[quote]
New South Wales state Attorney-General Brad Hazzard said he was "extremely concerned" about District Court judge Garry Neilson's alleged comments in a case where a man was accused of repeatedly raping his younger sister, which were reported in the Sydney Morning Herald. Neilson was quoted as saying communities might no longer see sex between siblings as "unnatural" or "taboo", likening a change in mindsets to how homosexuality was now socially accepted despite being criminalised in the past.
"A jury might find nothing untoward in the advance of a brother towards his sister once she had sexually matured, had sexual relationships with other men and was now 'available', not having (a) sexual partner," Neilson reportedly said.
Hazzard said he had referred Neilson to the Judicial Commission of New South Wales, which investigates complaints. He also requested the District Court suspend the judge from criminal trials until the probe was completed.
In his case comments, Neilson reportedly added that the "only reason" incest remained a crime was due to the risk of genetic abnormalities in children born through such a relationship.[/quote]
[url]http://news.msn.com/world/australia-judge-probed-for-saying-incest-may-be-accepted[/url]
I don't really see the problem with this.
It's not like he advocated people raping their siblings, he just said that it might happen that two siblings having a sexual relationship will be accepted.
[QUOTE=FalconKrunch;45361337]I don't really see the problem with this.
It's not like he advocated people raping their siblings, he just said that it might happen that two siblings having a sexual relationship will be accepted.[/QUOTE]
It won't. In general, animals and thus also humans instinctively avoid it. Of course, humans can find a lot of things sexually desirable that they by no means should, but that still doesn't mean any of those things will become widespread.
i think the biggest problem here is he starts talking about how incest might not be taboo in a case about someone being accused of RAPING their little sister
[QUOTE=Lachz0r;45362842]i think the biggest problem here is he starts talking about how incest might not be taboo in a case about someone being accused of RAPING their little sister[/QUOTE]
He's saying:
[quote]
"only reason" incest remained a crime was due to the risk of genetic abnormalities in children born through such a relationship
Communities might no longer see sex between siblings as "unnatural" or "taboo", likening a change in mindsets to how homosexuality was now socially accepted despite being criminalised in the past.
"A jury might find nothing untoward in the advance of a brother towards his sister once she had sexually matured, had sexual relationships with other men and was now 'available', not having (a) sexual partner," Neilson reportedly said.
"But even that falls away to an extent (because) there is such ease of contraception and ready access to abortion,"
[/quote]
Which I assume he was just referring to the fact of incest being part of the charges? Considering these lines comes up
[quote]"In my view the community would be rightly appalled at his reported comments," Hazzard said in a statement. "Incest is completely reprehensible, unacceptable, disgusting and criminal."[/quote]
It sounds like he's trying to explain how incest is only a problem when it comes to genetic abnormalities, and that it could eventually be considered socially acceptable. I personally see no problem with it really. You want to have sex with your brother/sister? Go ahead, just don't risk having kids that could have abnormalities so use birth control or condoms. Obviously this doesn't apply to cases of rape, where no matter who the victim is, it's still rape.
At the same time, he kind of sounds like a scumbag when you later read:
[quote]In a separate case reported in Sydney's Daily Telegraph, Neilson was said to have given an incestuous rapist a lighter sentence in 2011 because he did not ejaculate inside his teenage niece.[/quote]
So it's like one of those cases of "Even a broken clock is right twice a day".
[QUOTE=LittleDogX;45362935]He's saying:
It sounds like he's trying to explain how incest is only a problem when it comes to genetic abnormalities, and that it could eventually be considered socially acceptable. I personally see no problem with it really. You want to have sex with your brother/sister? Go ahead, just don't risk having kids that could have abnormalities so use birth control or condoms. Obviously this doesn't apply to cases of rape, where no matter who the victim is, it's still rape.
At the same time, he kind of sounds like a scumbag when you later read:
So it's like one of those cases of "Even a broken clock is right twice a day".[/QUOTE]
why is he bringing up that incest might not be taboo in regards to a incestuous rape case? the taboo of incest is irrelevant to a rape case from the sounds of it he's just a weirdo who likes incest and that thing about giving a rapist a lighter sentence for not ejaculating in his niece is just fucked up
[QUOTE=Lachz0r;45362957]why is he bringing up that incest might not be taboo in regards to a incestuous rape case? the taboo of incest is irrelevant to a rape case from the sounds of it he's just a weirdo who likes incest and that thing about giving a rapist a lighter sentence for not ejaculating in his niece is just fucked up[/QUOTE]
I edited my post because I forgot to add it, but I assumed he made comments about it due to the idea of it being against the law/taboo
[quote]"In my view the community would be rightly appalled at his reported comments," Hazzard said in a statement.
"Incest is completely reprehensible, unacceptable, disgusting and criminal."[/quote]
Again, I think the guy is a scumbag, based on the other rulings reported, and him bringing it up like it's a key point in this case. I think his stance on incest eventually not being taboo is correct (despite it's relevance to the case when the main crime is raping his 11 year old niece), assuming they take preventative measures to avoid having children.
We allow people with genetic disorders to have children freely, so I don't think that's a great argument against incest.
But incest is typically the result of rape, manipulation, or a generally fuck-up upbringing. In a situation where incest is genuinely consensual, it's fine by me---but that's incredibly rare. Life isn't like all those weird hentais.
[QUOTE=BlueChihuahua;45363198] stuff.[/QUOTE]
and to add to that, there is something called 'contraception', so when people say things along the lines of "incest is wrong because genetic defects" that's a very lazy argument, if i tossed a condom to someone who said that, they'd still (with 99% certainty) believe incest is wrong.
also to add to that, some animals do commit incest. its just like how some animals have gay sex.
and a disclaimer Im not condoning or condemning incest.
Noh_mercy bangs his sister, blates
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.