• Incest and necrophilia 'should be legal' according to youth branch of Swedish Liberal People's Party
    412 replies, posted
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;49885250]Contraceptives aren't magic, it's not uncommon for them to fail.[/QUOTE] double up, between a condom and the pill you've got next to zero chance of pregnancy or if you're going to be fucking your sister a lot go ahead and get a vasectomy.
A society that legalises and permits incest is doomed to eventual dissolution as the compounding genetic load and weakening of civil institutions leads to a sicker and more isolated people. It basically encourages the growth of large and tight knit families that are less likely to marry outside of their closed social groups. There's a very good reason that incest is practically a universal taboo among humans.
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;49885250]Contraceptives aren't magic, it's not uncommon for them to fail.[/QUOTE] Condoms have 1-2% failure rate, however female hormonal contraceptives (pill) have a less than 1% failure rate, and again, if you applied that logic to incest, you'd have to apply it to other groups of people as well. Trying to control what consenting adults do with each others in the privacy of their homes is not only a pointless effort (nobody's gonna go "I want it, and you want it, but the government doesn't want it so we won't do it"), it's ridiculous.
There are a lot of genetic disorders that have a higher chance of producing fucked up offspring compared to incest, so it makes no sense to ban one but not the other. And if you banned the other you'd be called a nazi. If contraception fails you can always get an abortion too.
I feel like everyone advocating for incest in this thread should read up on the concept of [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decadence"]decadence[/URL].
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;49885307]A society that legalises and permits incest is doomed to eventual dissolution as the compounding genetic load and weakening of civil institutions leads to a sicker and more isolated people. It basically encourages the growth of large and tight knit families that are less likely to marry outside of their closed social groups. There's a very good reason that incest is practically a universal taboo among humans.[/QUOTE] it's not though. many native cultures and old religions permit or even encourage incest
[QUOTE=FetusFondler;49885312][B]nobody's gonna go "I want it, and you want it, but the government doesn't want it so we won't do it[/b].[/QUOTE] reminds me of this picture that has a man and a woman who each have a speech bubble that says "I consent", and then Jesus who says "I don't", and the caption is "Aren't you forgetting someone?".
Also the argument "I don't see it hurting anyone, why not do it? " ignores the future and longterm consequences of it. For instance, families which are incestous suffer from higher dysfunction that results in divorces, child abuse, etc. Even a relationship between two siblings who aren't having children tends to be an extremely unhealthy one that is often unsustainable.
[QUOTE=Lurr;49885327]I feel like everyone advocating for incest in this thread should read up on the concept of [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decadence"]decadence[/URL].[/QUOTE] people make that same argument about homosexuality. I'm not buying it.
[QUOTE=butre;49885336]it's not though. many native cultures and old religions permit or even encourage incest[/QUOTE] Which ones, and what kind of incest? Because I'm pretty sure that nobody practices child-parent incest
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;49885344]Also the argument "I don't see it hurting anyone, why not do it? " ignores the future and longterm consequences of it. For instance, families which are incestous suffer from higher dysfunction that results in divorces, child abuse, etc. Even a relationship between two siblings who aren't having children tends to be an extremely unhealthy one that is often unsustainable.[/QUOTE] Have you seen the list of factors that contribute to divorce/disfunctional relationships? Should we ban uneducated and young people from having children too?
[QUOTE=Lurr;49885327]I feel like everyone advocating for incest in this thread should read up on the concept of [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decadence"]decadence[/URL].[/QUOTE] You might as well just start pointing fingers at people and calling them "degenerates" at this rate.
[QUOTE=FetusFondler;49885363]You might as well just start pointing fingers at people and calling them "degenerates" at this rate.[/QUOTE] Incest quite literally results in degeneration. Those who practice incest are, by definition, degenerates.
I believe that incest is something that the law cannot regulate, and thus should not be illegal, as long as it's done by two consenting persons of the same age. Necrophilia should be legal as long as the death person authorises the act, even if it's disgusting it's their body and they can do whatever the fuck they want with it.
[QUOTE=AlienCreature;49885362]Have you seen the list of factors that contribute to divorce/disfunctional relationships? Should we ban uneducated and young people from having children too?[/QUOTE] Except incestous relationships are inherently dysfunctional and unhealthy. Poor people and those without education, which until recently was about eighty percent of the human race, found themselves able to get along fine with healthy sustainable relationships.
[QUOTE=Lurr;49885377]Incest quite literally results in degeneration. Those who practice incest are, by definition, degenerates.[/QUOTE] It is their choice to do so. As it has been mentioned above, these same arguments are used against homosexuality. You can call them all you want, but using legislation to force everyone to bend to your own sense of ethics is more decadent than any consensual act between adults could be. [QUOTE=Sobotnik;49885385]Except incestous relationships are inherently dysfunctional and unhealthy. Poor people and those without education, which until recently was about eighty percent of the human race, found themselves able to get along fine with healthy sustainable relationships.[/QUOTE] Has any serious research even been performed on the subject? I don't think we can say the word 'inherently' without some science to back it up. And if that science is based on statistics, not absolutes (read: all science), then it is the same case as with all risk factors for dysfunctional relationships.
[QUOTE=butre;49885345]people make that same argument about homosexuality. I'm not buying it.[/QUOTE] Repeated instances of homosexual relationships over several generations don't lead to fucked up children and broken families. Incestuous relationship lead to bad situations a lot of the time, and the contraception argument is not valid because you can't trust people in good faith to use contraception for their whole life. The morality behind incest isn't just because someone one day saw someone kiss their cousin and was like "wow dude that's gross", it's because there was plenty of evidence over the past two thousand years that maybe fucking your blood relatives is kind of really fucking stupid. There isn't a distinction made with "safe" incest like homosexual couples or people who aren't blood relatives because it'd make for pretty fucking retarded law texts to allow some types of incest and not others.
What exactly are the consequences for being caught having sex with family?
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;49885307]A society that legalises and permits incest is doomed to eventual dissolution as the compounding genetic load and weakening of civil institutions leads to a sicker and more isolated people. It basically encourages the growth of large and tight knit families that are less likely to marry outside of their closed social groups. There's a very good reason that incest is practically a universal taboo among humans.[/QUOTE] You make it seem like upon legalisation people will only fuck blood relations. There are seven billion humans, we're not going to instantly die off as devolved, deformed monstrosities if something as minor as this were to come to pass. Which is very likely will, eventually. [QUOTE=Take_Opal;49885403]What exactly are the consequences for being caught having sex with family?[/QUOTE] Depends where you are. Imprisonment, most likely.
Sweden yes [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Meme / Shitpost" - Swebonny))[/highlight]
[QUOTE=Lium;49885408]You make it seem like upon legalisation people will only fuck blood relations. There are seven billion humans, we're not going to instantly die off as devolved, deformed monstrosities if something as minor as this were to come to pass. Which is very likely will, eventually. Depends where you are. Imprisonment is common.[/QUOTE] The point is that this happens over the course of centuries, which eventually leads to society eventually changing as a result. Generally the more that a society outbreeds the more successful and less dysfunctional it is.
[QUOTE=Lurr;49885327]I feel like everyone advocating for incest in this thread should read up on the concept of [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decadence"]decadence[/URL].[/QUOTE] People won't become inbred. We live in a society with abortions and contraceptives.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;49885434]The point is that this happens over the course of centuries, which eventually leads to society eventually changing as a result. Generally the more that a society outbreeds the more successful and less dysfunctional it is.[/QUOTE] I think we're at a stage now where that is irrelevant. There were far, far fewer people in the centuries it was allowed. And of course, this assumes that every incestual relationship will result in offspring, which it won't. And if it's the inbreeding you're really worried about, then ou would think homosexuals be could be incestous anway. But that's still illegal.
[QUOTE=AlienCreature;49885389]Has any serious research even been performed on the subject? I don't think we can say the word 'inherently' without some science to back it up. And if that science is based on statistics, not absolutes (read: all science), then it is the same case as with all risk factors for dysfunctional relationships.[/QUOTE] The centuries of families inbreeding all over Europe through contracted marriages and political alliances is proof enough that this shit rarely ends well. That's along with all the research done on animals, plus the animals who were inbred for fashion or novelty purposes and ended up dysfunctional at best and on their way to extinction at worst (most purebreeds of dogs and tigers are good examples). Incest is [I]visibly[/I] a bad idea. Homosexuality was [I]made up[/I] to be a bad idea by people who didn't know any better.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;49885352]Which ones, and what kind of incest? Because I'm pretty sure that nobody practices child-parent incest[/QUOTE] most sects of christianity permit incest as long as there's some degree of separation. what that degree of separation is depends on the specific sect but iirc eastern orthodox is second cousins, anglican communion allows first, etc. zoroastrianism encourages incest of all varieties
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;49885450]The centuries of families inbreeding all over Europe through contracted marriages and political alliances is proof enough that this shit rarely ends well. That's along with all the research done on animals, plus the animals who were inbred for fashion or novelty purposes and ended up dysfunctional at best and on their way to extinction at worst (most purebreeds of dogs and tigers are good examples). Incest is [I]visibly[/I] a bad idea. Homosexuality was [I]made up[/I] to be a bad idea by people who didn't know any better.[/QUOTE] But the same logic applies. Gay men are 20 times more likely to get HiV. We should ban gay relations and anal sex to protect people, etc. The logic is silly. Throwing people in prison always creates more problems.
[QUOTE=Lurr;49885327]I feel like everyone advocating for incest in this thread should read up on the concept of [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decadence"]decadence[/URL].[/QUOTE] lots of shit that we do would be considered "decadent" since it doesnt contribute to society in any meaningful way. Vices (smoking, drinking, etc), playing video games, sports, the list goes on. arguing that we should legislate things on account of them being "too decadent" is absolutely idiotic
[QUOTE=Lium;49885447]I think we're at a stage now where that is irrelevant. There were far, far fewer people in the centuries it was allowed.[/QUOTE] And the people who did it kept to themselves because they'd be dead scared of strangers and would try to keep the line "pure" by inbreeding. So despite not spreading their degeneracy to everyone and everything else, they'd instead bred xenophobia and growing elitism until they'd essentially create closed communities made exclusively of one family that would constantly fuck itself.
[QUOTE=Rocâ„¢;49885033]Uhm, necrophilia is with the dead right? Preeetty sure the dead can't give consent.[/QUOTE] Nothing says you can't write a will saying: "I allow my spouse who is a necrophiliac to fuck my corpse after I pass." Not entirely sure you can just legally write if off as "it's gross and icky" nor the health concerns, as people are free typically to medically fuck themselves up in a host of other ways. Now excuse me while I vomit a little after defending necrophilia.
[QUOTE=butre;49885476]most sects of christianity permit incest as long as there's some degree of separation. what that degree of separation is depends on the specific sect but iirc eastern orthodox is second cousins, anglican communion allows first, etc. zoroastrianism encourages incest of all varieties[/QUOTE] That's mostly because cousin incest has a pretty negligible genetic defect rate, I think it's roughly only about 2% higher than the rest of the population, compared to sibling incest which is significantly higher.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.