NY State blesses ‘incest’ marriage between uncle, niece

[Katzndogz]

The state’s highest court has toppled a cultural taboo — legalizing a degree of incest, at least between an uncle and niece — in a unanimous ruling.

While the laws against “parent-child and brother-sister marriages . . . are grounded in the almost universal horror with which such marriages are viewed . . . there is no comparably strong objection to uncle-niece marriages,” Tuesday’s ruling reads.

Judge Robert Smith of the Court of Appeals wrote that such unions were lawful in New York until 1893 and Rhode Island allows them.
NY State blesses incest 8217 marriage between uncle niece New York Post
----------------------------

Yeah, remember when we said once we start to redefine marriage that all of the perverts (liberals) will come out of the wood work and start to chant for their rights to marry?

Polygamy. bestiality, and yes incest marriages.

Well, here they are, right on que.

Aaaaand there are the liberals, supporting it.

crackers in the south are known for inbreeding

It seems like ******* in the north are doing it.

Especially Vietnamese crackers from the south er north.

It's difficult to get on the incest bandwagon when this is the mother's half brother making the relationship one of one eighth blood relationship. The same as cousins and they've been able to legally marry for 100 years.

 

[Ellipsis]

Which slope is it- marriage between uncles and nieces were legal until 1893.....when they were made illegal........if there was a slippery slope wouldn't that mean there were all sorts of more marriages should be illegal now?

Now? No. Eventually. One leads to the next, Z is necesseraly the logical consiquense of A, meaning incest and poligamy are necesseraly the logical consiquense of "as long as they're consenting adults".

 

[Silhouette]

Which slope is it- marriage between uncles and nieces were legal until 1893.....when they were made illegal........if there was a slippery slope wouldn't that mean there were all sorts of more marriages should be illegal now?

Now? No. Eventually. One leads to the next, Z is necesseraly the logical consiquense of A, meaning incest and poligamy are necesseraly the logical consiquense of "as long as they're consenting adults".

Incest and polygamy are as legal as gay marriage RIGHT NOW in fact. How you can tell this is true, is if polygamists or incest applicants at county clerks' offices are turned away for marriage licenses in the states where marriage laws have been rendered "dead in limbo" by SCOTUS's calculated-inaction [thank you conservatives on the Court who could've voted to take this up].. If those clerks turn away polygamists, they will have to cite the reasons why. Same with incest. Citing "universal horror" is not going to cut it. Because that's the same as citing "the majority disagrees and doesn't want you to marry".

Surely, anyone can see that from there, the clerks are opening themselves up to a lawsuit.

 

[Syriusly]

Which slope is it- marriage between uncles and nieces were legal until 1893.....when they were made illegal........if there was a slippery slope wouldn't that mean there were all sorts of more marriages should be illegal now?

Now? No. Eventually. One leads to the next, Z is necesseraly the logical consiquense of A, meaning incest and poligamy are necesseraly the logical consiquense of "as long as they're consenting adults".

Incest and polygamy are as legal as gay marriage RIGHT NOW in fact. t.

Go ahead and prove that Silhouette- this is my challenge to you- go apply for a marriage license for you and a sibling.

Let us know how that goes.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Polygamy isn't legal anywhere on Earth afaik. Polygany is in some places but no where in the US.

 

[Syriusly]

Which slope is it- marriage between uncles and nieces were legal until 1893.....when they were made illegal........if there was a slippery slope wouldn't that mean there were all sorts of more marriages should be illegal now?

Now? No. Eventually. One leads to the next, Z is necesseraly the logical consiquense of A, meaning incest and poligamy are necesseraly the logical consiquense of "as long as they're consenting adults".

No.....first of all- let me point out- as from my example before- the slippery slope argument is just fallacious- polygamy has been legal for centuries in the Middle East, and they have some of the world's most repressive laws regarding homosexuality.

Meanwhile, in countries with gay marriage, there has been no move towards legalizing polygamy or incestious marriage.

Even the case discussed in this thread is no move towards legalizing incestious marriage- because as the court pointed out, the distance of relationship between these two was as distant as the relationship between first cousins- and marriage between first cousins in that state is legal.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Polygamy isn't legal in the middle east. Polygany is (husband may have multiple wives.) Polygamy is where either may have multiple spouses. That's not legal anywhere afaik. Can live with as many as you want, but the law will only recognize 1 in the US and most other countries.

 

[Syriusly]

Polygamy isn't legal in the middle east. Polygany is (husband may have multiple wives.) Polygamy is where either may have multiple spouses. That's not legal anywhere afaik. Can live with as many as you want, but the law will only recognize 1 in the US and most other countries.

Sorry- unnecessary nit picking

Polygamy
Marriage to more than one spouse at a time. Although the term may also refer to polyandry (marriage to more than one man), it is often used as a synonym for polygyny (marriage to more than one woman), which appears to have once been common in most of the world and is still found widely in some cultures

While you are technically correct, in popular usage the polygyny practiced in the Middle East is referred to as polygamy- as in this quote:

The New Oxford American Dictionary defines polygyny as “polygamy in which a man has more than one wife.”

 

[Silhouette]

Polygamy isn't legal in the middle east. Polygany is (husband may have multiple wives.) Polygamy is where either may have multiple spouses. That's not legal anywhere afaik. Can live with as many as you want, but the law will only recognize 1 in the US and most other countries.

The US is not the middle east. Therefore your comments are irrelevant.

What is relevant is how one sexual behavior cannot be "more special/protected" than another between consenting adults as to marriage "rights"..

 

[Silhouette]

Delta, do you have a complete list of all the protected sexual behaviors vs unprotected ones between consenting adults that would qualify or not for marriage "rights"?

Get back to me with that comprehensive list.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Which slope is it- marriage between uncles and nieces were legal until 1893.....when they were made illegal........if there was a slippery slope wouldn't that mean there were all sorts of more marriages should be illegal now?

Now? No. Eventually. One leads to the next, Z is necesseraly the logical consiquense of A, meaning incest and poligamy are necesseraly the logical consiquense of "as long as they're consenting adults".

 

[Silhouette]

Well, the US Supreme Court will soon be attempting to give a damn Jar Jar..

 

[ScienceRocks]

Liberals want to destroy this country. They're doing it through destroying the insitutions that make up this country from the ground up.

 

[Syriusly]

Polygamy isn't legal in the middle east. Polygany is (husband may have multiple wives.) Polygamy is where either may have multiple spouses. That's not legal anywhere afaik. Can live with as many as you want, but the law will only recognize 1 in the US and most other countries.

The US is not the middle east. Therefore your comments are irrelevant.

What is relevant is how one sexual behavior cannot be "more special/protected" than another between consenting adults as to marriage "rights"..

The discussion is marriage not sexual behavior.

 

[Syriusly]

Liberals want to destroy this country. They're doing it through destroying the insitutions that make up this country from the ground up.

Homophobes want homosexuals rounded up and put in concentration camps

 

[Syriusly]

Delta, do you have a complete list of all the protected sexual behaviors vs unprotected ones between consenting adults that would qualify or not for marriage "rights"?

Get back to me with that comprehensive list.

Sexual behavior has nothing to do with marriage rights

All Americans have the right to marriage- whether they have sex or not.

Just more bat guano Silhouette crazy.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Syriusly's right, sexual behaviours don't enter into it. Legally, any adult man and woman (and in which ever states currently allow same-sex marriages) may marry. What sex they're into doesn't come up.

Using the state I'm most family with, my own Missouri, can marry at 18 to anyone 18 n up (or 15 if their parents consent.) Same-sex marriages aren't allowed. Yet. Just a matter of time though.

 

[Czernobog]

Delta, do you have a complete list of all the protected sexual behaviors vs unprotected ones between consenting adults that would qualify or not for marriage "rights"?

Get back to me with that comprehensive list.

Why is it that always boils down to where the penis goes with you guys? If sexuality, sensuality, romance, and desire starts, and ends with the penis for you, trust me when I tell you, you're doing it wrong.

 

[Silhouette]

Liberals want to destroy this country. They're doing it through destroying the insitutions that make up this country from the ground up.

Actually I disagree. You have to distinguish the far left from just the left.

The LGBT cult and its motivating elders isn't about destroying the country. They just want legal access to adopt kids. But yes, it so happens that that will destroy the country because everyone has agreed to not understand their motivations for wanting to adopt kids. It's far more socially polite to not ask questions about that. And to not comment on pride parades, or Harvey Milk, or the two lesbians in California drugging their 11 year old son to "become a girl"..

Insanity doesn't self reflect. I doubt even the keenest of their ranks has meditated on where the end point is of all this momentum they have will be. Though like I said, I believe it's access to children. Perhaps among other reasons, to fulfill some agenda that involves one of the members of that "marriage" to role-play something that they're not? Children shouldn't be forced as a matter of law to play along with serious adult mental dysfunctions and delusions IMHO.

If you're a woman who thinks she's a man or a man who thinks he's a woman, you're mentally unstable and delusional by definition. The definition of delusions are those thoughts, feelings and actions that only you see and no one else can; and that deny starkly obvious reality.

The APA is all about making policy via audited-consensus these days and not science. Well, the consensus is in society that if you are female you are a woman and if you male you are a man. Looking between your legs and asking the world to deny what you are is asking the world to share in your delusions. That's something the world isn't prepared to do.

Nor should the world surrender children into your world to be subject to a situation that poses clear and present danger to them. In other homes where adults are suffering that equal level of severe delusions, children are removed by the state for their own safety.

 

[Silhouette]

Why is it that always boils down to where the penis goes with you guys? If sexuality, sensuality, romance, and desire starts, and ends with the penis for you, trust me when I tell you, you're doing it wrong.

Your strawman is lovely. Why don't you start a thread about it somewhere else?