Quote:
Originally Posted by CCIP
So what about relationships between disabled people, or women having children after 35? Both are scientifically more likely to produce birth defects than incest.
|
Not really sure what to think of those atm, in the middle of studying and checking this thread so I'll get back to it when I've got more concentration.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skybird
The risk of genetic defects becoming latent mounts with every incestously born generation.
Incest relations therefore should not be considered normal, and by the biological desiogn of our sexual reproduction cycle they are not normal, too, like homosexual relations aren't normal in that context, too.
|
I completely agree that incestuous relations, to be precise, sexual relations are not normal and naturally speaking are not in the least bit close to natural. I also agree that the risks of genetic defects mounts with each incestuous born generation.
This is why in my earlier post I said if an incestuous couple would want a child, that's fine, just adopt one or get artificial insemination from a sperm bank instead of your partner. That way the risks of genetic defects doesn't like with incestuous sexual relationships.
All I'm saying here is that if someone chooses to love another, whoever they may be, and their partner loves them in turn, it is in no ones rights to tell them they cannot do this. This is a completely different topic then that the OP posted and I apologize for derailing the thread, but I just wanted to get that out. A judge doesn't have the right, in my opinion, to tell someone he or she cannot love someone else.