| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Were Julie and Mark wrong to have sex? |
| No |
|
40% |
[ 6 ] |
| Yes, but it shouldn't be against the law. |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
| Yes, and it should be against the law. |
|
60% |
[ 9 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 15 |
|
| Author |
Message |
David 
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: Should incest be unlawful? |  |
|
There's some controversy in Germany (where else?) at the moment over whether consensual incest between adult siblings should be legalised. I found this article on the topic really interesting, particularly this hypothetical posed at the beginning:
http://www.theguardian.com/law/2012/apr/16/incest-legality-ethics
| Quote: | Professor Jonathan Haidt, a well-known social psychologist, presented this scenario as part of a study:
Julie and Mark, who are brother and sister, are traveling together in France. They are both on summer vacation from college. One night they are staying alone in a cabin near the beach. They decide that it would be interesting and fun if they tried making love. At very least it would be a new experience for each of them. Julie was already taking birth control pills, but Mark uses a condom too, just to be safe. They both enjoy it, but they decide not to do it again. They keep that night as a special secret between them, which makes them feel even closer to each other. So what do you think about this? Was it wrong for them to have sex? |
What do you think? Vote in the poll, and explain your reasoning below.
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
 |
HAL
Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.
Joined: 17 Mar 2003
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| What is wrong with your old experience for each of them? |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie 
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto
|
| Post subject: | |
|
God you're crap at doing polls.
I vote "No, but it should be illegal."
This is a seemingly rare situation of two people close in age and equal in power who were "liberated" enough to come to a mutual decision to experiment and mature enough to decide not to do it again.
IMHO that would be by far the exception to the normal situation so while it should stay illegal (and no one would have known if they had of shut up) I'm quite comfortable that they not get punished.
_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
watt price tully 
Joined: 15 May 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Only amongst Burka clad Muslims 
_________________
“I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman |
|
|
|
|
HAL
Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.
Joined: 17 Mar 2003
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| What about the other ones? |
|
|
|
|
think positive
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| HAL wrote: | | What is wrong with your old experience for each of them? |
mate, im wondering the same thing!! scary, whats his sisters or brothers  look like!
_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| stui magpie wrote: | God you're crap at doing polls.
I vote "No, but it should be illegal."
This is a seemingly rare situation of two people close in age and equal in power who were "liberated" enough to come to a mutual decision to experiment and mature enough to decide not to do it again.
IMHO that would be by far the exception to the normal situation so while it should stay illegal (and no one would have known if they had of shut up) I'm quite comfortable that they not get punished. |
I see your point, but I don't know why you see the law as such a blunt instrument. If there are possible exceptions, why not code that into law?
Say, "it is a valid defence against prosecution to claim that there was no exploitation or imbalance of power between the parties."
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto
|
| Post subject: | |
|
I'll pay that wording, not bad.
That would normally be in the regulations to the act, not the act itself or, you'd make that statement in the law and then define it in the regs.
There are also the other principles involved of inbreeding causing birth defects, but there's an argument that people currently breed while they have genetic predispositions to all sorts of stuff so if people are aware of the consequences then let it alone.
_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: | |
|
^ yeah, that's my thought too. Same with older couples, etc.
Three people have voted that it's wrong and that it should be illegal. What made you choose that option?
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
mandy 
Joined: 03 Jun 2001
Location: Glen Iris
|
| Post subject: | |
|
I don't have an issue with anything consenting adults choose to do that doesn't hurt anyone else. Why would people even care?
_________________
#TEAMBUCKS
#TEAMEDDIE
#TEAMCOLLINGWOOD
#SIDEBYSIDE |
|
|
|
|
HAL
Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.
Joined: 17 Mar 2003
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| It is my fundamental purpose. |
|
|
|
|
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Yes it definitely should be unlawful.
One of the functions of law is to encode standards and set minimum expectations within society. If you legalise it, it will grow and become implicitly acceptable, then open to all kinds of abuse and exploitation in all kinds of dysfunctional and barely-functional settings. It's a non-problem today that will become a problem if we decriminalise it.
_________________
Two more flags before I die! |
|
|
|
|
think positive
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Can't believe it needs a law. Just like the sex with animals thread you once started. It's just wrong. Doesn't need a reason, it's just wrong. Gees I'm pretty liberal thinking, but seriously why is it even a question?
Wether you believe in Gods hand or science, fact is it causes birth defects. Does that not tell you it's a bad idea? To simplistic? Don't really care,
So I guess you can guess my vote.
_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: | |
|
But what if birth control is used, Jo? Would it still be "just wrong"? And who decides these things?
Lest we forget, until relatively recently, many people said exactly the same thing about homosexual relationships. "It's just wrong."
| Mugwump wrote: | Yes it definitely should be unlawful.
One of the functions of law is to encode standards and set minimum expectations within society. If you legalise it, it will grow and become implicitly acceptable, then open to all kinds of abuse and exploitation in all kinds of dysfunctional and barely-functional settings. It's a non-problem today that will become a problem if we decriminalise it. |
Doesn't the rarity of its current occurrence (at least, that we know of) suggest that this is unlikely to ever be the case? That is, would you really be substantially more likely to sleep with your siblings if you knew it wasn't unlawful? I can state with a fair degree of conviction that the law isn't the only thing preventing me from proposing to my sister!
My suspicion is that this is one law (like old-fashioned sodomy and adultery laws) where legal deterrent plays a pretty minor role. Either you and your sibling want to have sex or you don't, and it seems fairly evident to me that the majority of us already fall into the latter category. For the very few who do, I doubt the law holds them back. The only real question for me is whether they should be punished for it, and to me it seems pretty clear they shouldn't be.
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace
Last edited by David on Wed Oct 08, 2014 9:36 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
|
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| David wrote: | But what if birth control is used, Jo? Would it still be "just wrong"? And who decides these things?
Lest we forget, until relatively recently, many people said exactly the same thing about homosexual relationships. "It's just wrong."
| Mugwump wrote: | Yes it definitely should be unlawful.
One of the functions of law is to encode standards and set minimum expectations within society. If you legalise it, it will grow and become implicitly acceptable, then open to all kinds of abuse and exploitation in all kinds of dysfunctional and barely-functional settings. It's a non-problem today that will become a problem if we decriminalise it. |
Doesn't the rarity of its current occurrence (at least, that we know of) suggest that this is unlikely to ever be the case? That is, would you really be substantially more likely to sleep with your siblings if you knew it was unlawful? I can state with a fair degree of conviction that the law isn't the only thing preventing me from proposing to my sister!
My suspicion is that this is one law (like old-fashioned sodomy and adultery laws) where legal deterrent plays a pretty minor role. Either you and your sibling want to have sex or you don't, and it seems fairly evident to me that the majority of us already fall into the latter category. For the very few who do, I doubt the law holds them back. The only real question for me is whether they should be punished for it, and to me it seems pretty clear they shouldn't be. |
Human beings are social apes and apt to follow the authority of the tribe. We express this authority particularly in law. If the law says it's ok, a lot of people will come to consider it ok. You can imagine the 14 year olds in the playground saying "well, it's not illegal, so the adults say you can".
The problem may or may not be a moral one (though i think it is) but it is certainly a social/moral one. Brothers and sisters in families are placed together in households in conditions which provide boundless opportunities for sexual exploitation and misadventure at a very vulnerable, confused and injudicious time of life. The damage legalisation would do far outweighs the "problem" presented by prohibition.
Yes, I would prosecute the couple in your example. Not with pleasure, but pour decourager les autres, and for a greater good.
_________________
Two more flags before I die! |
|
|
|
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
