The Instigator
Mac
Pro (for)
Winning
8 Points
The Contender
fredsmith
Con (against)
Losing
1 Points

Consensual Incest Should be Legal

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Mac
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/24/2010 Category: Politics
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 4,357 times Debate No: 12611
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (8)
Votes (2)

 

Mac

Pro

I believe that consensual incest should not be illegal. Couples of incestuous relations should not be stopped from having children, having sex or marrying. If the two parties are consenting adults, why should it be illegal for them to have sex, have children or wed?
One may argue that incest produces deformed babies, therefore, incest should be made illegal. This is not always the case. In fact, a study here: http://www.nytimes.com... proved that the genetic defect rate of babies that are a product of first cousins is fairly low. The study stated that first cousins only have a 1.7 to 2.8 percent extra chance of having offspring with spina bifida or cystic fibrosis. Additionally, incestuous couples can simply adopt children or hire a surrogate mother to bear their children. They can also abort fetuses that have been discovered to have a genetic defect as well. They may also choose to not have children at all, so there is no chance of producing babies with genetic defects. Incest should not be illegal because it infringes on human rights. More specifically, making reproduction between close relatives illegal infringes on reproductive rights. The World Health Organization defines reproductive rights as:

"...the recognition of the basic right of all couples and individuals to decide freely and responsibly the number, spacing and timing of their children and to have the information and means to do so, and the right to attain the highest standard of sexual and reproductive health."

Marriage is a fundamental right of all human beings. Making laws against incest marriage breaches on that human right.

There are no laws imposed to prevent older women from reproducing. Old women (over 40) have a higher risk of producing children with genetic defects, yet there are no laws preventing them from having children or having sex. According to this website: http://www.babyhopes.com... women 40 years of age has a 1-in-100 chance of having a baby with a birth defect and a women 45 years of age has a 1-in-30 chance of having a baby with a genetic defect. A common birth defect is down syndrome. Since we don't ban old women or the disabled from reproducing, genetic defects as an argument against incest holds no value. Incest is defiantly a taboo subject in society and is commonly regarded as "gross, wrong and unnatural." However, on a deep moral level, there is nothing morally wrong with incest. I look forward to a good debate.
fredsmith

Con

Incestuous couples should be able to marry, but they should not be able to have children. If you said that if their children were defective they should be aborted? That wrong that is the same as killing someone because they aren't perfect. As for the percentages, that is only for two birth defects which makes the percentage worthless. what if I said that some kind of car got into accidents 1% of the time, then said that it was almost impossible to get into an accident. So do you really want to leave children's lives to chance?
Debate Round No. 1
Mac

Pro

"Incestuous couples should be able to marry, but they should not be able to have children. If you said that if their children were defective they should be aborted? That wrong that is the same as killing someone because they aren't perfect."

It was never stated that defected children "should" be aborted, it was just stated that abortion was one of the many choices that incestous couples can choose from the handle their products of reproduction. One may rather have their child not exist rather than letting them live to suffer a life with a genetic defect. On the contrart, some couples, non incestous or not, choose not to abort their fetuses upon discovering that it had developed autism or down syndrome because they believe they rather let the fetus live than have nothing at all. Abortion is not murder, it's just that you perceive abortion to be murder. Some believe fetus is not a person, thus not entitled the right to live. Nobody is "perfect," so that means that I'm entitled to kill everyone just because I believe that abortion should remain a choice?

"As for the percentages, that is only for two birth defects which makes the percentage worthless. what if I said that some kind of car got into accidents 1% of the time, then said that it was almost impossible to get into an accident. So do you really want to leave children's lives to chance?"

1% DOES make it "almost impossible" for a certain type of car to get into an accidents. The 1% doesn't mean that the occurance is impossible, it just means that the possibility of such happening is rare. There genetic defect risks for every child, but that doesn't mean that we should make procreation illegal in fear that babies have a risk of developing a genetic defect. 1% of babies in the U.S. are born with a heart defect and 1% of babies in the U.S. are born with autism. There are various genetic diseases that can develop in babies, however, people still choose to have babies regardless of the possible risks. In fact, we leave children's lives to chance many times. In the United States, 115 people are killed in car crashes. We choose to put childrens' lives at risk by driving them in cars, even though there is a possiblity of a car accident that can kill them.

Because Con agrees that couples of incestous relations should be able to marry and because they should clearly be allowed to procreate with the intention giving them responsibilty and freedom to handle their offspring, vote PRO.

My Sources:
1. http://www.wisegeek.com...
2. http://www.ibis-birthdefects.org...
3. http://www.canada.com...
4. http://www.car-accidents.com...
fredsmith

Con

fredsmith forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
8 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Posted by John33Dorian 2 years ago
John33Dorian
I think it is also important to bring up the fact that there are now laws on the books saying that people with aids are not allowed to reproduce. So why is it that the outdated laws are limited to incest? This fact is important because it directs us to the real reason it's legality is questioned to begin with.

Incest is something society has been raised to believe is wrong. And with most beliefs they need to justify it somehow so they claim it's because of birth defects. A lot of the fear thou is simply because of the irrational belief that this will lead to grooming of minors for abusive purposes. These fears are exaggerated in modern media which only reports on the negative stories involving incestuous family's in a negative light. Only way to provide an unbiased study would be to accept the life choices of individuals and get a true set of data on the subject.

Due to the taboo nature of the subject Data is bias and numbers may be higher or lower than actually recorded.

Unless there is proof that deformities are 100% guaranteed incest should be legalized... and even in that case the law should cover all cases of 100% deformity cases.
Posted by Mac 6 years ago
Mac
F*** when I re-read my argument, I realized that I made a ton of grammar and spelling mistakes -_-;
Posted by wmpeebles 6 years ago
wmpeebles
Well since it's none of my business, I'm going pro. What 2 people want to do is their business. I don't understand Con's 1st argument anyway.
Posted by lovelife 6 years ago
lovelife
I actually agree with pro, and I think I'm prolly the only one.
Posted by Koopin 6 years ago
Koopin
I hope you are a single child, because if your brother reads this...well....
Posted by I-am-a-panda 6 years ago
I-am-a-panda
You probably won't get a CON besides some nutcase Christian.
Posted by DiggyDawg 6 years ago
DiggyDawg
It's weirder than weird...and I'm a Nazi. SElDGOHEEL
Posted by wpfairbanks 6 years ago
wpfairbanks
This is too damn weird.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Rodriguez47 6 years ago
Rodriguez47
MacfredsmithTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:20 
Vote Placed by Mac 6 years ago
Mac
MacfredsmithTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:61