Translate

Thursday, March 17, 2011

Rights Aren’t Reserved For the Majority

When it comes to the notion that incest laws criminalizing adult consanguinamory and banning consanguineous marriage should be overturned, one common dismissal by antiequality forces is based the claim that there aren’t many people who want to do these things.

But rights are not determined by number of people. If there were only two immigrants in the US from Luxembourg, one man and one woman, would it be okay to deny them marriage, due process, housing, employment, or anything else simply because there were only two of them? Would racial segregation be okay if there were only 1,000 people in the country of a racial minority? Of course not. If the couple from Luxembourg wrote a book that only a few people wanted to read, would it be acceptable for the US government to ban the book? Of course not. Freedom of speech is not determined by whether or not you make the bestseller list. The freedom to marry should be no different.

An adult has the right to marry the persons he or she loves, and groups of people should not be excluded from that right based on their minority status.

There are consanguineous lovers who have been featured in major news media, who have to hide their love or have dealt with severe persecution and prosecution under incest laws (just click my labels below to see some examples). This has no doubt discouraged other people in such relationships from coming out. We have good reason to believe that there are many more people hiding in the shadows. There is a large amount of interest shown in straightforward accounts of such relationships, and in erotic or pornographic depictions of such relationships, whether fiction or presented as nonfiction.

Some counselors and law enforcement personnel will say they’ve never directly encountered a positive example of such a relationship, but their professions deal with people who are troubled, unhappy, or upset. Who is going to call up a police station or a prosecutor and say, “I just wanted you to know, I couldn’t be happier with my relationship with my sister. We really love each other and the sex is great?” In reality, those professionals, like everyone else, have had contact with someone who is in such a relationship, or has been in one, or wants to be in one. They just don’t know it, because most people don’t volunteer such information, and may actively hide it. On the average college campus, if there are ten students in once place, chances are that at least two of them have already experimented with a sibling close in age. They should not be made to feel lesser. Youthful experimentation is not the same thing as a spousal relationship, but if a spousal relationship does evolve, why should they be denied marriage rights?

It wasn’t that long ago (1989) that Rhode Island decriminalized consanguineous sex. That was during the conservative Reagan-Bush years. There is no reason why other states or national governments shouldn’t or couldn’t do likewise, especially now.

There is no basis for excluding consanguinamorous people from the rights of consenting adults to love, sex, and marriage, and wasteful laws that do so should be repealed in the name of freedom and equality.
— — —

4 comments:

  1. I love that you challenge my way of thinking. thank you for that.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I lol'd at the part of "Who is going to call up a police station or a prosecutor and say, “I just wanted you to know, I couldn’t be happier with my relationship with my sister. We really love each other and the sex is great?”"

    I agree with you, I'm sure there are many other people that feel a "different" connection to someone in their family, or feel like they love more than one person, and decide to hide it for fear of being ridiculed. Like I mentioned earlier...with gays getting more rights and being less prosecuted...there is sure a huge swarm of people coming out of the closet all of a sudden! o.o

    ReplyDelete
  3. Glad you appreciated this, Vegan. I'm certain there are people who are famous in their respective fields, whether the arts & media or other industries, politics, sports, etc. who are "in the closet" in this respect. Perhaps someday soon they can come out and not be bullied for prosecuted for doing so.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Lol as always when I feel in need of a some sanity I find right here on your website . As someone who is happy in a consanguinamorous relationship but who was forced to do therapy by my family I know that I personally just shut down and refused to talk about how I felt , all I wanted to do was get out that room and back into my uncles arms . Its like he says " the one person who has to be ok with who you are is you because at the end of the day there is no getting away from your self ." I am happy now we live as we want and can be open loving and real with each other .

    ReplyDelete

To prevent spam, comments will have to be approved, so your comment may not appear for several hours. Feedback is welcome, including disagreement. I only delete/reject/mark as spam: spam, vulgar or hateful attacks, repeated spouting of bigotry from the same person that does not add to the discussion, and the like. I will not reject comments based on disagreement, but if you don't think consenting adults should be free to love each other, then I do not consent to have you repeatedly spout hate on my blog without adding anything to the discourse.

If you want to write to me privately, then either contact me on Facebook, email me at fullmarriageequality at yahoo dot com, or tell me in your comment that you do NOT want it published. Otherwise, anything you write here is fair game to be used in a subsequent entry. If you want to be anonymous, that is fine.

IT IS OK TO TALK ABOUT SEX IN YOUR COMMENTS, BUT PLEASE CHOOSE YOUR WORDS CAREFULLY AS I WANT THIS BLOG TO BE AS "SAFE FOR WORK" AS POSSIBLE.