Incest ^o^

[Rogue planet]

As long as they don't reproduce, there's no reason not to.

This.
If both people consent to it, then they can do what they want. I don't care.

 

[magikarptrainer]

Also, consent can be compromised with incest.

I'm sure it happens often when they both consent, but the younger one was probably groomed/conditioned for that. So consent is a very gray area.

 

[Jolene]

I don't see why people would even want to have an incest with each other. I have a big brother and I know him too well to be in love with him.

 

[.Gamer]

By incest, don't you mean, wincest?

Lets be real here.

 

[Neko]

Um, hello? Is everyone here forgetting that most famous authors/artists out there have had at least ONE relationship that could be considered incest? xD Poe! Wells! Even Darwin!

Back on topic, I see no reason to care about what other relationships people would want to have. It's kind of like gay/lesbian marriage; you want to marry a chick? So what. Go right ahead; no skin off my back. Though as stated before, as long as it's MUTUAL consent, then it's all good and I don't see why not? Not me; not my problem. As long as they don't go spewing out three eyed little monsters, I have no worries. xD As for me personally though, I would never do it. To me it just seems like a creepy subject to even think about, let alone consider or even to go through with it. o__O;

 

[Luck]

I don't think I have the right to judge other people as long as they actually love each other and are of age. At least with incest you don't get a mother-in-law :D

Oh, and I think I remember hearing somewhere that people back then marrying close relatives for financial gain.

 

[Spearow]

Who knew that PC was such a hub for casual eugenists? :o

I kind of really wish this thread was in Other Chat so we could have a for real debate, but whatever.

 

[donavannj]

Laws against this exist primarily to protect children... at least, that's the way I see it. Though laws should be modified to be similar to statutory rape laws, since incest wasn't considered to include first- and second- cousins until the last 100 years.

 

[♣Gawain♣]

It's not good. Especially the chances of having a genetic disease, dominant or recessive, will rise.

 

[Butterfly Tears]

You know, just a thought. But don't we all technically come from extremely limited gene pools?

Say you're religious, and you believe that Adam and Eve were the first two humans. We then all descended from them, so early on there had to have been some sort of incestuous breeding going on. Same thing if you subscribe to evolution. Early on there would have to have been a lot of inbreeding. I could be completely wrong though... So do correct me if that's the case.

As for me... It's not something I'm into. But I'm not going to judge others for what they want to do. I'm bisexual myself, so I understand what it's like to be a minority and have laws made to prohibit who you are... Now, it's one thing if anything is done without permission, but consenting adults... come on now.

I do, however, think there should be some sort of law regarding conception. I'm not quite sure how that would work, but it would be best to try and prevent children from that sort of relationship because of the potential mutations.

 

[True Reign]

Let's all be honest - 150 years ago, you wouldn't care if your best friend started _____ his sister.

It's not good. Especially the chances of having a genetic disease, dominant or recessive, will rise.

I think someone just learned what dominant and recessive genes were.

 

[Spearow]

Same thing if you subscribe to evolution. Early on there would have to have been a lot of inbreeding. I could be completely wrong though... So do correct me if that's the case ^^'

There are multiple ways for new species to arise, the most common of which (I believe) is something along the lines of a group/colony migrating to a new environment, and then eventually producing surviving children that are so radically different from their predecessors that they are unable to reproduce with them, thereby constituting a new species. So it's not like all "new" animals descend from the same ancestral couple - evolution is probably a good deal more gradual and subtle than that. I could be giving you the wrong picture here, but think of the new gene pool being formed from the trickling runoff of the old pool, not just a single drop.

Haven't read the Old Testament so I can't provide the fundamentalist view, but I think most believers just hold that God actually created more people after Adam and Eve in order to populate the world. It's all very vague and open to interpretation anyway.

 

[True Reign]

There are multiple ways for new species to arise, the most common of which (I believe) is something along the lines of a group/colony migrating to a new environment, and then eventually producing surviving children that are so radically different from their predecessors that they are unable to reproduce with them, thereby constituting a new species. But it's not like a new animal pops out one day and has to make babies with its children to propagate its race. o_O

Haven't read the Old Testament so I can't provide the fundamentalist Christian view, but I think most believers just hold that God actually created more people after Adam and Eve in order to populate the world. It's all very vague and open to interpretation anyway.

**** sapiens survived European winter because of game. When we first got to Europe, I would imagine we could probably only get lucky in getting the food we needed. Eventually, over thousands of years, every generation would be slightly thinner, with more movement for the legs. This helped in running a lot. This evolutionized human branched off from our brothers and created the humans you know today.

If you didn't understand that;
Our brothers, the Neanderthals, were very accustomed to Europe. They were very strong, and they had a larger ribcage (along with small pelvic bone). This larger ribcage helped them breath during the winter and helped preserve heat. Humans on the other hand were considerably weaker and had smaller ribcages, but we had a larger pelvic bone which enabled us to run. Our running is what branced us off from the other Homos, our brothers, and helped our species survive.

 

[mr. ck]

But isn't like incesisn totally against the idea of evolution... That is a reason enough imo, coupled with genetic diseases, I see no point.

Even the idea of a relationship b/w cousins is sick, but then its still better than brother and sister.

But then again, there is a high possibility that the one you are marrying is your cousin anyway, especially if your parents (there are countries where orthodox beliefs still exist) want to get you married in the same race (and same caste as in india)
And nowadays since there isn't really anyone from a pure race or caste, it is likely you might be marrying your cousin anyway :P

And if you have studied high school biology, we all do have a common ancestor, and so do monkeys... So we all are in fact cousins O.o

 

[Façade1]

Laws against this exist primarily to protect children... at least, that's the way I see it.

You could even extend this reasoning beyond the typical child molestation case to actually protecting an un-born child from a potential birth defect.

If they signed an agreement to commit to not having children then as long as the two were also consenting then I'd be fine with it.
However you couldn't truly enforce a no-conception policy without requiring the partners to have a vasectomy/tubal ligation, and forcing them to do this would be highly questionable.

 

[ShinjisLover]

If wanting to sleep with your best friend's (whom you consider a sister) brother is incest, then I think it's wonderful. =3


I not, ewww! >< Seriously, WTF? =/ I can't believe anyone could find any of their relatives sexually attractive. X.x Thinking they're handsome/pretty is one thing, but being aroused by them is another.​

 

[Bianca Paragon]

Incest? Moar liek Wincest amirite? If its like..cute...twin girls of legal consensual age? I'm okay with this ;D

 

[¡No Hablo Inglés!]

1) Human beings should be allowed to do whatever they want.
2) Point 1) is void if violating the rights of another human being(ie. both must be consenting).
3) I don't want any part in it personally.

So basically, to echo what others have already said, it should be allowed assuming both parties consent. Though that said, I'd hope they'd realize not to bring another life into the world as a result, knowing what effects that could have on the child biologically.

This.

Seriously couldn't have put it better myself, 'Zam. xD

Yeah, I think everyone's entitled to their own views and choices in life as long as they're not violating basic human rights. I, personally, would never want to be involved in any kind of incest, but with that said, a topic like this is extremely subjective and controversial; everyone you ask will probably give a different opinion on it.

 

[Idiot!]

You don't need to be the product of incest to get four toes, six fingers and half an eye. If people wanted their offsprings to have shallower gene pools, I can't do anything about that anyway, so why bother?

 

[s0nido]

I think it's wrong for several reasons, many of which are obvious. >< Any relationship closer than first cousins is just plain wrong.