LinkBack URL
About LinkBackshttp://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6424937.stm
Is it me, or is this story just very wrong, on so many levels.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6424937.stm
Is it me, or is this story just very wrong, on so many levels.
[
Originally Posted by Blitzen
that is very wrong indeed. they have 4 kids, 8 arms?
edit: just realised that 8 arms would be biologically correct, i meant 10
There is something genetic that makes people who have been long separated fall in love. It is a common scenario with siblings who have been separated at birth etc.
Whatever has happened has happened. Is it worth making their lives miserable over it ?
Well, I am very much of the opinion that siblings having kids is not a good idea, but to make it illegal to have sex at all seems a bit harsh.
Why dot they not adopt? I mean, there's not a lack of kids wanting to be adopted, are there?
growing up knowing your mother and father are brother and sister? thats equally creepy!
Germany is strange like that tho, dogs are always finding penises in bins
Vodka
why in bins?
Its harsh for the law to prevent brothers and sisters having sex?
most sanitary place to put them i guess...
Vodka
In the sense that you can't help who you fall in love with, I guess.
Well, UB40 would seem to agree -
Wise men say - Only fools rush in,
But I can't help falling in love with yoooooooou.
Shall I stay - Would it be a sin,
If I can't help falling in love with yoooooooou.
Like a river flows
Surely to the sea
Darling so it goes
Some things are meant to beeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!
Take my hand - Take my whole life too,
For I can't help falling in love with yooooooou!
Its so romantic!
Sounds like an episode of Hollyoaks to me or just another letter to the Sun problems page from the inbred areas
So how do you enforce one without the other? Terminate accidental pregnancies?
It's a bit of an ethical dilema - on one hand there is the arguement that you are increasing the suffering of the children in terms of the hugely increased chance of genetic diesease, thus the state should step in to protect the children. And on the other is the arguement of the state not participating in eugenics, as it doesn't in other areas such as the rights of people with hereditry diesease to have children.
Well, it's not easy to do, and I'm not proposing any methods for policing one and not the other.
I don't think it's right for people to have sex with their siblings, obviously, but unless they are having children they are not really doing any harm to anyone. I don't agree with the practice, but then I don't think it should be the governments role to stop it.
Its kind of 'eeeww', but other than that, if this couple is not having kids, why does it bother you? (I know they have, and it's a bit late for that, but he has now had a vasectomy)
Agreed - it is not the role of government or law to enforce what society deems as normal. The issue of having children is tricky, as said, because of the fact that a line has to be drawn somewhere - do you stop disabled people having children? Is it really up to the government to control the gene pool?
However, I certainly think that serving time isn't necessary when there are two consenting adults involved.
"Well, there was your Uncle Tiberius who died wrapped in cabbage leaves but we assumed that was a freak accident."
Well, incest is illegal - being or not being 'kind of eeeww' doesn't really come into it, nor does it matter if it bothers me or not.
Having sex with your sister is not good for many reasons, having children with your sister is even less good.
Also, as you point out, its kind of eeeww.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
