One occasionally hears opponents of same-sex marriage portray same-sex marriage as a sort of thin-end-of-the-wedge; "If we allow same-sex marriage, what next? Would we let a brother and sister get married." All the right-on lefties then fall over each other in their haste to point out how stupid this is, same-sex relationships and incest are completely different things. But are they? Can we really think of any rational (and I stress the word 'rational') reasons that incest is, in some sense, wrong? Is there any justification in condemning what two consenting adults do, even of they are related by blood? Possibly the most obvious such argument is that genetic deformities are more likely in the children of incest, but this clearly is an argument that having children in an incestuous relationship is wrong, and it doesn't hold as an argument in principle that incest is wrong; a couple could simply use a condom, and the argument evidently doesn't apply to a gay couple, or in the case one of them is infertile.
In fact, I don't think any rational argument that incest is wrong exists, any more than a rational argument that being gay is wrong. So I would say that same-sex relationships and incest are comparable, in that they are both disapproved of by society for no good reason.
And if you're not convinced, and feel that incest is 'just wrong', then take a moment to reflect that that's precisely the sort of thing people have said in the past about interracial relationships, or being gay.
No comments:
Post a Comment