Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
...aaah, never mind
"Many people see it as a crime, but we've done nothing wrong," said Patrick, an unemployed locksmith.
Locksmiths in Germany are ten-a-penny
Think of all the starving, incestous locksmiths.
Who's laughing now, eh?
are there wives and children who are there nieces and nephews!
confusion over what to call people
is the name of my new band
is what you get when you put Starving Incestuous Locksmiths in Google.
WARNING - I've not looked, this could be absolutely anything
Locksmithers are all like one big family but this takes it to new levels.
i would have been a locksmith"- albert Einstein.
I'm more concerned about the stream of genetically impaired children they're liable to be pumping out.
"People have said that our children are disabled, but that is wrong. They are not disabled," said Patrick.
"Eric, our eldest child, has epilepsy, but he was born two months premature, he also has learning difficulties. Our other daughter, Sarah, has special needs," Patrick said.
This stroy scares me, and disgusts me, and other things.
and is one of the ethical questions that the case raises. Two of their four children have developmental problems, and all four have been taken into care:
So he thinks it's ok for him and his..sister to be together, because nobody can prove they're shagging.
To be honest, whilst I think it's wrong, I don't think they should put the father in jail now, that's just going to fuck the kids up even more.
I think it's unlikely that they'll ever have what might be considered a normal upbringing.
I think the point still stands though.
that harm could be done to any potential offspring.
I don't consider it minimal.
seems to have some learning difficulties of her own too
There was an interview in, maybe the guardian, the other week with them which went into more detail, and really seemed to show they need help more than anything else
Apparently it's really common for seperated siblings to be sexually attracted to each other on reunion
'In that case, I hope I'm your brother!' in a 'flirty' type manner, then I realised I didn't, and if I did and was thinking that I'd have to hate myself and then my brain collapsed and now I don't know what's going on.
Moral of the story - don't joke about flirting, marriage, incest or other stuff.
A woman was reunited with her son and they became a couple. I can kind of understand it a bit.
(or at least, your implied argument, since you've not made your position clear) is founded on the assertion that "the genetic inbred issue is pretty minimal". It's not, though.
And that article you've linked to is full of flawed logic and straw man arguments, so I'm not going to bother critiquing it.
having disabled children is. What happens if they don't have children, is it ok then?
of getting it on with my bro is the most sick inducing thought ever.
Do you mind?
This thread has descended a few levels of decency :-)
is that why it has no eyes?
He's an actor called Billy Redden I think.
This story actually makes me feel slightly sick
What if the law was changed so that a incestious physical relationship was allowed but they were not allowed to bear children? Germany? Nazis? Steralisation? oh dear...
Perhaps though what if adoption was legal for an incestious couple, would that be alright?
given that the main argument for a law against incest is to prevent birth defects, you'd think there'd be no reason why a brother and sister shouldn't have the right to adopt a child together. I'd imagine that adoption agencies would still turn them down, though.
if they're not fucking?
in this country that Religious adoption agencies are now not allowed to discriminate against homosexual couples, could that law be streached to include discrimination against incestious couples by all adoption agencies?
If my sister and I were unmarried, and we lived in the same house in a non-sexual, non-romantic, 'normal' brother-sister relationship (and could prove that this was the case), I imagine that an adoption agency would still turn us down if we wanted to adopt a child and act as its legal mother and father, based on an evaluation of whether the child's background would have a deleterious effect on its upbringing.
This also applies to Sarky's post.
the worlds population in half!
Seriously, though, it is a legal grey area (as the German couple's lawyers have pointed out). The historic associations, and the implications for human rights, of stopping people from having children on the grounds of their genetic characteristics are such that a law along those lines would be met with outcry even if it were proposed. But laws against incest are founded in cultural and moral values as well as genetic ones, and as such are harder to debate in a dispassionate way.
produces children who are physically and mentally deficient?
How about a law that says "You can have sex with your family, so long as you don't have kids?" As a middle ground, like.
"The historic associations, and the implications for human rights, of stopping people from having children on the grounds of their genetic characteristics are such that a law along those lines would be met with outcry even if it were proposed."
imagine the kids' parties if ever the all reuinted... chaos!
jelly, ice-cream and brother n sister fucking.
Hardly The Cement Garden now is it?
But it seems wrong to punish them just for being odd and breaking a taboo. But then I guess society is built on making limitations on this considered wrong and hence the law, so they must be "made an example of". Perhaps it would be possible to allow them their lifestyle as an oddity while upholding that people should not do it en masse.
So I guess they have suffer the consequences of breaking a social taboo which has been cast in law.
and still did it was a bit..eeeewwww. I wouldnt really have cared if they met each other randomly and later found out, after all the banging, that they were brother and sister. I really think it should be legal if you want to do it, as long as you dont have kids. But it should be frowned upon. its one of those peices of morality thats there for a reason.
"Why are disabled parents allowed to have children, or people with hereditary diseases or women over 40? No-one says that is a crime."
is that these are situations in which there's an increased risk of children being born with a debilitating condition. So if you're arguing for laws against incest on genetic grounds, you'll be called upon to explain why these people ARE allowed to have children, in contrast.
I mean, I doubt many disabled people have a heredity they can pass down to any children they might have. It smacks of not really thinking things through.
The laws against incest are about a different sort of genetic problem aren't they?
You can have a couple who might have a 25% chance of producing a child with a problem like extreme ageing. This can't be compared with the problem of ever reducing chromasomes caused by in-breeding:
Couples with hereditary issues will still be able to produce entirely healthy babies, or children with something like haemophila which isn't directly life-threatening, but brothers and sisters cannot prevent their children from suffering from the reduced genetic material.
Even if this isn't an issue on the first generation, by allowing it you allow for the fact this could happen for the next generations, which could cause massive harm.
For a start, the comments will have been translated from the German, so there may be a bit of slippage in meaning going on there. I think it's supposed to refer to hereditary disabilities, though.
I'd be interested to know more about this.
Haemophilia is an obvious one but a lot of the things you hear about are generally very treatable or rare even with two parents that have the issue.
It's not the same as talking about a lack of genetic material, is what I mean.
are any more likely to have disabled children than able-bodied parents. The other two, yeah I guess.
it's encouraging me to be mischievious.
in all seriousness, one of the reasons that this is so abhorrent to you is possibly because 'the government' is not synonymous with, or truly representative of, 'society'.
it's a bit like the pro-life vs pro-choice thing. one side says 'rights of the baby', the other side says 'right of the woman to do what she wants with her body' (conveniently forgetting about the other body involved, incidentally). NEITHER of them talk about the rights of society at large. If there is a disabled baby, one side says 'abort it', the other says 'let it live', nobody says 'look at the costs and benefits to society'.
i'd be hesitant to advocate any control over breeding when the current governmental and societal structure is as it is. but if people actually gave a shit about other people and things outside their selfish, basic biological desires to respawn, this wouldn't be so controversial.
those are the ones i mistrust and dislike.
if incestuous couples or couples with serious hereditary conditions are having kids, it's not just 'their body'. public money and the gene pool are just two considerations that go far beyond this essentially selfish and individualistic view.
If I did, I'd have said something other than "yeah, I guess" in my above post.
with hereditary illnesses you don't (so far as I know) get a 100% chance of the effect because you are mixing two different genetic makeups. This isn't the case with incest.
we're talking about the lack of genetic base from which to make a new life.
These guys are not blood related but still.. ewww.. I think it also odd that some countries allow first cousins to be married.
I am not an incest fan.
I read FLOWERS IN THE ATTIC at age 11
They are blood related.
"I am not an incest fan."
Can I get this on a T-Shirt please?
no germans should be allowed to reproduce
french and germans is worse!
or however you spell it.
Known cases of this have happened, siblings split up as Children and when they finally do meet when they are older, they have confused feelings... such as fancying another.
is a basic justification for incest being outlawed. Somehow those fuckers keep getting away with it.
They weren't brought up as siblings. Okay, it might seem a bit weird to most people, but they are in love and it doesn't affect anyone else, so I think they should just be left alone. I don't see the point in putting their kids in care (I also don't understand why it was only three of the children and they got to keep the third), it's not as if they have been bad parents.
it seems pretty clear that they may not be "bad parents" in a wilful sense, but they don't sound like they're capable of looking after themselves, let alone their kids.
What have they done t suggest they cannot look after themselves?
I just noticed you were talking about the Guardian article, sorry. All I've read is this... http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6424937.stm
Pretty sobering read.
before.....where the siblings are seperated early and later have an attraction, feel specially bonded.
I dont think this couple should be persecuted.
Equally I dont think we should get rid of the law.....I mean imagine the consequences....older brothers growing up with younger sisters......
I think that the law should stay but that every case should be judged on its merits.....in this case we can assuem there was no co-ercion of a minor into thinking/feeling a certain way, therefore no crime.
As for the kids being disabled.....it is not illegal to have children you may know will be disabled, that is a different matter entirely
but i'm saving up for my flights