**Criminal law has the purpose of prohibiting, deterring, and punishing actions that endanger the well-being and order of society. Therefore, the practice of incest, which is scientifically proven to genetically debilitate the offspring, naturally falls within the scope of criminal law.** Law is based upon precedence. Hence, any questions that involve legal issues naturally invoke a reexamination of existing institutions and cases. In the United States, criminal law is not only concerned with major felonies (like murder or rape), but also any action that potentially endangers the state of society (like driving under the influence). A crime is defined as the concurrence of a guilty mind (mens rea) and a guilty action (actus reus). (from https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/criminal_law) From a medical point of view, the adverse health effects of incest is already a well-established scientific fact. Not only is incest a universal cultural taboo, but also it is a matter of scientific consensus (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/6839266/) It may bring forth various forms of genetic mutation, such as a deformed jaw or fused limbs (https://www.ranker.com/list/genetic-mutations-from-inbreeding/laura-allan). The debilitating effects of this practice on society are therefore self-evident. Given the harmful nature of the act and its adverse impact on society, and since it occurs as a concurrence of both intention and action, there is no reason why it is not under the scope of criminal law. If it is not deemed a felony, at least it must be a misdeamanor.

**Legalizing incest would not have any positive impact on society at all. It is also completely morally wrong.** * I can’t imagine any ways in which the legalization of incest would benefit us at all. Vincent made a great case for why it should be considered a crime, but I also wonder what the argument for incest would even be. * Incest can have debilitating effects on any children produced from an that kind of relationship. The [Whitaker family](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nkGiFpJC9LM) is an example of the unfortunate physical and mental conditions that can arise from incest. Additionally, the children born from incest have absolutely no control over it, which places them in uncomfortable and shameful positions that they cannot change. * [Survivors of incest](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7HA-Y6jz10) are often victims of abuse and extremely traumatized. Making these types of relationships legal would only worsen these types of abuse cases. * Incest is a taboo for a reason. The conversations about incest shouldn’t be taboo when supporting victims, but incest needs to remain illegal.

I would say it is unethical to restrict something between consensual adults that does not affect anyone else. A case could be made about specifically making *pregnancy* of first cousins or closer being illegal, since it brings someone else into the world and could harm them. However, in order to hold the stance that it is immoral to reproduce if there is risk of genetic disability, you must simultaneously hold the stance that people with genetic disorders should not be allowed to reproduce as well. ie Eugenics. And to continue this point, this is also restricting the behavior of non-reproducing couples on the basis that one potential combination *could* create offspring, and that those offspring *could* share recessive genetic disorders. If inbreeding is the issue, then shouldn't homosexual and sterile couples be exempt? Oftentimes, people are quick to jump to declaring the absolute morality of something on the basis that it makes them feel gross and therefore is wrong. They can't quite put their finger on it, so they just outright ban it for good measure.

Legalise it for those willing to be steralised.

consenting adults? Police state violence stays out of the bedroom.