“We are like normal lovers. We want to have a family.”
Patrick and Susan have been living together for the last six years and they now have four children (3 of which have be taken and put into foster homes), but according to German law, not only can they not get married, they can be imprisoned for having sex. In fact, Patrick has already served a two-year sentence for having sex with his partner and is set to return to jail if the legal code is not overturned. Patrick and Susan are taking their case to court to change the laws so they can be left alone by authorities and be allowed to live like any other couple. You may have guessed by now, they are brother and sister.
Where is the outrage with all of the European progressives? Shouldn’t this law be considered somewhat antiquated by European standards, given all their advances of sexual freedoms and rights? Between you and me, I think a major part of the hoopla has something to do with the resulting pregnancy and subsequent birth. Who knows? Maybe the reproductive impossibility among same-sex couples has made it more palatable for acceptance in today’s culture.
Story found at Sed Contra.
.jpg)
Perhaps someone knows or can recall this case, but if my memory serves me correctly, several years ago in the Carolinas (?) or Virginia there was a case before the courts were a mother and her son were having sexual relations. The mother had been arrested but during this trial it was concluded that the sexual relations did not start until the son was of “consent” age, therefore the court ruled in favor of the mother & her lover, her son. I recall thinking why wasn’t there much outrage over this decision ….
So this does not surprise me … nope. And your right, where is the consistency in the liberal logic. Peter Kreeft’s book, CS Lewis for the 3rd Millennium (1993), Chapter 4, has a great “what if” scenario to ponder. I opened to the chapter the other day and re-read it, and much of the “what if” “is” today.
Comment by pml — March 21, 2007 @ 2:10 PM
I agree that the lack of outrage is due to the fact that this pair DARES to PROCREATE! The liberal secular mindset is one that says “Sure go ahead and “do” whom ever or whatever you want whenever you want but don’t you dare procreate or you’ll ruin the whole darn thing!”
Comment by kris — March 22, 2007 @ 8:11 AM
i think it is irresponsible of them to have children, i don’t care if they have sex or not, they are consenting adults just leave them be and over turn that incest law, i read the original article and in it, they said that 2 of the children had some form of physical and mental disability and the oldest is so slow he can not talk or walk yet and at four is still in nappies, if they really want to be together thats ok but having babies when you know there is a risk of genetic problems without getting genetic councelling and DNA tests for any defects before hand is just plain negligence.
Comment by ilona — November 18, 2007 @ 8:45 AM
ilona,
It seems to me that sexual intercourse has as its proper end, procreation. It is therefore, “just plain negligence” to engage in sexual intercourse with someone whom is not a complementary spouse committed in a irrevocable, exclusive, and genetically appropriate marriage. Use of technology to thwart the natural telos of sexual intercourse or the murder of an unborn child because he has genetic defects gravely aggravates the crime. It is a sign of the moral devolution of our society when prudence is equated with making sexual intercourse unnatural via artificial contraception or the murder of a child with defects.
Comment by David — November 18, 2007 @ 10:26 AM
What business is it of ours. If they want to run the risk of having babies with 2 heads – well.
Comment by A. Brown — December 5, 2007 @ 9:49 AM
It becomes our business when it is our tax dollars that end up raising the 2 headed babies.
Comment by limjay — March 8, 2009 @ 9:54 PM