NationStates Jolt Archive

Because I believe that 16-year-olds and 60-year-olds are at very different stages in their lives.

What of it? If they have ways of dealing with that, what's the problem? If they don't, they will end the relationship on their own. The state should not be dictating which relationships are "wise" and which not.

I don't see how banning incest causes greater harm.

Restricting freedom always causes harm.

Well, its certainly a different situation to fending off the unwanted advances of someone who's not a family member.

Maybe, but why is it different enough, and in a relevant way, for us to prohibit it?

"Consent" is in quotes, because, yet again, it's kind of hard to define consent when it comes to something like this. For example, if someone was having a depressive episode, they might want someone to kill them but regret it the next day. It's pretty hard for a dead person to say they consented, too. I think there should be legal consequences to that kind of thing.

Obviously there needs to be some proof of said consent (a signed contract frex).

That hundred dollar bill doesn't hurt anyone: killing someone hurts their loved ones and obviously phsyically hurts the person being killed. Anyway, see above.

The one being killed consented so the fact that it hurts him is irrelevant. As for his loved ones there are a lot of choices he could make that would negatively impact them, should he be legally prevented from making all of them or just the decision to die? What about the other half of such decisions, if someone sells him something (say a boat) that is so expensive it negatively impacts his families finances should the seller be prosecuted?

What about their loved ones?

What about them? Why should someones loved ones prevent him from exercising his free will?

As an aside, Amor, why is it that only father/daughter interest concerns you?

As an aside, Amor, why is it that only father/daughter interest concerns you?

Uh, if you read my posts you'd see it wasn't my only concern. I used it as an example. I see parental and sibling incest as the biggest problems. I'm not too concerned with kissing cousins.

Especially in the context of the Hebrew scripture, the 'law' is a combination of influenced material, and attempts to distance the 'chosen people' from their influences. Incidentally - that doesn't necessarily mean external influences, since traces of material still within the text suggest that Levitical law often counters internal influences, also... like the prohibition against 'other' gods, contrasting not JUST against external culture, but also against the polytheistic origins of the Hebrew people(s) themselves.

In the specific case of incest, there's an interesting dichotomy - the design of the original creation requires incest. The design of Noahide judgement once again requries incest. The maintainance of a pure blood (especially in the case of the Davidic lineage) requires limited genepools, if not SPECIFICALLY incest.

On the other hand, Levitical law also punishes some incestuous acts - although they seem more like prohibitions about interfering with possessions than laws about actual morality. Not just that - they approach incest unevenly... having sex with your sister requires that you both be exiled, but having sex with your mother requries you both be executed. Having sex with a sister-in-law is self-punishing (apparently) since your 'sin' is punished by dying childless. Having sex with your wife AND mother-in-law... you should all three be burned to death (even though you are likely to be blood-related to less than one of them). Having sex with an aunt is apparently unpunished (you'll 'bear your iniquity' - no external judgement specified). Having sex with your neighbour (well, 'his' wife) requires that you both be executed, though you may likely be related to neither. (That's why it looks like it's about 'possessing' other people).

Incidentally - through all of the 'Leviticus 20' prohibitions, while it is condemned to boink your mommy, mother-in-law, or daughter-in-law... having sex with your own daughter isn't even mentioned.

Plus, keep in mind where Leviticus places incest systematically: within the prohibitions of marriage - which were basically meant to impede rape. Also keep in mind the restrictive procedure and the number of witnesses required to prove such a relationship.

There are a lot of bans that restrict freedom much more than this one, though.

And is that a good thing or not ?
What is the purpose of those bans and does that purpose truly outweigh the right of an adult to chose ?