Teenager Who Has Been Dating Her Father For Two Years Reveals The Pair Are Planning To Get Married..

[NYcarbineer]

If you believe incest (between consenting adults) should be a crime, you believe in eugenics.

Why else would you want to make it a crime?

 

[bripat9643]

You're introducing all kinds of issues that aren't part of the argument. Assume the relationship didn't start until they were both adults. Why should it be illegal for them to marry?

Yeah, I see something wrong with that. I also see something wrong with Adam and Steve getting married.

Ugh, I don't even want to think about it anymore. It's gross.

That's right, run away like a scarred little puppy with its tail between its legs.

Lol, I'm not afraid to admit that I would run away from incest. Maybe you would like it.

Typical liberal: when you're losing an argument, you accuse your opponent of some kind of foulness. Then you'll wine like a baby if I apply the labels to you that accurately describe you.

I don't think I lost any arguments. I think my points still stand. You have not refuted any of them except to say they are both "adults." I already told you that the girl was only 16 years old. You admitted you see a problem with it.

As I said previously, you will continue failing to get the point. You're too stupid to bother arguing with.

 

[bripat9643]

Yes, you just old me your hypocritical position on incestuous marriages. You obviously don't have a problem with being a hypocrite. That's all you proved.

My position is in #333. Tell me what's hypocritical about it.

Well, you're still wrong because when people who are related that have transmissible genetic defects have children, the defects are many times more likely to be transmitted.

And if it was decided that those risks were so great what we would deny them would be sexual relations, not marriage, especially if they could not produce children.

Huh? Are you saying the government can prevent people from having sex?

It's not like we don't already. Lock one up and they won't be getting it on.

No, the government does not lock up consenting adults for having sex.

 

[ChrisL]

Ugh, I don't even want to think about it anymore. It's gross.

That's right, run away like a scarred little puppy with its tail between its legs.

Lol, I'm not afraid to admit that I would run away from incest. Maybe you would like it.

Typical liberal: when you're losing an argument, you accuse your opponent of some kind of foulness. Then you'll wine like a baby if I apply the labels to you that accurately describe you.

I don't think I lost any arguments. I think my points still stand. You have not refuted any of them except to say they are both "adults." I already told you that the girl was only 16 years old. You admitted you see a problem with it.

As I said previously, you will continue failing to get the point. You're too stupid to bother arguing with.

No that would be you who is stupid and incredibly ignorant, not to mention lacking any integrity at all. A poor excuse for a man.

 

[ChrisL]

My position is in #333. Tell me what's hypocritical about it.

Well, you're still wrong because when people who are related that have transmissible genetic defects have children, the defects are many times more likely to be transmitted.

And if it was decided that those risks were so great what we would deny them would be sexual relations, not marriage, especially if they could not produce children.

Huh? Are you saying the government can prevent people from having sex?

It's not like we don't already. Lock one up and they won't be getting it on.

No, the government does not lock up consenting adults for having sex.

Incest is illegal in many states with good reason. Because, as I explained to you earlier, but you failed to understand, there is a HUGE potential for abuse in such relationships.

 

[ChrisL]

Ugh, I don't even want to think about it anymore. It's gross.

That's right, run away like a scarred little puppy with its tail between its legs.

Lol, I'm not afraid to admit that I would run away from incest. Maybe you would like it.

Typical liberal: when you're losing an argument, you accuse your opponent of some kind of foulness. Then you'll wine like a baby if I apply the labels to you that accurately describe you.

I don't think I lost any arguments. I think my points still stand. You have not refuted any of them except to say they are both "adults." I already told you that the girl was only 16 years old. You admitted you see a problem with it.

As I said previously, you will continue failing to get the point. You're too stupid to bother arguing with.

I don't think you even know what your "point" is anymore. Lol! Here you are sticking up for incest!!! Disgusting and shameful!

 

[bripat9643]

Well, you're still wrong because when people who are related that have transmissible genetic defects have children, the defects are many times more likely to be transmitted.

And if it was decided that those risks were so great what we would deny them would be sexual relations, not marriage, especially if they could not produce children.

Huh? Are you saying the government can prevent people from having sex?

It's not like we don't already. Lock one up and they won't be getting it on.

No, the government does not lock up consenting adults for having sex.

Incest is illegal in many states with good reason. Because, as I explained to you earlier, but you failed to understand, there is a HUGE potential for abuse in such relationships.

I failed to understand nothing. It's not illegal between consenting adults. It's illegal only when committed when one of the parties is not of legal age.

You keep trying to bring up issues and constraints that aren't relevant to my hypothetical question. I'm not talking about people who aren't of legal age. I'm talking about adults. It's legal for them to have sex, so why isn't legal for them to marry?

There's also a reason that gays were not previously allowed to marry. It's the fact that they can't reproduce.

 

[bripat9643]

That's right, run away like a scarred little puppy with its tail between its legs.

Lol, I'm not afraid to admit that I would run away from incest. Maybe you would like it.

Typical liberal: when you're losing an argument, you accuse your opponent of some kind of foulness. Then you'll wine like a baby if I apply the labels to you that accurately describe you.

I don't think I lost any arguments. I think my points still stand. You have not refuted any of them except to say they are both "adults." I already told you that the girl was only 16 years old. You admitted you see a problem with it.

As I said previously, you will continue failing to get the point. You're too stupid to bother arguing with.

I don't think you even know what your "point" is anymore. Lol! Here you are sticking up for incest!!! Disgusting and shameful!

No you're the one who can't follow an argument. You keep trying to derail it by bringing up relations between a minor and an adult. The question is why shouldn't two adults be allowed to get married if they are related? You haven't managed an answer yet.

 

[bripat9643]

That's right, run away like a scarred little puppy with its tail between its legs.

Lol, I'm not afraid to admit that I would run away from incest. Maybe you would like it.

Typical liberal: when you're losing an argument, you accuse your opponent of some kind of foulness. Then you'll wine like a baby if I apply the labels to you that accurately describe you.

I don't think I lost any arguments. I think my points still stand. You have not refuted any of them except to say they are both "adults." I already told you that the girl was only 16 years old. You admitted you see a problem with it.

As I said previously, you will continue failing to get the point. You're too stupid to bother arguing with.

No that would be you who is stupid and incredibly ignorant, not to mention lacking any integrity at all. A poor excuse for a man.

ROFL! The irony of that is just precious.

 

[Lakhota]

 

[ChrisL]

And if it was decided that those risks were so great what we would deny them would be sexual relations, not marriage, especially if they could not produce children.

Huh? Are you saying the government can prevent people from having sex?

It's not like we don't already. Lock one up and they won't be getting it on.

No, the government does not lock up consenting adults for having sex.

Incest is illegal in many states with good reason. Because, as I explained to you earlier, but you failed to understand, there is a HUGE potential for abuse in such relationships.

I failed to understand nothing. It's not illegal between consenting adults. It's illegal only when committed when one of the parties is not of legal age.

You keep trying to bring up issues and constraints that aren't relevant to my hypothetical question. I'm not talking about people who aren't of legal age. I'm talking about adults. It's legal for them to have sex, so why isn't legal for them to marry?

There's also a reason that gays were not previously allowed to marry. It's the fact that they can't reproduce.

Yes I have told you why, right in the post you responded to. Why in the HELL do you keep saying it isn't illegal. It IS illegal.


http://www.ndaa.org/pdf/Incest Statutes 2013.pdf

Incest Laws in the United States SexInfo Online

 

[ChrisL]

Lol, I'm not afraid to admit that I would run away from incest. Maybe you would like it.

Typical liberal: when you're losing an argument, you accuse your opponent of some kind of foulness. Then you'll wine like a baby if I apply the labels to you that accurately describe you.

I don't think I lost any arguments. I think my points still stand. You have not refuted any of them except to say they are both "adults." I already told you that the girl was only 16 years old. You admitted you see a problem with it.

As I said previously, you will continue failing to get the point. You're too stupid to bother arguing with.

No that would be you who is stupid and incredibly ignorant, not to mention lacking any integrity at all. A poor excuse for a man.

ROFL! The irony of that is just precious.

What irony? Point out any irony you see there, since YOU are definitely in the wrong here, not to mention totally disgusting.

 

[Plasmaball]

i guess im supposed to be outraged or something over this?

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

And if it was decided that those risks were so great what we would deny them would be sexual relations, not marriage, especially if they could not produce children.

Huh? Are you saying the government can prevent people from having sex?

It's not like we don't already. Lock one up and they won't be getting it on.

No, the government does not lock up consenting adults for having sex.

Incest is illegal in many states with good reason. Because, as I explained to you earlier, but you failed to understand, there is a HUGE potential for abuse in such relationships.

I failed to understand nothing. It's not illegal between consenting adults. It's illegal only when committed when one of the parties is not of legal age.

You keep trying to bring up issues and constraints that aren't relevant to my hypothetical question. I'm not talking about people who aren't of legal age. I'm talking about adults. It's legal for them to have sex, so why isn't legal for them to marry?

There's also a reason that gays were not previously allowed to marry. It's the fact that they can't reproduce.

Marriage is the joining of one man and one woman and that is without regard to the sexually abnormal who 'feel' that they will FINALLY be 'legitimate', if they can just 'get married'.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Threads Merged.

 

[bodecea]

Huh? Are you saying the government can prevent people from having sex?

It's not like we don't already. Lock one up and they won't be getting it on.

No, the government does not lock up consenting adults for having sex.

Incest is illegal in many states with good reason. Because, as I explained to you earlier, but you failed to understand, there is a HUGE potential for abuse in such relationships.

I failed to understand nothing. It's not illegal between consenting adults. It's illegal only when committed when one of the parties is not of legal age.

You keep trying to bring up issues and constraints that aren't relevant to my hypothetical question. I'm not talking about people who aren't of legal age. I'm talking about adults. It's legal for them to have sex, so why isn't legal for them to marry?

There's also a reason that gays were not previously allowed to marry. It's the fact that they can't reproduce.

Marriage is the joining of one man and one woman and that is without regard to the sexually abnormal who 'feel' that they will FINALLY be 'legitimate', if they can just 'get married'.

Not limited to that anymore.

 

[bripat9643]

It's not like we don't already. Lock one up and they won't be getting it on.

No, the government does not lock up consenting adults for having sex.

Incest is illegal in many states with good reason. Because, as I explained to you earlier, but you failed to understand, there is a HUGE potential for abuse in such relationships.

I failed to understand nothing. It's not illegal between consenting adults. It's illegal only when committed when one of the parties is not of legal age.

You keep trying to bring up issues and constraints that aren't relevant to my hypothetical question. I'm not talking about people who aren't of legal age. I'm talking about adults. It's legal for them to have sex, so why isn't legal for them to marry?

There's also a reason that gays were not previously allowed to marry. It's the fact that they can't reproduce.

Marriage is the joining of one man and one woman and that is without regard to the sexually abnormal who 'feel' that they will FINALLY be 'legitimate', if they can just 'get married'.

Not limited to that anymore.

Yes it is. The term "gay marriage" is an oxymoron. It will always be a joke, and no one will ever take it seriously.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

No, the government does not lock up consenting adults for having sex.

Incest is illegal in many states with good reason. Because, as I explained to you earlier, but you failed to understand, there is a HUGE potential for abuse in such relationships.

I failed to understand nothing. It's not illegal between consenting adults. It's illegal only when committed when one of the parties is not of legal age.

You keep trying to bring up issues and constraints that aren't relevant to my hypothetical question. I'm not talking about people who aren't of legal age. I'm talking about adults. It's legal for them to have sex, so why isn't legal for them to marry?

There's also a reason that gays were not previously allowed to marry. It's the fact that they can't reproduce.

Marriage is the joining of one man and one woman and that is without regard to the sexually abnormal who 'feel' that they will FINALLY be 'legitimate', if they can just 'get married'.

Not limited to that anymore.

Yes it is. The term "gay marriage" is an oxymoron. It will always be a joke, and no one will ever take it seriously.

Most of the country already takes it seriously my little infant.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

Incest is certainly more natural than homosexuality, so libs shouldn't have a problem.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Incest is certainly more natural than homosexuality, so libs shouldn't have a problem.

As long as you are of age, **** your brains out, just don't stick us with the bill for the morons you create like Palin's drooler.