indeed LOL it is them it is not you. you can't stop it but you can prevent it.Originally Posted by Buh4Bee
yes (between consenting adults)
yes, but only if they get sterilized
no!
not sure
indeed LOL it is them it is not you. you can't stop it but you can prevent it.
it may never try
but when it does it sigh
it is just that
good
it fly
how is Godwin to do with it Taliesin? i live on Godwin road as it happens
Freudian slip may have a take on it or two.
it may never try
but when it does it sigh
it is just that
good
it fly
I don't believe incest is right and I'm not referring to 'incest property' laws which bore no threat of inbreeding but was self serving marital laws from the dark ages classified as incest to ensure that families didn't lose their property. I mean incest in its truest form both as a moral and biological wrong - although there is probably a stronger argument for the biological but I don't have any shame in throwing my moral standard in here for good measure having been a victim of incest myself. Having said that, it doesn't take experience to know that incest is a moral wrong. As responsible beings, we can discern rights and wrongs without having to be subject to them. It just means we have a deeper understanding and appreciation of the affect the wrong can have upon us if we do experience it.
Before sunlight can shine through a window, the blinds must be raised - American Proverb
Most of the arguments against non-reproductive, consensual incest - what we are, in the main, discussing here - center around two main themes.
The first is rationalisation of personal dislike; I would argue that you shouldn't oppose two people of age doing a thing they both wish to do because - simply and entirely - it makes you feel 'icky'. Remember that only a few decades ago, or even less, we would have seen exactly the same arguments used against gay and lesbian couples - in fact you can modify many of these arguments to refer to homosexuals without too much modification, and the arguments have the same merit in both cases.
The other is a resort to the naturalistic fallacy - again, for the longest time, homosexuality was 'unnatural', and now, because of a different set of biases in society, it is not. Exactly the same could happen for incest.
Again I do not refer to incest that results in reproduction. Today, however, we have any number of ways to prevent birth; and we do not prevent two people with recessive genes that could result in defects from reproducing, if they are not related: why is this different?
You can put that argument forward if you like. I guess some sisters like their brothers to f uck them and others don't. I'm definitely in the don't category and would campaign heavily to uphold the laws which make incest illegal.
What about the ick factor of consent? I mean can you f uck the family dog as well even though it can't actually say ok? And if that's the case, why the need to ask for a family member's permission? I'm sure there are families that bring the meaning of 'honour thy father and mother' to a whole new level anyway without ever having 'asked' but were raised to do as they were told. What do you have to say to this sort of practice?
Before sunlight can shine through a window, the blinds must be raised - American Proverb
I wish that I could see the correlation here between non-consensual sexual relations with animals and consensual relations between people who are related by accident of birth. According to the recent Vegetarian Times study, more than 300 million people in America alone don't subscribe to vegetarianism, and yet none of them seems concerned with obtaining the consent of the animals they eat, so I don't see much validity in a once-removed comparison at all, but for the vegetarian, there's one heckuvan "ick factor" in other people eating animals without their consent.
Again, I'm uncertain what Ephesians 6:2, or Deuteronomy 5:16 (or the Fourth or Fifth Commandment, depending upon your slant on Life) is doing here, but I'd always thought that these verses were geared primarily toward obedience in Children, so as to make order out of chaos. Wouldn't "****ing" someone with whom you shared no Love - no intimacy on the intellectual, emotional nor Spiritual levels - be at least as dishonourable to one's Parents as would enjoying physical intimacy with a Cousin with whom you already shared Love, intellectual intimacy, emotional intimacy and Spiritual intimacy? I suppose that would depend upon one's Parents in the end. Those who referred to sexual congress within a Loving relationship as "****ing" - and who encouraged their progeny to do likewise - probably wouldn't feel particularly "dishonoured" that their offspring were communing with one another anyway.
isn't nature telling you something if it is defective? there is a reason for it. it is defective so do not do it is what nature is telling you. incest is wrong and in now way should be encouraged.
would you drive a car if it does not take petrol ? no you would not you could not.
Last edited by cacian; 10-21-2013 at 09:48 AM.
it may never try
but when it does it sigh
it is just that
good
it fly
I don't use the word love when it comes to incest. I love my brother but that's because he's my brother and I don't see why my love for him should be used to justify incest. Sure, we can have 'nice' incest and 'bad' incest if you like. Consensual incest where two family members love each other and say it's ok to be intimate with each other and those who don't actually get afforded such a privilege but are raised in an environment where such practices are the norm but incest is incest however it gets dressed. Either way, I object to it.
Someone I once knew bore the child of her father and is now a chronic alcoholic. He was a very gentle, loving parent and she trusted him always and strove to please him in every way possibly imaginable. She was coerced through love into that situation. It wasn't her who reported him and she was distraught when he went to jail. Her father could not deal with her husband taking his place and things just fell apart for him - that's how the child came about.
Your comments are baseless. You don't ask bugs or flora if it's ok to kill them either so get off your circle of life high horse. This isn't a biblical debate thread (I was being witty - get a SOH) You are well acquainted with the other two threads that would welcome them!
Before sunlight can shine through a window, the blinds must be raised - American Proverb
Delta, I don't understand how you can't see you are being just as prejudiced as a homophobe.
There is nothing wrong with incest as long as it is consensual and is non-reproductive. I personally find the notion gross, I also find the idea of putting my penis in another man's mouth to be gross, but I have no problem if other people want to do that in their own time.
Volya I hear what you're saying but even you are putting a standard on incest. So long as it is consensual. So long as it is non-reproductive. It's the same argument when people say that abortion is ok so long as..... You're either ok with incest 100% no matter how it comes about or you're 100% against it. Who are you to pick and choose when it's ok and when it's not ok? Should family members submit incest application forms and get approval from you based on criteria?
Before sunlight can shine through a window, the blinds must be raised - American Proverb
Why do I have to be 100% for or against it?
Who am I to pick and choose? Who are you to outright ban people from doing it? I know that the majority of people think it should be illegal and that the odds are it will never be legal in my lifetime, but that shouldn't stop me from putting forward my opinion of it and doing my best to change the minds of others.
incest is not healthy it is something no one should practice. the whole idea is that you have a brother and a sister a family and that you keep it at that. it is family. intimacy is to be practiced outside the family circle because it is healthier and people go on reproducing to make more families. to say there is nothing with it is not the way forward. those who practice incest suffer deep seated psychological issues which should treated rather then encourage to be practiced. it and say it is Ok because it is not.
surely a better progressive way of looking at it is to address it in order to move on from it rather then stagnate it.
Last edited by cacian; 10-21-2013 at 11:46 AM.
it may never try
but when it does it sigh
it is just that
good
it fly
'homosexuality is not healthy it is something no one should practice. the whole idea is that you have a wife or a husband and that you keep it at that. it is family. intimacy is to be practiced outside your gender because it is healthier and people go on reproducing to make more families. to say there is nothing with it is not the way forward. those who practice homosexuality suffer deep seated psychological issues which should treated rather then encourage to be practiced. it and say it is Ok because it is not.
surely a better progressive way of looking at it is to address it in order to move on from it rather then stagnate it.'
How does that sound cacian.
LOL Ok let's see.
homosexuality is different. one is born gay and therefore that one person will move on later on in life to be with the same sex partner.
incest is not. a brother and a sister are born to the same mother or father and therefore areof the same blood line family related.
this means they are born brother and sister first and by that they are to fulfil that bond of brother and sister which means no sex between them. that is the meaning of brother and sister. the minute they enter into sex it becomes incest.
that is quite different from homosexuality.
it may never try
but when it does it sigh
it is just that
good
it fly
I can see I'm not going to change anyone's mind here so I have nothing further to add to this discussion.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
