Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
I just wanted to bring up a quick point about the incest argument.
At least as far as parent/child relationships go, an argument might be made that the child cannot be considered able to give informed consent. The reason for this is that parents have such a strong influence and are such a controlling figure in a child's life.
Not asking anyone to agree with the argument, just bringing up something other than the inbreeding point.
You make a good point and Kitten said the same thing...There is a whole other potential predatory element to it.
I just wanted to bring up a quick point about the incest argument.
At least as far as parent/child relationships go, an argument might be made that the child cannot be considered able to give informed consent. The reason for this is that parents have such a strong influence and are such a controlling figure in a child's life.
Not asking anyone to agree with the argument, just bringing up something other than the inbreeding point.
You make a good point and Kitten said the same thing...There is a whole other potential predatory element to it.
Well ya, except none of you will bring up the EXACT same point about Gay couples raising children to be gay, now will you? That just isn't politically correct.
Once again after the age of Consent the "child' is legally no longer a CHILD. NOW you guys are arguing the Government should forever ban them from being able to make decisions in regards their families.
Straight parents have gay children and vice versa. 
There are many, many, many young girls in this country who are molested from a young age by their fathers. Fathers have a natural, and indeed legally proscribed, power relationship over their children. The child never consents to this relationship, in fact the child is born into it without a say at all.
Nice try analogizing it to gay marriage. But fail.
I just wanted to bring up a quick point about the incest argument.
At least as far as parent/child relationships go, an argument might be made that the child cannot be considered able to give informed consent. The reason for this is that parents have such a strong influence and are such a controlling figure in a child's life.
Not asking anyone to agree with the argument, just bringing up something other than the inbreeding point.
You make a good point and Kitten said the same thing...There is a whole other potential predatory element to it.
Well ya, except none of you will bring up the EXACT same point about Gay couples raising children to be gay, now will you? That just isn't politically correct.
Once again after the age of Consent the "child' is legally no longer a CHILD. NOW you guys are arguing the Government should forever ban them from being able to make decisions in regards their families.
Actually RGS is correct because that can of worms have already been opened,
Gay marriage victory in Albany stirs valid fears that incest and polygamy could come next
Now the logic of you jackasses has been proven to be a slippery slope indeed.
Are you saying the Cheneys raised their daughter to be gay?I just wanted to bring up a quick point about the incest argument.
At least as far as parent/child relationships go, an argument might be made that the child cannot be considered able to give informed consent. The reason for this is that parents have such a strong influence and are such a controlling figure in a child's life.
Not asking anyone to agree with the argument, just bringing up something other than the inbreeding point.
You make a good point and Kitten said the same thing...There is a whole other potential predatory element to it.
Well ya, except none of you will bring up the EXACT same point about Gay couples raising children to be gay, now will you? That just isn't politically correct.
Once again after the age of Consent the "child' is legally no longer a CHILD. NOW you guys are arguing the Government should forever ban them from being able to make decisions in regards their families.
I just wanted to bring up a quick point about the incest argument.
At least as far as parent/child relationships go, an argument might be made that the child cannot be considered able to give informed consent. The reason for this is that parents have such a strong influence and are such a controlling figure in a child's life.
Not asking anyone to agree with the argument, just bringing up something other than the inbreeding point.
You make a good point and Kitten said the same thing...There is a whole other potential predatory element to it.
Well ya, except none of you will bring up the EXACT same point about Gay couples raising children to be gay, now will you? That just isn't politically correct.
Once again after the age of Consent the "child' is legally no longer a CHILD. NOW you guys are arguing the Government should forever ban them from being able to make decisions in regards their families.
There are many, many, many young girls in this country who are molested from a young age by their fathers. Fathers have a natural, and indeed legally proscribed, power relationship over their children. The child never consents to this relationship, in fact the child is born into it without a say at all.
Nice try analogizing it to gay marriage. But fail.
sure it is. once they become adults they are no longer bound by said relationship...you're ASSumption is that the relationship necessarily makes it impossible for offspring to have free will after 18. it is a logical fail. kids, everyday, disrespect and do not listen to their parents, long before they turn 18.
further, there is no proof that outlawing incest has decreased child molestation. in fact, child molestation was NEVER even considered as a reason to outlaw incet. you guys just can't handle that your logic fails when applied universally. you want to put your hands over your ears and somehow convince yourselves that your logic ONLY applies to homosexuality and it doesn't.
There are many, many, many young girls in this country who are molested from a young age by their fathers. Fathers have a natural, and indeed legally proscribed, power relationship over their children. The child never consents to this relationship, in fact the child is born into it without a say at all.
Nice try analogizing it to gay marriage. But fail.
sure it is. once they become adults they are no longer bound by said relationship...you're ASSumption is that the relationship necessarily makes it impossible for offspring to have free will after 18. it is a logical fail. kids, everyday, disrespect and do not listen to their parents, long before they turn 18.
No, I did not assume that a relationship necessarily makes it impossible for offspring to have free will after 18. You make the same mistake here as you did in the other thread, you are pretty bad at logic.
That it happens sometimes, and could happen, and is a danger, does not mean it will always happen. When people drive drunk they don't always kill someone. That doesn't mean we should allow it. Comprende?
further, there is no proof that outlawing incest has decreased child molestation. in fact, child molestation was NEVER even considered as a reason to outlaw incet. you guys just can't handle that your logic fails when applied universally. you want to put your hands over your ears and somehow convince yourselves that your logic ONLY applies to homosexuality and it doesn't.
It doesn't only apply to homosexuality. You are just too stupid to pick relationships that people find intuitively objectionable that are actually analagous to homosexuality. Try polyamory, you'll likely do better with that one.
sure it is. once they become adults they are no longer bound by said relationship...you're ASSumption is that the relationship necessarily makes it impossible for offspring to have free will after 18. it is a logical fail. kids, everyday, disrespect and do not listen to their parents, long before they turn 18.
No, I did not assume that a relationship necessarily makes it impossible for offspring to have free will after 18. You make the same mistake here as you did in the other thread, you are pretty bad at logic.
That it happens sometimes, and could happen, and is a danger, does not mean it will always happen. When people drive drunk they don't always kill someone. That doesn't mean we should allow it. Comprende?
further, there is no proof that outlawing incest has decreased child molestation. in fact, child molestation was NEVER even considered as a reason to outlaw incet. you guys just can't handle that your logic fails when applied universally. you want to put your hands over your ears and somehow convince yourselves that your logic ONLY applies to homosexuality and it doesn't.
It doesn't only apply to homosexuality. You are just too stupid to pick relationships that people find intuitively objectionable that are actually analagous to homosexuality. Try polyamory, you'll likely do better with that one.
you should really explain yourself more fully. you make a post that talks about how the child never consents to the relationship....and somehow that makes the analogy a fail...what exactly are you talking about then? if my point is correct, it matters not one wit that a child has no consent to that relationship. for the relationship i speak of...occurs after the age of consent. it irrelevent that a child has no choice being born into the family or do you like parroting the obvious because it makes you feel smart?
polygamy has been argued ad nauseum, this train of thought is new and exciting and clearly is making people like you squirm and poop their pants.
No, I did not assume that a relationship necessarily makes it impossible for offspring to have free will after 18. You make the same mistake here as you did in the other thread, you are pretty bad at logic.
That it happens sometimes, and could happen, and is a danger, does not mean it will always happen. When people drive drunk they don't always kill someone. That doesn't mean we should allow it. Comprende?
It doesn't only apply to homosexuality. You are just too stupid to pick relationships that people find intuitively objectionable that are actually analagous to homosexuality. Try polyamory, you'll likely do better with that one.
you should really explain yourself more fully. you make a post that talks about how the child never consents to the relationship....and somehow that makes the analogy a fail...what exactly are you talking about then? if my point is correct, it matters not one wit that a child has no consent to that relationship. for the relationship i speak of...occurs after the age of consent. it irrelevent that a child has no choice being born into the family or do you like parroting the obvious because it makes you feel smart?
polygamy has been argued ad nauseum, this train of thought is new and exciting and clearly is making people like you squirm and poop their pants.
*sigh*. There is a natural power relationship between a parent and a child. This is legally enforced when one is under the age of consent. It usually doesn't just go pop and go away when one hits 18.
Are you an orphan or something? Do I really need to explain to you how familial ties usually work?
Actually RGS is correct because that can of worms have already been opened,
Gay marriage victory in Albany stirs valid fears that incest and polygamy could come next
Now the logic of you jackasses has been proven to be a slippery slope indeed.
Fears are what you trade in. Just because you are afraid doesn't make it so.
Actually RGS is correct because that can of worms have already been opened,
Gay marriage victory in Albany stirs valid fears that incest and polygamy could come next
Now the logic of you jackasses has been proven to be a slippery slope indeed.
Fears are what you trade in. Just because you are afraid doesn't make it so.
So when Valerie talks about her fear of a "predatory element related to the parent child relationship" she's wrong, her fear doesn't make it so?
Actually RGS is correct because that can of worms have already been opened,
Gay marriage victory in Albany stirs valid fears that incest and polygamy could come next
Now the logic of you jackasses has been proven to be a slippery slope indeed.
Fears are what you trade in. Just because you are afraid doesn't make it so.
Fears are what you trade in. Just because you are afraid doesn't make it so.
So when Valerie talks about her fear of a "predatory element related to the parent child relationship" she's wrong, her fear doesn't make it so?
It's hyperbole. There is an element in a parent child relationship that would make a child vulnerable to a predatory parent no matter what the age of the child.Actually RGS is correct because that can of worms have already been opened,
Gay marriage victory in Albany stirs valid fears that incest and polygamy could come next
Now the logic of you jackasses has been proven to be a slippery slope indeed.
Fears are what you trade in. Just because you are afraid doesn't make it so.
So when Valerie talks about her fear of a "predatory element related to the parent child relationship" she's wrong, her fear doesn't make it so?
Obviously you haven't read the thread and have let your preconceived ideas rule your thinking.So when Valerie talks about her fear of a "predatory element related to the parent child relationship" she's wrong, her fear doesn't make it so?
The part of this thread that is completely ironic is the libs that are trying to convince the cons that there actually is something wrong with adult incest. Hmmm... ya think?
I guess it's a lot easier to address that non-issue (as probably 99.9% of everyone would agree it's not right) as if it needed debating than face the hypocrisy of the "consenting adult" argument.
Obviously you haven't read the thread and have let your preconceived ideas rule your thinking.
The part of this thread that is completely ironic is the libs that are trying to convince the cons that there actually is something wrong with adult incest. Hmmm... ya think?
I guess it's a lot easier to address that non-issue (as probably 99.9% of everyone would agree it's not right) as if it needed debating than face the hypocrisy of the "consenting adult" argument.
Yeah, let's start with showing me where I mentioned fear?you should really explain yourself more fully. you make a post that talks about how the child never consents to the relationship....and somehow that makes the analogy a fail...what exactly are you talking about then? if my point is correct, it matters not one wit that a child has no consent to that relationship. for the relationship i speak of...occurs after the age of consent. it irrelevent that a child has no choice being born into the family or do you like parroting the obvious because it makes you feel smart?
polygamy has been argued ad nauseum, this train of thought is new and exciting and clearly is making people like you squirm and poop their pants.
*sigh*. There is a natural power relationship between a parent and a child. This is legally enforced when one is under the age of consent. It usually doesn't just go pop and go away when one hits 18.
Are you an orphan or something? Do I really need to explain to you how familial ties usually work?
do you date strawmen?
i suggest you reread my post and then reply.
