Quote:
|
Originally Posted by politicophile
Incest is a difficult case because the harm is rather diffuse. If you and your sibling have children together, those children have a significantly increased chance of receiving double recessive genes that you got from your parents. In some cases, this can cause your children to have severe genetic diseases.
The problem, as I see it, is that harm is only being done in an incestuous relationship that bears children. It is entirely understandable that the state would have a vested interest in preventing close familial relatives from reproducing together. It is far more difficult to prove that harm is being caused by protected sex between a brother and sister, morally disgusting though it may be. For that matter, what harm is caused by two brothers having sex with each other?
|
The problem with legislating against incest due to the increased possibility of genetic disease (and it is only a possibility) is that it carries further-reaching consequences. What then, if we gain the technology to map each person's genetic qualities? Should we legislate against unrelated persons who both carry possible combinations for genetic disorders? Unless one is greatly in favour of large, sweeping sexually oppressive laws, the case of recessive genes is a thin one at best.
Or, perhaps we should start making laws against ugly people procreating. People will get disorders and diseases, and people will die or live difficult lives. It is unavoidable, and at a certain point trying to make laws to prevent it becomes ludicrous. I believe this is one of those points.