Post: #1

Apparently, an ethics committee has requested that the ban on incest be overturned because it violates sexual determination.
At least according to this site that is popular in Pakistan: http://www.parhlo.com/german-siblings-al...ex-by-law/
The article becomes absolutely freakish by the end.

After snooping around I found more information.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_regar...st#Germany

In 2014, an ethics committee requested the same thing.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2014...right.html

And as far as I know, the law has not been overturned (7:1 vote according to wikipedia back in 2008 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_regar...#Germany).
Incest remains criminalized. But something seems to be amiss.

For extra disgust, the sister in the first article is mentally subnormal and had her first kid with her brother when she was 16 and he was 23.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_St%C3%BCbing

An enlightened comment on this subject:

"Don't worry. Your current indecision will soon be ironed out after you hear several heart breaking love stories about siblings, who were "persecuted" by society and their "intolerant" families. Then you will read some references to how famous people or social workers or politicians support incestuous relationships, as long as the partners are responsible "consenting adults". This will then be followed by an "awareness campaign" that will surely persuade you not only to believe that there is nothing wrong with incest, but you will find yourself in the streets supporting these people in their own version of pride marches."

Stranger still, Germany doesn't even have gay marriage yet according to r/WorldNews and wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_Germany

Post: #2

“The fundamental right of adult siblings to sexual self-determination is to be weighed more heavily than the abstract idea of protection of the family.”

RIP Western Civilization.

Post: #3

Those whom the God's destroy they 1st make mad

-Ancient Proverb

Post: #4

No sources provided. Not sure if fake but sounds true.

Post: #5

(07-06-2015 08:54 PM)Samseau Wrote:  No sources provided. Not sure if fake but sounds true.

Its wrongly attributed from Euripides
https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Euripides

There are many other variants as well like:

Quote:Those whom the gods wish to destroy they first make mad.

Anonymous ancient proverb, wrongly attributed to Euripides. The version here is quoted as a "heathen proverb" in Daniel, a Model for Young Men (1854) by William Anderson Scott. The origin of the misattribution to Euripides is unknown. Several variants are quoted in ancient texts, as follows.
Variants and derived paraphrases:
For cunningly of old
was the celebrated saying revealed:
evil sometimes seems good
to a man whose mind
a god leads to destruction.

Sophocles, Antigone 620-3, a play pre-dating any of Euripides' surviving plays. An ancient commentary explains the passage as a paraphrase of the following, from another, earlier poet.

When a god plans harm against a man,
he first damages the mind of the man he is plotting against.

Quoted in the scholia vetera to Sophocles' Antigone 620ff., without attribution. The meter (iambic trimeter) suggests that the source of the quotation is a tragic play.

For whenever the anger of divine spirits harms someone,
it first does this: it steals away his mind
and good sense, and turns his thought to foolishness,
so that he should know nothing of his mistakes.

Attributed to "some of the old poets" by Lycurgus of Athens in his Oratio In Leocratem [Oration Against Leocrates], section 92. Again, the meter suggests that the source is a tragic play. These lines are misattributed to the much earlier semi-mythical statesman Lycurgus of Sparta in a footnote of recent editions of Bartlett's Familiar Quotations and other works.

The gods do nothing until they have blinded the minds of the wicked.

Variant in ''Dictionary of Quotations (Classical) (1906), compiled by Thomas Benfield Harbottle, p. 433.
Whom Fortune wishes to destroy she first makes mad.
Publilius Syrus, Maxim 911

The devil when he purports any evil against man, first perverts his mind.
As quoted by Athenagoras of Athens [citation needed]
quem Iuppiter vult perdere, dementat prius.
"Whom Jupiter wishes to destroy, he first sends mad"; neo-Latin version. "A maxim of obscure origin which may have been invented in Cambridge about 1640" -- Taylor, The Proverb (1931). Probably a variant of the line "He whom the gods love dies young", derived from Menander's play The Double Deceiver via Plautus (Bacchides 816-7).

quem (or quos) Deus perdere vult, dementat prius.
Whom God wishes to destroy, he first sends mad.
Whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad.

This variant is spoken by Prometheus, in The Masque of Pandora (1875) by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow

Those whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad.

As quoted in George Fox Interpreted: The Religion, Revelations, Motives and Mission of George Fox (1881) by Thomas Ellwood Longshore, p. 154
Those whom God wishes to destroy, he first makes mad.

As quoted in Bartlett's Familiar Quotations 16th edition (1992)

Nor do the gods appear in warrior's armour clad
To strike them down with sword and spear
Those whom they would destroy
They first make mad.

Bhartṛhari, 7th c. AD; as quoted in John Brough,Poems from the Sanskrit, (1968), p, 67
Vinaashkaley Viparit Buddhi

Post: #6

^ Was talking about the OP not your quote.

Post: #7

(07-06-2015 09:30 PM)Samseau Wrote:  ^ Was talking about the OP not your quote.

Went off on a bit of a tangent there

Post: #8

(07-06-2015 09:30 PM)Samseau Wrote:  ^ Was talking about the OP not your quote.

In the first article? No. Which is why I use the daily beast and decently sourced wikipedia articles.
I know wikipedia is not the best of sources but the statements are cited.

To lend better support here are more articles, from three left leaning and one right leaning source:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/...53506.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnew...-says.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/29...00672.html

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/incest...ay-n211391

Post: #9

Just the thread title got my motor running.

Post: #10

The only solution is for us to travel to the four corners of the earth, bareback sluts, cum inside of them, get them pregnant, and encourage them to have the kids, in order to stop the spread of retardation due to impending inbreeding.

It must be our duty.

Post: #11

Well, on the bright side it will increase the birth ratio, if you count retards as an increase.

Post: #12

(07-06-2015 07:24 PM)Sonsowey Wrote:  “The fundamental right of adult siblings to sexual self-determination is to be weighed more heavily than the abstract idea of protection of the family.”

RIP Western Civilization.

quoting Spock:

Quote:"Logic clearly dictates that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few"

But why would that work if you fall back to Barbarism?
Now "Sexual Determination" become more important than the future of mankind?

Post: #13

If they need a law to say its wrong to fuck your siblings then your society never really left the starting line. A society which actually wants to progress would rid itself of these deviants.

A lot of weird stuff comes from Germany as it is, it is merely a descent into the mind of madness with some of them in regards to sex.

Post: #14

Post: #15

There are several countries in which consensual incest is not illegal for adults, including France and Brazil. Apparently it has something to do with Napoleon.

I really wouldn't worry too much about it. There are biological impulses that make it extremely unlikely that siblings raised together would, ummm, ever consider getting down. They would find the thought disgusting. Biological siblings not raised together are another story. There is good reason to believe that they are in fact MORE attracted to each other than to other random people. This creates serious issues with adoption, births by sperm donor and cuckolding, where people who are biologically related either don't realise it or only become aware after the childhood imprinting window.

Now don't shoot the messenger. I'm describing how it seems things are, not making some sort of policy statement. If interested research "Westermark Effect" and "Genetic Sexual Attraction".

Post: #16

Post: #17

This is a problem. When all taboos are off, then there is no telling where it ends.

This case among siblings who only found out later is something rare, but what about the thousands of Pakistanis in the UK, who marry their first cousins and produce thousands of disabled children? Ultimately the taxpayer is straddled with the costs of those children.

Now - I don't want to blow the eugenics pipe here, because they claimed that the costs were too high and thus all disabled had to be killed. We can easily support a few disabled children, but when it becomes 5-10%+ of the population like with some Pakistanis, then it is a nuisance.

Also the number of girls with a disturbing perception to fathers is rising. Especially when they grow up with a divorced dad, then their infatuation with it can get strange. This will probably continue.

Top-down they want all morals to go, so yes - I expect incest, pedophelia to age zero, zoophilia, necrophilia and even later on snuff-sex (actual torture and killing of "sexual partner") to become legal.

Post: #18

(07-07-2015 02:26 PM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  This is a problem. When all taboos are off, then there is no telling where it ends.

It doesn't end.

About ten years ago, there was some British site that published a story by a woman who talked about how she had had sex with her brother when they were teens and how she loved him and only wanted to be with him, but they finally agreed that they had to marry others. The comments were interesting because the woman tried to use a strong emotional appeal that it was wrong that she couldn't marry the person she loved and many female commenters were swayed by her arguments (even though incest is disgusting).

Seeing that story and thinking that this was similar to the early attempts at making homosexuality appear normal (or transexuality back in the day). At first, everyone is disgusted, but over time, you begin to see them in entertainment and other areas of life(like GoT) until it starts to become an SJW crusade because of feelings.

I'm not sure what issue is immediately next, but incest will be a future issue that SJWs will fight for.

Post: #19

This topic reminds me of an excerpt from article called The Moral Instinct by Steven Pinker. In it he cites questions posed by psychologist Jonathan Haidt, one of which is:

Quote:Julie and Mark are brother and sister. They are traveling together in France on summer vacation from college. One night they are staying alone in a cabin near the beach. They decide that it would be interesting and fun if they tried making love. At the very least it would be a new experience for each of them. Julie was already taking birth control pills, but Mark uses a condom too, just to be safe. They both enjoy making love, but they decide not to do it again. They keep that night as a special secret, which makes them feel even closer to each other. What do you think about that, was it OK for them to make love?

Any response we give to this question will be rooted in disgust. This is normal.

Post: #20

I don't want incest to be socially acceptable, but I don't think it should be illegal/people thrown in jail because of it.

Regardless, just like homosexuality, a small percentage of the population will engage in this type of behavior anyway. I don't really care if they want to fuck up their own gene pool.

Post: #21

(07-07-2015 03:28 PM)Checkmat Wrote:  I don't want incest to be socially acceptable, but I don't think it should be illegal/people thrown in jail because of it.

Regardless, just like homosexuality, a small percentage of the population will engage in this type of behavior anyway. I don't really care if they want to fuck up their own gene pool.

This is exactly how the legitimization of homosexuality started. Convince normal people that it doesn't affect them and that as long as it's between "two consenting adults" why should anyone care?

Legitimization of this sort of deviancy means removing any punishment for those caught doing it and any disincentive for those considering it. It leads to these freaks proudly and publicly touting their degenerate behavior and pushing for not only tolerance of it but acceptance of it. So what if most people won't engage in it? I don't give a shit. I don't want this abominable behavior being promoted.

The ones who engage in this freakish shit and get caught should be punished severely.

Post: #22

(07-07-2015 04:45 AM)Foolsgo1d Wrote:  If they need a law to say its wrong to fuck your siblings then your society never really left the starting line. A society which actually wants to progress would rid itself of these deviants.

A lot of weird stuff comes from Germany as it is, it is merely a descent into the mind of madness with some of them in regards to sex.

This is true. States that don't ban incest don't have an incest problem.

Post: #23

(07-07-2015 03:39 PM)TheWastelander Wrote:  

(07-07-2015 03:28 PM)Checkmat Wrote:  I don't want incest to be socially acceptable, but I don't think it should be illegal/people thrown in jail because of it.

Regardless, just like homosexuality, a small percentage of the population will engage in this type of behavior anyway. I don't really care if they want to fuck up their own gene pool.

This is exactly how the legitimization of homosexuality started. Convince normal people that it doesn't affect them and that as long as it's between "two consenting adults" why should anyone care?

Legitimization of this sort of deviancy means removing any punishment for those caught doing it and any disincentive for those considering it. It leads to these freaks proudly and publicly touting their degenerate behavior and pushing for not only tolerance of it but acceptance of it. So what if most people won't engage in it? I don't give a shit. I don't want this abominable behavior being promoted.

The ones who engage in this freakish shit and get caught should be punished severely.

Tolerance
Acceptance
Legitimacy
Glorification
Coercion.

Post: #24

(07-07-2015 09:30 PM)Eskhander Wrote:  

(07-07-2015 03:39 PM)TheWastelander Wrote:  

(07-07-2015 03:28 PM)Checkmat Wrote:  I don't want incest to be socially acceptable, but I don't think it should be illegal/people thrown in jail because of it.

Regardless, just like homosexuality, a small percentage of the population will engage in this type of behavior anyway. I don't really care if they want to fuck up their own gene pool.

This is exactly how the legitimization of homosexuality started. Convince normal people that it doesn't affect them and that as long as it's between "two consenting adults" why should anyone care?

Legitimization of this sort of deviancy means removing any punishment for those caught doing it and any disincentive for those considering it. It leads to these freaks proudly and publicly touting their degenerate behavior and pushing for not only tolerance of it but acceptance of it. So what if most people won't engage in it? I don't give a shit. I don't want this abominable behavior being promoted.

The ones who engage in this freakish shit and get caught should be punished severely.

Tolerance
Acceptance
Legitimacy
Glorification
Coercion.

I think that list has recently been updated. And it goes a little like this:

Tolerance
Acceptance
Legitimacy
Glorification
Coercion
Sauerkraut
Bratwurst
Sisterwifen

Post: #25

(07-07-2015 02:26 PM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  This is a problem. When all taboos are off, then there is no telling where it ends.

This case among siblings who only found out later is something rare, but what about the thousands of Pakistanis in the UK, who marry their first cousins and produce thousands of disabled children? Ultimately the taxpayer is straddled with the costs of those children.

The British Pakistani problem is a problem of the welfare state and the apparent fact that a large percent of British Pakistani's are from some sort of compromised/backward community in Pakistan. They'd have these issues even if they married non first cousin fellow Pakistani's. Also, close inbreeding is actually a way to confine deleterious genes, and even eliminate them. Think about it. Just because you outbreed doesn't mean that your deleterious recessive alleles disappear. They are simply spread more widely. Sort of like kicking the can down the road. A Eugenic approach would actually be to encourage those with demonstrated deleterious alleles to only breed with others with the same alleles.

The siblings who find out later are rare in the sense that there are not many such siblings who actually end up having sex. But it is not that rare as a general issue, and it is very common for long lost biological siblings who only meet later in life, like in certain adoption scenarios, to have sexual attraction for one another. I know, I know, nobody wants to hear this shit, but it doesn't mean it isn't an issue in the world out there. Basically the disgust you and I would feel at the thought of having sex with a sibling, or imagining others doing it, does not apply in a certain scenario. That scenario arises when siblings did not grow up together and only met as adults long after the childhood imprinting window had closed. Read up on the Westermarck Effect if interested.

(07-07-2015 02:26 PM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  Also the number of girls with a disturbing perception to fathers is rising. Especially when they grow up with a divorced dad, then their infatuation with it can get strange. This will probably continue.

If the divorce happened when the girl was very young, and there was no or very limited contact during childhood, especially from 0 to 6 years old, sexual attraction between the two is almost inevitable if/when meeting up later in life. Sorry. Again it has to do with the lack of childhood imprinting, and also a somewhat controversial subject called "Genetic Sexual Attraction".

To be honest incest laws (relating to adults) have very little effect on anything. As I said in a post above, consensual adult incest is legal in certain countries, and there is no evidence that this has any statistical effect at all on their populations behavior relative to countries where it is illegal. To the massive majority who find the thought of close (parent-child and brother-sister) incest disgusting, and the very small minority who are attracted to close relative because of the existence of the modern displaced family and glitches in childhood imprinting, the law would barely enter into their calculus. They are driven by emotions (disgust, how they appear to the tribe and sexual attraction) that would likely override abstract laws.