Skip to comments.Lawful incest may be on its way (Santorum was right)
Posted on 05/02/2007 10:27:48 AM PDT by Uncledave
WHEN THE BBC invited me onto one of its talk shows recently to talk about the day's hot topic -- legalizing adult incest -- I thought of Rick Santorum.
Back in 2003, as the Supreme Court was preparing to rule in Lawrence v. Texas, a case challenging the constitutionality of laws criminalizing homosexual sodomy, then-Senator Santorum caught holy hell for warning out that if the law were struck down, there would be no avoiding the slippery slope.
"If the Supreme Court says you have the right to consensual sex within your home," he told a reporter, "then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything."
It was a common-sensical observation, though you wouldn't have known it from the nail-spitting it triggered in some quarters. When the justices, voting 6-3, did in fact declare it unconstitutional for any state to punish consensual gay sex, the dissenters echoed Santorum's point. "State laws against bigamy, same-sex marriage, adult incest, prostitution, masturbation, adultery, fornication, bestiality, and obscenity are . . . called into question by today's decision," Justice Antonin Scalia wrote for the minority. Now, Time magazine acknowledges: "It turns out the critics were right."
Time's attention, like the BBC's, has been caught by the legal battles underway to decriminalize incest between consenting adults. An article last month by Time reporter Michael Lindenberger titled "Should Incest Be Legal?" highlights the case of Paul Lowe, an Ohio man convicted of incest for having sex with his 22-year-old stepdaughter.
(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...
I’m not advocating incest by any means, but prosecuting a man for having sex with his 22 year old step-daughter, as creepy as that is, seems wrong, assuming this was consensual. I’m not even sure that’s technically incest in the first place. Would Woody Allen be criminally prosecuted in Ohio?
Not that it makes it right, but is it really "incest" if it's his stepdaughter?
They aren’t related so it isn’t incest.
It’s a bit creepy though.
Emotionally, it is incest. Just like Woody Allen with his stepdaughter.
“Not that it makes it right, but is it really “incest” if it’s his stepdaughter?”
Only if while her parent (how long?) he legally adopted her.
Many step-parents do not adopt previous children coming into there new marriage.
Perhaps the OH law (stupidly) defines incest to include adult step-children, otherwise how could the DA think this charge could stick?
We need to bring shame back to its rightful place in society. You can’t legislate morality but social mores need to be voiced by one’s peers. We need MORE judgment by others, not less. Even if certain acts are technically legal, like adult incest, they are WRONG and people need to say so fearlessly.
I agree. Creepy perhaps. Illegal, no. Steps or in-laws are not blood kin. Greg and Marsha Brady could have had sex and it would not have been incest. I think incest pertains to blood kin.
While I realize that every generation has pointed to events that mark the end of days,....
I don’t know when they were ever written with such a bold,broad markers as we have now!
I don’t think a guy showing off his wife/daughter is going to meet up with a lot of social acceptance anywhere, even in the most liberal areas. I hope I’m right in saying this!
I don’t know where their “definition” of incest comes from, but I’m pretty sure “step” is not in there...........
Of course we’re on a slippery slope. the same arguments that are being made for same sex marriage can be made for incest or any other twosome or group relationship.
In Justice Scalia’s dissent in Lawrence vs. Texas, he pointed out this reasoning, and that the case could be the end of any type of “morals” legislation. If we’re going to say anything consenting adults do is ok, then that anything can be things we would rather not think about. It goes beyond consenting homosexual relationships.
Sadly I don’t think I’d win if I was every on a game show called “Know Your Ohio Revised Code”
The state of Arkansas is rejoicing!!!!!!
Yeah, and also what if she's hot?
Technically, sex with one’s stepdaughter might be sexual battery:
ORC 2907.03 Sexual battery.
(A) No person shall engage in sexual conduct with another, not the spouse of the offender, when any of the following apply: ... (5) The offender is the other persons natural or adoptive parent, or a stepparent, or guardian, custodian, or person in loco parentis of the other person.
Don’t know if that applies once the step-daughter reaches adulthood, though.
If you're not advocating it, why does it seem wrong?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.