3

Incest: The Next Frontier in ‘Reproductive Freedom’

marriage-licenseLike a plastic Piggly Wiggly bag fluttering about in the alley, those untethered from God’s natural law are violently tossed to and fro by the gusting winds of moral relativism. Jenny Kutner is one such Piggly Wiggly bag. A 20-something assistant editor at Salon.com, she describes herself as “focusing on sex, gender and feminism.”

By “focusing on sex, gender and feminism,” and as you will soon see, this young “progressive” means to say that she spends her days rationalizing each and every conceivable form of sexual deviancy, as well as trying to otherwise deconstruct that which she and her fellow feminist travelers view as an artificially constructed culture of “heteronormativity” – the sinister brainchild of the evil-man-led global patriarchy (for those interested, we meet Tuesdays at noon at the Golden Corral on Wards Road). Along with a growing number of secular leftists, Kutner’s latest sexual taboo for de-stigmatization is incest.

Those of us defending the institution of legitimate marriage and fighting to preserve respect for sexual morality in our culture have long warned of the greasy slope made slippery by the advent of counterfeit “same-sex marriage.” If you artificially remove one requirement for marriage – in this case, the binary male-female prerequisite – then there is no justification, logically or legally, for not removing all requirements. If we yank one foundational brick from the marriage wall, then, as in the days of Jericho, the whole danged thing comes a-tumblin’. That is to say, in the wake of America’s burgeoning “gay marriage” tsunami, we can soon expect to dog-paddle the ensuing sewage of legalized polygamy, incestuous marriage and heaven-knows-what-else.

In her Jan. 15 piece headlined, “A woman describes her sexual relationship with her estranged father,” Kutner introduces us, via an earlier interview with the “Science of Us” website, to “an 18-year-old ‘from the Great Lakes region’ who has been in a serious relationship with her previously estranged father for two years.”

Daddy’s little girl, a self-identified bisexual who says she lost her virginity to her father at the age of 16, is planning a grand wedding with the old man. (Can you say mass confusion? “Are you family of the bride or the groom? Forget it. Sit wherever you want.”)

They later plan to settle down and have cross-eyed children of their own, thereby restocking the shallow gene pool from which Pops can later fish for his next victim.

Writes Kutner: “Genetic Sexual Attraction (GSA) is a term used to describe intense, almost obsessive romantic and sexual feelings that estranged relatives often feel for each other upon reunion – yes, I said ‘often.’ According to the Guardian, ’50 percent of reunions between siblings, or parents and offspring, separated at birth’ result in GSA – a much higher proportion than one might expect.”

Holy Oedipus complex, Batman! I guess absence really does make the heart grow fonder.

Calling Dr. Freud.

Set aside for a moment the bovine nature of this absurd assertion and pay special attention to Kutner’s application of the pseudo-scientific phrase: “Genetic Sexual Attraction (GSA).” This is a regular propagandist tool employed by the sexual anarchist left. They’ve become quite accomplished in the art of Orwellian Newspeak. To achieve the noble cause of unfettered sexual license, one must redefine the terms. In fact, one must recreate the terms.

Hence, male-on-male sodomy becomes “gay.” That which, heretofore, has been known as “child rape” shall, from henceforth, be called, “intergenerational romance.” He who was once identified as a “pedophile predator” shall, from now on, be referenced as a “minor-attracted person.” And, yes, the empirically pathological impulse of some sick pervert to schtupp his 16-year-old daughter shall, forevermore, be known as, “Genetic Sexual Attraction (GSA).”

Kutner continues: “The woman goes on to describe moving in with her father and his ex-partner (who is now their roommate), and how she must hide the relationship from her mother, who she says has not yet picked up on the fact that she and her dad are dating.”

Ah, the indifferent ease with which Kutner writes the words, “… she and her dad are dating.” This heartwarming story of love, romance and everlastingly damnable criminal reprobation “actually forces one to do some rigorous double-checking of one’s own beliefs,” she adds. “What the woman has to say about having children with her father, for instance, certainly forced me to consider my response carefully, given my own advocacy of reproductive freedom.”

And that’s what it all boils down to – that nebulous catch-all known as “reproductive freedom.” Libertine license. The left’s sacred “right” to have sex with, and/or to dismember alive in the womb, their own children. The freedom – between abortions, AIDS treatments, herpes outbreaks and Hep C shots – to otherwise copulate with whomever, or whatever, they so choose.

You know: “Equality.”


Matt Barber is Director of Cultural Affairs with both Liberty Counsel and Liberty Alliance Action. He also co-hosts the nationally syndicated “Liberty Live” talk radio program on AFR Talk.
  • Guy McClung

    New Oxford Review Jan-Feb 2013

    Out of the Shadows

    A 2011 article in Commonweal magazine noted that widely syndicated sex
    columnist Dan Savage, a self-professed homosexual who describes himself
    as a “cultural Catholic,” advocates infidelity as a way to strengthen
    marriages. According to Savage, any sexual desire is legitimate,
    “unless it involves feces, children, pets, incest, or the dead.”

    Your New Oxford Note “There Goes the Village” (Nov.) recounts how the world
    is careening down the path to legalized polygamy, polyandry, and
    incest. Based on what we’ve already accepted from our Supreme Court —
    the creation out of whole cloth of the so-called constitutional rights
    to privacy, abortion, and sodomy — what is to prevent the Court from
    similarly exercising its almighty legislative power in creating
    constitutional rights not only to polygamy and pederasty, but to many
    actions now called perversions?

    Like the “right” to abortion — which was heretofore “hidden” in constitutional shadows intentionally put there by our Founding Fathers in 1781, but penetrable only by today’s divine-wise judges — can we soon expect a constitutionally guaranteed right of every American to have sexual intercourse with his dog, with his dead mother, with minors, with multiple spouses, with his children, or with a favorite cow or oak tree? Imagine the “teaching materials,” complete with detailed diagrams, that Planned Parenthood will provide our kindergarten and elementary schoolchildren, with “no parents allowed” mentoring and field trips!
    Guy McClung

    • eddie too

      or, to have a civil “marriage” with their dog or their beloved tree, how can the court say no? if marriage means whatever those five or six tunnel-visioned justices (who have spent the bulk of their lives limiting their knowledge and understanding to the very, very narrow field call law) say it means.
      surely, more and more americans are coming to realize how retarded (socially and intellectually) the justices of the u.s. supreme court truly are!!!!
      America is insane to let nine very narrow-minded and knowledge limited people make its laws, in defiance of the u.s. constitution no less.

      • Terri K

        Eddie, have your heard about the movement toward a Constitutional Convention of States? One of its objectives is limiting the out-of-control legislating from the bench of the Supreme Court. I follow and support the movement.