Search the Community

Hello FDR!, Today I came across a series of convoluted reports on a court case in Oklahoma, USA concerning a young woman's marriage to her biological mother. The mother, allegedly, had previously been married to her son. https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.bet.com/news/national/2017/11/09/woman-pleads-guilty-to-incest-for-marrying-her-biological-mother.amp.html http://www.kswo.com/story/33054070/brother-claims-siblings-were-manipulated-by-mother Of course I'm thinking 'Isn't incest illegal because of the biological risks correlated with incestual reproduction?' Upon further reading I learned that there are two states in the USA that do not legally enforce ant-incest laws to impede people from participating in incest. In Canada, Incest is punishable by up to 14 years in prison. It's curious that we treat incest with such severe opposition because of the health risk involved in incestual breeding but we do not consider other forms of dangerous breeding to be as serious an offence. In many cases, dangerous breeding that may result in serious health problems or environmental deficiencies are facilitated by the incentives government subsidies provide through the use of force against citizens who generate economic growth. I'm opposed to the idea of incest between two consenting adults but I'm not sure it justifies caging the weirdos for a decade. If that choice does justify being caged for a decade, should we not hold other forms of dangerous breeding to an equal standard of legal judgement? *There is an important distinction made between incestual pedophilia or molestation and a voluntary incestual relationship between two consenting adults.