Does the Federation ban incest?

[Timo]

...And that's in an era where "incestual relationships" basically directly relates to inbreeding. But even today, it's more and more difficult to see a link between sex and procreation; typically, those two only get connected once, twice or perhaps thrice in the course of a relationship, and in many cases they never connect. A connection between the two respective sets of customs and mores is not going to carry an argument very far, then. Incest bans will have to ride more on sexual taboos than on inbreeding risks...

...and of course the Star Trek case completely excludes the latter aspect, as any genetic shortcomings can be amended afterwards, legally or illegally.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Tiberius]

Except there is a practical reason to ban incest. Inbreeding often creates birth defects, which has a negative impact on the child. Frankly banning incest promotes a practical good for children and society, maintaining bio-diversity is important for the entire human race. The more inbreeding there is, the more these children would be burdened by birth defects.

But incest doesn't necessarily lead to children, does it? If siblings have sex, but also use contraception to prevent pregnancy, would you have a problem with that?

 

[lisa]

They can't have a law about it in the federation... That wouldn't make sense... For humans, yes... I am 100 percent against incest. But this is fiction... what if the Enterprise ran in to a species that could ONLY breed in their blood line? Where they found the thought of breeding with someone you weren't related to as disgusting as you or I would find the thought of us breeding with our brother or sister. I think If humans have any chance of ever getting along with a species from another planet, we have to have a VERY open mind... You never know what we would find out there....

That being said its gross to think of a human doing it... I don't want to throw stones at this guy in the article, that's a sad story indeed... but the thought of it kind of makes my skin prickle and my stomach turn.

 

[tafkats]

i would suspect that would be a matter for the planetary governments individually to determine and legislate on, like age of consent, age for consuming alcohol - if they even allow it - or age for voting etc.

I would imagine that voting age, at least, would be constant.

Or ... would it? Wesley is obviously considered a child at 15, whereas Kes is considered an adult at 2. If the Ocampans were part of the Federation, would they gain voting rights at an earlier age? (The alternative would be for the entire race to be disenfranchised.) If it were planet by planet, what about a human born on an Ocampan world or an Ocampan born on Earth?

Or would the franchise be based on something other than age?

 

[scotpens]

But incest doesn't necessarily lead to children, does it? If siblings have sex, but also use contraception to prevent pregnancy, would you have a problem with that?

Not if you have a hot brother or sister.

(Yeah, I’m a perverted sick fuck.)

 

[T'Girl]

and inbreeding does have a negative impact

It's a consideration that while inbreeding can pass along and reinforce negative genetic traits, the opposite is true as well. A child produced by incest can also have reinforced positive traits. If a Federation member species was engaged in a selective breeding program, such as the one that produced Khan, for whatever reason, would the Federation be in a moral/ethical/legal position to stop them?

There also could be political, or social reasons for a brother to marry his sister. And maybe (maybe not) produce a child as a heir.

... or age for voting etc.

If it were planet by planet, what about a human born on an Ocampan world or an Ocampan born on Earth?

It might vary from planet to planet, a Human on Earth could vote at say 18, on Andoria at 16, and on Vulcan at 21. A fourth member world might require a intellectual test to determine "adulthood." You could have three Humans on the fourth world, one can vote at 15, the second at 25, and the third (hypothetically) may never be allowed to vote.

Where it gets really confusing is with a individual with parents from two different species. Naomi Wildman seemed to mature at a accelerated rate, at least for the first few years, when was she going to be considered to be an "adult" in the eyes of society?

 

[Sci]

i would suspect that would be a matter for the planetary governments individually to determine and legislate on, like age of consent, age for consuming alcohol - if they even allow it - or age for voting etc.

I would imagine that voting age, at least, would be constant.

Or ... would it? Wesley is obviously considered a child at 15, whereas Kes is considered an adult at 2. If the Ocampans were part of the Federation, would they gain voting rights at an earlier age? (The alternative would be for the entire race to be disenfranchised.) If it were planet by planet, what about a human born on an Ocampan world or an Ocampan born on Earth?

Or would the franchise be based on something other than age?

I think it would be most rational to base voting rights on what's called the "age of majority" -- the age at which point one becomes a legal adult.

And it would be most rational to pass a Federation-wide law saying that the age of majority for any given species falls to that species's indigenous government to determine, with Federation and Federation Member governments being obliged to so recognize a given individual as reaching the age of majority according to the standards set forth by the indigenous government.

So if, for instance, Andorians consider themselves to become legal adults at the age of 25, and Humans consider themselves to become adults at the age of 18, then those standards would have to be set in law by the Parliament Andoria and United Earth Parliament, respectively. And if there are Human communities that settle on Andor, or Andorian communities that settle on Earth (maybe 23rd/24th Century Chicago has an area called Andortown?), then those Humans living on Andor would have to be considered as Andorian citizens who reach the age of majority at 18 Earth years, and those Andorians living on Earth would have to be considered as United Earth citizens who reach the age of majority at 25 Earth years.

That would be my speculation, at any rate.

 

[Frontier]

I don't think the Federation bans much of anything. I think their society has matured to the point where things don't need to be banned; they're simply not done if "bad" or what not.

I'd kind of be curious to see how the UFP deals with a whole host of touchy topics, but I doubt we'll ever find out.

 

[neozeks]

I think it would be most rational to base voting rights on what's called the "age of majority" -- the age at which point one becomes a legal adult.

And it would be most rational to pass a Federation-wide law saying that the age of majority for any given species falls to that species's indigenous government to determine, with Federation and Federation Member governments being obliged to so recognize a given individual as reaching the age of majority according to the standards set forth by the indigenous government.

Makes sense to me. But I can see some further complications arising.

What if there is more than one government of a single species? Mars is supposed to be an independent Federation member world, at least in the novels. There are probably other independent human worlds in the Federation. Even if they are just colonies and not full member worlds, it's likely they would have the autonomy to set their own age of majority rules. What if they set different standards than United Earth? Which rules would Andor use for it's human citizens? Earth is the human homeworld, of course, but for all we know there could be more humans living away from Earth than on it.

Then there's the problem of whether it's right for the humans who were born on Andor and are Andorian citizens but are not United Earth citizens (and therefore can't vote for the Earth parliament) not to have any influence on when they reach their own age of majority.

I can see some possible solutions. A simple one would be to just let the Andorian government (on which the Andorian humans do have influence through voting) choose one of all the different standards used by human political entities.

A more complicated one would be to have a single standard set for all humans, or any other species, in the Federation. It could really be used for every single human, or it could be a sort of "baseline", used when a political entity hadn't decided on another one (like in the example of humans living on Andor; actually, Andor might then be expressly prohibited from doing that for it's humans). This standard could be set by the Federation Council - but then the large majority of those deciding wouldn't actually be members of the species in question. Or there could exist some sort of "species parliament" for every Federation species, aside from all the territorial planetary governments. Each one would be elected by all the members of a species, irrelevant of the territory on which they live, and would have the power to decide on matters exclusive to that species, like this matter.

 

[horatio83]

Trillions of humanoid folks out there and billions of Deltans and Orions among them so who would want to screw his parents or siblings?

 

[Sindatur]

Another complication, IMHO, for voting Age Rights would be, if a member world was a Geritocracy, who view the Wisdon age above all else. I can't really see that Society wanting folks barely into adulthood voting, before they had gained any Adult Wisdom.

On Incest, it's certainly not for me, my mind is too programmed with the "Ick Factor", but, who am I to judge someone who doesn't find it icky? And, although it can reinforce negative genetic traits, depnding upon the Gene pool/population of a given society incest may actually be necessary (IE: Adam and Eve being the only two Humans created by God, kinda suggests their children got jiggy with each other)

 

[T'Girl]

Okay, if incest was okay in the Federation, what about this?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...usbands-sex-dead-wives-hours-AFTER-death.html

 

[Sindatur]

Okay, if incest was okay in the Federation, what about this?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...usbands-sex-dead-wives-hours-AFTER-death.html

OMG, after the death of your spouse/soulmate, how could someone even think about having sex, let alone with their corpse. If my man died, having sex would be the very last thing on mind for a very long time.

Of course, I'm vehemently opposed to the removal of rights to education and employment for women, but, I'll leave it at that since this isn't a political Debate thread/Forum

 

[sojourner]

http://gizmodo.com/5905596/relax-its-totally-cool-to-get-with-your-cousin-says-author

 

[bbailey861]

Okay, if incest was okay in the Federation, what about this?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...usbands-sex-dead-wives-hours-AFTER-death.html

Absolutely 'no' to both. When I read about 'farewell sex' yesterday........well, it wasn't pretty.

 

[Sci]

I think it would be most rational to base voting rights on what's called the "age of majority" -- the age at which point one becomes a legal adult.

And it would be most rational to pass a Federation-wide law saying that the age of majority for any given species falls to that species's indigenous government to determine, with Federation and Federation Member governments being obliged to so recognize a given individual as reaching the age of majority according to the standards set forth by the indigenous government.

Makes sense to me. But I can see some further complications arising.

What if there is more than one government of a single species? Mars is supposed to be an independent Federation member world, at least in the novels. There are probably other independent human worlds in the Federation. Even if they are just colonies and not full member worlds, it's likely they would have the autonomy to set their own age of majority rules. What if they set different standards than United Earth? Which rules would Andor use for it's human citizens? Earth is the human homeworld, of course, but for all we know there could be more humans living away from Earth than on it.

That's a fair question. My suspicion would be that this issue simply doesn't come up that often, and that by the time a given species has spread across multiple worlds, it's probably already adopted a uniform age of majority.

Then there's the problem of whether it's right for the humans who were born on Andor and are Andorian citizens but are not United Earth citizens (and therefore can't vote for the Earth parliament) not to have any influence on when they reach their own age of majority.

Well, frankly, I don't see why it would be right for someone to apply standards derived from one species' biology to another's.

Another complication, IMHO, for voting Age Rights would be, if a member world was a Geritocracy, who view the Wisdon age above all else. I can't really see that Society wanting folks barely into adulthood voting, before they had gained any Adult Wisdom.

I don't see why a society that practices age discrimination when it comes to voting rights would be allowed into the Federation in the first place, any more than a society that restricts the franchise to property owners, or to males, or to members of certain ethnic groups. It wouldn't be a democracy, so they shouldn't qualify for Federation Membership.

 

[scotpens]

Okay, if incest was okay in the Federation, what about this?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...usbands-sex-dead-wives-hours-AFTER-death.html

From the linked article:

The subject of a husband having sex with his dead wife arose in May 2011 when Moroccan cleric Zamzami Abdul Bari said marriage remains valid even after death.

He also said that women have the right to have sex with her dead husband.

See? Who says Islam doesn’t support equal rights for women?

Hey, when even the Daily Fail admits something is a hoax, then you know it’s a load of bollocks.

I don't see why a society that practices age discrimination when it comes to voting rights would be allowed into the Federation in the first place, any more than a society that restricts the franchise to property owners, or to males, or to members of certain ethnic groups. It wouldn't be a democracy, so they shouldn't qualify for Federation Membership.

But a culture may see the age of possessing sufficient wisdom to choose their leaders as something separate and different from the age of majority. In the U.S. today, you can vote at 18. But, under the Constitution, the President must be at least 35 years of age and Senators and Representatives must be at least 25. Does that constitute age discrimination?

Hmmm . . . Now I’m flashing back to Wild In the Streets . . .

 

[Sci]

I don't see why a society that practices age discrimination when it comes to voting rights would be allowed into the Federation in the first place, any more than a society that restricts the franchise to property owners, or to males, or to members of certain ethnic groups. It wouldn't be a democracy, so they shouldn't qualify for Federation Membership.

But a culture may see the age of possessing sufficient wisdom to choose their leaders as something separate and different from the age of majority.

Then they're not a real democracy. Period.

In the U.S. today, you can vote at 18. But, under the Constitution, the President must be at least 35 years of age and Senators and Representatives must be at least 25. Does that constitute age discrimination?

Yes.

 

[Sindatur]

I think it would be most rational to base voting rights on what's called the "age of majority" -- the age at which point one becomes a legal adult.

And it would be most rational to pass a Federation-wide law saying that the age of majority for any given species falls to that species's indigenous government to determine, with Federation and Federation Member governments being obliged to so recognize a given individual as reaching the age of majority according to the standards set forth by the indigenous government.

Makes sense to me. But I can see some further complications arising.

What if there is more than one government of a single species? Mars is supposed to be an independent Federation member world, at least in the novels. There are probably other independent human worlds in the Federation. Even if they are just colonies and not full member worlds, it's likely they would have the autonomy to set their own age of majority rules. What if they set different standards than United Earth? Which rules would Andor use for it's human citizens? Earth is the human homeworld, of course, but for all we know there could be more humans living away from Earth than on it.

That's a fair question. My suspicion would be that this issue simply doesn't come up that often, and that by the time a given species has spread across multiple worlds, it's probably already adopted a uniform age of majority.

Then there's the problem of whether it's right for the humans who were born on Andor and are Andorian citizens but are not United Earth citizens (and therefore can't vote for the Earth parliament) not to have any influence on when they reach their own age of majority.

Well, frankly, I don't see why it would be right for someone to apply standards derived from one species' biology to another's.

Another complication, IMHO, for voting Age Rights would be, if a member world was a Geritocracy, who view the Wisdon age above all else. I can't really see that Society wanting folks barely into adulthood voting, before they had gained any Adult Wisdom.

I don't see why a society that practices age discrimination when it comes to voting rights would be allowed into the Federation in the first place, any more than a society that restricts the franchise to property owners, or to males, or to members of certain ethnic groups. It wouldn't be a democracy, so they shouldn't qualify for Federation Membership.

How does setting the voting age at, say 28, rather than 18 or 21 make it not a Democracy? Why is it OK to deprive 20 year olds the right to vote, if voting age is set at 21, or denying 17 year olds to vote if voting age is 18, any less age discriminatory than making them wait until 28?

 

[scotpens]

Apparently, by Sci's reasoning, the U.S. isn't a democracy because most of the rights and responsibilities of adulthood are conferred at age 18 -- but you can drive a car at 16 and you have to wait until you're 21 to legally consume alcohol. And that's not even considering the ages of sexual consent and marriage which vary from state to state.

Setting different legal ages for different activities isn't age discrimination, as long as the age for activity X is the same for everybody.

Anyway, I thought this thread was about incest.