Translate

Sunday, November 27, 2016

Frequently Asked Question: Why Is Incest Illegal?


It shouldn’t be illegal anywhere, as you’ll see. As always, we note that we are talking about consensual incest, such as between consenting adults and between minors close in age. We are not talking about anything involving coercion or force or molestation. There are laws against rape, assault, and molestation, and they should remain. We are talking about consensual incest, consanguineous sex and marriage, and consanguinamory, whether initiated through Genetic Sexual Attraction or not.

Short answer: It isn’t illegal everywhere, but where it is, it is the lingering result of sex-police holdovers, superstition, prejudice, and legislative inertia.

Long answer:



A significant part of the reason is that some cultures have an ancient taboo against incest, which begs the question, “Why is incest taboo?”

There seems to be more than one plausible reason why some cultures have had an incest taboo, in addition to protecting the power of the leaders.

1) The taboo appears to be an adoption as law or culture of the biological Westermarck effect, which is a common experience but not one experienced by everyone. Because of this effect, many people develop an avoidance of their close family members as sexual partners, and people have often expected that everyone feels the same way they do, and in many cases try to discourage people from acting differently than they do. But for those who, due to separation or some other reason, don’t experience the Westermarck effect, the bond becomes especially strong if it grows into a consanguinamorous one. It could be that if nobody had experienced the Westermarck effect, most people wouldn’t have ever “left the nest” (unless driven out by the dominant male) and the human race would have had a harder time developing genetic diversity, which was very important to survival when the human population was low. Without a growing and genetically diverse population, the entire population could have easily been wiped out by one disease. We hardly have that problem anymore. So in that respect, the Westermarck effect is vestigial and the taboo is no longer needed. (Note that the need for a growing population was also important when everything was accomplished through much physical labor, requiring many people. This was also one of the reasons why some cultures discouraged same-gender pairing that excluded males from bonding with females and making babies.)

2) Also, in patriarchal societies, it was common to trade daughters away in a business deal or to form alliances with other clans or nations. Especially if virginity was valued in new brides, it didn’t help matters if she was in love with, and making love with, her brother. But as with the previous reason, life has changed much and fewer segments of humanity are trading daughters like bargaining chips.

3) When the entire town or village was expected to attend the same church or temple, the taboo was reinforced if that religion had a prohibition against it. But in many places, this is no longer the case.

Incest was one of many things prohibited in the ancient nation of Israel, per the Torah. Church and political authorities have found incest prohibitions useful not only as part of overall control of sexuality, but for making accusations against opponents and the inconvenient (and how does one prove that they didn’t have sex with someone else?)… and to prevent any one other family from building up and retaining too much power. While royals in Egypt, Hawaii, Europe, and elsewhere married siblings, cousins, and other relatives to retain power, they often  denied other people that right for the same reason.

The religion-imposed taboo should not be underestimated, and leads us into the Other Reasons Incest is Illegal in Some Places.

In many places, there has been an official national or state religion, perhaps with a religious organization having at least some direct influence on the laws. Even in the US, where the Constitution now guarantees freedom of religion and there has been a firmly established separation of church and state, some states were originally colonies established with their own official churches. New states often set up their laws by copying from existing states, and the US has had some Puritan origins, later Victorian influence, and so forth. Famously, alcohol was banned under Prohibition less than a hundred years ago. Before that, women couldn’t even vote and there were many restrictions placed on women that were not placed on men, and thus there was gender inequality under the law and a woman was more or less the property of her father or brother until or unless she married, at which time she became the property of her husband.

Female schoolteachers were expected to abstain from sex or resign if they married. Female pageant contestants had to swear that they were virgins. Until recently, it was common for college dormitory buildings (if not the college itself) to be segregated by gender, complete with curfews and supervisors to try to make sure that students, who were 18 years and older, were not having sex (heterosexual, anyway). Innkeepers, landlords, and property sellers would routinely (often by law) refuse to accommodate or do business with unmarried, mixed-gendered couples.

Boys and young men routinely faced criminal charges for consensual sex with females (or men of any age could be civilly charged with “breach of promise”.)

It was common to have laws against anything but heterosexual intercourse between a husband and a wife. That meant oral sex between a husband and wife was technically illegal, as was any gay or lesbian sex (gay bars were raided by police), unmarried sex or cohabitation; even sex toys and birth control have been illegal in some places. There are still places in the US where someone can be sued for “alienation of affection” for having sex with a married person. Never mind that, even where illegal, brothels have always existed, and fathers have taken their sons to them for their son to have pleasant sexual encounter with a professional, and have mingled with people in power as fellow customers. Never mind that quietly having lovers on the side has been something that has always taken place.

There have also been, and in many ways remain, laws against and restrictions on various forms of dancing, nudity, “crossdressing,” and erotica.

With this sex-negative attitude, it isn’t surprising that there have been laws against incest. What may be surprising is that such laws have remained on the books. There has been a progression of civil rights in places like the US that is moving towards an adult having the right to share love, sex, residence, and marriage with any consenting adults, but we’re still not there. Loving v. Virginia struck down bans on (heterosexual, monogamous) interracial marriages. The Lawrence v. Texas decision struck down laws against gay sex and in 2015 the limited monogamous same-sex freedom to marry became nationwide in the US. Cases regarding polyamory are currently winding their way through US courts.

In order for remaining laws against consensual incest to be removed, we'll likely need a good test case for the courts. What that would require is a respectable and otherwise law-abiding (and attractive wouldn’t hurt) long-term consanguinamorous couple to fight a state law against consensual incest. The catch-22 is that since people can be, and are, prosecuted for engaging in this consensual relationship, lovers have a strong motivation to hide these relationships, and that is a hindrance to getting the laws changed. It would help if a couple in a state, such as Rhode Island, with no law against consensual incest, applied for a marriage license and subsequently got the courts to overturn prohibitions on consanguineous marriages. However, in addition to fear of prosecution and other legal problems, some people who are, or have been, involved in consanguinamory would prefer the law and/or the taboo remain in place, either because they like being the rebel, they are self-loathing, or they can’t (anymore) have what they want and they don’t want anyone else to have it, either. But they are the minority; most people involved in these relationships very much want their rights.

Throughout all of history, around the world, royal or peasants, urban or royal, rich or poor, there have been close relatives engaging in experimentation or having lifelong spousal-type relationships, and everything in between. You know people who have been involved in consanguinamory whether you know it or not, and whether or not your genealogical charts reveal it, chances are that you don’t have to go too far back in your family tree to find an ancestor whose true biological parents were close relatives.

There are people in relationships right now who would benefit if they had their right to marry. There is now no good reason to keep these laws and the taboo that deny an adult the right to share love, sex, residence, and marriage with any consenting adults. We’re not all going to want the same love lives as each other, but we should allow people to have the relationships of their mutual choosing, the ones in which they will function best.

An adult should be free to share love, sex, residence, and marriage with any and all consenting adults without being subjected to prosecution, bullying, or discrimination.

How You Can Help


Question: Why is incest illegal? Is incest illegal? Why is incest wrong? Is incest wrong? Why is consensual incest illegal? Is consensual incest illegal? Why is consensual incest wrong? Is consensual incest wrong? Why is incest illegal between consenting adults?
— — —

97 comments:

  1. Thanks Keith! This is great. It's amazing how much research you do on this stuff. This is definitely a keeper when I need facts...although, some people are just too ignorant to even understand what they have read V_V either that or they don't read it xD

    ReplyDelete
  2. As part of a couple who is working behind the scenes in Rhode Island I have to say that we have a long way to go. I will say there is hope though.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I hope you're still working on it, we need all the help me can get.

      Delete
    2. We also are a couple in Rhode Island. We wish that the atmosphere was such that we could get together and share with others like us. It would be a wonderful thing, but alas, there is quite a bit of fear to overcome.

      Delete
    3. Anonymous July 16... if you haven't done so already, please contact me at fullmarriageequality at yahoo dot com as I'd like to communicate further.

      Delete
    4. I wish you all the best and hope that this is still a work in progress. I am looking forward to hearing this case soon. I would love nothing better.

      Delete
    5. @keith would it be possable to contact you i have questions regarding this subject ive been doing research but im unable to find anything that involves a living kid ill explain more in a message your email still active

      Delete
    6. Xemik please email me at fullmarriageequality at yahoo dot com

      Delete
  3. Anonymous, thanks for that insight! I appreciate it.

    If you can let me know more, please write me
    fullmarriageequality at yahoo dot com

    ReplyDelete
  4. Very interesting. I am curious if you did any research on the increased rate of genetic mutations among offspring of closely related people (or other mammals for that matter). I thought that was the origin of the taboo.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There are actually sites on Google's website that give information on genetic markers and it only showed between .7 - 2.6 or somewhere along those lines of increased inheritable medical and mental factors....

      Delete
    2. The genetic problems with offspring of closely related people is the reason to prohibit sex between family members. Really, how can a person write an article on this and not address that fact? Birth control is not always effective. So their is a clear rational basis for these types of laws.

      Delete
    3. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    4. Anonymous, that has been addressed on this blog many, many times. I did link to this page: http://marriage-equality.blogspot.com/p/discredited-invalid-arguments.html

      You are referring to #18.

      I was addressing laws in this entry. The fact is, these laws were not instituted because of genetics.

      But please elaborate on your eugenics program, if you wish. And please explain why people with obvious genetic diseases are free to love other adults with the same genetic diseases and to marry them, but two genetically healthy close relatives aren't.

      Delete
    5. If genetics are the only reason to ban incest, then we should ban people with low IQs from reproducing too. Because I can guarantee you they are doing, and have done, worse for the gene pool than a few incestuous couples ever will.

      Delete
    6. Yes, it is a bogus reason to interfere.

      Delete
    7. The evidence for the taboos being based on perceived reproductive risks is shaky at best. It can't be a universal basis for the taboos, if there is one at all. For most of Christian and Islamic history, it was enforced under religious law, since it was an issue concerning sex outside of marriage, and who one could and could not marry, which were religious issues. "Incest" laws were abolished in most of western Europe under Napoleon. The laws in the US can specifically be traced back to the middle of the 1800s, when there was a sudden concern with the purity of society, the purity of families, and the purity of reproduction. It was at about the same time that society was becoming even more obsessed with preventing "miscegenation", and was also where the ideology of eugenics was born. It's not coincidental that people's sudden concern for PoC and the poor "polluting the society's gene pool" arose simultaneously with the sudden movement to ban sex between 1st cousins. However, in the Islamic world, the most widely accepted interpretation of Shariah still interprets consanguinamory as a violation of bans against non-marital sex. This is closer to how it was prior to the Enlightenment in Europe. If anything, I would say that the Romans were harsher on consanguinamory than post-Roman Catholics.

      Delete
  5. I doubt that was the origin because it wouldn't have been seen in most cases, and the connection wouldn't have been made even if it had been seen.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Hello! I was linked here from a polyamorous message board. I've got a few issues which keep me from accepting consanguinamory that I would like to tap your brain about. Please correct me on the proper way to phrase things if I offend.

    1) Accepting that the origin of the taboo is the Westermarck effect. The only way humans and other animals could have evolved a Westermarck instinct is if there were strong selective pressures against incest. This means that inbred offspring faced disadvantages.

    Now, you may point to a low disease rate, but not all disadvantages can be seen. Not all diseases are clear cut. An inbred child might face heavy hits to their IQ or life expectancy, and it would never show up in the data. Given this, why should consanguinous couples not adopt or get an unrelated sperm/egg donor instead?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks, Anonymous. Do you mean that you have a problem accepting consanguinamory should not be criminalized, or that you have a problem thinking it would be something you would support in a friend or family member? You don't have to LIKE the idea of consanguinamory to see that it should not be criminalized or discriminated against.

      Is the origin of the Westermarck Effect all that relevant for today? Humans have moved on, evolving biologically, socially, culturally, etc. For example, women (daughters) were traded like property and there was no legal system to prosecute rape. If a father traded his daughter to some man and the daughter didn't like the man, tough luck for her. Her only defense was others coming to her defense.

      If there is some biological cause of the Westermarck Effect, it is quite possible that cause is just one common variation. In early humans, those without that variation ended up being more isolated, smaller clans more likely to be wiped out in a famine (lack of an extended support network) or disease (lack of genetic diversity). Society has emerged and things are different now, but the variation still happens. For example, youthful experimentation between siblings is much more common than the variation of males being sexually attracted to other males (a variation that, if excluding attraction to females, also would have slowed the growth of a population.)

      When daughters were traded as property for breeding, the new "owner" likely wanted sexual exclusivity and assurance that her children where his, and that would be a problem if she was having sex with her brother or father or someone else in the family.

      As I said, today we have moved on. Women are not property. We also have reproductive rights, contraception, genetic counseling, etc. It is entirely possible for people in consanguinamorous relationships to have healthy, even gifted biological children. But even if they can't, the lack of ability (or desire) to produce healthy children is not grounds for denying anyone marriage, or criminalizing sex between them.

      There are also positives to consanguinamory.

      Delete
    2. Oh, I completely agree that there should be no criminalization of *sex* between related peoples. The concern is with reproduction, not sex. And of course, we can't really make inbreeding a crime either, because once a child is born, it is born and should be accepted. Legally, I don't think we should touch it...but then I don't think marriage should have a legal basis anyhow.

      I do think, however, that perhaps we should retain a *cultural* taboo against it, for the same reasons that we retain cultural taboos against minors getting pregnant. Here is the a parallel: We do not make it a crime for two underage people to have sex, and if one gets pregnant it is not a crime either. But we do have strong cultural taboos against this type of thing occurring, because the child of underage parents begins at a biological and social disadvantage.

      We have strong cultural taboos against, say, homosexuality and polyamory too...and I would work to dismantle those taboos because there is no good reason for them. I would work to dismantle discrimination against non-reproductive consanguinamory too, but I am not sure I would work to dismantle taboos against inbreeding, because of the biological harm to the child.

      Delete
    3. I'm happy you are against criminalization. There's no reason to have a taboo against two genetically healthy people having children together. A brother and sister, for example, can have healthy children together. If their genetic counseling shows are high probability of a problem, then fine, I can see why someone would be against it if they are also consistently against others having children if those people are carry serious hereditary diseases. However, try telling someone they should not have children (if you are not their counselor) and you're likely to hear a suggestion back that you do something to yourself.

      Delete
    4. Genetic counseling is only enough to prevent a few very specific, well studied, and simple genetic diseases...it's hardly adequate protection considering you are dealing with creating a life. Nor do I think humans have "moved beyond" these limitations... the reason genetic council began is because some endogamous populations (especially in certain Jewish and Middle Eastern subcultures) have a very high deleterious genetic load.

      Nevertheless, I think I have concluded that you are right and all restrictions should be removed...not because I don't think it is risky, but because it is difficult to enforce and as you pointed out, the level of risk is on par with other risky practices which we do not currently regulate against. However, I would also advocate that such couples be well educated about the possible consequences of reproducing with relatives, similar to how we advise older mothers, smokers, or drinkers about the dangers to the child.

      Here is a link to the convo back at reddit, who linked me here, if you are interested.

      http://www.reddit.com/r/polyamory/comments/onp50/in_response_to_santorum_another_atheist_supports/c3jaqf3?context=3

      Delete
    5. (From a new Anonymous, not the same as above!)

      I just found a recent science article showing that "inbreeding depression" is at least partly due to epigenetics (rather than to genetics) and that in living plants, the effects of "inbreeding depression" can be reversed by a chemical which reverses DNA methylation. The article theorizes that this or similar chemicals could become a generally useful drug for the treatment of "inbreeding depression".

      Here's the link: http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2012/07/inbreedings-downside-is-not-all-.html

      Delete
    6. I'd like to point out that sex between under age people actually IS illegal. If a 15 year old has sex with a 14 year old, the 15 year old can be prosecuted as a sex offender, because the 14 year old is below the age of consent, and thus cannot legally give consent even to another minor. It's one of the reasons I support Romeo laws. We discourage early pregnancy because it hampers the parents' economic development, which has nothing to do with consanguinamory. Many people would consider even 21 to be too early to have kids, and it has nothing to do with genetics or consent. That logic has no relation to why 30 year old siblings should or shouldn't have kids.

      Delete
    7. I do not think anyone has the right to tell anyone who they should or should nor love, only they know how they feel in their hearts know one else. I do not see a problem with consensual incest, nor do i see a problem with two women or two men no matter what it is if they love each other let it be. It is their relationship not yours so but out and let them be happy. If you did not know they where related and you seen them together you'd say what a happy family and cute couple but as soon as you find out they are related it is sick and disguisting. I think are society is sick and disguisting and people need to quit judging people and telling them who to love. I have been in a consensual incestuous relationship for 3yrs and no one knows they just think we are a cute happy couple. We love each other very much and that is all that matters. And as to having kids and health problems if they are gonna have birth defects or health issues it will happen no matter what it does not matter if genetically related. Kids are born all the time with health issues and parents are not related.

      Delete
    8. Anonymous from 7/7/2015 Thanks for your comments. If you're not already in contact with me, I'd love to hear from you at fullmarriageequality at yahoo dot com

      Delete
  7. This is a very interesting website. I once asked to a few people: "How do you feel about love between siblings?"
    I mostly got "Eww" as an answer. Then I realized that I have been raised in a world were it was obvious that it was wrong. Without giving me any valid arguments, I believed what people told me. I recently read a beautiful manga about a love story between a brother and his sister and I wondered: "Why is it wrong?" I did a little research and I found this website. I was amazed by the what I read. I feel somewhat more at ease knowing that the questions I use to ask myself didn't mean I was crazy. That's a relief...
    Going through adolescence is far less hard when you realize you're neither alone or completely insane.
    Although, I believe teenagers with questions should not have to look this far into the internet to find some answers. Practically all we know about consanguinamory is that it's forbidden and that it's gross. No one ever bothered to give me any argument whatsoever. Occasionally people would tell me about genetics and stuff, but that's not sufficient at all. Not for me at least.
    Of course, people have already so much problems with same-sex love marriage. Even with talking about sex in school!
    This is a very cruel world we live in.
    Well, I believe it's my generation's duty to make a significant change in the way people think (not meaning that past generations didn't do anything).
    Oh! I also wanted to say thank you to "Marriage Equality" for writing this extremely fascinating article.
    I really do see the world in a different way knowing others think that way as well.
    Live long and prosper.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well I'm just happy to see that some people understand this.

      Delete
  8. Your map of the world shows New Zealand as making ALL incest illegal however please see http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2005/0041/latest/DLM346175.html#DLM346175 which outlines it is "parent and child, siblings, half-siblings, or grandparent and grandchild" and not uncles/nieces and other permutations unless under 18.

    ReplyDelete
  9. In Italy consensual incest is not punished unless it costitutes a "public scandal", very strange...
    So if consanguinamory is punished in Italy, it's just because i bigotti non si sanno fare gli affari loro (the bigots are unable to do their business).

    ReplyDelete
  10. I have been apart of Consensual Incest with my neice who is the same age as me, and from my personal experience, I find nothing morally wrong with incest. While I understand why society views incest as "Taboo", and as people have previously posted does cause genetic problems due to the similarities and clashing within the genetic code, I find that there is no reason why two people who love each other and understand the risks involved should not be able to produce an offspring. To deny two humans from being together due to similarities within their DNA is wrong in my opition.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you for your contribution, Anonymous. Please feel welcome to share your insight here.

      Delete
    2. I will comment and provide insight when I can.

      Delete
    3. I must say I'm a guy that has been separated from my three half-sisters due to divorce when I was really little, and never grew up with them. So in the past couple years of being reunited with them, I've found a major emotional and physical attraction to them. I have slept with the oldest one on more than a few occasions consensually. Her and I'd even talk about moving to a country where marrying siblings was legal.

      At any rate, I've never understood why people have to use the one-and-only "genetic code and birth" excuse when it comes to the justification of having incest being illegal. Saying that, when there's plenty of preventive measures to not have offspring is just downright unobservant.

      We've all grown up in different circumstances and households. I feel those who haven't had the benefits of growing up in a full household, shouldn't be restricted from their feelings or disgraced because of it. The way I see incest in my case, it's not only the missing Westermarck effect, it's all the years of missed support and love (me being the one and only older brother).

      Lastly, I also wish I didn't have these feelings sometimes, but I do. It is disheartening because of society, and also something of which you doubt the family would be supportive in.

      Delete
    4. Thanks for sharing, Anonymous. Your insights are welcome here, especially on Genetic Sexual Attraction.

      Delete
    5. Well Anon i found that once you accept that you have those feelings, things get easier. I mean that you have those feelings and its nothing to be ashamed about, if you have those feelings and try to reject them you are severing a part of what makes up who you are. Also, I too find the "Genetic Code and Birth excuse" overused and i agree with you that there are many preventive measures that can be taken.

      Delete
  11. I appreciate you posting this! I am reading a teen fiction novel about a brother and sister have an incestuous relationship and was questioning whether or not it was actually "wrong" and if it was bad of me to question this. Now that I know more about the subject, thanks to your blog post, I am very happy to say I have formed my own opinions on the subject and they definitely match yours. I never realized what a problem it was that we don't have full marriage equality. Thanks again, and have a wonderful day!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Glad to be of help, Anonymous. Thanks for reading, and thans for commenting.

      Delete
  12. You know there are good reasons why consensual sex between family members(apart from husband and wife) a cultural taboo. If a man sleeps with his son/daughter he most likely still have the position of authority over her, in other words 'how can you consider it consensual?" Besides that there is the duty of family. We grew up to expect our parents and siblings to care and protect us, not look at us like we're meat. I hate to say this but in my experience that's what sexual relationship is. I already have enough people looking at me in a horny manner. I don't need them doing it as well. There are valid reasons for monogamy being widely supported and that's stability with a family.


    Too many people will take advantage of decriminalised incest and rape will happen more often.

    Lastly the author seem to think anyone is able to obtain contraception, or even know about it, seek genetic counselling etc. In this world of 7 billion people, a minute section of the society only can.


    I think populations should be controlled and the number of births should be controlled but that's another topic altogether,

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for your comments, atheist. Your concerns are thoughtful, but ultimately are not strong enough do deny such a basic right as freedom of association. Did the decriminalization of unmarried sex lead to more rapes by strangers? Sex and rape are two different things. We are talking about CONSENSUAL sex and lovemaking.

      There is a power differential in just about any relationship, sometimes an enormous power differential. One person is more emotionally needy than another. One earns more than the other. One is more educated than another. One has more friends and family than another. One has more life experience than another. On and on it goes. To question if consent is truly possible in these cases is insulting and demeaning. There are sober, functional, healthy adults who consent to consanguineous sex with an older relative. It shouldn’t be illegal or questioned, unless you would do the same to any intergenerational relationship between adults.

      Delete
  13. there are 2 points about incest that draws my attention, 1. inbreeding and 2. the rise of the fatherhood.

    embryology exposes an evolutionary picture of human evolution form amphibian,to reptile then mammal. there must have been at least one prior phase and that is perhaps bacterial, which would not be seen in the zygote but likely in the forms that make the zygote...male sperm and female egg.

    so there must have been a long period of cellular/gene pool expansion up the human stage at which so-called change to homo took place., which led to current human cultural matrix.

    my point is that by the time of homo the gene pool of our species must already have been wide enough to ward off any gene pool restrictions we think necessary to mitigate negative effects of inbreeding.

    the point is I do not believe inbreeding was ever a problem for humanity, from the point of producing defective off-spring due to a closed-in or limited gene pool. I believe that the incest taboo is purely and only a product of an ancient revolution..that achieved the changeover from female to male domination.

    that fact accounts for all restrictions and equipment we have seen that have ever been placed on the freedom of women. the purpose was to ensure that men, the new dominant father, knew who their children were.

    the old motherhood was promiscuous. they all knew who the mothers were but not the father. inheritance was from the mothers brother {uncle] to his sister's son. that was a known, provable connection.

    hence with new fatherhood we got chastity belts. and with the new father dominated religions we got harsh doctrinal prohibitions on sexuality and on women in particular, that could have been initiated only by father-hoods.. and for the purpose of control of human sexuality for the benefit of the fatherhood.

    all and every argument against incest can be explained in this manner...by singular focus on the fatherhood as initiatory factor and upholder of the taboo.

    in our times the fatherhood continues to mystify cause of incest taboo by emphasizing the impression that the cause is so deep and dark we may never get to an explanation of the incest taboo.

    but to me the evidence is in. in the motherhood incest was normal activity, general activity. if there is to be a father in the human family which from the start consisted of the mother and children only, he had to remake the family in his own image...provide a place for himself in it

    you really cant have a dominant fatherhood and incest at the same time. the fatherhood had to end incest, drive what remained of it underground and when found beheaded the fatherhood and incest does not compute.

    but the world has changed some in 15 thousand years and a dominant fatherhood is no longer consistent with anything positive in the human potential and future. so change is essential and it is imposing itself in all kinds of ways.

    i don't think incest will become the dominant way of the future, but its decriminalization appears to be part of the general emotional rectification and explanation of human history essential for human freedom...essential for us to go forward in good shape

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank for your your thoughtful comments, Anonymous. Very, very interesting.

      Delete
  14. http://www.geneticsexualattraction.org/feature-friday-do-you-think-incest-between-two-adults-should-be-legalized/

    These people experienced GSA and DO NOT want consensual incest to be legalized.
    What do you think about?

    (I still think it should be legal, but now I'm much less idealist than in the past)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nice to hear from you again! One need not be idealist to support equality.

      I almost never visit that site. I am not happy with what a couple of people, with dubious claims to GSA, did by taking over an existing free forum where I and many others had participated, put it behind a paywall so they could start charging for the use, and perpetuated a negative approach to GSA.

      See here:
      http://marriage-equality.blogspot.com/2012/03/here-comes-wall.html

      Delete
  15. I think many people mix up bad with unfortunate. For instance, losing at the lottery is unfortunate. Spending all your money on lottery tickets that ultimately lost is bad. In the incest situation, having a child with disabilities is unfortunate, whether it is from a related couple or unrelated one. What many seem to get at is that having a child knowing the risks are a bit higher is bad. I disagree, but to humor them in the situation where those same people are also under the impression that anything else you have makes you bad if you knowingly risk passing it on. Or if you do anything else, such as with women over the age of 35. But whereas the added risk from incest is in the single digits, those other things increase the risk by a lot more. And yet people don't rail against them. Of course, many do not even consider these risks, and even when they do they would pretty much just call it unfortunate as I have. In other words, people are selective about what they judge. They're targeting the big mac, but ignoring the bacon mcbaconator bacon sandwich (generic unhealthy sounding name).

    I also disagree with a poster saying we should keep the taboo even if he also says we should drop the law. Living first hand with this attraction, I've always felt so alone. I could never tell anybody about it using my real name, due to the persecution. Keep in mind that I haven't done anything, I don't even know if the feelings are mutual. Just having the feelings make me a social outcast where I live. See you may have good intentions in regards to the social taboo, but people always take things too far. When I was younger even before I fell in love, I was bullied for being too close to my half-sister. All my life, I've been given stress due to what if somebody found out, what if she found out. I've talked with others who have had similar experiences with bigotry, and I have a good feeling there are a lot more. Imo the drawbacks have far outweighed any benefit. Not to minimize anything, but most kids born from incest have been perfectly functioning people. Their lives were not ruined by any diseases. But what could ruin their lives is that same sharp taboo. It bleeds into anything associating with it. So those kids may be functioning and good people with no diseases, but people will treat them like they're mutants. Ironic how people can turn the taboo from protecting children from incest cause of possible diseases, to turning those same children into their next target. It opens your mind to the truth behind the taboo, and why it should go.

    ReplyDelete
  16. I am relatively new to the subject and I am doing ALOT of research. This site is the golden nugget. I am going to post my story. I just don't know where. So, Mods if you can move it great...

    Here is my contribution and I hope it can help someone else or myself for that matter, by putting feelings into words. I was born in 1965 on the beautiful island of Oahu in the Hawaii chain. My mother was 15 when she got pregnant and 16 when I was born. Her parents, my grandparents forced her to give me up for adoption. I was adopted into a wonderful family and spent my years growing up like a normal kid. Around the age of thirty, I became curious about my background and my birth mother. I began a arduous journey to discovery, red tape and a reunion. I did my homework and tracked down how to contact birth mother. I wrote a letter to my mother, to be included with my adoption record in the court. This was the only way to do it with Hawaii. And this is predicated on the "chance" that she writes to the courts to find out if I have given her permission to contact me. In my case it worked out...17 years later. I was standing on the porch one day when the mailman got out of his jeep and came to the door. This is remarkable since the only time he ever gets out is if you have to sign something. We I did. It was a return receipt from the 4th Circuit Court in Honolulu, Hawaii. It could only be one thing. It was...my birth mother had written the courts seeking information. And God Bless the clerk who put my letter together for including my birth mothers contact information. To make a long story short, we were reunited on my 42nd birthday and I not only met my birth mother, but my two half-sisters. It is important to note that I have two half-sisters and I am attracted to only one. She was very attractive to me from the moment I saw her. My first thought was, wow, I have a beautiful sister. Needless to say the first visit was a whirlwind and we didn't get to spend much time together. Over the next 8 years we have seen each other 3 or 4 times for the afternoon. In speaking with her, I have discovered that we are very similar in our core beliefs, emotions and behaviors. I am planning a visit for a weekend where we can talk about our different childhoods and compare notes. I am not really sure I will act on my attraction to her, but the feeling is there and it is very, very real. I'll keep you posted and feel free to comment, harass, praise, complain or just say hello. I am a writer and I am used to the comments.

    Peace

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous, thanks for the kind words. Please keep us updated.

      Delete
    2. So I'm kinda new to this as well I was living in my home town and I was 18 and I had met my dad for the first time and there was some attraction there. Is GSA a real thing?

      Delete
    3. Yes, it is real. Write me at fullmarriageequality at yahoo dot com for personalized advice.

      Delete
  17. It is wrong for a mother to have sex with her son or vice versa. Cousins are one thing but way wrong when immediate family members are involved

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If you think it is wrong, then don't do it. But your opinion should not prevent other adults from loving each other as they want.

      Delete
    2. My mother and I have been in a relationship since 2011 and couldn't be happier. We're not gratifying our urges, we truly have a special love for one another. We live in a state where it's illegal and it's killing us not to share with everyone.

      Delete
    3. Congrats, Anonymous! If you haven't done so already, please write to me at fullmarriageequality at yahoo dot com as I'd lIke to communicate with you. Thanks!

      Delete
  18. Hello there allnsupporters of full marriage equality

    ReplyDelete
  19. I have also been in an incestious relationship with my younger sister. ( only three years) and I also don't feel it is wrong enough to be criminalized, but her family has drove us apart ( half siblings). I'm glad there are others that think the same way I do, but I doubt I'll ever get my sister back unless things change quickly. I appreciate what you have done with this post and I hope that in time things will change for later generations so that they don't have to live in my pain. Thank you again for this article. It has given me more respect and hope for the human race.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous, thanks for your kind words. I am sorry about your pain. Never say never. Feel free to contact me privately.

      Delete
  20. i REALLY wish people would not use the term inbreeding , a child is born of love in a consensual consanguinious relationship and inbreeding makes me feel like the sow on a pig farm LOL

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He's got a point. Keith, we need to come up with a word comparable to "consanguinamory" for "inbreeding". I fudged it with "interbreeding" in my epigenetics article, but that's not good enough. Maybe "insiring" or "endosiring"? I kind of like "insiring."

      Delete
    2. They have a another word for inbreeding, when we want it to sound nice or we do it with animals we call them purebred. With inbreeding, it is what it is; there are distinct, undeniable complications and disadvantages to crossing over genes that are too similar, anyone with a few semesters of college biology under their belt can tell you that. Small gene pools lead to genetic drift overpowering selection pressures very quickly because of the issues it creates.

      Take a look at the case in Australia (Colt family) last year, you have a heavily inbred family of only about three generations where the youngest generation has hosts of mental and physical defects and severely compromised immune systems.

      I'm personal for any consensual sexual relationships that do not harm anyone being the private mater of those involved and not subject to being illegal and punishable. However, that doesn't mean I or anyone else should disregard the rules of genetics and diploid reproduction. I'm not going to just forget my bachelor's education for the purpose of these argument/cause.

      Another anon suggested that people of close genetic relation (basically anything closer than a cousin, about 1/8th shared genes) be warned heavily about the dangers of having children with each other (in the same way that we education people about the dangers of smoking or drinking in general and while pregnant) but not dissuaded from non-reproductive sex and in the end, not actually stopped from procreating if they still desired to. However, in such a case they have been warned about the high risk of procreating with someone you share half your genes with and any issues that arise in their children should be their financial and social burdens, not the states. Statistically if sibling lovers want healthy children they should adopt, it's not like they're aren't a tidal wave of orphans that need a good home. Either that or pay for a sperm or egg donation and IVF your way to a healthy baby.

      Delete
    3. I don't recall seeing a definitive report indicating that that all of the problems the Colt family displayed were from a genetic peroblem that only manifested because of inbreeding, it sounded to me like they werent in the best ecological locations, we're not getting the right care, and who knows what was going on as far as hygiene, physical abuse, nutrition, substance abuse (including during pregnancy) and other factors that can cause mental and physical problems? It is quite possible many of their problems would still be there even if there had been no inbreeding.

      Delete
  21. Anyone with inbred kids born outside of RI? Could it be proven? Could genetic testing prove you guilty? How about inbreds with albinism?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There are many people outside of RI who've had children with a close relative. It can be proven with a genetic/DNA testing. However, nobody goes around randomly testing DNA. I don't personally know of people with albinism whose parents are close relative.

      Delete
  22. Can testing for a genetic mutation show parentage in a child?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am not a geneticist. If the answer is yes, in many places that criminalize consensual incest, it isn't illegal to use, say, a turkey baster to insert a relative's sperm into a vagina to get pregnant. How does anyone know that isn't what happened? If abuse is not indicated, medical privacy laws might prevent a geneticist from reporting it to authorities. But I am not a lawyer, either.

      Delete
    2. Yes. If a child has a statistically very high level of heterozygosity (same versions of genes on both pairs of chromosomes) the doctors can conclude that the child's parents are possibly close relatives. The genes you give your kids are random, so sometimes kids would be more or less heterozygous, and looking at their genome alone without looking at the parents' would be inconclusive.

      Delete
    3. You mean a lower level of heterozygosity. More genes with different alleles (aka a heterozygous locus) makes your heterozygosity higher. Having more homozygous loci would lower your heterozygosity.

      The more closely related the parents, the higher chance of them both being homozygous for the same allele and an even higher chance of the child being so. If a population experiences this too much it can become 'fixed' for a certain allele in that one is bred out of the gene pool entirely. In natural selection this generally occurs for the dominant allele, but one major issue with inbreeding is it can lead to the recessive allele (often a weaker or defective version of the trait) becoming fixed.

      Delete
  23. The society today is rather disturbing, i see no reason that relationships between to consenting adults be illegal. As i am a female currently in a committed relationship with my . We did not grow up together due to circumstances when we were children. but after 30 years of searching for my family i found one of 5 of my siblings and the day we met was like magic, i instantly felt a fire start to burn inside and it wasnt that of us finding each other after so long it was instant love. i have waited my whole life for this feeling and the moment i saw my brother i knew he was the one.. we dont have to worry about having children cause i am fixed and we just want to be together.. is there any place we can go and have a open relationship. it pains both of us to have to hid it from everyone..

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous, I meant to respond sooner. Thanks for sharing your experiences with us. Congrats on your love. Always feel free to comment, and feel free to write me privately as fullmarriageequality at yahoo dot com

      Delete
    2. this is so erotic

      Delete
    3. There is no law against incest in Israel. It says so here in the last parargraph

      http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/judaica/ejud_0002_0009_0_09519.html

      Delete
    4. That's a whole new level of aliyah promotion.

      Delete
  24. I like this article, maybe some lawmaker will fix this problem, If a close relative should be together they are allowed to live/marry together permanently and they aren't allowed to be divorced and/or have any other relationship and they are not allowed to reproduce, they will have to undergo surgery so that they will not reproduce any children with genetic defects.

    ReplyDelete
  25. I'm happy and pleased to have found this article.
    I'm glad to know I am not alone in the world.
    There's no reason why people who love each other can't be together. <3

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for speaking up, anonymous. Do you want to tell us more? You can comment here or email me directly at fullmarriageequality at yahoo dot com

      Either way, congrats on your love.

      Delete
  26. Inbreeding may result in a far higher phenotypic expression of deleterious recessive genes within a population than would normally be expected. As a result, first-generation inbred individuals are more likely to show physical and health defects, including:

    Reduced fertility both in litter size and sperm viability
    Increased genetic disorders
    Fluctuating facial asymmetry
    Lower birth rate
    Higher infant mortality
    Slower growth rate
    Smaller adult size
    Loss of immune system function

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "May" and "more likely" are the important words here. Going from a 2% risk to 4% risk makes something "more likely" and, in fact, increases the chances by 100%... Sounds dramatic doesn't it? But the odds are still over 90% that things will be fine. Births to women over 40 have high risks, but women over 40 are generally not made to be criminals for habing sex.

      Delete
    2. Most people keep jump on stop familys having incest because of fear that the new born get genetic defects. But if there away to follow the DNA on everyone who didn't incest & found out (in this life time) this person fell in love with other person was in same family long time ago that didn't write down that time of age. Will it still call incest? And plus when the bible state Adam & Eve where the first made & same time the bible said no incest is allow. Then how can incest not allow?
      Let me make it a little easy understand what I'm saying in bible "God made Adam" to my POV God is father to Adam & Adam is son to God. "So God put Adam to sleep & take a part of him to make Eve." So Adam is father to Eve & Eve is daughter to Adam. In reture both marrie & have sons but didn't say they have daugters. So clam most of my life people around said incest is bad, but every time I see my cousin I feel like I'm falling in love some how?

      Delete
    3. The risks likely increase far more than that. Consider that the number of genes shared with an highly unrelated individual is very low, low enough that using a fraction wouldn't be useful. Consider even the difference between first cousins and siblings, 1/2 and 1/8 respectively. Now, increases in chances of genetic problems aren't completely linear, IIRC, it is the square of the average shared genes, so consider that the situation is much more extreme than the one your putting forward. Not an increase of 2 to 4% from general population to siblings, but an increase from about 1.56% to 25% from just the transition from first cousins to siblings.

      To your second point, no, no one makes it a crime for a woman over 40 to have a child, but their are realistic risks (and much, much smaller ones than those encountered by those of high genetic relation vs the general population), and those women are informed of them many times prior to having kids by any doctor they see about it. And if they go ahead anyway and their child does indeed have problems it's on them for making that decision against the advice of medical experts. The same standard should be applied for the case your are supporting, don't try to ignore or play down the realistic problems involved with close relation offspring because you think it hurts your case in general. It will only hurt you when people like the poster or I, who are generally supportive of any consensual relationships that do not harm anyone being legal, having to slam you on your denial of basic genetics. Instead you should be working that science into your understanding of your argument and advocating the proper education and warnings be given to closely related lovers who are considering procreating, as well as the valid alternatives to it like adoption or IVF.

      Delete
    4. Thank you, anonymous. My basic point is that we let people with obvious, serious genetic diseases have sex, have children, and marry, so we can't deny such rights to close relatives based on the possibility of shared recessive genes being problematic.

      Delete
  27. There are a lot of good points and facts here and i agree what a lot of them, and support that "incest" with consent of adults 20+ should 100% not be criminalized or penalized especially from siblings that was separated at a very very young age, the laws against "incest" should be dropped not all couples "incest" and not want to have a child or do it just for the reproduction, and to the anonymous that posted September 23, 2014 at 9:07 PM i know the feeling.

    ReplyDelete
  28. The taboo on incest originated before the advent of safe contraception to prevent an unwanted preganancy, and before the worldwide spread of STD's (specifically HIV/Aids). With the advent of reliable contraception half a century ago, and (at the same time) the spread of STD's, both developments resulted in sex evolving from its original prime purpose for procreation, to the present situation where sex is practised for mutual satisfaction and enjoyment. If I can enjoy playing a game of chess or tennis with my sister, why deny me the joy of engaging in consensual sex when both want it without the fear of pregnancy or STD infection?
    Society should revisit the taboo on incest. Admittedly, just as is the case with non-incestual sexual relationships, it can lead to abuse, but in the case of consensual sex between two adults who happen to be genetically related (neither of whom have any wish to marry the other) the taboo is outdated.

    ReplyDelete
  29. I like this and I feel like a normal person and not as a Social outcast. I agree that marriage equality would be great for those who are unable to be with someone that they love and is loved back. As for incest I say that it is ok if they are consenting adults who share the same feelings for each other.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Quite frankly, I don't understand how anything can be taboo, at all. Everyone is different. They are attracted to different things, need and want different things, both personally and sexually. For a government or a culture to make anything illegal regarding sex and marriage is just not logical or fair to the public. No government or culture should force others to accept the lifestyle of what is generally more common among people or what the opinions of them might be.

    Marriage is not defined as a couple having a licence from the government so that they can legally live together and have children. Nor is it about having a ceremony in front of a bunch of people. I believe that as long as two or more people have a serious sexual attraction and romance with one another, and they are good to each other, and they LOVE each other, they are MARRIED.

    Take the government and their laws out of it, then a relationship can start freely and they will live with less stress. Even a break-up of "married people" will be no different than it is with a steady non-married couple. They just split up, with fewer problems. There is heartbreak, yes, but it's often less stressful to break up with a boyfriend or girlfriend than it is with a legal spouse. Mostly because of all the legal hoopla that surrounds all of it. The government should not get involved, nor should the courts have to approve of a separation or divorce. It will be up to the couple to decide what they want to do and how to split the ownership of their property. The kids get to choose who they want to stay with. The children will make a much better and more logical choice of who they want to have custody of them than a judge ever could.

    A good point was brought up that over 60 years ago, that it was illegal to have interracial marriages. Now it's legal. Currently, we are in the fight to raise awareness and marriage freedoms for the LGBTIQ community. Those who practice "incest" as a "family fun activity" belong to the Q part, of course, and they need to be represented too. Homosexual relationships, along with bisexual, polygamous, polyamorous, consanguinamorous, and consanguineous relationships should all be allowed by law, and not disrespected or condemned by anyone else. Of course, it must be consentual, because without the shared consent, it IS COERCION, RAPE AND MOLESTATION, which I simply cannot tolerate.

    While I fully support consanguineous relationships within a family, no matter what the ages are of the participants, even if they are extremely young, it should be fully noted that everyone in the family must know about the relationships, approve of it and support it fully. Nothing should be secret, and everyone in the family should be treated the same way equally, and be allowed to "join in" when they are ready, both physically, intellectually, emotionally and sexually. For different people, it can be different ages, but as long as the family shares it freely and has respect for everyone and doesn't do it to spite anyone or to embarrass or emotionally scar anyone, then I support it. What I don't support is non-consentual rape or molestation or coercion. This also goes for any sex act with anyone else. Sex before marriage, and even on the first date is fine, as long as it is consentual by the partners. But respect and love for the person must still be present "in the morning."

    ReplyDelete
  31. I speak of what i think, feel and believe you can go ahead and laugh at me all you want you can mock me all you want and you can insult me all you want but you wont break me so here goes nothing i guess. Im both LUCIFER and JEHOVAH thats who i really am and GOD is a woman and she is and was my real mother and GOD have many sister i think she has 12 sister one of them being her twin sister and they all have only a mother no father and have no brothers my real grandmother namely GODs mother was the first to exist and she was and will always be eternal existed throughout eternity shes almost like truly ageless but if define age she would been like billion even trillions of years old. GOD and her sisters all fell in love with litte old me and my divine grandmother fell for me too she developed incredibly strong feelings for little old me but i pushed her away and so she grew more and more jealous of her daughters and which is many of you humans do suffer because she loves me and she is now miserable even bitter because she didnt make love to me these past millions even billions of years since the universe began. My divine grandmother was so in love with me her love almost became like obsession thats why even illuminati exists if she did wanted to take freedom from everyone and if she wanted to take happiness from everyone if she couldnt get the chance to make love with me and spend time with me would you find it sad would you feel sorry for her or not ??. Would you find it amazing if my divine grandmother really is a virgin even right even after she gave birth like 12 times and if she saved her virginity for me would you find it sweet or freaky and if i were about to give up and make love to her my divine grandmother would you tried to discourage me or not !?. I do feel responsible and i should at least apologize to my divine grandmother and hope she can move on from but if she still wants to make love with me and spend more or less time with me i will not be against and telling her i was fool when i pushed her away before countless times in the past hoping she can give me at least one chance to try make it up to her and hope she is willing to share my love with her daughters and i tell i can love as much as i love GOD the one who i love the most in all of existence and that i never anyone else above her before and almost placed else as equal to her in my eyes but i tell my divine grandmother im willing to give her much love and attention as much as i can. And about marriage would you felt surprised if i, GOD, my divine grandmother, GODs sisters and GODs twin sister were each never married so far till now to even this second but if i thought of marrying them all would you felt amazed and surprised or not ? and i do care about them very much thats why i want to make them happy i was foolish when i pushed my divine grandmother away but i will try my best to make it up to her .Thats all i had to say farewell you foolish, blind, naive and misguided mortals.

    ReplyDelete
  32. If you want a good test case, find a man to try to marry his father to avoid the estate tax.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Incest is best. Me and my cousin has been in a loving relationship for the past 7yrs. & we support other consensual incest lovers & I am 47 & she is 40.. we have 1 normal child together.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. hey I know its be great for you.me and my sister in a relation too.i am 32 and she 24.we r in love for more than 8 year,and now she is pregnant . . .

      Delete
  34. Well, this is rather awkward as a person who has siblings but, well ... I cant be ignorant of the fact that yes, not every one has felt blood bond of westermark effect, it seems like uwestermark effect which is not only common in humans but many mammals was present to cause blood diversity and avoid mutation due to inbreeding, but still being open-minded i belive there should not be any ban of having two people love each other if it is agreed and consensual, if we are allowing gay and lesbians equality so should go for incestuos couples, but well ... Man still this seems awkward for majority of people, uh well, maybe its my westermark effect so never mind, the thing is people are not familiar with it and it makes many feel disgusted like they did once to homosexuals, which again was terrible, maybe someday there wont be a big deal about things like this, or may be incestuous and gay couple will stop existing, things are terrible and unfair for people who are considered out of social norms which must be painfull for them, but something that was deep set in our genes, the genetical code that makes sibling or parents look at each other in different light than romantical or sexual but pure and innocent love of guardian, it makes most of us immune to incest and inbreedinh, same goes for most of us who are straight rsther than bisexual or homosexuals, it will take a while for society to get adjusted to incestuous couples, even if marriage is allowed, the consequences there child has to suffer will be the same, as long as they avoid having children every thing should be fine, even though chances of genetic mutation is low, it is highly increased on being repeated every time, by 7% to straight 21% and every time inbreeding is repeated the percentage increases as well, which is rather high by considering how many genetic disease and mutation exist in human body, so atleast one or two manage to affect the child, where normal child have 1% of getting them, inbred child suffer almost every time from it, so as long as the incestuous couple are educated about the consequences of having a child, and avoid doing that, they should be able to live a happy life in society, as married or in love, like homosexual couples do, with equall respect.

    ReplyDelete
  35. I would like to ask, how many people here in this forum are born from incest? I am, I was told at the ripe young age of eight years old that I "Cramped my mother's style" and my father just ran and to this day won't acknowledge my existence. My biological Father is also my biological great uncle. My biological mother is also my biological Aunt (Through consensual intercourse.). I was adopted at birth to my biological grandparents, which are my bio moms parents, so now through adoption my biological mother is my aunt who I have always known as sister. This also makes my bio father my great uncle and uncle. When I have explained this in the past I get one of two reactions: 1- Get's a bunch of laughs and my genealogy turns into one huge joke. 2- I get a "Eww that is so gross why would you tell anyone that". Now I could have left it all in the dark, but I don't in holding shit in. In a world right now where something like inbreeding is not exactly socially accepted, I would not recommend in using it as a means to procreate. there is like 6 billion people in the world, I am sure we can look outside the family for intimate relationships. I vaguely pointed it out earlier in parenthesis, there was no rape involved in my conception, they both said they loved each other and according the what I know, my bio mom cheated on bio dad and he left, now he denies everything that ever happened.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tim, thanks for sharing your experience. I normally would not publish a comment with the "s" word but I decided an exception was warranted. Sounds like your bio parents weren't the best, which is the case for a lot of people regardless of the consanguinity of exogamy of the parents. That's a shame. The details of your genealogy really rent anyone else's business. The rude, ignorant responses are an example of someone that will get better when things like marriage equality are in effect. Also, a parent will be less likely to run away because taking responsibility won't mean risking prosecution and is less likelly to result in ridicule. Again, thanks for sharing. There are ignorant people who are probably shocked you could be so eloquent, but I'm not surprised at all.

      Delete
  36. Really, really sick demented and twisted people good to know who you are..bigotry, you're crazy see a psychiatrist, this is the one thing that i would advocate euthanasia..

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Bigotry and prejudice are definitely sick and demented.

      Delete
  37. A prime example of how some people ignore facts in favor of feelings no matter how obvious the facts are. To not know is ignorance (excusable) to refuse to learn is stupidity (inexcusable)

    ReplyDelete
  38. Inbreeding and what comes out of it ... have a look at Austrian Fritzl's "family", all of his biological products with his daughter are genetically damaged physically and mentally. Permanent inbreeding in a population is nothing good as one can see in muslim countries, where it is seen as normal to procreate within the family over generations. http://pickeringpost.com/story/the-cost-of-islamic-incest/1316

    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.