Legal Incest Marriage Inevitable?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Charlemagne_III
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Charlemagne_III said:
kfor.com/2016/09/07/oklahoma-mother-daughter-arrested-after-alleged-incestuous-marriage/

How will it be philosophically possible to argue against the legalization of incest marriages after same-sex marriages were confirmed as a constitutional right by the Supreme Court?

Your thoughts?
Click to expand...
I’d think that the courts would uphold the idea of a compelling interest the state would have in banning such marriages in light of the provable genetic risk from such marriages. Not the case, though, with polygamy (or polyandry for that matter), which I think would prevail in any court challenge.
 
Tarpeian_Rock said:
I’d think that the courts would uphold the idea of a compelling interest the state would have in banning such marriages in light of the provable genetic risk from such marriages. Not the case, though, with polygamy (or polyandry for that matter), which I think would prevail in any court challenge.
Click to expand...
But strictly speaking I don’t know that it’s a valid concern given society as it operates today. Since marriage and procreation have been completely divorced from each other the state can no longer just assume that marriage will lead to children. Also not all inbreeding causes issues in first generation cases. It is generally an issue of continuous inbreeding that has greater risks. The whole basis for the argument of homosexual marriage was that two consenting adults should be able to form a legal family with all the rights and privileges. As far as I remember there was no requirement that the couple be sexually active with one another either. So given the reasoning I think one could have a strong challenge against any state law. It would most likely be something like gay activism where they chip away at it a bit over time. It might take 20, 30, 40+ years, but based on the logic behind Obergefell vs Hodges I don’t know how the court could uphold restrictions from any group of consenting adults forming a legal family.
 
Usige said:
But strictly speaking I don’t know that it’s a valid concern given society as it operates today. Since marriage and procreation have been completely divorced from each other the state can no longer just assume that marriage will lead to children. Also not all inbreeding causes issues in first generation cases. It is generally an issue of continuous inbreeding that has greater risks. The whole basis for the argument of homosexual marriage was that two consenting adults should be able to form a legal family with all the rights and privileges. As far as I remember there was no requirement that the couple be sexually active with one another either. So given the reasoning I think one could have a strong challenge against any state law. It would most likely be something like gay activism where they chip away at it a bit over time. It might take 20, 30, 40+ years, but based on the logic behind Obergefell vs Hodges I don’t know how the court could uphold restrictions from any group of consenting adults forming a legal family.
Click to expand...
I think that it is inevitable. Especially since there are so many children born from sperm donors. These children are going to meet and fall in love with their siblings. Many of these children have been raised in same sex environments and have little concept of the Catholic concept of father and mother and birth siblings.
 
Usige said:
But strictly speaking I don’t know that it’s a valid concern given society as it operates today. Since marriage and procreation have been completely divorced from each other the state can no longer just assume that marriage will lead to children. Also not all inbreeding causes issues in first generation cases. It is generally an issue of continuous inbreeding that has greater risks. The whole basis for the argument of homosexual marriage was that two consenting adults should be able to form a legal family with all the rights and privileges. As far as I remember there was no requirement that the couple be sexually active with one another either. So given the reasoning I think one could have a strong challenge against any state law. It would most likely be something like gay activism where they chip away at it a bit over time. It might take 20, 30, 40+ years, but based on the logic behind Obergefell vs Hodges I don’t know how the court could uphold restrictions from any group of consenting adults forming a legal family.
Click to expand...
This is pretty much the case. It is inevitable – IF we continue on our current course. If we, as a people, repent instead, then things may turn out differently.

I’ve spoken to people who believe in same sex marriage and are totally against incest. They say the two are totally different. I ask: “how?” The answer: “It just is”. Or “it’s gross.” or “it’s so obvious I can’t believe you don’t see it.”

Funny, people said the same thing about same sex marriage not that long ago. 🤷 It’s just a matter of public opinion and socially constructed morality, which we know is fickle over time.
 
Disclaimer: Obviously I don’t approve of any of the following.

But logically if an incestuous couple agreed to be sterilised there would be no reason to prevent their marriage. Not a single one. Except for the “ick” factor.

I think you could actually make a weak argument against polygamy based on tax laws or from a psychological POV based on jealousy and favouritism, but I doubt it would hold up in the court of law.
 
Garyjohn2 said:
This is pretty much the case. It is inevitable – IF we continue on our current course. If we, as a people, repent instead, then things may turn out differently.

I’ve spoken to people who believe in same sex marriage and are totally against incest. They say the two are totally different. I ask: “how?” The answer: “It just is”. Or “it’s gross.” or “it’s so obvious I can’t believe you don’t see it.”

Funny, people said the same thing about same sex marriage not that long ago. 🤷 It’s just a matter of public opinion and socially constructed morality, which we know is fickle over time.
Click to expand...
You said it perfectly.
 
The article said that this is not the first time the mother married one of her kids. Clearly this mother has some mental issues. I think incestuous marriages will be more common in the future. The same arguments in favor of same-sex marriage can be applied to incest, such as “They’re not hurting anyone”, “they were born this way” and “Who are you to judge if it’s a loving relationship?”

It’s coming. When it does, may God give us grace to oppose it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top