look, I cba to keep going back and forth with you any more so I'll say this: if you're saying that incest couples should have no legal freedom of association purely based on the possibility that they might reproduce, then you are unnecessarily reducing their individual rights. you can (if you so desire) advance an argument to prohibit their reproduction with each other, but their mere association shouldn't be blocked simply because people fear them reproducing. because, again, if dwarfs and people with downs syndrome reproruce, they also will make "defective kids". yet nobody even mentions this regarding incestuous reproduction and the obvious similarities . and a "potentially traumatising" medical procedure? well, I'm not the person saying that they should even be made to not reproduce in the first place. it would be more traumatising to be prevented from being with the person they love anyway.(Original post by JordanL_)
No, it's not. It's entirely different. One is preventing people from ever having their own kids. The other is preventing people from having kids with a tiny subset of the population.
This just isn't true. The risk really is significant, even in a single generation. It costs a hell of a lot of money to offer genetic screening, it isn't even given to everyone with genetic disorders, so it couldn't be extended to even more people.
yes you can.
not really - it's the principle of coercion either way. the difference is merely subjective.
I don't understand how you can't see the difference between imprisoning someone and forcing them to undergo a potentially traumatising medical procedure.
Here's a question I'd be intrigued to see opinions on Watch
- 23-04-2016 00:53
- 12-05-2016 21:42
Well I'm pretty sure incest isn't illegal in UK anyway your just not allowed to have children if your 1st cousins or closer I think because they'd be much much more likely to have problems with their health. I guess I don't think its wrong if its consensual however genetically we're predisposed to be less attracted to close relations as its not beneficial in terms of natural selection. I think people should be free to love whoever they want and I don't see why anyone but them gets a say in that as long as they're not harming anyway else by doing so. As for you finding it hypocritical; honestly we're all hypocrits about something whatever that may be
- 12-05-2016 21:44
Also whether you believe in the bible or evolution for you to be here at some point incest will have very likely occurred to get you here so...
Not saying its right but just thought Id point it out
- 12-05-2016 21:55
There are real genetic consequences to incest but if a condom is used... now you have an interesting question. Let the battle commence!
- 13-05-2016 10:21
genetically we're predisposed to be less attracted to close relations as its not beneficial in terms of natural selection.