The Student Room Group

If you're for gay rights surely you should be for incest?

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Sid99
Of course I am bb you're so loveable

No I am not


"Yes I am, no I'm not" he says. Classic.

So which is it? You are or you aren't obsessed with me? You have a very volatile temperament when it comes to the guys you love.

Do you want me to cut the cord, babes? For both our sakes? I can put you ignore if you can't bring yourself to do it
Reply 181
Avatar for Sid99
Sid99
OP
5
Original post by young_guns
"Yes I am, no I'm not" he says. Classic.

So which is it? You are or you aren't obsessed with me? You have a very volatile temperament when it comes to the guys you love.

Do you want me to cut the cord, babes? For both our sakes? I can put you ignore if you can't bring yourself to do it


Put me in your ignore list bb, I think we need some time apart (possibly forever)
Original post by tazarooni89
Consider what might happen for example, if a homosexual relationship or marriage took place between members of two highly religious and conservative households. Family ties can, and often are damaged.


But that's not inherent to homosexuality, the same thing could happen with two people of different races, or with an unapproved marriage, etc. So that is not an argument against homosexuality.

On the other hand, it is inherent in parent-child incest that it transforms and destroys that relationship insofar as it existed as the relationship of a guardian over their charge. I would submit it is against the interests of the family, and of society, to allow parents to abdicate their responsibility for their children in that way

Perhaps they have eyes for each other only


Many people think that in the grips of love, but they would get over it because incest is not a sexual orientation.
Hell why not be in for bestiallity and paedophilia by your logic.
Reply 184
Avatar for Sid99
Sid99
OP
5
Original post by Guy Secretan
Hell why not be in for bestiallity and paedophilia by your logic.


Because animals can't exactly consent to sex can they? And paedophilia is to do with minors which is something we're not even discussing.
True but incest is frowned upon partly because it causes genetic deformity if they were to possibly have children. Also even if it was tolerated amongst mainstream society it would be nowhere near as prevalent as homosexuality,
Reply 186
Avatar for Sid99
Sid99
OP
5
Original post by Guy Secretan
True but incest is frowned upon partly because it causes genetic deformity if they were to possibly have children. Also even if it was tolerated amongst mainstream society it would be nowhere near as prevalent as homosexuality,


But the children point wouldn't stand between gay incest? Also for example if it was between brother and sister then surely you could hold them to some sort of agreement to only partake in safe sex and if that fails then take the necessary precautions against having the baby?

I mean if you can make something illegal then I'm sure you can put some boundaries in place for them to only be allowed to adopt etc

And if it is to do with genetic defects etc Why do we allow people with disabilities etc to have children?
Original post by young_guns
But that's not inherent to homosexuality, the same thing could happen with two people of different races, or with an unapproved marriage, etc. So that is not an argument against homosexuality.

On the other hand, it is inherent in parent-child incest that it transforms and destroys that relationship insofar as it existed as the relationship of a guardian over their charge. I would submit it is against the interests of the family, and of society, to allow parents to abdicate their responsibility for their children in that way


You could say that it is not inherent in incest either. it need not "transform and destroy" a relationship, but may just add an extra dimension to it - especially in instances of incest that are not parent-child.

Lots of people have pre-existing relationships before beginning a sexual one e.g. friends, colleagues etc. without destroying what they had to begin with. And if the sexual relationship ends, they just go back to being how they were before. There's no reason why the same would be implausible with a family relationship.

Many people think that in the grips of love, but they would get over it because incest is not a sexual orientation.


But just as homosexuals can only be attracted to members of the same sex, it is also possible for an individual to only be attracted to another particular individual, especially if they've already had a long term relationship. Try telling any married couple for example, "You have to get a divorce, but this isn't oppressive because you'll eventually get over it and find someone else". They don't want anyone else.
Original post by tazarooni89
And if the sexual relationship ends, they just go back to being how they were before. There's no reason why the same would be implausible with a family relationship


I've seen no evidence to suggest that's possible, and plenty of anecdote to suggest the opposite. I also think that it is inconsistent for a guardian to have sex with their charge, the same as it is for teachers, for doctors, and so on. My view is that a parent's moral guardianship for their child goes on past the attainment of adulthood.

I make no apologies for erring toward caution in protecting children and the family unit from this. However, if you'd like to show me some evidence that parent-child incest is harmless and has no negative affect on the family unit and on the child, I would be willing to look?

But just as homosexuals can only be attracted to members of the same sex, it is also possible for an individual to only be attracted to another particular individual


No, it isn't. There is no such thing as a sexual orientation comprised of attraction to one person.
Original post by Sid99
But the children point wouldn't stand between gay incest? Also for example if it was between brother and sister then surely you could hold them to some sort of agreement to only partake in safe sex and if that fails then take the necessary precautions against having the baby?

I mean if you can make something illegal then I'm sure you can put some boundaries in place for them to only be allowed to adopt etc

And if it is to do with genetic defects etc Why do we allow people with disabilities etc to have children?


People with disabilities aren't as likely to have children with disabilities I don't think. Also remember homosexuality used to be illegal and still is in many countries. A lot of countries incest would be more preferable than homosexuality.
Original post by Guy Secretan
True but incest is frowned upon partly because it causes genetic deformity if they were to possibly have children. Also even if it was tolerated amongst mainstream society it would be nowhere near as prevalent as homosexuality,


I find it difficult to impose on people based on the mere possibility of having a child. Arguably we don't have any obligation to that which is not existent yet (particularly because there is no guarantee that what we fear will come to exist). That being said, another issue is that we already allow others who have a predisposition towards having children with 'genetic deformity' to reproduce...so why should incest be a special case?
Original post by Doctor_Einstein
So I take it that you think anyone with an inheritable genetic defect should not be able to have sex?


I simply stated that incestuous sex increases the risk of damage to children, which is a fact. I didn't make any kind of moral judgement as to whether that's right or wrong.
Original post by young_guns
I've seen no evidence to suggest that's possible, and plenty of anecdote to suggest the opposite. I also think that it is inconsistent for a guardian to have sex with their charge, the same as it is for teachers, for doctors, and so on. My view is that a parent's moral guardianship for their child goes on past the attainment of adulthood.

I make no apologies for erring toward caution in protecting children and the family unit from this. However, if you'd like to show me some evidence that parent-child incest is harmless and has no negative affect on the family unit and on the child, I would be willing to look?


Firstly, can I ask; you keep talking about parent-child incest specifically. Why are you narrowing the discussion down to just that one type of incest? There are several other types as well.

Secondly; I'm sure incest often is harmful to family units. The key issue here is whether it is necessarily harmful. I don't see any evidence for that.

No, it isn't. There is no such thing as a sexual orientation comprised of attraction to one person.


You might not call it a "sexual orientation"; but there is such a thing as only wanting to have a relationship with one person.
Well providing it is consented I got nothing against people doing incest. :dontknow:
Original post by tazarooni89

You might not call it a "sexual orientation"; but there is such a thing as only wanting to have a relationship with one person.


That's monogamy, a form of relationship, which is not related to sexual orientation whatsoever.
Original post by Ruthless Dutchman
That's monogamy, a form of relationship, which is not related to sexual orientation whatsoever.


I'm not calling it a "sexual orientation". I don't care what it's called; I'm making the point that such a thing exists.
Original post by Ruthless Dutchman
That's monogamy, a form of relationship, which is not related to sexual orientation whatsoever.



Original post by tazarooni89
I'm not calling it a "sexual orientation". I don't care what it's called; I'm making the point that such a thing exists.


It could be demisexuality (a form of asexuality). http://www.asexuality.org/wiki/index.php?title=Demisexual
Original post by RandZul'Zorander
It could be demisexuality (a form of asexuality). http://www.asexuality.org/wiki/index.php?title=Demisexual


Interesting, I hadn't heard this terminology before...
Original post by tazarooni89
Interesting, I hadn't heard this terminology before...


Its a growing field. I highly recommend AVEN as a source of information on it. http://www.asexuality.org/home/overview.html
Original post by young_guns
No, it isn't. There is no such thing as a sexual orientation comprised of attraction to one person.


What about demisexuals?

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you