I saw this story and I'm glad you brought it to our attention by way of this article.

"How" you ask. or why? Because the sexual revolution is being orchestrated in a cultural campaign run by the "anything goes" crowd. It all began in 1972 in an attempt to "normalize" homosexuality and other deviant sexual behaviors.

I can understand some taking that out - perhaps in the case of first cousins.  However in the case of parents and children, there is more going on than sex.  It is clearly rape by the parent since he basically raised the child and was (and probably still is) the authority figure.  Besides having the biological implications, just that is enough to sicken most people, especially women.

The man should be castrated - period.  And then sent to jail to explain his situation to the other felons.

well, i suppose the state could choose to ignore the wishes of the people involved and start arresting and interrogating them to get at the truth.

however, if it's indeed consensual and they started humping at the right time ... no crime. or a victimless crime, in case someone digs out some law to nail them. besides, getting dragged out in the open is terrible enough in a country without privacy protection laws.

Maybe as far as actual laws, there is no crime, but there is much harm done.

It is undeniable and absolutely wrong and much harm done when a father and his adult daughter consent to a sexual relationship.  

Who said consent makes something moral? Remember the mass suicide at Jonestown? Was it simply a matter of consenting adults? My point is we can't universally say that whatever consenting adults do is OK. Some things are objectively wrong whether adults consent to them or not.  

Being who he is - he may have, but then he still broke a law, so I suspect you may be right.

You apparently did not read anything written here, and have no children. 

There was no gestapo involved - remember?  Obamination is in charge and if a black is not being victimized, no crime is being committed.

That proves you do not read.  that question was already answered above.  Try reading - I know it is hard for someone who only gets their information from talking points - but you may find it enlightening.

I jumped into a family snake pit (hissing loudly)  on my husband's side regarding this issue on FB a week or so ago.  One of them wrote in using bad examples of marriage (Tiger Woods, Elizabeth Taylor, Brittany Spears etc) to show support for homosexual marrriage. 

My husband replied first explaining that these bad examples  show  the sinfulness of man.  There are many things we're not allowed to do and marrying the same sex is just one example. 

The conversation that ensued got nasty and ugly fast with absolutely no logic coming from these very very liberal relatives (all from MA) .  The attacks started almost immediately.  So typical.  When we'd answer their questions logically, backing them into a corner they'd end with an "I'm done with this conversation" never answering our questions. 

What many didn't see was that the most vicious one publicly was writing to me privately and I have to give him credit because he did apologize in the end.   Although I'm a firm believer that if you make a public idiot of yourself you should rectify it publicly as well. 

But the lack of logic and the attack mode was just so typical.  Even if it's a contentious issue there's absolutley no need for the ugliness that this can generate.   I can't believe they can't see this.  It's just so darn evident.  Instead they seemed to be cheering each other on with a love fest.

And it's true, if you open the door to legalizing homosexual marriage/sex between two consenting adults there can be no justification for NOT allowing incest and the other stuff that comes directly behind it.  Once that door is opened, it's opened.   

I totally disagree - but it will be used that way.  As long as their  ARGUMENTS are validated, then bestiality (talk to the dog whisperer), pedophilia (consent gets lowered - after all you do not need parents permission to have abortions now), and incest will jump right in with the SAME argument.  and that is what is happening.  What that shows is the basic argument used by some - is fatally flawed.  It does not say that the concept of homosexuals joining is wrong.  But as you pointed out earlier in your post, that is the argument of choice.  And I think many who would not otherwise think of themselves as supporting incest, pedophilia and bestiality do so because they are too stupid to admit they are wrong and stop using fallacious arguments to shove a politically correct point down the "unwashed masses" throat.

To answer your question: None to you - if you're not a member of the family in question.

Finding such statistics from studies would be a tad difficult, if they could be conducted at all.  They would necessarily start with the assumption that parent-child incest is acceptable until & unless 'harm' is proven.  Then you have the issue of defining what constitutes harm.  And to be valid, the subjects of the study could not know they were in it.  Such a study, if it could be pulled off, would rank up there with the Tuskeegee Experiment.  Maybe up there with Dr. Mengele.

This is the moral relativist's refuge - everything is OK until 'proven' wrong.  Especially when 'proof' is impossible.  Easy way out.

Well put!

And in some cases impossible.  My children do not "consent" to my authority.  And some even into adulthood still recognize the parent as the authority.  Even if they rebel, they are rebelling AGAINST the authority.

No, that incest is objectively wrong and for that reason causes harm is not a personal opinion. It's valid because every person has a hardwired sense of right and wrong. We know interiorly when we are doing wrong and our conscience rebukes our conduct. People inherently know that incest is wrong and therefore harmful.

Egads! "If any?" 

OKay. I'll rattle off a few....Incest causes psychological, moral, familial, societal and spritual harm. Incest is incompatible with the moral, familial and social order.

.....................

Oh my, there's actually an argument in that wall of rage. "Accepted knowledge in psychiatry". You could have proven me wrong completely without getting nasty at me, if you'd have posted something like that from the start. You still can if you pull up something scientific relevant to the question.

You were only raving against that man anyway. Besides, all is still on topic. Congrats for creating the topic. Well done. You are very good at creating different topics which somehow seem to be all the same topic: "I hate liberals!"

And now your fantasy is making you see things I never wrote and didn't imply. Is there a chance that anytime soon you are stopping to project your hate of Mr Epstein onto me?

I was making the point that you can debate without denigrating each other. I actually enjoy civilized debate.

And now you imply that I do practice incest. That is low.

I am so awesome at reading your stuff, I can even spot the words between lines!

And a second argument hidden in a pile of screaming fury: There is no consent in a relationship with an authority figure.

You know, that does make sense, although it can be argued that for adults the authority figure 'father' becomes less of an authority than in someone's childhood. Still, you made a valid argument and I accept that, even though you made it very hard looking for that diamond of wisdom in all that muck.

And now I am responsible for them, too?? Even assuming you mean that figuratively, you again try to dress me up in your rape fantasies.
No right and wrong to me? I wrote in my very first post that this episode doesn't seem right to me, a notion I reinforced later. But no, you have to fight the hated "liberal" (I assume you think I'm a liberal) and in your rage you twist everything into a blade to strike me with.

I have given no offense, I didn't question your beliefs. Yet you act like I'm some kind of enemy.
Look, if you got abused in the past and this a personal touchy issue for you, then I'm sorry. But even then I don't deserve that kind of foul mouthed behavior.