Posted on 12/15/2010 9:45:01 AM PST by wmfights
There are certain questions now pressed upon us that previous generations would never believe could be asked. One of these is thrust upon us by events in New York City, where a well-known Ivy League professor has been arrested for the crime of incest. What makes the question urgent is not so much the arrest, but the controversy surrounding it.
David Epstein is a professor of political science at Columbia University, where his wife also teaches. He previously taught on the faculties of Harvard and Stanford. Last week, he was arraigned before a judge in Manhattan, charged with a single count of felony incest. According to authorities, Professor Epstein was for several years involved in a sexual relationship with his adult daughter, now age 24.
Though the story was ignored by much of the mainstream media, it quickly found its way into the cultural conversation. William Saletan of Slate.com, who remains one of today’s most relevant writers working on the issues of bioethics and human nature, jumped on the story with a very interesting essay that openly asked the question many others were more quietly asking: “If homosexuality is OK, why is incest wrong?”
After reviewing the various legal arguments used to justify criminalizing incest, Saletan comes to the conclusion that genetics cannot be the fundamental basis, since incestuous sex could be non-reproductive. Similarly, the basic issue cannot be consent, since no one is arguing in this case that the sex was non-consensual.
He gets the liberal response just about right: “At this point, liberals tend to throw up their hands. If both parties are consenting adults and the genetic rationale is bogus, why should the law get involved? Incest may seem icky, but that’s what people said about homosexuality, too. It’s all private conduct.”
Saletan comes to the conclusion that the basic reason for the wrongfulness of incest is damage to the family unit. As an Ohio court ruled, “A sexual relationship between a parent and child or a stepparent and stepchild is especially destructive to the family unit.”
Now, remember that Saletan raised the issue of the morality of incest as related to the question of homosexuality. He argues that the family-damage argument against incest does not apply to homosexuality. In his words: “When a young man falls in love with another man, no family is destroyed.”
Saletan’s argument is easy to follow, and if you accept his fundamental premise, it can even make sense. But his fundamental premise assumes that there is no damage to a particular family unit if a homosexual relationship exists. That argument can be made only by ignoring the impact upon a family of origin. Beyond this, it limits the family-damage argument to an individual family, when the argument must be more broadly applied to the family as an institution.
This article is a very interesting window into the sexual confusions that lie at the heart of our age. To his credit, Saletan gets the conservative argument basically right:
The conservative view is that all sexual deviance—homosexuality, polyamory, adultery, bestiality, incest—violates the natural order. Families depend on moral structure: Mom, Dad, kids. When you confound that structure—when Dad sleeps with a man, Dad sleeps with another woman, or Mom sleeps with Grandpa—the family falls apart. Kids need clear roles and relationships. Without this, they get disoriented. Mess with the family, and you mess up the kids.
That’s a pretty fair summary. Of course, the Christian argument goes much deeper than the merely conservative argument, affirming the fact that, with exacting precision, God has spoken to the sinfulness of such behaviors — specifically condemning both homosexuality and incest. In other words, Christians move the question from mere wrongfulness to sinfulness and place all issues of sin within the biblical account of sin and redemption.
It is extremely revealing that, for many of our fellow citizens, incest may merely “seem icky.” And yet, all around us are folks who, with a straight face, deny the inevitability of this slippery slope.
Start with a glaringly incorrect assumption, get a glaringly stupid question.
That bunch has it’s own definition of incest - calls it “good breeding”.
Not to mention the potential for awkward moments at Thanksgiving dinner.
If you give perverts an inch they will take a mile.
It is starting with Homosexuals, Been around for years, mainly in the closet. Today they want homosexuality allowed in the military and in marriage.
Soon it will be consensual incest, Polygamy,then pedophilia, then Beastiality.
It is an old argument with liberals saying that one thing does not necessarily lead to another, but the fact is that it does.
Pornography starts with the viewer watching two people having sex ,then that isn’t exciting enough along come the more exotic films with oral, anal, before long its fisting and BDSM and it gets worse from there.
Just as Marijuana is a gateway drug to Cocaine, Heroin, Meth and other drugs.
Homosexuality is the latest gateway for openly perverted sex.
Turn your backs and allow open perversion of one kind and pretty soon you will be turning your back on other perversion. Already this story has people who see nothing wrong with incest. They speak of a controversy. There is no controversy It is wrong.
Idiots like a great many members of this forum think is A-OK for teachers to have sex with their students if the student is male and the teacher is female and "hot".
Its common place in Islam.
Look a lot like my neighbors.
Absolutely it is. Utterly and 1000% completely. Just ask the Washington, DC City Council. They'll tell you all about it ... and give you and your "buddy" a "marriage" license.
In 10 years, they'll be licensing you to marry your llama.
As soon as you grant them their premises you are obliged to accept their conclusions.
Eye, there’s the rub.
Did you read the article? That doesn't apply to many situations (e.g., two gay brothers).
Also, you can wind up with brain damaged offspring between unrelated spouses -- it's just a lot less likely that way.
If they’re into incest, just tell them to go to Pakistan.
Excuse me, Pahkeestahn.
“When a young man falls in love with another man, no family is destroyed.”
Wrong.
Two are and two more potentially are. The potential ones are those each ‘mo could have had if they were not encouraged to pursue deviancy.
Slippery slope argument. Once you get out there on the downhill slide it is nearly impossible to stop. This is yet another example of the truth of the argument. Now that the homosexual lobby has been almost guaranteed victory in the courts, here come the rest of the perverse and perverted wanting the same.
“But we just want to prohibit smoking on airplanes! Honest!”. “This ‘common sense’ legislation will only (fill in the blank), and anyone opposed doesn’t want to keep our children safe!” Yeah, we are the ones that are ‘paranoid’ alright. We have been right every time.
Now about that Tri-Lateralist Commission... ;-)
Why are we even ASKING this question?????
I did not think any state allowed first cousins to marry any longer but...
State Laws Regarding Marriages Between First Cousins:
Twenty-five states prohibit marriages between first cousins. Six states allow first cousin marriage under certain circumstances, and North Carolina allows first cousin marriage but prohibits double-cousin marriage. States generally recognize marriages of first cousins married in a state where such marriages are legal.
http://www.ncsl.org/default.aspx?tabid=4266
I believe a good number of homosexuals are victims of incest. I wish a study would be done on this.Certainly victims of homosexual molestation, whether or not by a relative.
Yes, Josef Fritzl of Austria has shown us all the joys of an incestuous family. Pedophlia builds healthy attitudes toward sex in children? The lessons of eons of human experience can be discarded. If it feels good to you, the hell with how it screws up the kids. This filth has to be the final nail in our coffin.
Has anybody considered that maybe the Liberals are already doing a lot of incest and that’s why there are so many Liberals?
I’m glad someone said what you just did. Saves me some typing...
If incest became marriage it could eliminate the estate tax if done properly
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.