Originally posted by: DAGTA
Addressing the saying, "Government should not legislate morality":
If a government did not govern and form laws based on morality, we'd all be living in a state of anarchy. If you break it down, all laws are based on morality. Why are laws put into place? Generally to protect someone from 'getting harmed'. That's a moral judgment. Murder and stealing are illegal? Why? Because they're considered "wrong and harmful".
Saying, "The government shouldn't legislate morality." is just another cliche that people like to use in an attempt to oversimplify a complex issue or situation. Laws are based on morality and each law should require thought and debate before it is created or abolished.
Morality is a complex idea. In its general sense, yes, all laws are based on morality, since all laws are designed to, in some way, conduct and regulate human behavior. So you are correct.
However, when someone says "government should not legislate morality," in the way it is being used in this thread and specifically with the issue of incest, they aren't really talking about morality in its general sense. They are talking about certain moral attitudes that have a certain bearing on society. These are limited to moral beliefs that, if made into law, regulate human behavior but have no immediate effect on society. These could be call "intrapersonal" laws (I'm sure there's a better word for it), laws that only affect individuals (or consenting groups), versus "interpersonal" laws that immediately affect all of society.
Interpersonal laws including laws against murder, raping, theft, and going well over the speed limit. We have these laws so that people will not do things that could harm us or others, and that, as a whole, allow us to live in a peaceful society and not anarchy. Intrapersonal laws, the ones that make people cry that government shouldn't legislate morality, include laws against homosexuality, marijuana, abortion, listening to satanic music, watching porn, lots of things sexual, and even incest between consenting adults (if we leave it that there won't be offspring). These laws only affect the groups and individuals that engage in the acts that are being prohibited, and do not affect society as a whole.
The idea of incest to me is icky and creepy, so there's no issue about where I stand with it as an idea. But as for a law prohibiting it, what benefit is there to me and society by doing so? Is there some fear that if we allow it, people will be without a guide in their life and eventually society will be in ruins because our moral compass will have gone off kilter? I don't think this is likely. And by doing so, is it worth the downside of denying certain individuals a certain personal form of happiness and pleasure, even though we are disgusted by the idea?
Personally, the idea of incest is disgusting enough that, although I wouldn't be for a law prohibiting it, I'm not that vocal about a law de-prohibiting it.