• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    5711 months ago

    So I do not endorse this guy or any GOP member in any way. But if you read the article he says dropping the first cousin from the list was an error of omission and not intentional, and he is re-filing the bill to include it. The intent of the bill was to expand the classification of incest beyond just intercourse to include any type of sexual contact. Which seems like its actually progressive, just not clickbait worthy.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      1111 months ago

      I wouldn’t call that “progressive” but it’s not exactly libertarian freedom either. The actual law seems weirder than trying to deregulate cousin incest.

      Not that I really feel strongly about it but I don’t see the state interest in specifically banning cousin blowjobs. Seems like one of those things that should be in the dustbin of overtightened sexual restrictions like sodomy laws.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        611 months ago

        I’ve seen some compelling arguments for decriminalizing incest. Basically rape is already illegal [citation needed], the genetic risk is pretty small for the average person, and ultimately regulating what weird stuff consenting adults might choose to do in the bedroom is generally not a good thing. There is of course the problem of social/power dynamics and how that might play into consent but that’s another issue not exclusive to incest.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        111 months ago

        By progressive I mean a step in the right direction for shit place like KY. Source: am from KY

    • Alien Nathan Edward
      link
      fedilink
      English
      311 months ago

      you could argue that accidentally making cousin fucking legal, like accidentally making weed legal in minnesota (was that minnesota? I think so) is part of an ongoing issue where republicans don’t actually know what the laws they’re implementing do.