I’m with Weirddave and lola. This is wrong on pretty much every level except for the one where it hurts a non-consensual party. They ought to be allowed to shack up. And then they should be publically shunned.
Something tells me it started even earlier than that. I will admit that is an assumption on my part.
I’m having just a little bit of trouble seeing this as a ‘consenting adults’ issue.
Yes I did. I loved it. Now eat the peanuts out of my poo.
I hope I don’t sound like I’m channeling Libertarian, but I think the proper concern of the law with respect to incest is to prevent coercion and abuse of position in sexual relationships. And I think it’s applicable in a case like this, where the girl went directly from being her biological father’s ward to being his wife. She may be legally an adult, but she wasn’t exactly a free agent before entering the marriage with her father.
If she were to go off and live on her own for a few years, and then decide she wanted to shack up with Daddy, I’d still consider it icky, but I wouldn’t regard it as the law’s business.
I don’t know, just because she’s 18 doesn’t mean that there isn’t a whole heap of coersion and exploitation going on. If he’s that kind of father, she doesn’t suddenly become immune to it all on her 18th birthday.
So, sure, people should be allowed to mary who they want. They’d be weird, but that’s their business. But society should have a reall good hard at these situation to make sure it’s on the level and nothing illegal is occuring or has occurred in the past.
That would be a “really good hard look”. :rolleyes:
I could make a joke this, but it would be tasteless and just drawing further attention to my useless proofreading.
about this. about!!
:smack:
I gotta agree with RTFirefly and Futile Gesture. I suspect that there is a very low percentage of incestuous relationships between adults where both parties nonetheless are in a position of equality. I suspect that the vast majority involve age differences, misuse of authority, and some sort of coersion or training.
If I were defending this man, I would be acting as his advocate, not speaking my own mind. If I were defending this man, and Lawrence helped him, you bet I’d argue it. If I were defending this man, and Roe v. Wade somehow helped him, I’d argue it, even though I personally believe Roe to be both flawed and unwise.
But just because I think there’s a legal argument to be made doesn’t mean I personally support the wisdom of the underlying decision.
- Rick
And for the record: I absolutely believe the legality of the “marriage” mentioned in the OP is for the state to determine, and I do not believe the man has a federal constitutional right to marry his daughter, her age of majority notwithstanding.
- Rick
“Well, gosh, officer, last time I measured him, he was only four-foot-nine!” :dubious:
It’s not the size of the gator, it’s what you do with it!
More squirrell? [crunch, munch, munch, munch]
Well, there is nothing like one of these coming along and testing one’s values is there? I firmly support the ability for gays to marry, but this one gives me the heebie jeebies. Partly it is because I am an incest survivor. I know the kind of abuse of trust and power this kind of situation is. There is know way that girl did not know he was her father unless her mother had a habbit of handing off custody to just anyone. Here is the part I am having trouble with…
I do not know if the changes in the girl’s behavior denotes the point of abuse starting, it certainly is one of the warning signs, but then again it is a warning sign of puberty too. That all said there is no proof, and these people are adults. I guess I just hope that she gets out of there eventualy and that someone beats the shit out of him.
By the way, my above statement in no way stated that what these people are doing is akin to gay marriage. All I am saying is that sometimes one’s blithe sayings, such as “consenting adults should be able to do what they want.” Gets tested when someone tests the edges of the statement.
Even if “consenting adults should be able to do what they want”, society is not always obliged to give it legal recognition. Any hyper-libertarian who wants to compare this to SSM is totally playing into the hands of the anti-SSM folks (of which I am).
I will say that what adults who marry & later find they are related should be allowed to continue in that marriage (tho parent/offspring is debatable), but to knowingly become intimate, while not necessarily being prosecuted, should neither be socially legitimized. Investigation to see if maybe “Daddy” started such a relationship while she was a minor is totally warranted!
Now I need to find how far Jay County is from where I live. Damn fellow-Hoosier degenerates!
(As distinct from Hoosier fellow-degenerates! G)
The woman is 18, and old enough to marry. Any reason why she’s not being charged with the exact same crime he is?
You know what? That’s exactly why I said that I “reluctantly” came to the opinion that it was nobody’s business what consenting adults do. It’s all about being consistant, and being consistant can be very hard when dealing with a creepy situation like this. It’s easy to support the Society of Widdows and Orphans’ right to march on the Mall in D.C., and much tougher to support the KKK’s right to do so, but it is equally important that the rights of both groups be protected.
I realize that comparing adult onset incest to SSM is going to hurt the efforts to get SSM recognized with some folks, playing into the hands of those who suggest that people will be wanting to marry dogs next (which I still don’t get, how is a dog in any way,shape or form a consenting adult? it’s a totally different thing), but I also think that it’s more important that one’s principles remain consistant. It’s tough, though.
I happened to be reading Fred Phelps’ “biography” (more like a newspaper story that didn’t run because of lawsuits) last night, and the thing that struck me was how he was able to completely twist and distort his family’s view of themselves and the world beyond. The two or three children that managed to break away and stay away took a long time to realize just how deeply their perceptions had been affected by Fred.
I see the same thing here between this girl and Steen. Yes, she is a consenting adult, and by the letter of the law, she is legally married. However, the spirit of the law, which can be determined by test cases, may be far different. On the surface, Fred had certain rights as a parent, just as this girl and Steen do as consenting adults. But looking deeper into the relationships, one can find (in Fred’s case) abject abuse and coercion, and a strong possibility that Steen manipulated his wife as a minor under his care. If that is the case, then it isn’t surprising that she consented to marry him, as her view of normal relationships would be quite different that what most of us believe in and experience. By the letter of the law, she legally consented to marry him, but by the spirit of the law I would say no she didn’t, and if coercion and manipulation were present, then Steen should be charged.
Vlad/Igor
Agreed. This was my first thought.
Esprix
You DO understand that no one can be criminally charged with violating the “spirit” of the law, do you not? The fact that she gave consent is not remotely relevant to determing guilt for the criminal charge of incest.
An act is either proscribed by law or it is not.
Indiana has codified their criminalization of incest in IC 35-46-1-3 as follows:
From the article:
This would seem to establish that the girl knew Steen was her biological father and Steen knew the girl was his biological daughter. Their sexual intercourse thus would fall within the ambit of IC 35-46-1-3(a).
However, they were apparently married, which gives Steen a defense under IC 35-46-1-3(b). The marriage must be a valid one for this defense to be raised.
IC 31-11-1-2 provides, inter alia:
This would seem to indicate that the marriage was not valid if entered into in Indiana. I know of no jurisdiction in the United States that permits father and daughter to marry.
Pending some new information about the validity of their marriage, it would appear to me there are sufficent facts alleged that, if proven, would sustain a finding of guilty.
- Rick