Incest a 'fundamental right', German committee says

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/11119062/Incest-a-fundamental-right-German-committee-says.html

:eek:

WinnyThePoo

http://reactiongifs.me/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/infinite-yes-daniel-bryan.gif

YES!

Timberrrrrrrr

Deleted User wrote: »

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/11119062/Incest-a-fundamental-right-German-committee-says.html

:eek:

A certain Mr Head will be quite pleased to hear this methinks.

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/11119062/Incest-a-fundamental-right-German-committee-says.html

:eek:

Have you anything to actually add to the OP or are you just going to dump that link there?

wazky

Awful!

*off to ride the sister*

P_1

Well if no children result from the relationship and both parties to it are consenting adults, then where's the harm?

Gatling

Consenting adults why not .

RobbingBandit

Now to marry my cousin and get me to Berlin.

Chips Lovell

Deleted User wrote: »

Have you anything to actually add to the OP or are you just going to dump that link there?

Ah here. He put in the "shocked" smiley face too.

Peist2007

Anyone else notice how prevalent incest is on the main page of major porn websites? You would think that most people would be disgusted by that sort of stuff yet the amount of videos of incest or acted incest is unreal. Has to be a lot more popular than you think

iDave

A sudden exodus of people from Connacht and Munster to Germany ensues

suicide_circus

I've often said, if other let's say "non traditional" relationships are A-OK nowadays, I struggle to see the logical objection to incest.
Two consenting adults etc

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

Have you anything to actually add to the OP or are you just going to dump that link there?

i really tried to think of something to say but my mind was blank how does one reply to something like this

Peist2007

iDave wrote: »

A sudden exodus of people from Connacht and Munster to Germany ensues

That would be a disaster for Dublin. Who would do all the work?

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

i really tried to think of something to say but my mind was blank how does one reply to something like this

How do you expect "one" to reply to your thread if you don't think it can be replied to??

Just to remind you, you've been banned from starting threads in the past. And banned from the forum for posting threads with absolutely no discussion.

So, please make your next post your opinion on the issue.

Philo Beddoe

Peist2007 wrote: »

That would be a disaster for Dublin. Who would do all the work?

I will.

Birneybau

suicide_circus wrote: »

I've often said, if other let's say "non traditional" relationships are A-OK nowadays, I struggle to see the logical objection to incest.
Two consenting adults etc

Incest can result in seriously deformed kids, that's why it's frowned upon.

P_1

suicide_circus wrote: »

I've often said, if other let's say "non traditional" relationships are A-OK nowadays, I struggle to see the logical objection to incest.
Two consenting adults etc

Well societal conventions aside the only thing that people can object to about incestuous relationships is the potential health effects that it can cause for any children that arise from the relationship.

who_me

iDave wrote: »

A sudden exodus of people from Connacht and Munster to Germany ensues

There is also a Munster in Germany. Coincidence? I think not...

dashcamdanny

The horror of it is up there with disembowelment.

nozzferrahhtoo

Birneybau wrote: »

Incest can result in seriously deformed kids, that's why it's frowned upon.

P_1 wrote: »

Well if no children result from the relationship and both parties to it are consenting adults, then where's the harm?

Actually even with children it is hard to know "Whats the harm". There is a common myth about incest that it "causes" genetic defects in Children but this is simply not true.

But yes, it is funny that people against the idea of adult consensual incest will often cite the children thing as their reason. Yet if you tell them "ok what if the two are entirely sterile is it now ok?" they still say no.

Which tells me one thing only: The reasons they are giving for being against incest.... are not their actual reasons. But reasons they cherry picked retrospectively to justify the position they already hold.

I myself struggle to understand if there are even arguments against incest at all that are valid. Assuming of course consensual adults. Alas "incest" is an umbrella term for many things, many of which have their own demerits that damn them. So one needs to make that clarification clear. Though even having made it I expect we will see all kinds of "Father with his kiddie daugther" type comments coming up in the thread.

MarkR

P_1 wrote: »

Well societal conventions aside the only thing that people can object to about incestuous relationships is the potential health effects that it can cause for any children that arise from the relationship.

I had a dose of the heebie jeebies reading the title, but it's hard to get away from the logic. The law is based on the presumption that we are protecting against the increased likelihoodof genetic abnormalities. That's a good reason, but if a couple who aren't brother and sister are predisposed to genetic abnormalities, they wouldn't be criminalized for having kids.

Karl Stein

"Criminal law is not the appropriate means to preserve a social taboo" the German Ethics Council said in a statement. "The fundamental right of adult siblings to sexual self-determination is to be weighed more heavily than the abstract idea of protection of the family".

telegraph.co.uk

Awful stuff altogether.

nelly17

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Actually even with children it is hard to know "Whats the harm". There is a common myth about incest that it "causes" genetic defects in Children but this is simply not true.

But yes, it is funny that people against the idea of adult consensual incest will often cite the children thing as their reason. Yet if you tell them "ok what if the two are entirely sterile is it now ok?" they still say no.

Which tells me one thing only: The reasons they are giving for being against incest.... are not their actual reasons. But reasons they cherry picked retrospectively to justify the position they already hold.

I myself struggle to understand if there are even arguments against incest at all that are valid. Assuming of course consensual adults. Alas "incest" is an umbrella term for many things, many of which have their own demerits that damn them. So one needs to make that clarification clear. Though even having made it I expect we will see all kinds of "Father with his kiddie daugther" type comments coming up in the thread.

In fact its estimated that we are all descendant of a population of some 150K people with the rest of the population having been wiped out by some disease or other I'll try and find a link

Pat Mustard

dashcamdanny wrote: »

The horror of it is up there with disembowelment.

Ah, Germany is going all Game of Thrones on us.

They'll be looking for that money back that they lent us next.

Nodin

Very surprised. I fully expected there to be references to Wicklow within the first 10 posts.

DEFTLEFTHAND

Nodin wrote: »

Very surprised. I fully expected there to be references to Wicklow within the first 10 posts.

Or the 'hill people' residing in the Slieve Blooms.

suicide_circus

P_1 wrote: »

Well societal conventions aside the only thing that people can object to about incestuous relationships is the potential health effects that it can cause for any children that arise from the relationship.

Sure they can just be aborted?

preston johnny

Nodin wrote: »

Very surprised. I fully expected there to be references to Wicklow within the first 10 posts.

A couple were caught having sex in broad daylight on a park bench in Roundwood recently, one outraged local resident said 'This is absolutely disgusting, they weren't even related'

whupdedo

Incest..........

A game for all the family :pac:

Slot Machine

Birneybau wrote: »

Incest can result in seriously deformed kids, that's why it's frowned upon.

Within the first generation? Unlikely. It's only after you've had generations of it that you'll begin to see a real rise in the risks.

whupdedo

whupdedo wrote: »

Incest..........

A game for all the family :pac:

now thats funny

Akrasia

MarkR wrote: »

I had a dose of the heebie jeebies reading the title, but it's hard to get away from the logic. The law is based on the presumption that we are protecting against the increased likelihoodof genetic abnormalities. That's a good reason, but if a couple who aren't brother and sister are predisposed to genetic abnormalities, they wouldn't be criminalized for having kids.

In ireland, the list of people who you can't marry includes plenty of non genetically related people.

A man may not marry his:

Grandfather’s Wife (step-grandmother)
Father’s Wife (stepmother)
Father’s Brother’s Wife
Mother’s Brother’s Wife
Son’s Wife
Son’s Son’s Wife
Daughter’s Son’s Wife
Brother’s Son’s Wife
Sister’s Son’s Wife
Wife’s grandmother (grandmother-in-law)
Wife’s Mother (mother-in-law)
Wife’s Father’s Sister
Wife’s Mother’s Sister
Wife’s Daughter (stepdaughter)
Wife’s Son’s Daughter
Wife’s Daughter’s Daughter
Wife’s Brother’s Daughter
Wife’s Sister’s Daughter
A woman may not marry her:

Grandmother’s Husband (step-grandfather)
Mother’s Husband (stepfather)
Father’s Sister’s Husband
Mother’s Sister’s Husband
Daughter’s Husband
Son’s Daughter’s Husband
Daughter’s Daughter’s Husband
Brother’s Daughter’s Husband
Sister’s Daughter’s Husband
Husband’s Grandfather (grandfather-in-law)
Husband’s Father (father-in-law)
Husband’s Father’s Brother
Husband’s Mother’s Brother
Husband’s Son (stepson)
Husband’s Son’s Son
Husband’s Daughter’s Son
Husband’s Brother’s Son
Husband’s Sister’s Son
http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/birth_family_relationships/getting_married/legal_prerequisites_for_marriage.html

Harry Palmr

Bad genes creating medical issues are most likely between first cousins I think

Karl Stein

Hitler.

conorhal

suicide_circus wrote: »

I've often said, if other let's say "non traditional" relationships are A-OK nowadays, I struggle to see the logical objection to incest.
Two consenting adults etc

You mean apart from the fact that incest is an evolutionary cul-de-sac and the fact that sibling relationships are supposed to be just that, a sexual component to them raises real questions about the emotional stability and disfunctionality of such a family unit?
The notion that consenting adults can do whatever they like is stupid, as the german cannibal and his consensual victim found out, even though they sat down to snack on his victims sauted mickey together.

Dr. Mantis Toboggan

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Actually even with children it is hard to know "Whats the harm". There is a common myth about incest that it "causes" genetic defects in Children but this is simply not true.

But yes, it is funny that people against the idea of adult consensual incest will often cite the children thing as their reason. Yet if you tell them "ok what if the two are entirely sterile is it now ok?" they still say no.

Which tells me one thing only: The reasons they are giving for being against incest.... are not their actual reasons. But reasons they cherry picked retrospectively to justify the position they already hold.

I myself struggle to understand if there are even arguments against incest at all that are valid. Assuming of course consensual adults. Alas "incest" is an umbrella term for many things, many of which have their own demerits that damn them. So one needs to make that clarification clear. Though even having made it I expect we will see all kinds of "Father with his kiddie daugther" type comments coming up in the thread.

So you're saying it's ok to knob your sister?

looking_around

Akrasia wrote: »

In ireland, the list of people who you can't marry includes plenty of non genetically related people.

But.
you can't get married, if you're already married?

who the fug

wazky wrote: »

Awful!

*off to ride the sister*

Yes Jim :rolleyes:

Harry Palmr

The reason its social frowned upon is because siblings have been brought up together, the idea that they'd suddenly get horny for each other is obviously fairly shocking esp if its happening when they are still under the family roof of course but separated children have fallen in love unwittingly since the year dot and if they never discover the truth does it actually matter?

Ush1

MarkR wrote: »

I had a dose of the heebie jeebies reading the title, but it's hard to get away from the logic. The law is based on the presumption that we are protecting against the increased likelihoodof genetic abnormalities. That's a good reason, but if a couple who aren't brother and sister are predisposed to genetic abnormalities, they wouldn't be criminalized for having kids.

No it isn't, it's based on inheritance and where the money is going.

iDave

Peist2007 wrote: »

That would be a disaster for Dublin. Who would do all the work?

Poles?

The Diabolical Monocle

So going off the earlier thread where the fella got arrested for shagging a drunk woman consensually while drunk himself.

Todays world is genuinely one where you can be arrested for a drunken consensual shag yet its fine to produce banjo playing pale six toed inbreds.



(leave the Dubliners out of this)

conorhal

Ush1 wrote: »

No it isn't, it's based on inheritance and where the money is going.

For which reason the Pharoh's 'kept it in the family'. Didn't really make for happy relations though.

nozzferrahhtoo

Dr. Mantis Toboggan wrote: »

So you're saying it's ok to knob your sister?

I would not say that phrase in relation to anyone myself. But if you are asking me if I can think of any arguments against the morality of consensual adult siblings having sex? No, I can not think of one.

I would _advise_ against it however as I know sex changes relationships. Usually a lot. And while sexual relationships are easy to obtain.... sibling relationships are not. They are rare, and unique in our lives and to turn them into just another sexual relationship is a decision I would not advise anyone take lightly.

But actual moral arguments against that kind of incest that are valid and not just emotional or misinformed...... I am currently not aware of any no.

Amirani

Birneybau wrote: »

Incest can result in seriously deformed kids, that's why it's frowned upon.

As can relationships between people with genetic disorders or indeed genomes that are predisposed to such.

Czarcasm

"Inbred" is often an insulting term levelled at uncivilised people. Is inbreeding now a measure of a civilised society?

I can't see it catching on myself. The headline in the article in the OP is misleading. This was just some German think-tank idea that's already been shot down by German Government.

It's not in any way an indication of a progressive society. If anything, it would be a move towards a more regressive society -

Girl doesn't pull on a night out, be grand, she's still got her father and a couple of brothers at home. Yeah, I can really see that as progressive. It's insane, and shouldn't be encouraged.

nozzferrahhtoo

Czarcasm wrote: »

Girl doesn't pull on a night out, be grand, she's still got her father and a couple of brothers at home. Yeah, I can really see that as progressive. It's insane, and shouldn't be encouraged.

That is quite a skew of the issue right there and not at all representative. The idea of someone going out and trying just to get laid, and then deciding "Oh I failed so youll do" is pretty disgusting on the face of it.

That kind of thing is disgusting already, a horrible enough picture, regardless of "incest". "I will be grand I have x y and z at home I can shag anyway" is dodgy on its own merits.

I think you are wheeling that off putting image into the subject of incest to try and make incest look bad by proxy to it. You are not attacking or saying anything about incest AT ALL in your little spiel there. You are just painting an unpretty picture and then dropping incest into the middle of it.

wazky

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

That is quite a skew of the issue right there and not at all representative. The idea of someone going out and trying just to get laid, and then deciding "Oh I failed so youll do" is pretty disgusting on the face of it.

That kind of thing is disgusting already, a horrible enough picture, regardless of "incest". "I will be grand I have x y and z at home I can shag anyway" is dodgy on its own merits.

I think you are wheeling that off putting image into the subject of incest to try and make incest look bad by proxy to it. You are not attacking or saying anything about incest AT ALL in your little spiel there. You are just painting an unpretty picture and then dropping incest into the middle of it.

Would it not be awkward at the dinner table on a Sunday afternoon, to have your brother and sister latch on to eachother and go at it hammer and tong at the table?

nozzferrahhtoo

wazky wrote: »

Would it not be awkward at the dinner table on a Sunday afternoon, to have your brother and sister latch on to eachother and go at it hammer and tong at the table?

You are doing the same thing as Czarcasm just tried to pull above. You are painting a picture that would be unpleasant at the best of times, and simply dropping incest into the middle of it to try and have peoples natural revulsion to that situation stick to incest rather than the situation itself.

Czarcasm

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

That is quite a skew of the issue right there and not at all representative. The idea of someone going out and trying just to get laid, and then deciding "Oh I failed so youll do" is pretty disgusting on the face of it.

That kind of thing is disgusting already, a horrible enough picture, regardless of "incest". "I will be grand I have x y and z at home I can shag anyway" is dodgy on its own merits.

I think you are wheeling that off putting image into the subject of incest to try and make incest look bad by proxy to it. You are not attacking or saying anything about incest AT ALL in your little spiel there. You are just painting an unpretty picture and then dropping incest into the middle of it.

I'm sorry, I didn't realise I was meant to paint a pretty picture of a father having sex with his own son?

"Disgusting" doesn't matter when it comes to incest apparently, so you can't say what I said is disgusting in the same way as I can't object to incest because I find the whole concept disgusting.

I'm talking about consenting adults too btw, as if that makes any difference.