Calls for review of German incest law.

A recent trial of a German brother and sister for incest has led to calls for consensual sex between adult siblings to be de-criminalised in Germany.

News article here.

In my opinion, what consenting adults do in private is their business and nobody else’s. As long as they’re not harming anyone else, people should be free to do whatever they want with whoever they want, without any interference from the law.

Those lousy motherfuckers!

I'd definitely agree with that.

In western culture. Some other cultures don't have the taboo of close relatives fucking.

[Edited on Nov 18, 2005 by hadees]

Oral sex only.

or Anal.



And even though I'm of German descent, I still cannot see ever fucking my sister up the ass. Spanking her yes, and perhaps even getting a lap dance, but that's as far as it goes.

This is a question that my first reaction is 'eww, sick' but I don't necessarily have a logical argument for or against, other than gut feeling.
Also just yesterday I read this issue asked as a rhetorical question in 'The Blank Slate' by steven pinker, Although it doesnt include the inbreeding issue. to quote:
"Consider this story: Julie and Mark are brother and sister. They are traveling together in France on vacation from college. One night they are staying alone in a cabin near the beach. They decide that it would be interesting and fun if they tried making love. At the very least it would be a new experience for each of them. Julie was already taking birth control pills, but Mark uses a condom too, just to be safe. They both enjoy making love, but they decide not to do it again. They keep the night as a special secret, which makes them feel even closer to eachother. What do you think about that; was it OK for them to make love?
The psychologist Jonathan Haidt and his colleagues have presented this story to many people. Most immediately declare that what Julie and Mark did was wrong, and then they grope for reasons why it was wrong. They mention the dangers of inbreeding, but they are reminded that the siblings used two forms of contraception. They suggest the siblings will be emotionally hurt, but the story makes it clear that they were not. They venture that the act would offend the community, but then they recall that it was kept secret. They submit that it may interfere with future relationships, but they acknowledge that julie and mark agreed never to do it again. Eventually many of the respondents admit, 'I don't know, I can't explain it, I just know it's wrong." Haidt calls this 'moral dumbfounding' and has evoked it by other disagreeable but victimless scenarios: A family's dog was killed by a car in front of their house. They had heard that dog meat was delicious, so they cut up the dog's body and cooked and ate it for dinner.

and

A man goes to the supermarket once a week and buys a dead chicken. But before cooking the chicken, he has sexual intercourse with it. Then he cooks it and eats it. "

well, i'm not really sure about it, but i'd guess they made the law in order to prevent hereditary diseases. When i remember the biology class right, there should always be a "good mixture" of the genome which isn't given within a family.

"I'm not interested in morality," she said, adding that she didn't think consenting incestuous relationships should be punished as long as they don't result in children being born.


Somebody please think of the DNA! OHhhh WHy won't anyone think of the DNA!!!

"in love" means you want wants BEST for each other.. I'm sorry , I don't buy this garbage.

i wish i could remember what culture it is, but i do recall being taught about one culture that sibling marriage/coupling was accepted. but this was after say the age of 60+. that there is no longer the chance of conception.

don't take this as absolute fact. this is just something i think i remember from a sociology class i had a long time ago

Right, just like Catholic schoolgirls!

I think it's ok as long as she's really hot.

well, it gives me the heebie-jeebies, and it'll be fun explaining the distinctions between "aunt & uncle" and "mom & dad" to those kids, but for me the overpowering emotional response is to the legislation of sex between consenting adults. there are a lot of sexual acts that I personally don't find appealing (some of which even gross me out), but that doen't mean I should be able to force my morality on others. As long as they're not hurting anybody, why not leave them alone?

And they need to lower the age of consent from 18 in the US, to be in-line with a lot of the rest of the world (and the US military). A 16-year-old knows if they want to have sex or not. It's not like they're kids anymore.

Does Germany have legal gay marriage?

this couple is continually churning out severely handicapped children because they won't even practice safe sex.
i think it's safe to say that this couple is harming people, their own offspring.

from what i remember from biology class it's fairly easy to determine what the chances are of a inbreeding couple producing flawed and handicapped offspring with a bit of research.
that would be a pretty good place to start for any incest laws.

this particular couple sickens me with their intentional progreation while they know very well it produces handicapped kids with some regularity.

If not, it would be a burn.
gay man- Please may I marry this man, my partner, the love of my life?
government- Well no, but have you looked at your sister lately, that's something you could consider.

Uh. OK. What does that have to do with German Incest laws?

Also: Not all states have 18 as the age of consent

[Edited on Nov 19, 2005 by Subrosa]

The age of consent in Canada is 14. Also, Even consensual activity with those under 14 but over 12 may not be an offence if the accused is under 16 and less than two years older than the complainant.

well, it is legal for adults to have sex with anyone over 14.

Even that's tricky. Is it illegal for two people who are carriers of a genetic disorder just through dumb luck to have kids? Even if there's a 100% chance that their children will have a disorder, I doubt it would be illegal. I was under the impression that at least in the US, the legal position was "any life is better than no life". I think Liante said that in the context of whether doctors could be sued for a faulty sterilization that resulted in an impaired child, to give credit where it's due.

Even if it would be legal though, I still think these two are definitely assholes for procreating.

There’s nothing in the news article that suggests that any of the couple’s children are disabled. Furthermore, inbreeding is not illegal in Germany, so if a woman was artificially inseminated with her brother’s semen, there would be no crime, even if the child turned out to be disabled.

In fact, inbreeding is only a potential problem if the parents both carry harmful recessive genes for a particular genetic disorder. If only one or neither of them carry such genes, the risk of having a disabled child is no greater than for an unrelated couple.

I think that incestuous couples should be made aware of the risks of inbreeding, and discouraged from having children is there is any history of genetic disorders in the family. I don’t think they should be banned from doing it though, because the next step along that road is banning unrelated couples from having children if they carry potentially harmful recessive genes. Then we would be talking about eugenics, which is something that no civilised society should do.