaged child. Incest is far more unhealthy than smoking, smoking isn't (usually) done because of a disorder, incest is. A 'normal' person would not decide to have sexual relations with their parents or their siblings one day.

[Living Freedom Land]

1) Why does it matter is someone wants to masturbate to a picture of an animal? It doesn't hurt the anyone, including the animal.
2) I'm uncomfortable with tagging people. Put them on a database instead.

1) No, I was unclear, I meant doing it to an animal or the animal doing it to a person.
2) I hadn't thought of that, I will adjust the bill.

What if the incest is consensual? Why should that be illegal?

Umm because of what it is and also the damage that it can do to a child created through that union. Also, it's just not the thing to do, it is not healthy to want to have 'fun' with your siblings like that, it could be the sign of a disorder.

If it's a sign of a disorder, why are we putting them in jail instead of putting them under psychological evaluation? The fact is, this act would enforcing, in a heavy handed manner, penalties on people that (if the incest is consensual) are hurting nobody except (possibly) themselves as long as no child is produced from the act.

Also regulating sexual relations between cousins is not the way to go. Charles Darwin married his first cousin. In countries like Pakistan, cousin marriage is very common and a culturally accepted practice.
EDIT: Read up on it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cousin_marriage

[Bleckonia]

Just because something is gross doesn't mean it should be illegal. I think nose picking is gross, but I don't think it should be illegal. Also, I know that there could be genetic damage to a child in the union, but that's not the parents' fault, that's biology's fault. And just because something isn't healthy doesn't mean you should have to spend 5 years in prison for doing it. We don't ban smoking because it's unhealthy, so why incest?

The genetic damage is not biology's fault, it is the fault of the two people deciding to engage in sexual activities with each other. The damage caused is like that because they are doing something which is not intended to be done, nature has not given us the ability to have sexual relations with our siblings and not have a damaged child. Incest is far more unhealthy than smoking, smoking isn't (usually) done because of a disorder, incest is. A 'normal' person would not decide to have sexual relations with their parents or their siblings one day.

Define 'normal.' And incest is not a disorder, at least not according to the American Psychiatric Association. And we don't ban smoking while pregnant, which can also cause a damaged child, so again: why incest?

[Rumostan]

1) No, I was unclear, I meant doing it to an animal or the animal doing it to a person.
2) I hadn't thought of that, I will adjust the bill.



Umm because of what it is and also the damage that it can do to a child created through that union. Also, it's just not the thing to do, it is not healthy to want to have 'fun' with your siblings like that, it could be the sign of a disorder.

If it's a sign of a disorder, why are we putting them in jail instead of putting them under psychological evaluation? The fact is, this act would enforcing, in a heavy handed manner, penalties on people that (if the incest is consensual) are hurting nobody except (possibly) themselves as long as no child is produced from the act.

Also regulating sexual relations between cousins is not the way to go. Charles Darwin married his first cousin. In countries like Pakistan, cousin marriage is very common and a culturally accepted practice.

Ok, should I change it to being put into a mental facility then?

Also, times were different in the Victorian era, which can probably explain the amount of odd people around then. I am also going by the co efficiency scale and I am keeping everything be,ow 12.5% legal. Now, as you may have notice from my flag, I do know quite a bit about Pakistan. They don't marry their cousins, they marry their second cousins. Our family stopped the cousin to cousin marrying about seventy years ago when one of the children had so many physical deformities that it was dead on arrival. The custom of marrying cousins is ending, it may be legal but that is quite frankly because Pakistan is a backwards nation that had had so much political instability that it can't sort itself out.

[Bleckonia]

If it's a sign of a disorder, why are we putting them in jail instead of putting them under psychological evaluation? The fact is, this act would enforcing, in a heavy handed manner, penalties on people that (if the incest is consensual) are hurting nobody except (possibly) themselves as long as no child is produced from the act.

Also regulating sexual relations between cousins is not the way to go. Charles Darwin married his first cousin. In countries like Pakistan, cousin marriage is very common and a culturally accepted practice.

Ok, should I change it to being put into a mental facility then?

Also, times were different in the Victorian era, which can probably explain the amount of odd people around then. I am also going by the co efficiency scale and I am keeping everything be,ow 12.5% legal. Now, as you may have notice from my flag, I do know quite a bit about Pakistan. They don't marry their cousins, they marry their second cousins. Our family stopped the cousin to cousin marrying about seventy years ago when one of the children had so many physical deformities that it was dead on arrival. The custom of marrying cousins is ending, it may be legal but that is quite frankly because Pakistan is a backwards nation that had had so much political instability that it can't sort itself out.

Or maybe not a mental facility, just mandatory therapy if it is in fact a disorder.

[Rumostan]

The genetic damage is not biology's fault, it is the fault of the two people deciding to engage in sexual activities with each other. The damage caused is like that because they are doing something which is not intended to be done, nature has not given us the ability to have sexual relations with our siblings and not have a damaged child. Incest is far more unhealthy than smoking, smoking isn't (usually) done because of a disorder, incest is. A 'normal' person would not decide to have sexual relations with their parents or their siblings one day.

Define 'normal.' And incest is not a disorder, at least not according to the American Psychiatric Association. And we don't ban smoking while pregnant, which can also cause a damaged child, so again: why incest?

Incest is a disorder in the UK. We don't ban smoking but we advise against it because there is a chance that it won't do anything. With incest, especially between siblings, there is an almost 100% chance of damage.

Also, are you really suggesting that incest should be legal or are you just trying to see if I can come up with good reasons?

[Living Freedom Land]

If it's a sign of a disorder, why are we putting them in jail instead of putting them under psychological evaluation? The fact is, this act would enforcing, in a heavy handed manner, penalties on people that (if the incest is consensual) are hurting nobody except (possibly) themselves as long as no child is produced from the act.

Also regulating sexual relations between cousins is not the way to go. Charles Darwin married his first cousin. In countries like Pakistan, cousin marriage is very common and a culturally accepted practice.

Ok, should I change it to being put into a mental facility then?

Also, times were different in the Victorian era, which can probably explain the amount of odd people around then. I am also going by the co efficiency scale and I am keeping everything be,ow 12.5% legal. Now, as you may have notice from my flag, I do know quite a bit about Pakistan. They don't marry their cousins, they marry their second cousins. Our family stopped the cousin to cousin marrying about seventy years ago when one of the children had so many physical deformities that it was dead on arrival. The custom of marrying cousins is ending, it may be legal but that is quite frankly because Pakistan is a backwards nation that had had so much political instability that it can't sort itself out.

Practically all of Europe allows first cousins to marry. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Cousi ... eWorld.svg
Including the UK, Germany, and France.

Also, at least use the term first cousin in the act, because the term cousin applies to all cousins (first, second, third, fourth, etc.).

[Otrenia]

I have two proposals that link with each other, I'm not sure if they have already been dealt with though so if they have been, I would like to know.

The Bestiality Act | Urgency: High | Drafted by: Rumostan | Sponsors:

Noticing that we have not already banned Bestiality,

Appalled that the violation of animals by mankind is still legal,

Hereby makes bestiality illegal. Bestiality shall from hereon in be an act in which a human either masturbates or performs aural, anal or vaginal sexual intercourse with an animal. Animals shall count as all creatures that are not human.

Bestiality shall be punished with a minimum prison sentence of two years and a minimum fine of £2,000. If the person owns animals then the animals shall be taken away from him and given to more responsible owners. The person who commits such an abhorrent act shall also be banned from keeping animals or going into zoos and places of business that sell animals. The person shall also have an electronic tag put around his or her leg.

The Incest Act | Urgency: High | Drafted by: Rumostan | Sponsors:

Noticing that incest has not been banned in Aurentina,

Knowing the damage that it can cause to a persons mental well being and the damage to a child if it has been created through such an act,

Hereby makes incest illegal. Incest shall be the act of either giving a French kiss or masturbates with or performs oral, anal or vaginal sex with a member of the persons immediate family. The immediate family shall consist of any siblings, parents, grandparents, great grandparents, children, cousins, grand children and great grand children. Marriage between the already mentioned people shall also be made illegal as it would invariably lead to some sort of sexual intercourse.

If a number of people are found to have done such an act, then they will be imprisoned for a minimum of five years and have a minimum fine of £5,000 unless they give the following reason. If one or more of the people who preformed such an act can give evidence that they were forced to have sexual intercourse then that person shall be allowed to go free. If a person is found guilty then they shall be prohibited from going within 200 metres of any member if the immediate family and shall also be forced to wear an electronic tag.

If a child has been created in the unnatural union of two people then the child shall immediately be put into care and monitored for genetic abnormalities. If the woman is pregnant then the baby shall be aborted in all cases where the unborn child can be aborted safely and legally.

What do you think?

We could all mind our own bedrooms, but then that would be too easy...

[The Grand Republic of Hannover]

If it's a sign of a disorder, why are we putting them in jail instead of putting them under psychological evaluation? The fact is, this act would enforcing, in a heavy handed manner, penalties on people that (if the incest is consensual) are hurting nobody except (possibly) themselves as long as no child is produced from the act.

Also regulating sexual relations between cousins is not the way to go. Charles Darwin married his first cousin. In countries like Pakistan, cousin marriage is very common and a culturally accepted practice.

Ok, should I change it to being put into a mental facility then?

Also, times were different in the Victorian era, which can probably explain the amount of odd people around then. I am also going by the co efficiency scale and I am keeping everything be,ow 12.5% legal. Now, as you may have notice from my flag, I do know quite a bit about Pakistan. They don't marry their cousins, they marry their second cousins. Our family stopped the cousin to cousin marrying about seventy years ago when one of the children had so many physical deformities that it was dead on arrival. The custom of marrying cousins is ending, it may be legal but that is quite frankly because Pakistan is a backwards nation that had had so much political instability that it can't sort itself out.

I agree. This argument of "well, they do it in this country, so we should do it too". In Vietnam, drug dealing a crime punishable with torture, I believe; so then, because in Vietnam, the laws are this way, we should do that as well. See, not all laws are modern, some laws are harsh and archaic

[Living Freedom Land]

Define 'normal.' And incest is not a disorder, at least not according to the American Psychiatric Association. And we don't ban smoking while pregnant, which can also cause a damaged child, so again: why incest?

Incest is a disorder in the UK. We don't ban smoking but we advise against it because there is a chance that it won't do anything. With incest, especially between siblings, there is an almost 100% chance of damage.

Also, are you really suggesting that incest should be legal or are you just trying to see if I can come up with good reasons?

The only supportable reason you have for banning incestuous behavior is because a child may (but also may not, in fact with birth control it's likely there won't be) born from the union. Otherwise you state it isn't "normal" because the acts rub wrongly against your sense of morality. Why, then, do you want to ban such behavior that won't cause a child to be born (such as french kissing)?

[Rumostan]

Ok, should I change it to being put into a mental facility then?

Also, times were different in the Victorian era, which can probably explain the amount of odd people around then. I am also going by the co efficiency scale and I am keeping everything be,ow 12.5% legal. Now, as you may have notice from my flag, I do know quite a bit about Pakistan. They don't marry their cousins, they marry their second cousins. Our family stopped the cousin to cousin marrying about seventy years ago when one of the children had so many physical deformities that it was dead on arrival. The custom of marrying cousins is ending, it may be legal but that is quite frankly because Pakistan is a backwards nation that had had so much political instability that it can't sort itself out.

Practically all of Europe allows first cousins to marry. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Cousi ... eWorld.svg
Including the UK, Germany, and France.

Also, at least use the term first cousin in the act, because the term cousin applies to all cousins (first, second, third, fourth, etc.).

I will change it to first cousins but one must remember that even though it is still legal, there are many advocates for it to be banned because of the risks associated with it.

[Rumostan]

Incest is a disorder in the UK. We don't ban smoking but we advise against it because there is a chance that it won't do anything. With incest, especially between siblings, there is an almost 100% chance of damage.

Also, are you really suggesting that incest should be legal or are you just trying to see if I can come up with good reasons?

The only supportable reason you have for banning incestuous behavior is because a child may (but also may not, in fact with birth control it's likely there won't be) born from the union. Otherwise you state it isn't "normal" because the acts rub wrongly against your sense of morality. Why, then, do you want to ban such behavior that won't cause a child to be born (such as french kissing)?

Actually, I am going with the current agreement in the UK that incest is a disorder.