Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Connor27)
    Why do you think consenting adults having sex is inappropriate?
    I have to say, I share a similar view to Emily on this one. I can understand sex diagonally along the family line (ie uncles/aunts and nephews/nieces) but allowing parents and their children, and grandparents and their children to have sex just seems wrong in my opinion.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quamquam123)
    I have to say, I share a similar view to Emily on this one. I can understand sex diagonally along the family line (ie uncles/aunts and nephews/nieces) but allowing parents and their children, and grandparents and their children to have sex just seems wrong in my opinion.
    Again, it's the result of social conditioning: who are we to say what is and isn't acceptable, you would limit two people in love from having a relationship, that's a poor excuse and very disappointing from one of the few Labour MPs I actively like.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    Nay.

    This is ridiculous
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DanE1998)
    Nay.

    This is ridiculous
    I find it funny that all the people speaking out are members of the Labour Party, that supposedly progressive force of social justice that doesn't like the idea of two consenting adults in love having sex and thinks it should be illegal because they happen to be related.

    This just illustrates how illogical and hypocritical the left are.

    With the exception of DMcGovern, who's superior intellect has allowed him to get over the default knee jerk that the rest of you have defaulted to, bravo Des!
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Connor27)
    People said that about gay marriage; the preservation of individual liberty (especially social liberty) is more important than electability.

    Economic Liberty is where I can be pragmatic and say "well, this isn't gonna be popular," like the social security example I gave earlier in this thread.

    But if people are opposed to individual social liberty that is not breaching the NAP, and doesn't really affect them at all (they can still chose to have sex with whoever they want) then they are fascists.
    Tough one, this just had to be one the first bills I had to vote on/consider! I just got elected an MP ,
    I'll consult my party and then will make a call when this goes to the house!
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quamquam123)
    I have to say, I share a similar view to Emily on this one. I can understand sex diagonally along the family line (ie uncles/aunts and nephews/nieces) but allowing parents and their children, and grandparents and their children to have sex just seems wrong in my opinion.
    It's wrong to you because the culture in which you were raised doesn't welcome it, but if somebody who was raised in a very religious family said that they can understand homosexuality but it just seems wrong in their opinion, you'd label them a homophobe. Smh.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by frankielogue)
    Nay. We should not be supporting such immoral acts. Incest is not something you are born with.
    So what if you're not born with it. Wtf does two consenting adults being in a committed relationship have to do with you for you to say you disagree? Why do they need the permission of you or anyone else?
    Offline

    20
    Actually, I believe that if we're moving to a situation where all that happens between people above the age of consent is legal, incest should likewise be legal. For one thing, the idea of it being abusive isn't necessarily wrong - it only appears to be because much of what happens that is abusive is between parents and young children.

    While I don't know that I can (personally) accept extremes like sleeping with one's parents as being the right thing to do, I also don't think it's my place to tell them they can't. Having (drunkenly, in boredom, late one night) read up on much of this legislation, I've come to learn that not only is direct sexual activity illegal between relatives, but even allowing each other to watch oneself masturbate or engage in other sexual activities is actually legally (as well as socially) defined as incestuous.

    I would comment that our law is founded (ideally, at least) on respectability and respectfulness, and, while I personally wouldn't sleep with a close relative, I don't believe it's my place to tell anyone else who they can and can't sleep with, provided it's done in safety.

    And as regards religious law: as a man of faith myself, I try to hold a clear definition of right and wrong, stemming from what I hold to be acts of love for my fellows, and hatred toward them. Those moral laws are mine to keep, and the only ones I believe should be enforced are the obvious ones - don't kill, don't rape, don't beat people up or steal from them, blah. As a man of faith, I believe incest is not right. But just as a person, I acknowedge that incest (assuming it's concensual) is a victimless crime, and therefore one which needn't be legally defined as a crime at all. if people who do it are guilty, on some fundamental (or spiritual) level, of a crime/sin, that's for them to reckon with on their own. Not for me to tell them they should feel bad.



    (Original post by RayApparently)
    Tell me, what is the current punishment for committing incest?
    Being a registered sex offender. Can't remember if there's a prison term or fine too.


    (Original post by Connor27)
    I support this;

    I personally think that it's a degenerate act and don't condone it at all (it's distgusting in fact), but two consenting adults having sex shoudn't be illegal, that's draconian.
    Exactly.


    (Original post by Obiejess)
    Nay. Absolute nay. Symptomatic of mental health issues, not something to be accepted socially.

    Also a family member will always be in a 'position of trust' so this brings up ethical issues.
    Anyone you trust is in a position of trust, by definition, but if I (by mutual consent) slept with, say, my sister - how is that any more abusive of that trust than if I slept with a friend?


    (Original post by cherryred90s)
    I support this but only if the age is brought up to 18. If I'm not mistaken, its illegal for a 16yr old to be sexually active with someone 18 and above.
    I also don't believe that they should be allowed to procreate but I'm not sure how that could be implemented without breaching human rights
    It is not. You're confusing consent and majority.


    (Original post by Gladstone1885)
    Yes, I would support some kind of constraints on reproductive freedom to prevent serious disabilities. There are enough kids in this world without parents who ought to be adopted, we don't need to go around popping out more ****ed up ones

    May sound like eugenics, but honestly I don't care. There's no reason we as a human race should continue to tolerate the production of disabled people when it's not necessary


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    How do you define serious?

    Incest doesn't actually, for the most part, produce disabled children, unless it has been going on for many generations. If you look at recent cases of incest-produced babies, I believe you'd be very challenged to find any with debilitating congenital disorders of any nature.


    (Original post by jape)
    Extraordinary degeneracy.

    That said... I don't have a philosophically sound reason not to support this. But still. Ew.
    Says it all. A lot of the law is still there mostly because ew.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Aph)
    Mothers and grandparents are in a position of trust so no, not really.
    I recall some stats that say as much as a third of people loose their virginity to their siblings or have some form is sexual contact with them before 18 and this is often forced by the older children so I'm not a fan of this idea either because of the message it might send.

    Cousins I have no issue with and the same with aunts if it isn't a position of trust relationships.
    Father leave when you were young, or do you have some other reason to exclude them from the position of trust column?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by cherryred90s)
    So what if you're not born with it. Wtf does two consenting adults being in a committed relationship have to do with you for you to say you disagree? Why do they need the permission of you or anyone else?
    Take a ****ing genetics lesson and you'll see why at the core, that doesn't cover affinity relations though.

    As for people saying "€aunt uncle niece nephew cousin are fine" they are the extreme of association with an increased risk of congenital heart disease. The full list (of main relations) is parents, grandparents, children, grandchildren, siblings, half siblings, aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews, cousins, great aunts, great uncles, great nieces, great nephews, double first cousins, quadruple second cousins, great grand parents and great grand children.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Online

    15
    ReputationRep:
    According to Wikipedia, 'Consensual incest between adults is legal in the Netherlands. Parents and children, grandparents and grandchildren, and brothers and sisters are not anymore forbidden to marry in the Netherlands, although a dispensation may be granted if the partners are adopted siblings.'

    Given that these are the first people who legalised same-sex marriage, I suppose legalising incest and incestuous marriage is what's next on the liberal agenda, right PetrosAC? Soon, you lot are going to be calling those opposed to incest incestophobes or some other bs term like that, and these 'incestophobes' are shunned by the liberal elite, just as those who are called 'homophobes' are.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Take a ****ing genetics lesson and you'll see why at the core, that doesn't cover affinity relations though.

    As for people saying "€aunt uncle niece nephew cousin are fine" they are the extreme of association with an increased risk of congenital heart disease. The full list (of main relations) is parents, grandparents, children, grandchildren, siblings, half siblings, aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews, cousins, great aunts, great uncles, great nieces, great nephews, double first cousins, quadruple second cousins, great grand parents and great grand children.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    What are you on about?
    It was a very simple question I asked. what does their private affairs have to do with you?
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by cherryred90s)
    What are you on about?
    It was a very simple question I asked. what does their private affairs have to do with you?
    Because we all end up having to pick up the tab for their retarded babies?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Online

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Miscegenation is disgusting and immoral! Can we ban it now? Will all those who are against this bill agree with me that we should ban miscegenation and buggery?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    lol, I really don't know. Haven't read the whole thread, but I'm inclined to say aye.

    Also... does anyone else get the impression that BH has a hot sister?
    Online

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Because we all end up having to pick up the tab for their retarded babies?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    So would you be fine with homosexual incest given that they can't produce babies?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    The whole thing is disgusting but surely at least for someone 16 to 18, a parent, uncle, aunt, older sibling etc would be abusing a position of trust/power. Sounds abusive to me. 16/17 year olds are above age of consent, but are not consenting adults. Like how it is illegal for a teacher to have a sexual relationship with a 16/17 year old student at their school.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Father leave when you were young, or do you have some other reason to exclude them from the position of trust column?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Implicit and like uncle I couldn't be bothered.
    Online

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Take a ****ing genetics lesson and you'll see why at the core, that doesn't cover affinity relations though.

    As for people saying "€aunt uncle niece nephew cousin are fine" they are the extreme of association with an increased risk of congenital heart disease. The full list (of main relations) is parents, grandparents, children, grandchildren, siblings, half siblings, aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews, cousins, great aunts, great uncles, great nieces, great nephews, double first cousins, quadruple second cousins, great grand parents and great grand children.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I plan on submitting a bill to prohibit those who those with genetic disorders from reproducing and foetuses with genetic orders from being born. Given that you are against this because of babies born with problems, I hope you will agree to support my bill that would prevent babies from being born with genetic problems.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Unown Uzer)
    I plan on submitting a bill to prohibit those who those with genetic disorders from reproducing and foetuses with genetic orders from being born. Given that you are against this because of babies born with problems, I hope you will agree to support my bill that would prevent babies from being born with genetic problems.
    Perhaps legalise genetic engineering ?
 
 
 
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: January 16, 2017
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.