Incest rears its ugly head

[HoughMade]

Because this is what your side has been reduced to.

"Well, you're a....."

My side? What side am I on in this....cite please.

 

[rambone]

HoughMade, I know you have posted a lot without taking a side. Why not dive in and commit? Do you think incest should be illegal?

(Do you hate liberty? lol )

 

[printcraft]

 

[HoughMade]

HoughMade, I know you have posted a lot without taking a side. Why not dive in and commit? Do you think incest should be illegal?

(Do you hate liberty? lol )

I'll take the challenge.....kind of.

I do not believe that incest is a Constitutional right. If I lived someplace where it was legal, I would see no reason to push for a law. I live someplace where most of it is illegal, and if people agitated to legalize it, I would probably roll my eyes and not get involved either way. In other words, "should" it be illegal? I generally like less laws rather than more, but I really don't care one way or the other about this.

 

[JollyMon]

Its it possible to be more vague on which side you stand? Top or Bottom?

 

[Arthur Dent]

I'll take the challenge.....kind of.

I do not believe that incest is a Constitutional right. If I lived someplace where it was legal, I would see no reason to push for a law. I live someplace where most of it is illegal, and if people agitated to legalize it, I would probably roll my eyes and not get involved either way. In other words, "should" it be illegal? I generally like less laws rather than more, but I really don't care one way or the other about this.

In other words you won't commit.

 

[HoughMade]

In other words you won't commit.

I am committed to the notion that incest is not Constitutionally protected and that it is within the state's power to prohibit marriages as it has. I don't have a dog in the hunt as to whether it is legal or not. Why must I?

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

I am committed to the notion that incest is not Constitutionally protected and that it is within the state's power to prohibit marriages as it has. I don't have a dog in the hunt as to whether it is legal or not. Why must I?

I think I'm on board with you.

Say there was a bill to "legalize" incest. I would not support it.

Now, say there was some sort of omnibus, comprehensive bill to repeal some number of laws...and let's say for the sake of argument the vast majority of the ones were stupid laws like seat belt laws, texting laws, selling beer on Sundays, etc. and the repeal of the incest law was amongst them, I would support the repeal of that bundle--assuming the overall effect would be positive, in my view.

 

[hornadylnl]

I am committed to the notion that incest is not Constitutionally protected and that it is within the state's power to prohibit marriages as it has. I don't have a dog in the hunt as to whether it is legal or not. Why must I?

Do the 49 states not named on your marriage license have the right to deny you or your spouse the legal rights granted by marriage?

 

[Liberty Sanders]

In other words you won't commit.

And why should he commit?

As I've stated previously, if the only issue is that some people would be offended by it, to hell with them. If a guy wants to marry his mother I don't care EXCEPT for the fact that there's more to it.

I'm uneducated in the genetic ramifications involved concerning offspring. If someone in the medical community can assure me that there are ways around it then I say, yes, legalize it. Somehow I don't expect that anytime soon.

Until that happens I also am not committed. Too many loose ends.

 

[hornadylnl]

And why should he commit?

As I've stated previously, if the only issue is that some people would be offended by it, to hell with them. If a guy wants to marry his mother I don't care EXCEPT for the fact that there's more to it.

I'm uneducated in the genetic ramifications involved concerning offspring. If someone in the medical community can assure me that there are ways around it then I say, yes, legalize it. Somehow I don't expect that anytime soon.

Until that happens I also am not committed. Too many loose ends.

Does the key to the chastity belt come with the marriage license? I'm unaware how denying a marriage license to related individuals prevents children born of incest. Again, denying the license only serves to make the opponents FEEL like they've done something.

 

[HoughMade]

Do the 49 states not named on your marriage license have the right to deny you or your spouse the legal rights granted by marriage?

When you can provide evidence that incestual marriage itself was historically recognized as a fundamental right the Constitution was drafted to protect, then you may have a point.

 

[Liberty Sanders]

Does the key to the chastity belt come with the marriage license? I'm unaware how denying a marriage license to related individuals prevents children born of incest. Again, denying the license only serves to make the opponents FEEL like they've done something.

It doesn't...separate issue.

 

[Arthur Dent]

When you can provide evidence that incestual marriage itself was historically recognized as a fundamental right the Constitution was drafted to protect, then you may have a point.

9th amendment.

 

[hornadylnl]

When you can provide evidence that incestual marriage itself was historically recognized as a fundamental right the Constitution was drafted to protect, then you may have a point.

So heterosexual marriage and the regulation of it is in the Bill of Rights?

 

[Arthur Dent]

I am committed to the notion that incest is not Constitutionally protected and that it is within the state's power to prohibit marriages as it has. I don't have a dog in the hunt as to whether it is legal or not. Why must I?

It's a simple yes or no question. Or is your opinion determined by who pays your fee?

 

[IndyGal65]

HAHAHA!!! I just spewed my drink!!

 

[rambone]

When you can provide evidence that incestual marriage itself was historically recognized as a fundamental right the Constitution was drafted to protect, then you may have a point.

I feel like the "marriage" discussion throughout the thread is a separate issue and a distraction. I've been focused on the felony law that throws people in prison for acts of consensual sex.

 

[jamil]

Must be blood in the water. They're circling.

 

[HoughMade]

It's a simple yes or no question. Or is your opinion determined by who pays your fee?

That is exactly right. This is a simple question and a simple issue. I must have a firm belief about every issue. I must always take a side. Is that a law?

As for the Level 5 felony statute....I feel the same way as the marriage statute. It is within the power of the state to regulate this and it is a proper to be subjected to the legislative process. People who feel one way or the other should let their legislators know. I am perfectly fine with this issue being driven by people who have strong beliefs in this area one way or the other. I don't. I am perfectly fine with the notion that some things that are morally abhorrent to me are legal. Likewise, I understand why why some people may feel like it is important to have these laws for more than just personal belief issues. Some of these reasons have been articulated above. Some people think these reasons are valid, others do not. As I said, it's a matter for the legislature and for people who feel passionately one way or the other. I am not one of those people.