sapphi_snake said:
pizzahut451 said:
sapphi_snake said:
pizzahut451 said:
sapphi_snake said:
pizzahut451 said:
Isnt incest supposed to be illegal? If it isnt, it damn right should be !!!
|
It's a very difficult issue, that raises a lot of questions.
|
what difficlut issue? Its disgusting, its wrong, most of the time its agaisnt someone's will, and it can dangerously harm the child/baby
|
Sex against someone's will = sexual abuse.
Incest means sex with someone with whom you are realted too. If it's against someone's will then it's sexual abuse. If it's not (like this case), then I have a hard time finding a good reason why it should be illegal.
|
Well, lots of abused people stay quiet and dont really talk about it because of fear, so its hard to recognize when the sexual abuse is happening. In most incets cases I heard, the younger relative is usually the victim that doesnt really fight the abuser, mostl because of naive ignorance, shame or fear.
|
But that's sexual abuse, and not incest. Incest just implies 2 people that are related having sex. It says nothing about whether or not there is abuse, and in this particular case we are talkingh about there certainly is no abuse.
So we should simply be talking: is there something wrong with these two people (from the article) having such a relationship? Should it be illegal? Does that even make sense?
|
i know the diffrence between incest and sexual abuse. My point was, in most of incest cases, sexual abuse DOES happen, only the victim stays quiet about it. As for this case specificlly, there are probably no reasons why it should be illegal EXCEPT the fact they put thier inbred child in great danger
