Neoliberal

62 readers

1 users here now

Free trade, open borders, taco trucks on every corner. Latest discussion thread: April 2024 **We in m/Neoliberal support:** - Free trade and competitive markets

Immigration
YIMBYism – ‘yes in my backyard’-ism
Carbon taxes
Internationalism and supranational governance – e.g. the EU, UN, NATO, IMF
LGBTQ+ rights
Democracy, human rights, civil liberties and due process Neoliberals can be found in many political parties and we are not dogmatic supporters of specific parties. But we tend to find ourselves agreeing more often with parties that espouse liberal values, internationalism and centrist economics, such as the Democrats in the US, Liberal Democrats in the UK, FDP in Germany, Renaissance/MoDem in France, the Liberal Party in Canada, and so on. **Further reading** - I’m a neoliberal. Maybe you are too.
The neoliberal mind
Neo-liberalism and its prospects
Neoliberalism: the genesis of a political swear word **News sources** Here are some suggested news sources that we like and tend to find reliable. Please note that posts and threads are not at all limited to these sources! - The Economist https://www.economist.com/
Financial Times https://www.ft.com/
The Guardian https://www.theguardian.com/
New York Times https://www.nytimes.com/
The Atlantic https://www.theatlantic.com/world/
The New European https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/
Vox https://www.vox.com/

founded 2 years ago

Kentucky Republican pushes bill to make sex with first cousin not incest (www.newsweek.com)

submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

24 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The bill would remove first cousins from the list of family members with whom it's illegal to have sexual relations in the state.

Edit: there is an update to this story and Rep. Nick Wilson has withdrawn the bill saying it was filed in error. See the new thread.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Here is a link to the actual legislation:

(c) Engages in sexual contact; with a person whom he or she knows to be his or her parent, child, grandparent, grandchild, great-grandparent, great-grandchild, uncle, aunt, nephew, niece, brother, sister,~~[ first cousin,]~~ ancestor, or descendant. The relationships referred to herein include blood relationships of either the whole or half blood without regard to legitimacy, relationship of parent and child by adoption, relationship of stepparent and stepchild, and relationship of stepgrandparent and stepgrandchild.

First cousin is crossed out.

Remember everyone, this is the party of “family values.”

Edit: Nick Wilson now claims this was filed in error. See the new thread.

[–] shalafi 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Right on! They should copy liberal states like CA, VT, MA and CO on this!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cousin_marriage_law_in_the_United_States

This is the second thread I've seen on this where the ignorance is appalling.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I think this misses the point which is Why does Nick Wilson want to legalize it? It is important to note that most of states you have listed appear to have incest laws that are based on very old statutes and seem to have gone mostly unchanged over the years. The point of criticism towards Nick Wilson is that Kentucky currently actually has an incest law that matches modern societal expectations yet he wants to change it. (To be clear, I think those states that currently have it legalized should reexamine their incest code.)

California seems to have defined incest in 1872 when first cousin marriage was seen as more acceptable (still very gross imo): Link

Vermont seems to have defined in in 1797. Link

Massachusetts codified it 1648. Link

Colorado looks to be a bit more recent, as it looks like their incest laws were at the center of a court case in 1966 but that case does not involve a first cousin, but rather a step daughter (the whole case is still disgusting.) I am finding it more difficult to find official documentation as to when their laws regarding incest were first codified, however, I would assume it would be around 1875 when Colorado officially became a state.

Regardless though, it would seem that even when updates are issued to the criminal code the provisions pertaining to incest laws are laws rarely updated.

This, of course, begs the original question of Why Nick Wilson wants to update this in the first place, especially when first cousin marriage is now frowned upon and can lead to generational, genetic abnormalities? Old laws are typically modified to better match the society they govern.

Edit: Nick Wilson now claims this was filed in error, so I suppose that answers the question. See the new thread.