Oklahoma woman sentenced for incestuous marriage with birth mother

originally posted by: Nyiah
a reply to: 3daysgone
Was that directed at me, or Deaf Alien? If it was directed at me, I posted it in the forum where the content would best fit, as far as I can tell.

Is it a thought on moral society or the kind of thing that happens because of evolution?

a reply to: Deaf Alien

As soon as your account indicates that you are staff you can determine that.

Until then, I'll ask once and once only that you stop trolling.

No need to reply, everyone can return to the topic now.

originally posted by: 3daysgone

originally posted by: Nyiah
a reply to: 3daysgone
Was that directed at me, or Deaf Alien? If it was directed at me, I posted it in the forum where the content would best fit, as far as I can tell.

Is it a thought on moral society or the kind of thing that happens because of evolution?

Morals & ethics of society. On one hand, it's taboo for a reason to marry and/or procreate with your offspring. BUT, and this also touches on morality & ethics, because how does that get discussed socially if it's a mental health problem? America doesn't exactly have a great track record with respectfully discussing mental health, adding incestuous marriage isn't going to make it any easier to take seriously (again, IF there's mental issues)

The woman obviously had her kids young and lost them young (17 year age diff between her and daughter) One has to wonder how both being a young mother and then not impacted her mental health, and if it had anything to do with marrying her kids.

originally posted by: Nyiah

originally posted by: Deaf Alien

originally posted by: Nyiah

originally posted by: Deaf Alien

originally posted by: Nyiah

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: Nyiah

Look at the picture again and see how similar the pictures are.

They're biologically related, of course there's going to be offspring that look damn close or identical to their parents. My younger brother is the spittin' image of my dad when he was that age, they could have been twins.

Wow. You can't even see it? Same posture.

They have lousy posture. So do I, and millions of others. I don't see where you're getting a Photoshop vibe from.

Same face. Same posture.

No, and no. Two different people.

Maybe the mental deficiency relates to generations of the same behavior.

Inbreeding aint good

a reply to: Nyiah

Hmm. I didn't read all of your links,but one think stuck out to me. It was to adopt a child? I've heard about this before and that was never given as the reason. I read that the daughter claims it was just so they could get more government benefits. So which is it?! Either way,I say why waste tax payer money locking these clowns up?

a reply to: nightstalker78

Either way,I say why waste tax payer money locking these clowns up?

So whats the solution - letting them round around pro-creating?

a reply to: Deaf Alien

a reply to: Nyiah

Sometimes in those twilight hours I just browse ATS to see what headlines catch my interest. Your thread wins!

Goodnight.

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

Heck no. They can't exactly have each other's children,correct? I'm thinking they were just trying to scam the government somehow and it backfired. I could be wrong though.

originally posted by: nightstalker78
a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

Heck no. They can't exactly have each other's children,correct? I'm thinking they were just trying to scam the government somehow and it backfired. I could be wrong though.

I really, really want to believe that's the case just to reduce the ick factor, but both articles mentioned her having been previously married to one of the sons for 2 years. The pattern seems to fit incest/abuse more than scamming.

a reply to: Nyiah

You're right. I'm not sure how I missed that. Good lord. I retract my previous statement. Lock them up so they don't breed!

I saw this on Yahoo a little while ago. This is a pretty weird situation. Clearly the mother is ill. And her daughter isn't too bright. They both need help.

But what if the situation were different, and a mother and daughter actually wanted to get married? And they were sincere.

Would that be in conflict with basis for the ban on incestuous relationships? Namely, that heterosexual incestuous relationships with close relatives can produce weak offspring.

However, homosexual relationships among that same group of close relative will not result in any offspring. Thus the physiological need for the ban no longer applies.

If we look at this from a purely amoral perspective, how does enforcing this prohibition in this case help society?


PS: I'm not advocating for anything like this. But, I think it is a valid question.

-dex

I .. um I don't ... u know what I'm not touching this with a 10 foot pole just to gross

originally posted by: Nyiah

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: Nyiah

Look at the picture again and see how similar the pictures are.

They're biologically related, of course there's going to be offspring that look damn close or identical to their parents. My younger brother is the spittin' image of my dad when he was that age, they could have been twins.

Actually, from your link:

Records show that the mother lost custody of her children -- who were adopted -- when they were little. KOTV writes that Patricia told investigators she and Misty "hit it off" when they were reconnected in 2014.

So if that information is correct, she has no biological relationship with any of her children. I'd say there are definite mental issues and some degree of deficiency. How the heck did she adopt these children in the first place?

a reply to: diggindirt

I think it means she lost her children to Social Services who were then adopted to other parents not that this mother adopted those children in the first place.

If a mom and a daughter want to get it on, I couldn't care less. I spend a lot of time watching porn to that affect. As long as both people are consenting adults, who cares? I guess it's the liberal coming out of me.

a reply to: PhyllidaDavenport
Ah, that makes a lot more sense than the way I interpreted it. Wondering about the dad....

I'll have to say that this case is even stranger than the weirdness in my family. As far as I am aware currently anyway.

This seems to be one of the consequences of legitimizing gay marriage. When the push was on making gay marriage legal, part of the backlash was the claim that doing so would result in additional "amoral" behavior becoming legal. The slippery slope concept was often invoked. Such behavior would be things like reducing the age of consent to an extremely young age encouraging pedophiles, or making bestiality legal, or making any other number of other currently illegal behaviors legal.

I had imagined that sodomy laws would have to be changed due to legal gay marriages otherwise sexually active married gay males would still be breaking the law. I didn't believe that bestiality or under aged sex would gain any ground, however, I hadn't considered the idea of gay incestuous marriages. That idea never came into my mind.

It seems that the legal gay marriage issue has complicated other legal issues though, as this case seems to indicate. Perhaps the slippery slope into other moral issues is a valid concept after all. Legal gay marriage does appear to open a can of worms when such situations as this reach the lower courts. At the very least it is giving some people the green light to push other commonly unaccepted practices into the legal spotlight.