The dangers of genetic malfunction from incestuous reproduction are greatly exaggerated, almost to the point of being non-existant.

Did you hear about the guy who refused to let his son marry a virgin? He claimed that if she wasn’t good enough for her own family, she wasn’t good enough for theirs…

Read further down the article though. The man is being held for having a pet alligator, not for any form of sexual deviance whatsoever.

Aside from the sole purpose of violating the couple’s privacy and enticing the rest of the community to ridicule and scorn them, what was the point of this article?

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not advocating incest, but its this kind of irresposible journalism that really pisses me off.

You cannot suggest that incest is morally wrong because morals are objective from person to person and from society to society. And don’t spout about the danger to the family as a social institution, because firstly I should think that loving, consentual incest would actually strengthen the family unit, and secondly, the claim is absolutely ludicrous, as are the similar claims of gay marriage destroying the family. If you don’t allow one, you can’t allow the other, and why stop there? Why not outlaw racial inbreeding and marriages of people of different faith? After all, they are just as likely to destroy the ‘family’ as is (consentual) incest.

Wow. Learn to read the first sentence.

I retract my statement.

Piffle.

Incest is quite a victimless crime. Many people seem to have incest and rape somehow associated together in their minds, but obviously they can be mutually exclusive.

What goes on between two consentual adults is the business of no one. The potential for “destroying the family unit” is a non-issue. I can think of a thousand and one things which threaten family happiness more than incest.

Too bad the Earth doesn’t run on reason.

There is no doubt in my mind that if society’s taboo on incest were not so deeply and thoroughly ingrained in the collective psyche, it would be commonly, if not openly, practiced. Incest remains one of the few sexual “deviations” that goes unspoken, even behind closed doors. However, the sexual tension and attraction which it generates is, I believe, present in probably 75% of households.

I can tell you that I grew up in a healthy, well-adjusted home that saw no abuse of any kind, physical, sexual, or emotional. My parents were unwaveringly loving and supportive. And I never outgrew the deep sexual yearning that burned inside me for my late mother. Of course, I never voiced my “shameful thoughts” and I believe she would have been horrified by them. But who knows? I sometimes wonder if I was actually picking up ultra-subliminal vibes that may have eventually led to the ultimate tryst.

Even as a happily married adult, I harbored sexual fantasies of her. I will never know from where these feelings arose, or why they persisted decades beyond the traditional Oedipal pre-pubescence. But you may count me among the legions of normal, well-adjusted, completely functional folks who understand that incest is not just for perverts.

I am only a preschool teacher my education is not extensive. But I do know about about abuse. For whom ever said incest can make a family stronger you are a pedophile plain and simple.A family that condones incest and marries their daughter or son is the lowest on the totem pole in the chain of life. You are a nothing but a predator. How many intelligent decent people with a career marry their family members? You are to be loathed and despised you are a creature not of god but of some deviate force of nature. And the men or woman who marry their children you or someone else have ruined them through the years and I am sure put them through years of pain and abuse. They don’t love you they just don’t know any better you offer them a sick twisted love and to them that is better than no love.

I happen to breed cats and spend much of my time and money in/on cat shows. Many breed’s of cats suffer neurological and psychological problems due to in-breeding. Fortunately the Cat Fancier’s Association carefully tracks all bloodlines.
As my father explained to me when I was 13, sex isn’t just about not getting pregnant. There are also disease’s, emotional, and psychological ramifications involved. Humans, along with 99.9% of mammals are not emotionally set up to have sexual relations with ones own family. Native Americans would often forbid sex within the same tribe, and send women to other tribes when they reached adulthood.

I once woke up with my cousin’s hand down my shorts, he had fallen asleep that way. I have no idea what the hell he was doing alla that time that i was asleep. i was 9 years old. i have been fucked up ever since. i couldn’t tell from fear. i have never felt comfortale around anyone since, my trust has been lost in the world, and that isn’t fair.

I would suggest that one should differentiate between child-child, adult-child and adult-adult incest. The first may be just the usual experimentation, but the second is not, and should be discouraged, just like any other exploitive action. However, adult-adult incest is really no bodys business except the adults themselves. However, can you imagine the complications amongst the familymembers if the female became pregnant?

there some states where is ok to marrying your firsr cousin.i really see nothin wrong.you could marrying your aunt.mother,sister.

Why is the incest taboo wrongfully carried over to include Stepsiblings?

I am sexualy involved with my 21 year old daughter. She initiated sexuall relations last year, when she
graduated from college. She admitted to me after we had engaged in passionate intercourse that she had planned to secuce me for years, and that she was vvery happy now that we had had sex together. She does not want to end the relationship. The point is, we are both consenting adultls, there is no coersion, there is no domination or abuse. As long as my daughter wants to have me as her lover, I am willing to continue the relationship. When she wants to end the relationship, then it will end. I asked my dauther whether she wanted to end the sexual relationship, and she was very adamant that she did not.

We do take the necessary precautions against pregnancy. She is using oral contraceptives, and we frequently use a spermicide.

i think consensual incest between adults should be allowed. its not the government’s place to say what two consenting adults do with each other behind closed doors.

and i think, as long as you have reached the age of consent, no one should tell you who to have sex with, you should be able to tell whether or not you want the relationship by yourself.

i think, pedophilia charges should be raised heavily in order to discourage it, but incest should be completely legalized. there should be no mention of ‘incest’ in lawbooks.

I personally think this article takes the spin & the gray area out of the whole gay marriage issue & am pretty much in agreement with it:

April 30, 2003, 9:35 a.m.
The Libertarian Question
Incest, Homosexuality, and Adultery.

Here is a mystery at the heart of the gay-marriage debate. I call it the “libertarian question.” The libertarian question (really a series of questions) goes like this: Why should any form of adult consensual sex be illegal? What rational or compelling interest does the state have in regulating consensual adult sex? More specifically, how does the marriage of two gay men undermine my marriage? Will the fact that two married gay men live next door make me leave my wife? Hardly. So how, then, does gay marriage undermine heterosexual marriage? Why not get the state out of such matters altogether?

The libertarian question is mysterious because, in modern society, we find it difficult to understand the continuing necessity of shared moral standards — and of collective taboos against actions that violate those standards. Traditional societies depend on shared moral sentiments and collective taboos. Modern democracies, for the most part, have rejected these forms of collective morality in favor of an emphasis on personal freedom. Yet the truth is, although their workings are mysterious to us, shared moral codes (and a structure of taboos that guards those codes) can never be entirely dispensed with.

INCEST
Let’s approach the libertarian question about gay marriage from a new angle. The flap over Senator Rick Santorum’s remarks has raised the question of incest. If homosexual sex is declared private, why won’t consensual adult incest fall under the same sort of protection? (In raising this question, Sen. Santorum was simply echoing Justice Byron White’s decision in Bowers v. Hardwick.)

In his very useful exploration of the consensual incest problem, (See “Incest Repellent?” and “Incest Repellent, Continued.”) William Saletan points to a case of incest in which a woman was drawn into a sexual relationship with her uncle while she was still a minor, but continued that relationship as an adult. The woman was found guilty of incest and sentenced to supervised probation. After violating probation (presumably to return to her uncle) she was sentenced to five years in jail. Why should this woman have been jailed?

The prevalence of consensual adult incest is difficult to judge. It may be relatively rare. The deeper problem, of course, is the sexual abuse of children by older family members. The impossibility of real consent, as well as the potential psychological damage in cases of incestuous child abuse, are matters of very serious concern. But incestuous child abuse can obviously be made illegal. What is wrong with consensual adult incest?

Let’s return to the libertarian question. If a man happens to walk around town arm and arm with his adult niece, is that going to make me abuse my teenaged niece? In most cases, probably not. Clearly, however, there is a connection. Our collective horror at incest-even adult incest-acts as a protective barrier against the temptation to incest with minors. The very real dangers of child abuse within families shows us that a significant number of people are potentially susceptible to sexual interest in the children under their control. Our collective taboo on incest, as expressed in our laws, helps to offset that potential temptation.

The mechanism here is embodied in the law, but goes well beyond the mere mechanical workings of the law. The real mechanism is collective and psychological. The law on incest expresses a shared moral value. It is a collective statement. As such, it reinforces a sense of disgust that helps to ward off temptation.

To see the mechanism of our incest taboo at work, imagine a world in which consensual adult incest was legal. Once we see or hear of couples — even a relatively small number — who engage in legal, consensual, adult incestuous relationships, the whole idea of incest with minors becomes thinkable. Preventing incest with minors from becoming thinkable is the purpose of the taboo.

The reason we need an incest taboo is because there is no effective way for the state to protect children from sexual abuse by family members. Children are essentially at the mercy of the adults who care for them. So only by building into adults a psychological mechanism of disgust and horror at incest can society protect children from the psychological harm of abuse by close relatives. The taboo runs deeper than the law itself. Yet the law embodies and reinforces the taboo. Were the law to be eliminated — even for consenting adults only — the taboo on incest with minors would be weakened, or break down-maybe not in all families, or even most, but for far too many.

HOMOSEXUALITY
The taboo against homosexuality works in a similar fashion. But what, exactly, does the taboo on homosexuality protect? There is more than one way to approach that question, but the short answer is: The taboo on homosexuality protects marriage. Or, to look at the same problem from a slightly different angle, the institution of Western marriage, in its most traditional form, has been protected by a many-sided taboo against all sexuality outside of its confines — and against non-procreative sexuality within it. Just as the taboo on incest reduces the temptation to child abuse, the taboo on non-marital and non-reproductive sexuality helps to cement marital unions, and helps prevent acts of adultery that would tear those unions apart.

As an ultimate symbol of sexuality for the sake of pleasure (rather than reproduction) homosexuality has traditionally been taboo. That taboo was embodied and expressed in sodomy laws. Rigorous enforcement of these laws was secondary — and in any case, next to impossible. The important thing was the statement of collective values made by the laws against sodomy. By making homosexuality taboo, the law reinforced the idea that the highest and proper purpose of sexuality itself was to bind and energize families.

Of course, over the last 30 years, the taboo on homosexuality, like the broader taboo on a purely pleasure-seeking sexuality inside and outside the confines of marriage, has substantially broken down. And it’s not surprising that, as a consequence of our changed understanding of sexuality, the rates of divorce and out of wedlock birth have dramatically risen. Of course, at the same time as the divorce rate has risen, the weakening of the old taboos has substantially increased our personal freedom. And our new sexual freedom has benefited no one more than homosexuals, who no longer serve, in nearly the degree they once did, as ultimate symbols of forbidden sexuality.

On balance, I think we as a society have gained much from the weakening of the old sexual taboos, although it is important to keep in mind that we are in fact dealing with a trade-off here. Traditional sexual taboos protect marriage, and their weakening cannot help but weaken marriage — even as they increase personal freedom. But again, on balance, I believe that at least some of the weakening in the old sexual system has been worth the trade-off.

ADULTERY
What we need to understand — but do not — is that gay marriage will undermine the structure of taboos that continue to protect heterosexual marriage — and will do so far more profoundly than either the elimination of sodomy laws, or the general sexual loosening of the past thirty years. Above all, marriage is protected by the ethos of monogamy — and by the associated taboo against adultery. The real danger of gay marriage is that it will undermine the taboo on adultery, thereby destroying the final bastion protecting marriage: the ethos of monogamy.

Gay marriage threatens monogamy in two ways. First, gay marriage threatens monogamy because homosexual couples — particularly male homosexual couples — tend to see monogamy as nonessential, even to the most loyal and committed relationships. Of course, advocates argue that legal gay marriage will change all that — that marriage will make gays more monogamous. But it is just as likely (indeed, far more likely) that the effect will go in the other direction — openly non-monogamous married gay couples will break the connection between marriage and monogamy. (For more on this, see the NRO Gay-Marriage Debate, particularly my, “Point of No Return.”)

Even more powerfully, gay marriage threatens monogamy through its tendency to lead, on a slippery slope, to the legalization of polygamy and polyamory. (For more on this, see my Commentary article, “What Is Wrong With Gay Marriage.”

It’s important to understand what the danger of openly non-monogamous gay marriages, and of legalized polygamy and polyamory, really is. The key problem here is not, say, that polygamous marriages are unfair or exploitative to women. (That is a legitimate concern, of course, but it is not the greatest social danger posed by legalized polygamy.) The real problem is the effect of openly non-monogamous gay unions, and of legalized polygamy and polyamory, on the ethos of monogamy.

Even in the wake of the sexual-cultural changes of the Sixties, there is still a strong consensus in our society that marriage means monogamy. That consensus is expressed in the taboo on adultery. Legal recognition for group marriage, and for openly non-monogamous gay unions, would effectively destroy the taboo on adultery. That doesn’t meant that everyone would instantly go out and commit adultery — any more than everyone exposed to legal incestuous unions between consenting adults would engage in child abuse. But there would be a significant social effect — and it would be over and above the weakening of marriage that has already occurred in the wake of the changes since the Sixties.

The libertarian asks, Just because two married gay men live next door, is that going to make me leave my wife? In a way, the answer is “Yes.” For one thing, as a new generation grows up exposed to gay couples who openly define their marriages in non-monogamous terms, the concept of marriage itself will gradually change. No doubt, movies and television in a post-gay-marriage world will be filled with stories of the “cutting edge” understandings of open marriage being pioneered by the new gay couples, even if the actual number of such married gay couples is relatively small.

A large segment of the gay community looks forward to gay marriage for precisely this reason. Many thoughtful gay activists see same-sex marriage as a chance to redefine marriage itself — stripping marriage of what they see as its outdated and constricting connection to monogamy. And of course, even more powerfully than openly non-monogamous gay marriages, legalized group marriage would destroy the taboo against adultery. (Lot’s of potential for movies and TV there.)

Still, the libertarian asks, Would the group marriage next door really make me leave my wife? Maybe not. Of course, the married commune next door might invite the two of you over for some fun, with potentially problematic results for your marriage. But even that is not the real problem. The deeper difficulty is simply the breaking of the taboo on adultery. Sodomy laws were barely enforced, yet they made a collective statement about social attitudes toward non-marital and non-reproductive sexuality. Similarly, incest laws are rarely invoked. Yet their existence reinforces the horror of incest, and helps prevent the sort of violations that make incestuous temptation thinkable.

So the mere social statement that marriage does not mean monogamy is where the real danger of legalized gay-marriage and polyamory lie. And the collapse of consensus about shared social institutions really does effect us as individuals. Once we as a society no longer take it for granted that marriage means monogamy, you may not decide to leave your wife. But you may be more likely to give in to the temptation of an affair. And that could mean the end of your marriage, whether that’s what you wanted going into the affair or not. (For another way of looking at this problem, see my, “Code of Honor,” where I compare the operation of the taboo against adultery to the working of a college’s anti-cheating honor code.)

As with the taboos on incest and sodomy, society can’t enforce the taboo on adultery with laws. Laws on matters of sexual conduct do make a difference, but less as enforcement mechanisms than as embodiments of common values. Precisely because the state cannot monitor and prosecute adultery, society writes a taboo against the practice into our hearts. The laws of marriage as currently constituted embody and express that taboo. Transform those laws, and the taboo will disappear.

The ongoing need for shared social understandings on matters pertaining to the family and sexuality does not fit neatly into the libertarian playbook. Social and sexual taboos are the stuff of traditional societies. But the truth is, so long as we live, not merely as isolated individuals, but in families together, we shall be in need of social and sexual taboos.

If the controversy over Senator Rick Santorum’s remarks has made it possible to openly discuss the real basis of our shared social and sexual understandings, then it will have done some good. Unlike Sen. Santorum, I would rather accept some disruption in family stability than go back to the days when homosexuality itself was deeply tabooed. The increase in freedom and fairness is worth it. Yet there has been a terrible social cost for the changes of the sixties. We need to mitigate those costs. And we certainly do not need to risk the destruction of an already weakened family system by radically undermining the ethos of monogamy.

Gay marriage would set in motion a series of threats to the ethos of monogamy from which the institution of marriage may never recover. Yet up to now, our society has been unable to face the real costs and consequences of the proposed change. That is partly because of an understandable sympathy for the gay-rights movement. But it also reflects the sheer inability of modern folk to grasp the operation, necessity — or even the existence — of the system of moral consensus and prohibition upon which society itself depends.

— Stanley Kurtz is a research fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University

This guy obviously did his research & i couldn’t of said it better myself.
What do you guys think?

Kurtz is well-known to be a right-wing asswipe, and you are very naive to believe his bullshit.

sounds yummy to me… kinda wish my daddy had played with me in my sweet spot while I was growing up. I believe that families should share everything.. thats the truth no exceptions.

My daughter and I have been enjoying sex for just over a year now. I’m 51 and she is 31. My wife took off a few years ago. I’ve never remarried and date only from time to time. My daughters husband left her and my two granddaughters now 11 and 13 little over a year ago. They had no place to stay so they moved in with me. Couple months later we started having sex. It happened and neither one of us wants it to stop. I can’t have anymore kids so we don’t have to worry about her getting knocked up. Knowing we don’t have to use protection makes it more entense. I have a three bedroom home and my daughters room and mine have a door between us. After the girls are gone to bed and my daughters goes to bed, she then comes into my room the furtherest down the hall from the girls room and we enjoy lots of slow passionate sex. I think as long as both partners are willing then go for IT!!

This opinion piece - and that’s what it is - is based on faulty logic on top of broad assumptions. Incest between consenting adults harms nobody; adultery has always been rampant because man is not supposed to be monogamous; polyamory isn’t illegal, and unless this guy is gay himself I don’t know where he comes up with his conclusions about why gay marriage would damage anything but his fragile hold on sanity. Then again, if he’s a right winger, he’s probably one of these gay bashing gays who are in denial and in the closet.

I THINK INCEST IS VERY GROSE—I’D KILL MY HUSBAND IF HE WERE TO EVER HAVE SEX WITH OUR DAUGHTER IN THE FUTURE- BUT AS NASTY AS IT IS, IF THE TWO OF THEM ARE CONSENTING AND ADULTS-IT SHOULD NOT BE ILLEGAL. THE GOVERNMENT SHOULDNT HAVE ANY SAY ON IT. BUT IT IS NASTY!
ANY SEXUAL PERFORMANCE WITH A CHILD SHOULD BE EMMEDIATE DEATH PENALTY! NO IFS ANDS OR BUTTS ABOUT IT. CHILD MOLLESTERS SHOULD DIE!

Once when my daughter wanted to borrow the car, I whipped out my dick and told her she knew what she had to do.
While on her knees, ready to blow me, she complained about the shit on my dick, “daddy, you’ve got poo-poo on your weenie”.
“I know, says I, your brother also wanted to borrow the car”.

there is nothing wrong with a man and a women in love like me age 50 and my 76 year old mother i feel like such a big man a real stud when iam on top of my mother humping her while she smokes her lucky strikes

I had a few experiences with an ex-girlfriend and her sister a few years ago. The first time was the result of a big bottle of jager, and when we all woke up together the next day, it was the most awkward, embarrasing moment you could imagine. It took a few days for me and my girl to even talk about it, and we decided we had to all 3 talk about what had happened. Subsequently, we all admitted that we had enjoyed it on a whole other level than any sex that any of us had ever had. It happened again that day, and about 10 or so times over the next few months. The two of them also began having it with each other, which ended up causing the first problem, and it was a massive one. They were drunk at a wedding, and invited their stepdad’s daughter back to their room. She went, so they thought she was ok with it, but she freaked when they got physical, and told their parents. In the drama that followed, the parents also found out about my involvement, sent my girl’s sister to a mental hospital disguised as a “finishing school”, and forced my girl under threat of being commited to break away from me. What’s my point? Whether or not this sort of thing is inherently wrong, in the world we live in, it will inevitably cause major, potentially life-shattering problems. Watch your step.

When I was a teen and in trouble with the law and school my mom (she was a single mom)took me to her bed in the same way that many Japanese moms take their sons to bed. It was good for me, good for her. I would not have made it through school without disastrous results had it not been for her understanding and courage. My wife doesn’t have sex with our sons, but they aren’t having the problems I had, either. But if she did we could work it out. We are, after all, a FAMILY, and that’s a special unit that sometimes needs to think outside the box.

my mother and I have been having a sexual relationship for the past 26 years. I have been married twice in that time and have two sons that I love very much. But the Love I have for my mother far exceeds that. I got her pregant while my wife was pregant with my second son. Mom lost our child after three months she said that was the saddest day of her life because she so wanted to have my child, we tried after that several times but she never got pregant again. As we have both gotten older our sex life together has gotten better and better. We some times talk about if she had been able to have a child with me she says it would have truely made her a very happy women. It always feels so good to cum where I came from. She says it feels so good to have my hand on her breast to caress the to feel my tounge on her pussy to feel my stiff hard cock thrust in her to make her cum she tells me it make her feel complete when I take her. I know some people say this is wrong but when to adults Love each other and want to be Lovers it should not matter if they are related or not. IF you want to e-mail me please feel free to but untill them I am going to go and get in bed with my mom right now and give her what she wants most. Her sons stiff hard cock.

All comments become the property of PervScan. You must use an email address to post a comment. However, PervScan disallows email addresses in the text of comments.