Father and daughter arrested for incest

Marriage is an Evolving Paradigm (5.00 / 1)

Just because you and I find it icky doesn't make it any of our business.

---

by: geo999 @ Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 20:47:24 PM UTC

Sorry but we are responsible for the well being of children (0.00 / 0)

One of the main roles of government is to protect children from harm, and being born from incest or rape or experimental gametes is harmful to children, not just physically but psychologically and socially as well. Don't duck the responsibility you have to protect vulnerable people and preserve a just and livable world for generations to come.

---

by: John Howard @ Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 20:50:52 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I think it went over your head, John. (5.00 / 1)

I was, of course, being quite facetious, in light of anything goes mentality that now prevails. Otherwise I'd have ignored totally your nutty diary, as I usually do.

---

by: geo999 @ Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 21:26:07 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Lots of people say that though (0.00 / 0)

Well that's good. There was no way to tell you were being facetious, lots of people seriously say things like that. I can't wait until Ron Paul admits that he was just being facetious and says his whole shtick was an elaborate ruse that went over everyone's head.

---

by: John Howard @ Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 21:33:55 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Laws didn't prevent them (0.00 / 0)

I'm not a libertarian, I'm a conservative.  Laws did prohibit them and now they are being subject to the fullest extent of the law for their violation of that prohibition.  The problem is the laws did not prevent them.

Laws rarely prevent any deviant from engaging in behavior deemed  not desirable, even criminal, in society.  Laws are followed by normal, decent people.  Laws are punitive, not preventative.

What prevents bad behavior is a fully & properly formed conscience.  What forms a conscience is the culture which seeps into the hearts & minds of the individual.

---

by: BNCordeiro @ Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 23:18:49 PM UTC

Laws form conscience (0.00 / 0)

When something is decriminalized, the message is it's OK to do it, and we shouldn't feel guilty about it. The culture is affected by what we say is criminal and what is allowed. Laws do prevent crime. Lots of people do not murder because before shooting someone, they remember that it's a crime and they'll go to jail. Huckabee is right that it helps if they also think they'll go to Hell, but the fact is, murderers, like thieves, don't necessarily go to Hell, and people that never break a law in their lives don't necessarily go to Heaven, according to Christianity.

---

by: John Howard @ Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 23:43:36 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I feel an amazing prediction coming on..... (0.00 / 0)

Here is my prediction.  

I predict that incest becomes a serious health related concern and widespread in the United States within ten years.

Based on what, you say?

Based on the fact that having children out of wedlock is becoming rampant.  News stories abound of middle aged inner city men having scores of children with multiple women.  Half brothers and half sisters will often not even know they are related.  Fathers will not recognize their own children.  Is it inconceivable (no pun intended) that a possible, infact likely, result will be that many of them will have sex together and produce children.  

Here is a very recent (1 week ago) story about a father orered not to have any more children because of his reckless behavior.

Corey Curtis, 44, has fathered children with six different women and currently owes over $100,000 in back child support.

The man, Corey Curtis, has 9 children by the way.....But of course, that is small potatoes compared to these three losers that combined have fathered nearly 80 children.  Is it so hard to imagine that some of the kids will have sex with each other - seeing as they probably don't even know about each other....

Of course, no woman in her right mind would have a kid with a man who already has children in the double digits. Latoya Shields, one of Turnage's many babies' mothers, told WREG in Memphis that she was "floored" when the prosecutor told her that Turnage had 20 children. She says that, though she spent eight years with him, she thought he only had four children.

It seems the mother and father have lost count of what kids they have.  The mothers don't know about each other so how can they possibly take precautions?  And for sure they are likely to live in the same general geographic area and the kids will be involved with each other.....

We are headed for a 'Fiscal Cliff' and the country just elected a dope whose motto is 'Forward'.  

---

by: Vote3rdpartynow @ Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 19:38:09 PM UTC

Plus all the donor conceived half-siblings (0.00 / 0)

Some donors have 100 children, most have at least 20 kids some don't even know they are donor conceived. Plus there's something called genetic sexual attraction that makes them attracted to each other...

---

by: John Howard @ Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 04:03:19 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Love to (0.00 / 0)

know who said "...that incest laws do not prohibit conceiving a child with a sibling or a parent"
"People" say things "regularly" that "people" "never said"....all the time in your world.

"I acknowledge having racist and classist and sexist feelings of white male superiority." -John Howard

---

by: ElectricStrawberry @ Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 16:37:50 PM UTC

You say that (0.00 / 1)

"incest laws have nothing to do with what I do with my sperm.  Incest is an action."

conception  "is a HUMAN RIGHT that all who are able and "of consenting age" enjoy."

You squirm around refusing to admit that the government can prohibit admit siblings from marriage and from having sex, confusing the issue with whether incest rules out IVF by siblings or not (dumbass question).

Are you saying that incest laws DO prohibit conceiving with a sibling or parent?  Oh happy days, you admit that there is a government interest in preventing unethical conceptions.

---

by: John Howard @ Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 20:10:55 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Lying about me (0.00 / 0)

 does not make me say "...that incest laws do not prohibit conceiving a child with a sibling or a parent"
Yes..."incest laws have nothing to do with what I do with my sperm.  Incest is an action. "
Yes..."conception is a HUMAN RIGHT"

Yes...you are a pathetic liar by claiming "you say that"
You are further a pathetic liar by claiming "You squirm around refusing to admit that the government can prohibit admit siblings from marriage and from having sex, confusing the issue with whether incest rules out IVF by siblings or not (dumbass question)."
Even furthering the lie "Are you saying that incest laws DO prohibit conceiving with a sibling or parent?". Incest laws prevent sexual intercourse between close family members.  

But, I'll answer this pathetic one "...you admit that there is a government interest in preventing unethical conceptions."

I have ALWAYS said that it is in a STATE government's interest to prevent the creation of sibling children due to the coefficient of inbreeding being too high.  I ALSO say it is in the STATE government's interest to prevent incest, simply because "consent" is not "freely" given in familial relations.

Why do you always sink to "incest" when trying to control the sexual behaviors of consenting adults?  
Do you wonder why people ignore your ravings?
Now get back to lying about me, prick.

"I acknowledge having racist and classist and sexist feelings of white male superiority." -John Howard

---

by: ElectricStrawberry @ Thu Jan 03, 2013 at 19:51:53 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Per (0.00 / 0)

MGL:
"Section 17. Persons within degrees of consanguinity within which marriages are prohibited or declared by law to be incestuous and void, who intermarry or have sexual intercourse with each other, or who engage in sexual activities with each other, including but not limited to, oral or anal intercourse, fellatio, cunnilingus, or other penetration of a part of a person's body, or insertion of an object into the genital or anal opening of another person's body, or the manual manipulation of the genitalia of another person's body, shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for not more than 20 years or in the house of correction for not more than 21/2 years."

Here's what "the law" prohibits:
..."who intermarry or have sexual intercourse with each other, or who engage in sexual activities with each other, including but not limited to, oral or anal intercourse, fellatio, cunnilingus, or other penetration of a part of a person's body, or insertion of an object into the genital or anal opening of another person's body"
Broken down, "the law" "prohibits":
Intermarrying
Sexual intercourse
...and other "sexual" relations.

Period

"I acknowledge having racist and classist and sexist feelings of white male superiority." -John Howard

---

by: ElectricStrawberry @ Thu Jan 03, 2013 at 20:00:33 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

So is IVF sexual intercourse or not? (0.00 / 0)

These are still false statements:
."incest laws have nothing to do with what I do with my sperm.  Incest is an action. "

I think the spirit of the law and the meaning of the term "sexual intercourse" mean that the current law against incest also prohibits bringing a brother and sister's sperm and egg together in a lab, and therefore that consenting adults are not allowed to do whatever they want with their sperm and eggs.

You have never agreed to that, have you? Even here right now, "Period" means you think that incest laws only prohibit those intimate relations, and does not stop a lab joining a brother and sister's sperm and egg in a petri dish. But you do say that the state has an interest "to prevent the creation of sibling children due to the coefficient of inbreeding being too high" so are you suggesting a new law to do that? Or what law do you think currently does that?  If you want a new law to do that, would it apply to all lab conceptions to ensure that they are safe, or only to siblings? Would you protect married couples right to use their own genes, or subject them to screenings for coefficients of genetic risk factors?

Also "conception is a HUMAN RIGHT" is a false statement, only married couples have a right to conceive children together, though everyone has a right to marry if they can find someone eligible who consents to marriage. Couples that are prohibited from marrying do not have a right to conceive together even if both are human. There are many relationship types that are prohibited from marrying, such as siblings. Are you arguing that they have a right to conceive because both are human? Or are you

---

by: John Howard @ Thu Jan 03, 2013 at 21:05:55 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

No, it's not. (0.00 / 0)

If you're even asking that question it, it means you're not doing it right.  And by "it", I don't mean IVF.  

---

by: Lenny @ Thu Jan 03, 2013 at 22:55:35 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I think it is, legally (0.00 / 0)

The incest ban isn't on putting a penis in a vagina, it is on sexual intercourse, and I think that modern science has expanded the number of ways sexual intercourse can be accomplished beyond "intromission." See the wikipedia entry:

Sexual intercourse is also known as copulation, coitus or coition; coitus is derived from the Latin word coitio or coire, meaning "a coming together or joining together" or "to go together" and is usually defined as penile-vaginal penetration.[3][29][30][31] Penetration by the hardened, erect penis is additionally known as intromission, or by the Latin name immissio penis (Latin for "insertion of the penis").[32] Copulation, although usually used to describe the mating process of non-human animals, is defined as "the transfer of the sperm from male to female" or "the act of sexual procreation between a man and a woman"

Even before IVF, the word intercourse meant running together, or joining together, and referred to the mating process that transfers sperm from male to female, and so I think the meaning of the term and the spirit of the incest law forbid conception by siblings through IVF.

And as this case in Connecticut shows, the couple was arrested for incest even though there is no proof that he put his penis in her vagina, it is enough that they procreated offspring together and it doesn't matter what position they used or how they did it, they committed incest.

And the point I'm making is that it is incorrect to say that people have a right to do whatever they want with their sperm and all consenting adults have a right to conceive offspring together. No, many people are off-limits and the state can prohibit people from reproducing offspring with siblings, and with someone of the same sex too.

---

by: John Howard @ Fri Jan 04, 2013 at 00:52:44 AM UTC

[ Parent ]