|
|
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
swoop42
Whatcha gonna do when he comes for you?
Joined: 02 Aug 2008 Location: The 18
|
Post subject: | |
|
If Emma Watson was my cousin I'd still be tempted.
LOL. _________________ He's mad. He's bad. He's MaynHARD! |
|
|
|
|
think positive
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005 Location: somewhere
|
Post subject: | |
|
swoop42 wrote: | If Emma Watson was my cousin I'd still be tempted.
LOL. |
But would she? _________________ You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
swoop42
Whatcha gonna do when he comes for you?
Joined: 02 Aug 2008 Location: The 18
|
Post subject: | |
|
think positive wrote: | swoop42 wrote: | If Emma Watson was my cousin I'd still be tempted.
LOL. |
But would she? |
I don't think she'd be tempted in any circumstance. _________________ He's mad. He's bad. He's MaynHARD! |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003 Location: Andromeda
|
Post subject: | |
|
think positive wrote: | David wrote: | I guess the defining nature of taboo is its essential irrationality (even though it might be something that could have a perfectly logical post-hoc justification). If incest laws had been formulated logically from scratch, I'm guessing they would only deal with consequences, deterrent and the like. As it is, we have a society-wide refusal to engage logically with the topic. |
See there's the the thing the logic.
Say we just say, hey go for broke, do what ever you want. But don't breed. What happens when the condom breaks? we end up with a society that looks like deliverance on steroids. To me it's about as healthy as your views on sex with animals. Or kids. A certain amount of social taboo is a good thing. It's like honesty and white lies. If we all told the whole truth all the time, no one would have any friends. Simplistic? Yep. Why not? It's real life. I'm sure there will be exceptions to the rule, but for the most part I think a certain amount of moral outrage is a good thing.
It has nothing to do with any religious beliefs, and social grooming. It's just common sense. |
I just think "moral outrage"—if that's even a useful thing at all—should be reserved for things that actually matter, like terrible acts of cruelty, injustice and callous disregard. I don't see the use in moral outrage when it comes to things that don't hurt anyone.
You know, I'm not saying that the incest taboo doesn't serve any useful purpose. Obviously breeding between siblings or other close relatives should be discouraged, and any sexual relationship within an existing family unit is probably a bad idea.
But that doesn't mean that adult relatives who have consensual sexual relationships should be punished by the law. I don't think that's right; particularly when it comes to siblings who haven't even grown up together. Governments shouldn't have any business legislating on such matters.
When it comes to marriage, I'd retain the prohibition on siblings marrying but allow exceptions where it could be established that the two people in question didn't grow up together. |
|
|
|
|
think positive
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005 Location: somewhere
|
Post subject: | |
|
I disagree
Any child they may have, accidental or otherwise, will live with a stigma or a secret, and maybe, birth defects
The other family members also live with the stigma. Mental anguish can be just as painful, sometimes more so, or suicide would not exist, than physical pain.
As for any sexual relationship is PROBABLY a bad idea! PROBABLY? If you make exceptions where do you stop, some *&%%^&(*^$ always wants to push for more.
I feel for this couples pain. The really wrong thing about it all, is that it has been made public knowledge. The ideal would be it is dealt with, with privacy, compassion, and probably some psychiatric assistance. Maybe after that they still choose to be together. That's when it's time to think about exceptions. Not just because. _________________ 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: | |
|
I completely agree on the damage that can be caused by stigma, but that to me suggests that we should be fighting against sexual stigma and associated shame. It can be done: see the thread about same-sex marriage as a case in point (there used to be plenty of stigma regarding same-sex relationships; now there is very little).
As for childbearing, obviously siblings and other close relatives in relationships should avoid breeding. But keep in mind that a) plenty of people enter sexual relationships without the intention of having children; and b) as much as doctors might discourage people with, say, HIV or haemophilia might be discouraged from procreating, there's no law against conceiving children with a high risk of disease or disability. That's because we don't live in a country in which eugenics is practised. Whether or not it should be is a different question. _________________ All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
think positive
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005 Location: somewhere
|
Post subject: | |
|
David wrote: | I completely agree on the damage that can be caused by stigma, but that to me suggests that we should be fighting against sexual stigma and associated shame. It can be done: see the thread about same-sex marriage as a case in point (there used to be plenty of stigma regarding same-sex relationships; now there is very little).
As for childbearing, obviously siblings and other close relatives in relationships should avoid breeding. But keep in mind that a) plenty of people enter sexual relationships without the intention of having children; and b) as much as doctors might discourage people with, say, HIV or haemophilia might be discouraged from procreating, there's no law against conceiving children with a high risk of disease or disability. That's because we don't live in a country in which eugenics is practised. Whether or not it should be is a different question. |
You know sex is really all about procreation. That's a scientific fact, that's what it's for. So no, I don't think it's a good idea to remove that stigma. (Have you seen deliverance?!!). Also, where does it end? I personally think it's a good thing there is a stigma attached to certain preferences, defects, what ever you want to call them. Beasiality is animal abuse, peadophlilier is child abuse, I see no grey area. That's my own personal truth, where my moral standing is, and the same goes for family. You just don't go there. _________________ You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You cannot download files in this forum
|
|