As it so happens Sweden does at the current moment have a general law prohibiting incest, or more accurately incestuous intercourse (samlag). The relevant paragraph, as translated into English, is this:
This paragraph, together with others preceding it that target situations where their offspring is under 18 or where force/coercion was used, makes it punishable to engage incestuous intercourse with some caveats.
In-particular it should be pointed out that "intercourse" refers exclusively to penile-vaginal penetration. Because this paragraph, unlike the paragraph targeting rape for example, doesn't include the phrase "equivalent to intercourse" it effectively means that the law doesn't prohibit consensual incestuous homosexual sex whether it's between two males or females. In-fact most types of sexual activities would be legal as long as no penile-vaginal penetration takes place. Likewise it doesn't cover cases adoptive-parents or something equivalent.
If one bothers to read up on the rationale for the law it's not hard to see why: the prime motivator for it was due to concerns about hereditary health problems and such it ostensibly tries to "protect" the health and well-being of children by discouraging closely related people from procreating. In that regard criminalizing homosexual sexual acts would be completely pointless. The other other motivation was a desire to reinforce social attitudes that regard sexual activities between family members as taboo and something undesirable, but since it wasn't a major factor by-itself the law was restricted towards intercourse between genetically close people instead.
Although I've seen people mentioning that the law should be changed to included "homosexual intercourse" as-well there hasn't been any strong demands or calls for a change in the law. Considering how rarely its enforced and people are sentenced for consensual incestuous intercourse at all it's not hard to see why.
In any case, is it reasonable to "equalize" homo and heterosexual incestuous sex? Again, considering the extent of incest in society, it's not really a relevant political issue but for principle reasons i found it interesting considering the dilemma between "sex/gender-neutral legislation" and laws that specifically target behavior that is restricted to one of the sexes, or in this case a combination of sexes.
Quote:
|
7§ A person who, otherwise than as previously mentioned in this chapter, has sexual intercourse with their own children or their descendants, shall be sentenced for sexual intercourse with a descendant to imprisonment not exceeding two years. Whoever, otherwise than as previously mentioned in this chapter, has sexual intercourse with their siblings is sentenced for sexual intercourse with a sibling to imprisonment not exceeding one year. The provisions of this section do not apply to the person induced to act by duress or in any other improper manner. Act (2005: 90). |
In-particular it should be pointed out that "intercourse" refers exclusively to penile-vaginal penetration. Because this paragraph, unlike the paragraph targeting rape for example, doesn't include the phrase "equivalent to intercourse" it effectively means that the law doesn't prohibit consensual incestuous homosexual sex whether it's between two males or females. In-fact most types of sexual activities would be legal as long as no penile-vaginal penetration takes place. Likewise it doesn't cover cases adoptive-parents or something equivalent.
If one bothers to read up on the rationale for the law it's not hard to see why: the prime motivator for it was due to concerns about hereditary health problems and such it ostensibly tries to "protect" the health and well-being of children by discouraging closely related people from procreating. In that regard criminalizing homosexual sexual acts would be completely pointless. The other other motivation was a desire to reinforce social attitudes that regard sexual activities between family members as taboo and something undesirable, but since it wasn't a major factor by-itself the law was restricted towards intercourse between genetically close people instead.
Although I've seen people mentioning that the law should be changed to included "homosexual intercourse" as-well there hasn't been any strong demands or calls for a change in the law. Considering how rarely its enforced and people are sentenced for consensual incestuous intercourse at all it's not hard to see why.
In any case, is it reasonable to "equalize" homo and heterosexual incestuous sex? Again, considering the extent of incest in society, it's not really a relevant political issue but for principle reasons i found it interesting considering the dilemma between "sex/gender-neutral legislation" and laws that specifically target behavior that is restricted to one of the sexes, or in this case a combination of sexes.
via International Skeptics Forum http://ift.tt/1K9czAr
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire