Incest

Hold on, so incest is sexual love with your own siblings or offspring?


Disgusting.
 
Norsefire said:
Why is there even debate? Such behavior is immoral and should be punished.
Click to expand...

because Norsefire...some people fall in love with their own brothers/sisters...and after 20 years of trying to find a mate, they cannot...but still love each other...this is not a black and white world Norsefire...This is not Iran
 
But your own family? Not only is that morally wrong, but biologically bad. It produces deformed babies, doesn't it?
 
Norsefire said:
Great logic, but then there's no problem with loving a cockroach, I presume?
Click to expand...

What? Are your sisters cockroaches? Is that what you are trying to say? It's OK if you have insects for siblings. Tell us all about it....
 
Randwolf said:
What? Are your sisters cockroaches? Is that what you are trying to say? It's OK if you have insects for siblings. Tell us all about it....
Click to expand...

? No

He said that we cannot control love, that it has no boundaries NOR SHOULD IT have boundaries

By this logic, a person can fall in love with a cockroach and it's "normal"
 
yes a person can fall in love even with cockroach. ...

a person can fall in love with themselves

with their God

with their Sun

with their last dance

with dancing leaves' rain in autumn

with anything...

Love is boundless and that is its power
 
actually draqon your wrong, (not in a major way but just a clarity issue)

Incest is sex with anyone closer than a second cousin in australia.

This means anyone in a drect line from youself (parents, grandparents ect), sibblings, uncles and aunts and first cousins and first cousins once removed.

Second cousin marrage is legal (at least in Australia)
 
Kadark:

Kadark said:
I just had this discussion with visceral_instinct in this very thread, James. The only way to ensure that procreation does not occur is sterilization
Click to expand...

Yes, condoms are only 99% effective, blah blah blah.

I suppose you wish to ban all sex that is not for procreation, just in case. Do you?

however, the question is then raised, "why are we barring this couple from procreating, anyway?" If your answer is along the lines of, "there is an increased chance for deformities within the baby from incest couples", then it surely doesn't end there, does it? If this is your rationale, then you're (perhaps unconcsciously) supporting eugenics.
Click to expand...

I haven't made any argument for banning people from procreating. Perhaps that is your argument.

Of course, the only way to ensure this law's widespread enforcement would be sterilization. Doesn't sound very appealing or moral, does it? It's simply safer to outlaw such a primitive and backward practice, if you ask me. Same thing goes for bestiality and homosexuality.
Click to expand...

Homosexual sex has no risk of accidental procreation, so your concern about possible deformities in children is irrelevant in that case. The same can be said for bestiality, actually.

So, presumably you have another rationale for banning those things? Do you?
 
Yes, condoms are only 99% effective, blah blah blah.
Click to expand...

So you're going to be there when the incest couples have sex, strapping the condom onto the guy's dick? What I'm trying to say is that you can't enforce something like that, just like you can't arrest somebody for sodomy.

I suppose you wish to ban all sex that is not for procreation, just in case. Do you?
Click to expand...

What? Of course not. What gave you that impression?

I haven't made any argument for banning people from procreating. Perhaps that is your argument.
Click to expand...

You said yourself that there was nothing wrong with incest as long as it didn't lead to procreation. So yeah, you kind of are trying to ban certain people from procreating.

What's your problem, if there is consent, and no chance of procreation?

Homosexual sex has no risk of accidental procreation, so your concern about possible deformities in children is irrelevant in that case. The same can be said for bestiality, actually.
Click to expand...

I obviously don't think homosexuality/bestiality should be banned for accidental procreation; sorry if I wasn't clearer. I was merely bunching them altogether as things I would like to see outlawed.

So, presumably you have another rationale for banning those things? Do you?
Click to expand...

Of course I jolly well do, ole chap. Aye, but the thread is about incest, see?

Kadark the Enraged
 
Kadark:

So you're going to be there when the incest couples have sex, strapping the condom onto the guy's dick?
Click to expand...

You're the one who wants to avoid any chance of accidental conception.

What I'm trying to say is that you can't enforce something like that, just like you can't arrest somebody for sodomy.
Click to expand...

So, why do you want laws against sodomy?

I suppose you wish to ban all sex that is not for procreation, just in case. Do you?
Click to expand...

What? Of course not. What gave you that impression?
Click to expand...

I got that impression from your posts suggesting that there should be laws against any form of sexual activity that might result in accidental procreation.

You said yourself that there was nothing wrong with incest as long as it didn't lead to procreation.
Click to expand...

Did I?

Homosexual sex has no risk of accidental procreation, so your concern about possible deformities in children is irrelevant in that case. The same can be said for bestiality, actually.
Click to expand...

I obviously don't think homosexuality/bestiality should be banned for accidental procreation; sorry if I wasn't clearer. I was merely bunching them altogether as things I would like to see outlawed.
Click to expand...

Why would you like to see homosexuality outlawed? This is the second time I have asked.
 
Are you stupid? You deleted two sentences of my previous post which answered the very questions you just asked. I can't be bothered by your insolence.

Kadark the Grisly
 
The questions I asked were "Why do you want laws against sodomy?" and "Why do you want homosexuality outlawed?"

The complete text of your previous post follows:

Kadark said:
So you're going to be there when the incest couples have sex, strapping the condom onto the guy's dick? What I'm trying to say is that you can't enforce something like that, just like you can't arrest somebody for sodomy.

What? Of course not. What gave you that impression?

You said yourself that there was nothing wrong with incest as long as it didn't lead to procreation. So yeah, you kind of are trying to ban certain people from procreating.

What's your problem, if there is consent, and no chance of procreation?

I obviously don't think homosexuality/bestiality should be banned for accidental procreation; sorry if I wasn't clearer. I was merely bunching them altogether as things I would like to see outlawed.

Of course I jolly well do, ole chap. Aye, but the thread is about incest, see?
Click to expand...

Clearly, there is no answer to either of my two questions in that text.

Hey, while you're here, I challenge you to a [thread=82760]Formal Debate[/thread].
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top