46 replies to this topic

[DocM]

Conjor, on 10 January 2013 - 14:55, said:

I'm curious as to what legal issues they are reffering too. Is the government going to try and step in and stop them? Last I checked, it was not the mandate of the US government to interfear with peoples sex lives. Incestuous or not, it's their choice.

First principle: states are given a wide latitude when it comes to home rule, so the Feds don't often get into state criminal law issues unless they go against the Federal interest. What's illegal in one state is often legal in another. In this states are like semi-autonomous "countries" within the larger Federalist structure. This is codified in the 10th Amendment.

In Lawrence v Texas (2003) the US Supreme Cousd ruled that homosexual sodomy was legal. But it did NOT rule that other nominally illegal sexual activities were too by extension; prostitution, incest, polygamy, etc.

Next up; Muth v Frank (7th Circuit Court, 2005.) In Muth a brother & sister incest was prosecuted in Wisconsin. They were convicted and appealed referencing Lawrence

http://caselaw.findl...it/1247048.html

Finding -

Quote

Given, therefore, the specific focus in Lawrence on homosexual sodomy, the absence from the Court's opinion of its own “established method” for resolving a claim that a particular practice implicates a fundamental liberty interest, and the absence of strict scrutiny review, we conclude that Lawrence did not announce a fundamental right of adults to engage in all forms of private consensual sexual conduct.

AFAIK the Supreme Court has not ruled on this subject again since Lawrence

[Simon-]

I don't see a problem as long as they don't sexually touch each other - that would be gross - and I'm glad that they profess that they would not even want to, that would cross the line in weirdness factor. This taboo theme has been popular in porn but until now it has all been staged as far as I know (hope). I have heard though that there are twin brothers (legitimately twin brothers; not lookalikes) on the homosexual scene who actually DO incest. The homosexuality is fine, but actual incest is really gross.

The only other gross factor/borderline incest is that if they are sharing partners at the same time, they will invariably be sharing bodily fluids of each other off the shared partner. Other than that, lucky guy or girl who gets to do a bona fide mother & daughter at once! Even if still a little bit messed up that they would be having sex near each other at all.

[Pupik]

Legal or not; still gross to even think about it.

[Tuishimi]

I think it is wrong... but why is it incest? Wasn't the law designed to prevent inbreeding and potential birth defects?

[Praetor]

disgusting...at least.

[+Perfect72]

Clearly a lot of people here haven't gotten to do the mother/daughter duo.

This is pretty hilarious though. I'm enjoying the laugh.

[DocM]

Tuishimi, on 10 January 2013 - 16:56, said:

I think it is wrong... but why is it incest? Wasn't the law designed to prevent inbreeding and potential birth defects?

The law has to be gender blind, so it isn't necessary for the participants to be of opposite sexes. Example: women can be, and have been, charged with rape and reproduction is incidental to incest.

[Growled]

Pupik, on 10 January 2013 - 16:38, said:

Legal or not; still gross to even think about it.

My thoughts exact. Just yuck.

[PGHammer]

Growled, on 11 January 2013 - 00:58, said:

My thoughts exact. Just yuck.

Don't like it? Fine - have nothing to do with it. As long as no laws are broken, all opinions are pretty much moot - outside of the participants.

[Shiranui]

What is the rationale behind the criminalization of same-sex "incest" between consenting adults -- apart from it being revolting?

A consanguine mother and daughter pr0n team can pound their pudenda together all they like, but it is not going to result in offspring.

[FloatingFatMan]

Simon-, on 10 January 2013 - 16:37, said:

I don't see a problem as long as they don't sexually touch each other - that would be gross - and I'm glad that they profess that they would not even want to, that would cross the line in weirdness factor. This taboo theme has been popular in porn but until now it has all been staged as far as I know (hope). I have heard though that there are twin brothers (legitimately twin brothers; not lookalikes) on the homosexual scene who actually DO incest. The homosexuality is fine, but actual incest is really gross.

There are plenty of cases of identical twin lesbians in the porn industry actually doing each other, as well as partners. It's really not that hard to find it, either.

[xiphi]

Neither are attractive, and I really wouldn't want to see a 56 year old getting it on. It's just... *shivers*

[jerzdawg]

compl3x, on 10 January 2013 - 15:24, said:

I'm not an expert on porn (LOL! ) but I don't think people become filthy rich by doing porn. They might make a decent living, but filthy rich? Nah.

While I am sure it's rare to become filthy rich, just head over to an article on Jenna Jamison. She has pretty much built a porn empire and I would certainly put her in the category of filthy rich (this mom/daughter duo will not be so fortunate).

[Hum]

I'll stick to poRn with attractive people.

[compl3x]

jerzdawg, on 11 January 2013 - 13:41, said:

While I am sure it's rare to become filthy rich, just head over to an article on Jenna Jamison. She has pretty much built a porn empire and I would certainly put her in the category of filthy rich (this mom/daughter duo will not be so fortunate).

1 porn star out of . . . fuq knows how many? Odds are certainly against them.