Legalization of Incest in some countries

These days a lot of taboo relationships are becoming more and more accepted, so i think even though most people dont like incest or at least pretend too, that eventually incest will just be legal like gay marriage soemtime in the future bc i think itll not just be about incest but about being able to freely be with anyone you want to be with regardless of the social or morale norms. or it could all just go to shit and ppl just wont let anyone do anything.

>Implying Canada actually has "free" healthcare rather than overpriced waiting rooms.

>Implying that Canadians and permanent residents don't have easy access abortions.

I already listed several options to prevent a compromised child from being born. That alone should alleviate your fears on that issue.



Using the same logic, Canada must ban soda, candy or other sugary confections because excessive consumption can lead to weight gain and the associated illnesses such as Diabetes and high blood pressure. It must ban the consumption of alcohol because it can lead to cirrhosis of the liver, gastritis and Ulcers. Canada must also prevent anyone infected with an STD from having sex, especially if they have something contagious such as Herpes, Gonorrhea or HIV/AIDS. The effects of all these seemingly benign activities is that the Canadian healthcare system will have to pay for it which means you'll have to pay for someone who couldn't control themselves.


See where I'm going with this? With logic like that, you have to ban anything that can have a negative externality because others will have to pay for your poor choices. In other words, Canada punishes the intelligent people for the choices of the idiots. How is that even remotely fair that people in Ontario be required to pay for the idiocy of some bumpkin in Newfoundland that can't keep his dick out of newfie whores?



The school of thought on this is that government shouldn't bother aiding people to begin with. This "aid" gives a monetary incentive for people to commit the encouraged behavior. The second part is governments dole out this "charity" after collecting it (read stealing) at gunpoint. It doesn't matter if my motivations were selfless and altruistic when I rob you because I still robbed you.



It's a twisted concept of equality. Perhaps it's "equality" in an egalitarian sense where everyone has the potential access to the service but, when it comes to the reality of how things play out then it's not equal at all. One segment of society is treated as lesser than another as one segment will benefit from it's use and the other will rarely ever use the service.

Who am I to tell what two consenting adults can do and cannot do in bedroom. Its none of my business.

I've long argued the thesis that "Equality" doesn't exist. We're all men and women with individual unique talents, likes/dislikes, strengths/weaknesses. We're only equal in Birth and Death. In short, I hold the Darwinist theory to be true. That doesn't mean for the allowing of inequality, but "equality" exists as a common courtesy to others.

We're all "equal" in that we all pursue one form of happiness or another, theoretically we'd all like to be healthy, have healthy children and to be with the person we choose to be with.

So rather than instill a right within a group(whether that group is a majority or minority sect of society), general rights that can be exercised irregardless(IE: rights that will lead to the prosperity of Humanity) of religion, sexual orientation should be the ideal goal.

I said this in a relationships thread, but I'm not opposed to gay marriage, except for the fact that the vast majority of Americans are heterosexual. So, my solution: Privatize Marriage. If you find a church that supports gay marriage, good for you. But this way, you can exercise your right to happiness without flinging it around others who frankly disagree.

It's insulting to compare the recent philosophical and social debates with the Civil Rights Act(as some news anchors and otherwise ill informed Liberals have done). The Civil Rights Act established certain liberties to ALL Americans irregardless of race, sex or creed. Whether it's Abortion or Gay Marriage, it's the support for the minorities over the majority. In the case of Abortion, it's even more inherently bias'd as the child is executed without say. Because that child is deemed an "inferior species"

If one's happiness is to be childless, find a male who feels the same way and you can both exercise proper birth control. But don't exercise your moral superiority of knowledge to mean you have the right to butcher children.

All Humans must exercise self determinism, egalitarianism exists to a few central core principles(one of them being the sanctity of life) but the simple fact is, not everyone will agree and forcing them to agree results in conflict.

Which is why the Civil Rights Act hasn't ended discrimination per say, now both sides seek to discriminate against the other. And we have had a silent civil war brewing for quite a while, mostly played out through political votes.

Because we're not equal, there are groups of people who don't fit in with the vast majority of others. Should we continue to "tolerate" state of affairs while elevating emotions to the max?

From an Egalitarian standpoint, to centralize the world I always envisioned the following: Americans cultivating America, Africans cultivating Africa. Asians cultivating Asia, just as the Russians have cultivated the Caucasus.

Individuality is what will preserve and create a collective. A collective cannot first be had without Individual Will. Alliances are forged out of commonalities between Individuals, as these alliances are merged those who weren't originally a part of an Alliance with a nation in question happened to be on good terms with an allying Nation and a further connection occurs.

We've tried hard to centralize the world, but I now believe the world's centralization can only be had with the independence of every Nation. Before we can begin rapid trading as we've done, reducing our national deficits and being financially independent is of order. And that way, we won't even need to rapidly trade as a major source of Economic Goods.

Africa can only become a world power at Africa's hands, no matter how much Western assistance is given to that area if the Africans are uneducated and continue not to educate themselves that continent is doomed to perpetual colonization.

Incest is just fine if it's consensual and a baby is not conceived. Actually, the chances of a baby getting a defect from an incestuous relationship is surprisingly close it's chances from a normal one.

I don't see why it should be shunned, it may not be what is considered natural, but neither were/are gay relationships. They're seen as not normal and something to be condemned which they are most certainly not. As far as I'm concerned, most people only really frown upon it due to religious, or social reasons. All I can say is that you love who you love, and you shouldn't be judged for something like that. People call it unnatural, people call it an affront to god(that really pisses me off), and things like that but honestly when it comes down to it it's just people loving one another despite being related to one another.

As for ramifications of incestuous relationships when it comes to offspring, yeah that is a terrible outcome when it happens, and it does happen. But all in all, I don't see that as being a reason to condemn it, hell if that were the case then it could also be used as an excuse to condemn women having many children later in their lives because there is an increased possibility of birth defects.

Some things are still legal but considered as immoral. Nothing you could do about it. If I have the liberty to choose, I'd vote no.

The world is experiencing moral decay in my opinion. Back then, homosexual relationship were treated as immoral, as immoral as incest and pedos. Now, you know what's happening. People asking to legalize same-sex marriage, but let's not go too far off topic.

I don't condemn people who are engaged with this type of relationship, but it's something I don't want to get involved to. Life is all about choice, and once you choose, you should be ready to pay for the consequences.

In short, I don't like it, I won't support it, but people can do whatever they feel like as it does not concern me in any way.

Honestly I'd like to believe that if two family members are in that situation and are both giving each other consent, then I see no problem. As someone mentioned above, it is much like homosexual couples. If one wants to live life a different way, allow them to so long as it doesn't impact the community.

Then again, this feeling could be somewhat from the fact that I've never had a sister and/or sibling to be so close to, so I wouldn't even know how incest felt, much less how having a family felt in the first place.

My teacher once told me that incest was considered taboo not because of the fact that it was two members in the family, but it was a taboo instilled because it disrupted the family pattern, and ensure proper psychological and emotional growth.

For instance, The father needs to be a father to the daughter, not a husband. The daughter needs a father figure to have proper emotional bonding and psychological growth. By having the father act as a husband to the daughter, she loses growth in that area.

The same goes for the son and mother. The mother needs to be a mother to the son, not his wife.

I guess since i've never had a close sibling and such i'd be a natural supporter of "Wincest" seeing as i'm pretty ignorant to how it feels in the first place, but I try to approach it from the same standpoint on homosexual relationships and marriages.

Let them be, in my opinion. If they're both old enough and consent to it, I see no problem with it as long as they've been informed about possible defects that could result with their gene therapists if they're planning on having a family.


By the way. Not all children of incestual bearing are mentally ill. Egypt is a testament to this.

I don't mind incest but if you look at the results , the rumours will spread around. Either school or elsewhere. The couple might be hung out of the society. Having troubles for the rest of their lifes. Because society today judge anything that looks weird or unnatural.

I am amazed at how rapidly the human civilization is going under. I mean incest is like the most stupid thing you can do. Nature programmed most organisms to not have sex with relatives for the safety of their offspring. A child that comes from incest will be genetically inferior to another human. And if they keep having incest over generations they will get children that are so sick they either die upon birth or that can't even reproduce.

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/animals-and-us/201210/the-problem-incest

I found this article interesting, especially the part where in nature there is a specific genetic mechanism to prevent incest. It makes me wonder if this is the same with humans and if people who like incest or partake in incest happen to be mentally dysfunctional.

This. Incest is fucking stupid and will just shouldn't be done but whatever, humans do stupid shit all the time and I don't see this changing any time soon

A small genepool is a bad genepool, encourage this and you encourage genetic disorders. Plus, why the hell would you want to? Real life is real life, hentai world is hentai world.

I think family is a bond that is above that of a sexual relationship, incest is a degredation of that bond and a healthy person from a normal family wouldn't consider it. It's hard to put this into words, but the gist is that I think family is a bond that is above something like sex. I'm talking bro-sis level here. Cousins is less weird depending on how close your parents are, but still probably bad for the children.

"normal family" and "healthy person" are very relative terms here. "above sex" is in my opinion a over idealization of the family bond, into something that is somehow holy.

Actually, considering that people normally go through puberty in close contact with their parents/siblings I would be surprised if they never had a single sexual thought towards their close family members. Ofcourse, this is not exactly what leads to a long lasting relationship.

Healthy as in mentally healthy, normal as in no abusive parents and a relatively safe environment. But I see your point, i'm just gonna go with: It's icky, if I ever go into politics it will not be in my policies list.

If someone wants to fuck their brother/sister I couldn't care less. Incest in reality is kind of gross, but I don't think it's worth making illegal. That being said, they shouldn't have any kids.

The small gene pool is not the issue with incest. It's the increase risk of acquiring deletions (also called gene deletion, deficiency, or deletion mutation).

What you just said it absolutly true. There is a greatly increased chance of mutation of the chromosomes when a child is conceived in a incestuous relationship. These can cause minor disabilities but also provoke madness, defienciencies in vitamines, calcium, and in worst cases still-born babies.

So I absolutly approve the point that, in our society as it is today, an incestuous relationship with intention of giving birth to a child is a very stupid thing, considering the risks for the childs life and the possible consequences for him if he survives. Not taking into account the genetic defiencies, the child would also be looked down upon by the rest of society, and thus would never evolve into a full fledged member of the human race, always being put on the side or rejected.

But, an incestuous couple could technically be viable if no child was conceived. And that none was adopted of course(lets not wander on the psychological trauma of having a sister and a brother as your adopted mom and dad).

BUT. And this is a tentative but, to take a glimpse of a possibility that would arise in the not so distant future.

Mentalities evolve, things change, taboos change, and pass by. In the victorian era, showing your ankles was considered lecherous and provocative. The chinese thought small feet were sexy and sign of healthiness.

Maybe in the future these couples will be accepted, with the regulations around them to protect their "potential" child. It's harsh to say that they should never have a child, but...that's the only solution I see apart from genetic manipulation and we know where that's going to go don't we?

This issue, like gay marriage and some others, is a floodgate scenario. If we ban this then we should ban that as well. Or if we allow this, then we should allow this. Eventually it will lead to either absolute freedom or absolute constraint on freedom of marriage, sex, and daily life. Someone else mentioned the age of consent in Spain is 13. If it is legalized, does this apply to an adult and a consenting child?