Originally Posted by kronas

they are both party to commiting the offence, however if you look at it the woman took advantage of the man's state at the time of the alleged act happening, so thusly she was the one that enticed the man in to the illegal act.

Originally Posted by Kronas

the law is the law, this is illegal.

not to mention the immoral aspects of it.

Originally Posted by Nugget

I see what youââ‚Âà ‚¬ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¾Ã‚¢re saying but, irrespective of the situation, thereââ‚ƚ¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢s no way that an adult can consent to sex with their mother / son, and not know that itââ‚ ¬ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¾Ã‚¢s wrong †“ I donââ‚Âà ‚¬ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¾Ã‚¢t think itââ‚ ¬ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¾Ã‚¢s a case of her †˜enticingâà ƒÆ’¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â€ žÂ¢ him. As you say, they are both party to the offence and have committed an illegal act.

Originally Posted by kronas

read the link, he was having a panic attack, she was comforting him, 'one thing led to another' and they kissed.

as for what i think, i agree with everyone, both partys were involved so they should both be punished, but whats the suitable punishment for this ?

Originally Posted by orangebird

Neutering.

Originally Posted by Xaccers

Hmm, do panic attacks often have the same effect as viagra?
Perhaps he was "scared stiff" :erm:

Originally Posted by Xaccers

Don't try and mix morality with law, it gets you into sticky situations.
Yes it's illegal, but locking them away wouldn't do much

Originally Posted by Xaccers

and who would look after all her other kids?

Originally Posted by kronas

no, i meant a suitable realistic punishment.

Originally Posted by orangebird

It is suitable - who wants to risk sick, socially retarded people like them spawning inbred deformed children?

Originally Posted by orangebird

Realistic? No, it's not (unfortunately).... Jail for both of them, and children in the family taken into care until the mother cannot be considered a danger to them.

Originally Posted by kronas

read the link, he was having a panic attack, she was comforting him, 'one thing led to another' and they kissed.

Originally Posted by kronas

as for what i think, i agree with everyone, both partys were involved so they should both be punished, but whats the suitable punishment for this ?

Originally Posted by kronas

thats branching off in to other things, some parents do not deserve to have children the lack of basic control over them is ever apparent in alot of areas in this country.

Originally Posted by Nugget

I know what you're saying Kronas, but I just can't see the link between 'oh, my son's having a panic attack' to 'oh look, we're having sex'.

Originally Posted by Nugget

Personally, I don't think that jail is a particularly suitable punishment (for either of them) - there's obviously some sort of problem which should be addressed, maybe through supervision or councilling. Of course, if it happens again, I may be forced to agree with OB :p:

Originally Posted by orangebird

And your point is?? :confused: Letting your children be unruly cannot be compared to screwing them.....

Originally Posted by orangebird

I personally don't think they could...If it were up to me I'd make sure that she never saw them unless it was supervised. Was just trying to be a little merciful...

Originally Posted by Jerrek

Why is this even illegal? Two consenting adults, having sex...

Originally Posted by Jerrek

Why is this even illegal? Two consenting adults, having sex...

Originally Posted by Bifta

Are you telling us that you condone incest? Where's your banjo?

Originally Posted by Jerrek

Of course not. Just because smoking is legal doesn't mean I condone or engage in such activities.

But, isn't this the government legislating morality? If you support this law, what grounds do you have to not support laws against, say, anal sex or gay sex?

Originally Posted by Bifta

I'm quite happy to have someone legislating that. If it keeps laws that stop people fornicating with minors/animals/corpses etc .. but I guess you feel that impinges on your personal freedoms too?