Is it inappropriate to compare homosexuality with incest?

  • A few obvious things

    1. Incest is a particular attraction to a family member, while homosexuality is an orientation. Denying the unhealthy attraction to particular family members is justifiable because of the billions of other options out there. Denying a homosexual (who cannot feel contently in love with the opposite sex) their orientation is cruel because it denies them not only of a particular interest, but their entire life of love.

    2. Genetic problems caused by incest, not evident in homosexuality. Also incest may not necessarily involve two consensual adults like homosexuality.

    3. If people are not convinced by the first argument, a.k.a saying incestual reproduction can be avoided through protection - Incest disrupts relationships between child and sibling, or child and parent, while homosexuality involves two distinct individuals.

  • They are not the same.

    Incest is biologically incompatible with a healthy bloodline. Homosexuality has no chance of reproduction and as such can not have the same restrictions. I am not even sure how such a comparison is made without a foolish attachment based in bronze again mythology. While incest should be eliminated to prevent the complications that come with homosexuality has no more impact on society then celibacy.

  • Yes, It Is

    It is indeed wrong to compare homosexuality to incest. The comparison is not a logical one, nor can it be considered fair. There is increasing acceptance of homosexuality in the United States, but none what so ever of incest. As such, the comparison should not be made. That is my opinion.

  • Yes, they are two different things.

    I don't even know why homosexuality and incest would be talked about in the same sentence, they are two completely different things, just as heterosexual love and incest are two completely different things. Some unenlightened people seem to associate homosexuality with things like incest and pedophilia, and I think that is pure ignorance.

  • Yes it is.

    Incest is not a sexual orientation like homosexuality is. Incest is an action. One can avoid engaging in incest while one cannot stop being homosexual.
    Incest is considered wrong by many because it often brings the risk of having impaired children. Homosexual presents no such risks even in adoption where studies have supported that homosexual parents are equal to heterosexual parents.
    The argument that they are because a divine being or a holy book says they are both wrong is hypocritical in that many religions have a human origin story that starts with incest (e.G. Adam and Eve).

  • Homosexuality And Incest Very Different

    I believe it is inappropriate to compare homosexuality with incest. These two terms have very different meanings and very little in common, comparing them makes no sense. Incest in involves sexual acts with family members, something deemed amoral in Western society. Homosexuality only involves sexual acts with the same gender.

  • Not that different

    Obviously they arent the same thing but I think they are definetly compadable. Most arguement for and against the two can apply for either for instance you arent logical for saying that incest is wrong because some instances dont involve consent because its equally ridiculous to be against homosexuality because of homosexual rape in prison. If its two consenting adults it shouldnt really matter. When it comes down to deformity when a baby is born out of incest that shouldnt restrict the relationship just like a disabled man or women shouldnt be unable to have children. Also homosexuals are unable to have biological children at all. Its simply that homosexuality has become a symbol for tolerance and incest has not so the current generation sees incest like homosexuality was seen a couple generations ago. When people defend homosexuality they use arguments like its there own buisness or it doesnt hurt anybody and i think that is hypocritical.

  • Don't go beyond context, the answer is really simple just by giving the meaning of the two main points asked.

    Clearly, incest is a sexual act committed by two closely-related people. Homosexuality is not, and it's even a sexual act (I blame those who don't even read dictionary and blabbering things as if they really know it.!)

    Now, those people who read bible, please re-read again! On the first book, doesn't it says that everyone came from Adan and Eve? They were the first human right? And had Cain and Abel eventually? And Cain later "lays" a lady..... So that lady was also her sister....

    Doesn't early relationship from those on the bible are incestuous?
    Think again People, if you're going to give such example... Make it clear!

  • Yes it very much is.

    They are both bad for a child whether he/she is adopted or not. It is very likely that a child with gay parents or parents of incest would be very much picked on. Homosexuality is on the basis of relationships, but incest can as well. Besides they are both family matters anyway.

  • Yes it very much is.

    They are both bad for a child whether he/she is adopted or not. It is very likely that a child with gay parents or parents of incest would be very much picked on. Homosexuality is on the basis of relationships, but incest can as well. Besides they are both family matters anyway.

  • Both are disorders and need healing

    These two have many things in common:
    1- Being disgusting to 99% of the population.
    2- Can't produce a healthy offspring (homosexuality is even worse, giving none)
    3- both are disorder that can be fixed through healing process
    4- They don't harm society, but they harm themselves.

    In sum, It is against human rights to heal every mental disorder and leave out homos and incest.

  • No both disgust God

    The Bible refers to both acts as repulsive. While they are two very different situations, 50 years ago, before America let its values be thrown out the window, both would have been punishable by the same means. For centuries, America has been a country where its citizens were able to do whatever they wanted which was permissible by the law. Homosexuality is wrong, just like incest is.

  • Love vs. Perversion

    Completely inappropriate.

    This is key:
    MOST family members love each other. Plain and simple
    If a brother and sister love each other and happen to FALL IN LOVE romantically, let them be. Any debate about biology is irrelevant. You don't stop people with disorders from reproducing, do you?

    Now compare that to two fágs that want to suck off shít stained dícks after being fûcked. This is 100% a perversion. I don't think they should be killed like in some countries (unless they disgustingly promote it to children), but the perversion SHOULD NOT be celebrated nor enforced into marraiges.

  • What is the difference?

    From my point of view I see no difference between homosexuality and incest. This is from the perspective that biologically they are nonsensical , particularly incest which can be genetically damaging to any offspring. I am not strongly against homosexuality but I will not openly support it either. Apart from the argument that they contribute to helping give happier homes to orphans etc. I do not see the desperate reasons why homosexuals would want to participate in the holy sanctity of marriage. Yes, sure, two consenting adults that love each other can go off and be together. But personally I feel that as they cannot physically unite as one like a perfect puzzle piece, and there is no ying and yang in the situation, they should not be able to taint the sanctity of marriage. If it is one hundred per cent justifiable, moral and accurate to be homosexual, then let those who participate in incest and any other sexual perversion run free among the masses.

  • They are both similar categories; they are both sexual deviancy/perversion.

    The only valid, but flimsy argument about incest is birth defects. Ok, what about incestous couples that won't have children ever? Or how about incestous gay/lesbian couple? What then? It makes it valid?

    Of course hypocritical homosexuals will be crying and denying the comparison because it points out their fallacy.

    Both of those are simply mental deviancies, same as other types of perversions.

  • Maybe Not "Inappropriate"

    They're definitely two different things, but you're never going to be able to "compare apples to apples" when it comes to various sexual acts.
    Some of the answers to the question suggest comparing homosexuality to incest is insulting, and the use of the word "inappropriate" in the question seems to set up that implication, but I don't know if I can go that far. Both homosexuality and incest involve two or more people who are consenting adults, and who just want to be with whom they want to be with. Implying that one is distasteful and completely out of the question while the other is worthy of acceptance and even advocacy is subjective and arbitrary. I just don't see how that distinction can be proved, and I certainly don't want to start taking relationship advice from a society that started changing its sexual rules in the last fifty years, only to see its divorce rate rise to fifty percent and its rate of kids born to unmarried parents balloon from four percent to forty.
    Incestuous intercourse does have an increased risk of birth defects, but at least an isolated population would still have a chance at reproduction and survival by way of incest; homosexuality is an evolutionary cul-de-sac that doesn't carry any reproductive potential at all.

  • Both Should Be Allowed Between Consenting Adults

    If two or more adults are consenting then the sex should be nobody's business. Even the "birth defect" argument is poor, because it's not only legal for 2 people with the exact same recessive genetic illness to have sex it's legal for them to get married. And if they have kids the chance of them having that same problem is 100%. With incest the increased risk is not even nearly that high. So if you ban incest because of birth defects to be consistent you have to ban not just marriage but sex between 2 people sharing a recessive illness. I doubt you'll find much support for that.

  • Both were considered deeply amoral and disordered for most of Human history based solely on disgust

    Obviously Western Society has changed its opinion/willingness to tolerate homosexuality in the past few decades, but the underlying rationale for why it was condemned for much of Human history is the same as for incest. Some have created post-hoc rationalizations as for why incest is distinct, but if one narrows it to consenting legal adults not engaged in procreative sex those rationalizations fall apart as others have observed. Plus those people who say even legal adults cannot consent either deny human agency or are overly paternalistic. Those who make the birth defect argument should be consistent with their eugenic thinking.

  • Regardless of which cases you support, its always appropriate to compare the two.

    If you are trying to find the solution to a problem, and there are factors that are related, then I see no reason why they cannot be discussed. It is completely appropriate the compare the two, much like it is appropriate to compare the two with pedophilia and heterosexuality. If you want to support one and not the other, then you definitely need to provide reasoning for that and no just say that it is 'inappropriate to compare' the two.

  • It is appropriate to compare the two.

    There is no reason to allow homosexual relationships and,l at the same time, discriminate against relationships between blood relatives. I find it amusing how gays are against the comparison. They are ready to deny to this group exactly what they want for themselves- the right to have sex between two consenting adults. The 'biology' argument is stupid- it is not more natural to have gay sex than incest. The only kind of sex that passes the test of being natural is heterosexual (because this is the only kind of sex that can produce an offspring).

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.