Tuesday, December 21, 2010

Andrei The next taboo to be taboo no more

This is the start - a Bush loathing, Palin sneering, Ivy League professor with impressive left wing credentials, including a gig at the Huffington Post has been charged with incest with his adult daughter.

Now if he were a snaggled toothed bible thumping hill billy he would go to jail and it would be of no interest to anyone especially not the Huffington Post, excluding the remote possibility he was Sarah Palin's third cousin twice removed by marriage in which case he might be used to illustrate degeneracy of her family.

But he isn't even remotely related to that Sarah Palin as far as anybody knows. He's of the left elite, which is why this extraordinary statement appears on that blog.
"It's OK for homosexuals to do whatever they want in their own home," he said. "How is this so different? We have to figure out why some behavior is tolerated and some is not."

And thus begins the erosion of yet another long standing taboo because such things are hideously old fashioned and have no place amongst the enlightened and may stand in the way of their sexual fulfilment.

8 comment(s):

Lucia Maria said...

I can't believe that this is just going to go away. Surely this is just one taboo too far?

Even though I have heard the opposite when we had an incest case, here in NZ, involving adults.

Actually, I doubt that those who want to commit incest are as organised as those who are attracted to persons of the same sex, so hopefully, the erosion exhibited there will not make the same inroads as quickly.

One can only hope (and pray).

Andrei said...

Well Lucyna it is already underway

Switzerland considers repealing incest laws

'Switzerland is considering repealing its incest laws because they are "obsolete"'.

Psycho Milt said...

Lawyer comes up with bullshit to try and deflect from his client's illegal behaviour? I'm shocked.

Back outside the lawyer-client relationship, I'm picking that most people are aware that defining which behaviour is tolerated and which is not is actually the entire purpose of the law - something I'm willing to bet the lawyer in question is as aware of as anyone else, when he isn't trying to bullshit reporters on behalf of his client.

This doesn't strike me as having a natural left/right split to it. The idea that adults are best left to themselves to make decisions about their sex lives isn't something that's predominantly a leftist view.

macdoctor01 said...

The idea that adults are best left to themselves to make decisions about their sex lives isn't something that's predominantly a leftist view.

True, PM. It's predominantly a stupid view and stupidity knows no one political home. Whenever I hear some attempting to justify this position, I just murmur "Josef Fritzl" and the conversation ends

Danyl said...

Whenever I hear some attempting to justify this position, I just murmur "Josef Fritzl" and the conversation ends

You need to have these conversations with a smarter class of person - they'd point out that kidnapping your 11 year old daughter and keeping her prisoner doesn't really fit the 'consenting adults' criteria.

ZenTiger said...

"Consent" seems to be the crux of the matter, doesn't it?

That is actually the argument the lawyer made too Danyl. Do you agree with him then?

In an interview with the Huffington Post, Galluzzo questioned if prosecuting incest was "intellectually consistent" with the repeal of anti-sodomy laws that resulted from Lawrence v. Texas in 2003. "What goes on between consenting adults in private should not be legislated," he said. "That is not the proper domain of our law."

Galluzzo continued: "If we assume for a moment that both parties [involved in incest] are consenting, then why are we prosecuting this?"


I guess if consent is the only criteria to defining our morality, then this is exactly where such questions take us.

Does the smarter class of person sum up the Fritzl case as merely an issue of non-consent?

Danyl said...

Does the smarter class of person sum up the Fritzl case as merely an issue of non-consent?

I see it more as a categorical imperative, but my understanding of the criminal justice approach to rape and kidnapping is that they're seen as primarily crimes of non-consent.

Presumably the prosecutor in this case will argue that because of the nature of the relationship between a father and daughter, she cannot give meaningful consent.

Personally I think such relationships are wrong, but I'm not convinced the state needs to be involved, except to determine whether or not historic child abuse took place. The social pressure not to behave like this should be a strong enough disincentive to most. These relationships are pretty rare - the most prevalent type of incest involves siblings raping their younger brothers or sisters, that seems like a much bigger problem to worry about.

ZenTiger said...

Presumably the prosecutor in this case will argue that because of the nature of the relationship between a father and daughter, she cannot give meaningful consent.

Another line of attack might be to point out that it is illegal, and they have wilfully broken the law and admitted doing so, and the law may be there for more than just reasons of consent.

(I am assuming they are living in a jurisdiction where it is explicitly against the law, otherwise they would presumably not now be charged with a crime).

The social pressure not to behave like this should be a strong enough disincentive to most.

I think though the point is being raised that the social pressure might possibly be shifting, because the only restraint some people want to be bound by is "consent" and nothing else.

Sodomy, adultery, polygamy, seem to be reduced to issues of consent, although once there were other social pressures curbing these topics.

This issue of consent being the key criteria, potentially to the exclusion of other factors is quite thought provoking for me.

Post a Comment

Please be respectful. Foul language and personal attacks may get your comment deleted without warning. Contact us if your comment doesn't appear - the spam filter may have grabbed it.