 |
|
|
|
| If You Are For Homosexual Marriage & Rights, You Should Be For Incestual Marriage & Rights Or You Are A Hypocrite. |
| Incestual rights and incestuous marriages should be included when debating homosexual rights and homosexual marriages. Homosexuals should be tied to incestuals. There are homosexuals and homosexual supporters that do not support incest. If you don't support one, you shouldn't support the other or you are irrational and picking and choosing.
The argument that incestual relations result in genetically deformed children is countered like the argument that homosexuals cannot have children within the marriage. Incestuals can adopt or be artificially inseminated.
There's an overlap of homosexuals and incestuals. For example, brother-brother, sister-sister, mother-daughter, father-son. |
 yqbd  04 May 2008 01:19
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All (or most of...) the arguments against homosexuality can easily be applied to incest. All or most
of the arguments for homosexuality can easily be applied to incest.
If it's consensual between legal adults, then what's the issue? Isn't that what homosexuality rights
advocates are saying? By saying that all relationships between adults that are consensual should be
allowed, and that religion and personal beliefs shouldn't play a part in it, but then saying that
consensual relationships between related adults are out of the question because your religion/
personal beliefs doesn't/ don't support it, is HYPOCRITICAL!!!
What you're basically saying is that someone else doesn't have the right to limit your rights based
on their beliefs of what's right and wrong, but you have the right to limit their rights based on
your beliefs as to what's right and wrong.
What's the problem with love? If two people love each other and are legally old enough to consent,
then why stand in their way? Isn't that the argument lesbians, gays, and bi people are trying to
win?
Genetic diseases can easily be dealt with. Don't have kids, adopt, or artificially inseminate. The
same options open to gays and lesbians due to biological reasons.
Yes, people will hate on the children of incestuous couples. They'll also hate on the children of
homosexual couples. Is the hatred of the children of an incestuous couple justified, while the
hatred of the children of a homosexual couple not? Why?
No, it's not supported by religion. Neither is homosexuality.
Yes, it's socially taboo. So is homosexuality.
Yes, it's a sexual minority, that also happens to have the option of being between consenting adult
humans. Same thing with homosexuality.
Both have been shown in past societies. The Greeks entire pantheon seemed to consist of incestuous
relationships. Zeus marrying his sister Hera, anyone? The Greeks also supported homosexuality.
Homosexuality was revered in many societies. Incest was present and common, to strengthen relations
within a family or maintain bloodlines in the nobility. It was only recently that it began to become
heavily taboo. Even still in some parts of the world it isn't.
Homosexuals and incestuous people are fighting the same battle. They just call themselves different
things and fight differently worded arguments. Does that mean they should fight each other? They
should make each other's lives hell? They should kill each other? They should deny each other their
rights?
I'm disappointed in the people who are saying that they should. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
A father f*cking his 8-year old son is wrong, but if he does it to his young daughter then that's
okay. What reason is there not to approve of doing it with your daughter, as long as it's not a
homosexual act. . . Especially if you're a christian-- catholic priests have always f*cked little
boys, so it's part of the christian tradition.
Also, if you're for marriage BETWEEN A MAN AND A WOMAN, then you approve of a man marrying his own
sister or else you're a hypocrite. Shoot, a man should be allowed to be married to every one of his
sisters at the same time-- polygamy is in the bible.
Isn't logic wonderful? |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not. Sorry. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
This has come up in previous threads and this is a ridiculous argument because homosexuality and
incestual relationships are different in one major way. There isn't a large community of parents and
their children or brothers and sisters trying to get married and in certain circumstances and states
they ARE allowed to get married. There have been cases where brothers and sisters and fathers and
daughters who were separated or given up for adoption at a young age meet later in life and get
married not knowing they are related. Once they found out they were related they can stay married or
get a divorce, the choice is up to them. Other than these very unique circumstances there is not an
overwhelming population of incestual couples crying out to be recognized and beyond 1st cousin is
fair game anyways. It also depends on what kind of incestual relationship you are talking about. If
it is a father or mother trying to marry their child then that is wrong because chances are the
child was raised inappropriately and incest more than likely started before they were 18. Plus
children raised to be in an intimate relationship with their parents are brainwashed. A gay man does
not have a hand in raising his partner and therefore it is a completely different story considering
the bond and influence a parent has over their child. Other than that I do not see anything wrong
with 2 consenting adults getting married. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I wouldn't say so since you can have both heterosexual and homosexual incest, though I'm not against
incest I think that care should be taken having child as genetic problems can occur ( I don't know
that much about it.) However by your logic if you support heterosexual marriage and rights you
should support homosexual marriage and rights since arguments apply to both sides, otherwise you are
a hypocrite |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
There is no equivalence between the two types of relationships. Because you can recycle the same
argument for both assertions does that make you a hypocrite? There were arguments that were made
against interracial marriage that paralleled the arguments against gay marriage. By your logic,
those who are against gay marriage would also be against interracial marriage, else they be
hypocrites. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Parents are in a position to unfairly and unreasonably influence their children to make them do
anything they want, and make them think it's right. We see this regularly when children grow up
adhering to exactly the same preposterous magical belief system as their parents. Isn't it a
remarkable coincidence that of all the competing daft magical belief systems out there, the children
should freely choose exactly the same one that their parents did?
Of course not. The parents influenced the children to choose it. And they could influence them to do
anything else too. We had a nice illustration of this recently with the Yearning for Zion ranch in
Texas. The children were abused, both psychologically, by being brainwashed into accepting the
christian cult's doctrines, and physically, becoming sexual playthings for the adults.
Therefore in any case where one proposed partner has had any influence over the other while growing
up, the relationship should be illegal. Also saying they could adopt or have children through
artificial insemination does not dispose of the malformed children problem. There is no guarantee,
and can be no guarantee, that they will not practise sexual relations with one another, so the
relationship should be barred by law. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
If you're for the buybull, then you are for rape, child molesting, selling your daughter into
slavery, slavery in general, the smashing of babies onto rocks, the murder of people who don't
practice jewish customs, among many others.
Otherwise, you're a hypocrite. If you lie and say those things are not in the buybull, I'll post
chapter and verse. |
| |
 K9 04 May 2008 09:29
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Homosexuality is nature and has no victims. Incest between opposite gendered person can be
hazzardous to any offsping(look at the British royals) I don't have an argument with proof other
than, Incest is wierd and kind of creepy. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
No. You shouldn't. And besides, how does not doing so make you a hypocrite? |
| |
 Mark 04 May 2008 01:46
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 For and Against Recent Activity
|
|
|
|
| |
Sign In
