PDA

View Full Version : ‘This Is Not Incest’: Colorado Man Leaves Wife for Sexual Relationship With Mother



Angel4Truth
April 11th, 2016, 05:32 PM
‘This Is Not Incest’: Colorado Man Leaves Wife for Sexual Relationship With Mother (http://christiannews.net/2016/04/10/this-is-not-incest-colorado-man-leaves-wife-for-sexual-relationship-with-mother/)


An Colorado man who found his biological mother three years ago after being put up for adoption as a child has left his wife to marry his mother and have children together.

“This is not incest. It is [Genetic Sexual Attraction] GSA,” Kim West, 51, told the outlet New Day. “We are like peas in a pod and meant to be together.”

“I know people will say we’re disgusting, that we should be able to control our feelings, but when you’re hit by a love so consuming you are willing to give up everything for it, you have to fight for it,” she said.

West, who is from the U.K., had given her son Ben Ford, now 32, up for adoption 30 years ago. In 2013, Ford sent his mother a letter after locating her and the two decided to meet up after speaking on the phone for some time.

However, West found herself having feelings for her son, as well as dreams about him. Confused, she researched the matter and concluded that she had GSA.

Ford soon announced that he had stopped having feelings for his wife, Victoria, and told her that he was leaving her to be with his mother, who he allegedly referred to as “mummy girlfriend.” They admitted engaging in sexual relations on several occasions and met up with another twosome who also claim that they have GSA so as to find support for their lifestyle and counsel.

GSA is defined as “sexual attraction between close relatives, such as siblings or half-siblings, a parent and offspring, or first and second cousins, who first meet as adults.”

Ford and West now state that they are planning to marry and have children together. They remain unrepentant over their actions and were recently photographed for the cover of New Day, a national British newspaper.

“It’s a once in a lifetime chance and something Ben and I are not willing to walk away from,” West said defiantly.

As previously reported (http://christiannews.net/2015/01/19/report-new-york-woman-to-marry-her-biological-father/), a teenager in New Jersey announced last year that she planned to “marry” her biological father after the two met for the first time and had sexual relations following the admission of having feelings for each other.

“I didn’t regret it at all. I was happy for once in my life,” she stated. “We fell deeply in love.”

Some have spoken out against the slippery slope that occurs when God’s word is discarded for man’s opinion.

Last year, Dr. Michael Brown wrote in an article for Charisma News he was asked to participated in a debate surrounding whether consensual adult incest should be legalized. Brown recalled that he was the only one on the panel that said that such relationships are never okay in the eyes of God.

“All the other participants, including a professor and a psychoanalyst, advocated for removing the laws against consensual adult incest,” he stated. “Are you surprised? But what’s the problem? Love is love [according to society], right? As long it’s consensual, who can say no to love?”

Brown stated that these developments are demonstrating the domino effect that results when the world rebels against God and His Master design for mankind.

“Those who have taken down the fence of marriage as God intended it have opened up a Pandora’s Box of possibilities,” he said, “none of them good.”

Leviticus 18:6-7 reads, “None of you shall approach to any that is near of kin to him, to uncover their nakedness: I am the Lord. The nakedness of thy father, or the nakedness of thy mother, shalt thou not uncover: she is thy mother; thou shalt not uncover her nakedness.”

Thoughts?

Do those of you who support gay unions also support this kind of thing? Why or why not?

Rusha
April 11th, 2016, 05:45 PM
Thoughts?

Do those of you who support gay unions also support this kind of thing? Why or why not?

I do not support gay men marrying their fathers or brothers. I do not support gay women marrying their mothers or sisters. Why not ... because I don't support incest.

patrick jane
April 11th, 2016, 05:53 PM
I do not support gay men marrying their fathers or brothers. I do not support gay women marrying their mothers or sisters. Why not ... because I don't support incest.
but you support gay marriage ?

Rusha
April 11th, 2016, 05:54 PM
but you support gay marriage ?

Not among family members ... or anyone who is under the age of consent.

patrick jane
April 11th, 2016, 05:59 PM
Not among family members ... or anyone who is under the age of consent.
Yeah, that story is definitely incest.

jamie
April 11th, 2016, 06:38 PM
Paul said, "But now I have written to you not to keep company with anyone named a brother who is sexually immoral, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner — not even to eat with such a person."
(1 Corinthians 5:11)

If they invite you to dinner, don't go.

Tambora
April 12th, 2016, 05:24 AM
That's gonna sling the door wide open for consensual sex between adults and children.

PureX
April 12th, 2016, 07:32 AM
Incest and homosexuality have nothing to do with each other. Just as pedophilia has nothing to do with incest or homosexuality. Except in the minds of people who can only see the "sins" of others, and don't want to see anything else.

I don't believe it's possible to control what happens between consenting adults. And I don't see any productive result from criminalizing some of these behaviors, and not others, knowing that doing so will not deter them, regardless. If we keep trying to criminalize sin, we're all going to end up in jail, eventually. And we already incarcerate more of our own people than any country on Earth because we can't seem to differentiate between a "sin" and a crime.

The solution to these kinds of unhealthy behaviors: incest, obsessions with pornography, sadism and the like is positive and thorough sex and ethics education, as well as providing access to effective emotional health care, for all.

These kinds of adult human behaviors are not criminal, and treating them as such doesn't do a thing to help nor dissuade those who engage in them. All it does is satisfy the lust for punishment of the terminally and falsely self-righteous. Of which there are also far too many, and of whom are also in need of some emotional health care IMO.

PureX
April 12th, 2016, 07:39 AM
That's gonna sling the door wide open for consensual sex between adults and children.No, it's not. Because a child's inability to 'consent' is the padlock on that door, and no one in our society wants to remove it.

Tambora
April 12th, 2016, 08:39 AM
No, it's not. I certainly hope you are right, but I have my doubts.
Especially since I've seen so many other perversions allowed during my lifetime.



Because a child's inability to 'consent' is the padlock on that door,I could use the old "we thought at one time we had a padlock on gay marriage" tact.
But I won't.

Instead, I will just say that padlocks can be opened or broken off.



and no one in our society wants to remove it.I think there are lots of folks that want it removed.
Both adults and children.
Sick, I know, but they are there.

Tambora
April 12th, 2016, 08:44 AM
Incest and homosexuality have nothing to do with each other. Just as pedophilia has nothing to do with incest or homosexuality. Except in the minds of people who can only see the "sins" of others, and don't want to see anything else.

I don't believe it's possible to control what happens between consenting adults. And I don't see any productive result from criminalizing some of these behaviors, and not others, knowing that doing so will not deter them, regardless. If we keep trying to criminalize sin, we're all going to end up in jail, eventually. And we already incarcerate more of our own people than any country on Earth because we can't seem to differentiate between a "sin" and a crime.

The solution to these kinds of unhealthy behaviors: incest, obsessions with pornography, sadism and the like is positive and thorough sex and ethics education, as well as providing access to effective emotional health care, for all.

These kinds of adult human behaviors are not criminal, and treating them as such doesn't do a thing to help nor dissuade those who engage in them. All it does is satisfy the lust for punishment of the terminally and falsely self-righteous. Of which there are also far too many, and of whom are also in need of some emotional health care IMO.When it comes to sexual activity between adults, is there nothing you deem to be perversion?

PureX
April 12th, 2016, 09:27 AM
I certainly hope you are right, but I have my doubts.
Especially since I've seen so many other perversions allowed during my lifetime.


I could use the old "we thought at one time we had a padlock on gay marriage" tact.
But I won't.I never thought that about gay marriage, because that was always an equal rights issue. Pedophilia is not an equal rights issue, it's a human rights issue, and virtually no one is going to willfully allow adults to sexually interact with their children. And if you think they will, you are crazy.

PureX
April 12th, 2016, 09:28 AM
When it comes to sexual activity between adults, is there nothing you deem to be perversion?There are many things I deem to be perverse. But I am not in charge of what other people do in their beds, or what THEY should deem perverse.

And neither are you.

And CERTAINLY neither is the state!

Angel4Truth
April 12th, 2016, 06:10 PM
There are many things I deem to be perverse. But I am not in charge of what other people do in their beds, or what THEY should deem perverse.

And neither are you.

And CERTAINLY neither is the state!

God is. You either care about that or you dont.

Crucible
April 12th, 2016, 06:21 PM
No, it's not. Because a child's inability to 'consent' is the padlock on that door, and no one in our society wants to remove it.

Well, 14 year olds are becoming able to dress and make themselves up as adults, adults other than those in their family are forced to treat them as fellow adults, and in a lot of cases there has been men who mistake them for being adults because of it.

All people have to do is start arguing that, in most cases of 'statutory rape', there's never actually been any harm done, and *poof*, there goes your padlock.

Arthur Brain
April 12th, 2016, 07:22 PM
I certainly hope you are right, but I have my doubts.
Especially since I've seen so many other perversions allowed during my lifetime.


I could use the old "we thought at one time we had a padlock on gay marriage" tact.
But I won't.

Instead, I will just say that padlocks can be opened or broken off.


I think there are lots of folks that want it removed.
Both adults and children.
Sick, I know, but they are there.

All evidence to the contrary and there wouldn't be a cat in hells chance of it being passed under law, well apart from some backwards states that still allow minors to be wedded off with parental consent...

Laws in relation to child molestation have tightened up not relaxed and it's only a 'slippery slope fallacy' that ends with societal acceptance of paedophilia coming to fruition. No chance.

CherubRam
April 12th, 2016, 08:01 PM
Sexual relations with parents causes birth defects in children.


Exodus 34:7
maintaining love to thousands, and forgiving wickedness, rebellion and sin. Yet he does not leave the guilty unpunished; he punishes the children and their children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation.”

PureX
April 13th, 2016, 07:18 AM
God is. You either care about that or you dont.Neither you nor I are God. And neither you nor I knows what God knows about others. So "caring about it" is an irrelevant fantasy, based on a presumption of knowledge that we don't even have.

But I have no doubt that this will be far too complex for you to grasp, and you will continue minding everyone else's morality as if you were God, Himself.

PureX
April 13th, 2016, 07:31 AM
Well, 14 year olds are becoming able to dress and make themselves up as adults, adults other than those in their family are forced to treat them as fellow adults, and in a lot of cases there has been men who mistake them for being adults because of it. How 14 year olds dress is irrelevant. So is how they behave. Because any adult over the age of consent HAS THE OBLIGATION to make sure he/she is not interacting sexually with a minor. Stop trying to blame children for behaving irresponsibly, and put the blame where it belong: on the adults who exploit them.


All people have to do is start arguing that, in most cases of 'statutory rape', there's never actually been any harm done, and *poof*, there goes your padlock.Rape is rape. "Statutory" rape is still rape under the law. The "harm done" has no relevance except in sentencing, after one has been convicted. A "statuary" rapist is still a convicted rapist.

There has been no "poof" regarding this "padlock" against the sexual exploitation of children, and there will not be.

Sorry, dude, your hopes are in vain.

Crucible
April 13th, 2016, 07:52 AM
How 14 year olds dress is irrelevant. So is how they behave. Because any adult over the age of consent HAS THE OBLIGATION to make sure he/she is not interacting sexually with a minor. Stop trying to blame children for behaving irresponsibly, and put the blame where it belong: on the adults who exploit them.

Who said I was blaming 'children'? I'm blaming YOU- mister liberal :rolleyes:

If you have your 15 year old dressing like a 30 year old model and wearing a shirt that could fit a 3rd grader, you look like a real fool sitting there calling whoever she sleeps with a 'rapist'.

In reality, you may as well raped her. So who's escaping accountability now, Mr. Lib?


Rape is rape.

You all always feel the need to overstate the painfully dull and obvious every time yall speak, like someone eager to sell a cheap product.


"Statutory" rape is still rape under the law. The "harm done" has no relevance

I'm not even going to state the problem here.


There has been no "poof" regarding this "padlock" against the sexual exploitation of children, and there will not be.

It surely poofed into existence, the same type of drivel can knock it back out.


Sorry, dude, your hopes are in vain.

What a ridiculous statement. I don't even know why those as yourself even have these discussions when it's clear others could spend better time reading their kid's school code of ethics or something- just systematic nonsense every time certain subjects even begin, followed by tripe.

Tyrathca
April 13th, 2016, 10:46 AM
Sexual relations with parents causes birth defects in children.


Exodus 34:7
maintaining love to thousands, and forgiving wickedness, rebellion and sin. Yet he does not leave the guilty unpunished; he punishes the children and their children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation.” Given that the example in the OP was of a 51 year old woman that seems a rather moot point, I highly doubt there is much risk of any children. Does that then mean you condone their relationship, given it doesn't fall foul of birth defects? :think:

What is your rationale then? I'm curious how you'll answer this :Popcorn:

PureX
April 13th, 2016, 02:02 PM
Who said I was blaming 'children'? I'm blaming YOU- mister liberal :rolleyes:

If you have your 15 year old dressing like a 30 year old model and wearing a shirt that could fit a 3rd grader, you look like a real fool sitting there calling whoever she sleeps with a 'rapist'. No, you look like a fool who's trying to blame the rape of a 15 year old on her choice of clothes, instead of on the rapist. I'm saying that it doesn't matter what she's wearing, because every adult has the responsibility to make sure they are not interacting sexually with a 15 year old. Some 15 year olds look older. That doesn't matter. Adults still have the responsibility to be sure of who they're having sex with, and that their consent is legally informed.

If she's legally inebriated, she cannot give legally informed consent. If she is 15 years old, sober, and says she consents, her consent is still not legally informed. And if you have sex with her, you will be legally considered a rapist.

Why is this so difficult for you to understand?


In reality, you may as well raped her. So who's escaping accountability now, Mr. Lib?That's both sick and insane.

Crucible
April 13th, 2016, 02:12 PM
No, you look like a fool who's trying to blame the rape of a 15 year old on her choice of clothes, instead of on the rapist.

No, you've just been brainwashed into chanting the same broken record whenever there is insight to be had on the matter.

'Age of consent' is a new age thing, and a legal abstract- it doesn't actually exist. You can't call it rape here and not rape in whole other culture. That's the problem with you all- you don't even see that you have basically called all the Patriarchs in the Bible rapists :doh:

Pointless arguing with sheep.

CherubRam
April 13th, 2016, 02:44 PM
Given that the example in the OP was of a 51 year old woman that seems a rather moot point, I highly doubt there is much risk of any children. Does that then mean you condone their relationship, given it doesn't fall foul of birth defects? :think:

What is your rationale then? I'm curious how you'll answer this :Popcorn:

Sexual relations with close relatives is not proper and not intended, therefore it is a sin.

CherubRam
April 13th, 2016, 02:53 PM
Until recently people married at a young age of 12 to 14 years of age. Coming into adulthood (was and is ) celebrated at the age of 8. Puberty starts as early as age eight. Christ mother, Mary, may have been about 12 years old when she became pregnant with Yahshua.

Angel4Truth
April 13th, 2016, 03:00 PM
Neither you nor I are God. And neither you nor I knows what God knows about others. So "caring about it" is an irrelevant fantasy, based on a presumption of knowledge that we don't even have.

But I have no doubt that this will be far too complex for you to grasp, and you will continue minding everyone else's morality as if you were God, Himself.


In other words, you could care less what Gods word says, thanks.

Greg Jennings
April 13th, 2016, 03:04 PM
Until recently people married at a young age of 12 to 14 years of age. Coming into adulthood (was and is ) celebrated at the age of 8. Puberty starts as early as age eight. Christ mother, Mary, may have been about 12 years old when she became pregnant with Yahshua.

True. Which is why you and others are off-base when calling Mohammed a pedophile. He's no more a pedophile than Joseph.



That being said, I don't see our age of consent changing anytime in the future, do you? Times have changed. People don't have to breed to survive anymore, so not every girl of birthing age needs to be carrying a baby

Angel4Truth
April 13th, 2016, 03:08 PM
True. Which is why you and others are off-base when calling Mohammed a pedophile. He's no more a pedophile than Joseph.


He married a 6 year old, he was a pervert. Would you like to kill me now for saying that? A whole lot of Muslims would.

Greg Jennings
April 13th, 2016, 03:11 PM
He married a 6 year old, he was a pervert. Would you like to kill me now for saying that? A whole lot of Muslims would.
I'm not a Muslim. But maybe

Is it perverted to marry a 12 year old?



:up: thanks for answering

Angel4Truth
April 13th, 2016, 03:15 PM
I'm not a Muslim. But maybe

Is it perverted to marry a 12 year old?

Today, yes. Can you at least see the difference in a prepubescent girl and one who is clearly a child, he was a total pervert.

Why a woman would choose to convert to islam ever deliberately is beyond me.

:idea: Maybe thats why they have to force it.

Greg Jennings
April 13th, 2016, 03:18 PM
Today, yes. Can you at least see the difference in a prepubescent girl and one who is clearly a child, he was a total pervert.

Why a woman would choose to convert to islam ever deliberately is beyond me.

:idea: Maybe thats why they have to force it.

He married the girl when she was 6, then waited several years until she was of birthing ahe to consummate the marriage.


In a primitive culture in a world 1500 years ago, what more [in terms of morality] could you ask for?

How is it any different for him to have sex with an 11 year old than for Joseph to hand sex with a 12-13 year old? It's equally perverted in modern times, particularly in a legal sense

Angel4Truth
April 13th, 2016, 03:35 PM
He married the girl when she was 6, then waited several years until she was of birthing ahe to consummate the marriage.


In a primitive culture in a world 1500 years ago, what more [in terms of morality] could you ask for?

How is it any different for him to have sex with an 11 year old than for Joseph to hand sex with a 12-13 year old? It's equally perverted in modern times, particularly in a legal sense

I dont believe mary was 12. One more time, do you know the difference in a girl after puberty and long before? (aisha was consummated at 9 - the sicko man)

Mohamed was a raving lunatic and pervert.

Greg Jennings
April 13th, 2016, 03:55 PM
I dont believe mary was 12. One more time, do you know the difference in a girl after puberty and long before? (aisha was consummated at 9 - the sicko man)

Mohamed was a raving lunatic and pervert.
I believe it was later than 9 but even then, the youngest mother in recorded history was exactly 9 years old, so 1500 years ago impreganting a 9 year old bride may have been unusual, but hardly taboo. Puberty hits different people at different times.

Mary was 12-14. Is it perverted for a 30+ year old man to have sexual relations with a girl of that age or no?

Tyrathca
April 15th, 2016, 02:48 AM
Sexual relations with close relatives is not proper and not intended, therefore it is a sin. So you think your god's preferences should be law and not something for him to deal with on his own? Are you picky about which of your gods rules become law or do you vote for them all?

Is that really the justification you want to hang law on?

Until recently people married at a young age of 12 to 14 years of age. Coming into adulthood (was and is ) celebrated at the age of 8. Puberty starts as early as age eight. Christ mother, Mary, may have been about 12 years old when she became pregnant with Yahshua. In one post you call incest a sin and in the next you are promoting paedophilia as acceptable? Since you seem a fan of imposing your gods rules of propriety on society do you think the age of consent/marriage should be dropped and if so how young is too young? 12 is clearly OK to you (ew), what about 10? 8 even seems acceptable to you given this post....

This seems a horrifying double standard, you advocate government intervention in the private affairs of consenting adults harming no one (except maybe themselves psychologically, maybe) yet in the next breath you seem to say that children (as young as 12? 8? how young is too young for you?) should be allowed to be married off and have sex with adults... Seriously?