How about the children? They or society are the ones that will have to deal with their disabilities and deformities that may result from this and even if all is okay genetically, there is still the stigma associated with this. Most of the comments focus on the legality and practically of the law and the view of the adults involved...how about from the child's perspective -how do you think you would feel being the byproduct of an incest relationship? where your father is also your uncle and your mother is also your aunt?

I am all for consenting adults making their own choices, as they need to live with the consequences of these choices. Sex should not be banned for consenting adults (even if incest) but I would be for regulations and guidelines regarding children of these relationship. I know this is not politically correct at all and this is the only situation I feel that having children should be regulated. Respect to Odile's aunt for making what I think the right conscious choice to not have children.

..I seriously don't understand, how you can say that being gay is remotely in the same category as incest.

Oedipus, shchmedipus. What does it matter so long as a boy loves his mother.

There are probably some serious issues going on in a family that would create the desire to have a physical relationship between 2 people. I couldn't imagine anything so distasteful to be honest. But then again, I wasn't exposed to country music growing up .....

it's in the same category only in as much as he does not understand them... I thought that was rather clear ...

Cue Tom Lehrer:



Cheers,
Nick

So how does society act when the situation arises , without laws the offenders carry on unrestrained ? If there is little evidence to support a law, we need not worry about the law being there. The real victims would be innocent offspring and the future bearers of the genes. This is an act against our race, and should not be tolerated. Make the law stronger, do not remove it.

Laws are only there for a minimum protection to keep up a more or less sane society.
Not that would hold some people back from screwing anyone, anything, anywhere anytime anyway though.

I fail to see any logic behind repealing a law just on the basis that not many people break the law.

Fair enough if a law is out of date or no longer relevant to modern society.

I guess that there must be a small amount of time required to administer existing laws: checking that they are still current, checking for loopholes etc. so it makes sense not to have irrelevant laws on the statute books.

In this case, not having a law could well cause more problems.

I don't think that there would be a sudden rush for people to marry their siblings but it would surely be more difficult to deal with the very few cases that do exist.

__________________
"I'll say I can't tell you when, But if my spirit is strong, I know it can't be long, No questions I'm not alone, Somehow I'll find my way home" Rod

One could use that argument to prevent any Swiss people breeding.

Dino, a sexual orientation is a trait such as race, gender, height etc. and by no means would classify as a psychological disturbance such as feeling sexually attracted to your family members.

That wasn't Odile's point at all. She was merely acknowledging that some people have feelings and preferences that she couldn't even begin to understand, but that we should tolerate them all the same.

You're just being politically correct, but you're picking on the wrong target here.

No, Odile said "I don't understand incest, just like I don't understand being gay but I try to be tolerant...". That means that to him/her homosexuality and incest is on the same level which isn't at all since one cannot chose to be homosexual but one can surely chose to be involved in incest (at least in Western culture one can chose).

You know, not everyone is of the same age and culture as you, LiB.

Just sayin'.

...what does that have to do with anything?

That some people are pigheaded, ethnocentric, politically correct morons who will pick a scrap for no reason whatsoever, whereas others preach tolerance, even as they are prepared to acknowledge that they do not understand why people act as they do.

Odile was born and grew up in a different time and place to you, a place where homosexuality was considered in exactly the same light as perversions such as incest and bestiality. The fact that she is now prepared to speak for tolerance of the same speaks volumes about her personality and willingness to think for herself.

You should try it sometime.

One word: IMMORAL

I'm totally with SVP on this one (Never Thought I Would Say That)

My (not quite favourite) aunt married her cousin too and had a daughter who was schizophrene and caused an awful lot of problems

..moron huh? and you're somebody people trust their children with?
Newsflash DB, the fact that we're like totally in the 21st century and all speaks volumes about Odile's stance on homosexuality...because putting a natural occurance on the same level as incest just isn't all that right is it? But all this "politically correctness" is probably too much to bare for an archaic person like you right?

What stance? Tolerance?

Let's just look again at the sentence to which you so vehemently object:

Why do you have a problem with Odile preaching tolerance, LiB?