Germany and Incest

Thinkmarble · Post by **Thinkmarble** » 2005-09-22 01:01am

Who said that every fucked up news either come from germany or Florida ?

In germany a brother and sister have sued before the constitutional court to abolish the ban on intercourse between siblings. They have together 4 children and the brother is at the moment imprisoned for 11 month for exactly that crime. It ought to be noted that
a. it is only vaginal intercourse which is banned, oral sex, anal sex or petting is permitted
b. they have a good chance to actually win this fight.
(neither possible genetic damage nor "it's icky" fly as justifications for law in germany)

VT-16 · Post by **VT-16** » 2005-09-22 04:04am

I think I've heard about them before, ain't most of their kids handicapped in one way or another?

Chris OFarrell · Post by **Chris OFarrell** » 2005-09-22 04:51am

I would dobut it.

Genetic defects IIRC only start to set in 2-3 generations down the line in most cases. An initial sibling relationship without a histroy in the family shouldn't be THAT dangerous.

Such is what I remember anyway. I could be completly off on the other hand.

AMX · Post by **AMX** » 2005-09-22 05:26am

Both of you, check your Mendel's Rules.
And remember that everyone carries multiple recessive diseases.

It's simple math from there.

The Grim Squeaker · Post by **The Grim Squeaker** » 2005-09-22 05:52am

I don't see anything wrong (except in the long term genetic case- idiot babies anyone?) with related sex, but Brother/sister is to close, cousins is acceptable or further but this is just wrong.
Also you're saying that they're allowed to have oral sex without any problems? Where are their parents?

Molyneux · Post by **Molyneux** » 2005-09-22 07:28am

Thinkmarble wrote:Who said that every fucked up news either come from germany or Florida ?

In germany a brother and sister have sued before the constitutional court to abolish the ban on intercourse between siblings. They have together 4 children and the brother is at the moment imprisoned for 11 month for exactly that crime. It ought to be noted that
a. it is only vaginal intercourse which is banned, oral sex, anal sex or petting is permitted
b. they have a good chance to actually win this fight.
(neither possible genetic damage nor "it's icky" fly as justifications for law in germany)

..."possible" genetic damage? If you swim in the shallow end of the gene pool, you're going to get crud in your lineage, no ifs, ands, or buts.

I'm going to be very, very annoyed if they win this case.

Elheru Aran · Post by **Elheru Aran** » 2005-09-22 09:00am

DEATH wrote:I don't see anything wrong (except in the long term genetic case- idiot babies anyone?) with related sex, but Brother/sister is to close, cousins is acceptable or further but this is just wrong.
Also you're saying that they're allowed to have oral sex without any problems? Where are their parents?

They've obviously been doing this for a long time. Four *children*. I don't think their parents are part of the equation, to say the least...

Adrian Laguna · Post by **Adrian Laguna** » 2005-09-22 05:39pm

Sibling and parent-child relationships are too close for comfort in genetic terms. The anything further (ie first cousins) and problems only arise after a few generations. The Rothschilds married their cousins (and in one case a young lady married her uncle), and had perfectly healthy children. Though it only went on for three generations. The Haspburgs, married their cousins for I think six generations, before someone retarded... and tone deaf, and hediously deformed, and worst of all as far as the Haspburgs were concerned: infertile (I think he either couldn't get it up, or the dammed thing was deformed). So this poor Spanish king realized that he just didn't have what it takes to rule. He abdicated the throne, and there was a war (the War of Spanish Succesion), and the Haspburgs began a long decline that hit rock-bottom in the First World War.

wolveraptor · Post by **wolveraptor** » 2005-09-22 05:52pm

I always figured the biggest problem in sibling sex was the destruction of brother-sister bond. On the other hand, that sounds a lot like fundies harping on about the destruction of marriage, so I guess that's pretty much crap.

Thinkmarble · Post by **Thinkmarble** » 2005-09-22 06:39pm

Molyneux wrote: ..."possible" genetic damage? If you swim in the shallow end of the gene pool, you're going to get crud in your lineage, no ifs, ands, or buts.

I'm going to be very, very annoyed if they win this case.

Every sperm is holy, eh.
There are such things as the anti-baby pill, condoms, sterilization or abortion.

Disabeled people have a right to procreation, this is actually something germans are a little hung up about thanks to the history of eugenics during the third reich and also I'm not an legal scholar I would wager that this right is procted under Article 1 German Basic law.

Darth Servo · Post by **Darth Servo** » 2005-09-22 07:02pm

VT-16 wrote:I think I've heard about them before, ain't most of their kids handicapped in one way or another?

If it was that severe, there would be a lot fewer fundies in the world.

wolveraptor · Post by **wolveraptor** » 2005-09-22 07:04pm

I should think they lose that right when they have kids that they are unable to take care of and throw them to the state. Obviously, this is more a problem for the mentally, rather than physically, disabled.

Jalinth · Post by **Jalinth** » 2005-09-22 07:06pm

Thinkmarble wrote:
Disabeled people have a right to procreation, this is actually something germans are a little hung up about thanks to the history of eugenics during the third reich and also I'm not an legal scholar I would wager that this right is procted under Article 1 German Basic law.

This isn't the goverment saying you can't proceate at all, only that you can't procreate with a very small number of people (your siblings). The reasoning is that you stand a very high chance of producing a child or children with severe physical and/or mental deficiencies.

Is it eugenics? Of a very minor variety and is actually backed up by science. All that the research is saying is that breeding with your brother/sister is a bad idea. You could have Mr. and Mrs. Einstein 2, and it still would be a bad idea.

So personally, I have little problem in a government doing this - they are protecting both the children and themselves (the costs for raising disabled children is extremely high)

Enforcer Talen · Post by **Enforcer Talen** » 2005-09-22 09:14pm

If they are consenting adults, I dont care. However, I am concerned about the genes of the kids.

Sriad · Post by **Sriad** » 2005-09-22 10:13pm

Jalinth wrote:This isn't the goverment saying you can't proceate at all, only that you can't procreate with a very small number of people (your siblings). The reasoning is that you stand a very high chance of producing a child or children with severe physical and/or mental deficiencies.

Is it eugenics? Of a very minor variety and is actually backed up by science. All that the research is saying is that breeding with your brother/sister is a bad idea. You could have Mr. and Mrs. Einstein 2, and it still would be a bad idea.

So personally, I have little problem in a government doing this - they are protecting both the children and themselves (the costs for raising disabled children is extremely high)

Saying that the disabled have a right to procreate and have probably disabled children but siblings can't procreate with possibly disabled children is kinda... It's icky, but I can see where they're coming from on this, and ickyness shouldn't carry much legal weight.

Dominus Atheos · Post by **Dominus Atheos** » 2005-09-22 10:37pm

If it was that severe, there would be a lot fewer fundies in the world.

.....

.....

screw it (joke too obvious)

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Germany and Incest

Germany and Incest

Re: Germany and Incest

Re: Germany and Incest

Re: Germany and Incest

Re: Germany and Incest