Jump to content

Welcome to FutureTimeline.forum
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!

These ads will disappear if you register on the forum

Photo

Do you think incest and polygamy will be legalized?


  • Please log in to reply
87 replies to this topic

Poll: Do you think incest and polygamy will be legalized? (52 member(s) have cast votes)

Will incest and polygamy be legalized in the future?

  1. Yes (26 votes [50.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 50.00%

  2. No (9 votes [17.31%])

    Percentage of vote: 17.31%

  3. Only incest (1 votes [1.92%])

    Percentage of vote: 1.92%

  4. Only polygamy (16 votes [30.77%])

    Percentage of vote: 30.77%

Should in your opinion be incest and polygamy legalized?

  1. Yes (22 votes [42.31%])

    Percentage of vote: 42.31%

  2. No (9 votes [17.31%])

    Percentage of vote: 17.31%

  3. Only incest (2 votes [3.85%])

    Percentage of vote: 3.85%

  4. Only polygamy (19 votes [36.54%])

    Percentage of vote: 36.54%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#21
Cosmic Cat

Cosmic Cat

    Hibernating

  • Validating
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,345 posts
  • Location-

I hope polygamy will be legalized and acceptable even in the west. I always dreamed to have multiple wives.

...

#22
GottSchreit

GottSchreit

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 16 posts
  • LocationThe United States of America

---



#23
GottSchreit

GottSchreit

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 16 posts
  • LocationThe United States of America

I hope polygamy will be legalized and acceptable even in the west. I always dreamed to have multiple wives.

 

The question is, do multiple wives dream of having you?


  • EVanimations likes this

#24
TheAsianGuy_LOL

TheAsianGuy_LOL

    What's Up Homies

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 963 posts
  • LocationThe Stars of Which to be Settled

 

I hope polygamy will be legalized and acceptable even in the west. I always dreamed to have multiple wives.

 

The question is, do multiple wives dream of having you?

 

^ This. 

I do believe the both incest and polygamy will be legal in the future. With genetic mods and VR, they wouldn't be much of a problem. IMHO, I agree on only incest however. No, I don't have sexual relations or feelings with my own relatives, but in the future, people may choose to fall in love with their siblings or cousins if they happen too (like in the many news of it) and because of genetic mods, won't lead to genetic mutations. I agree with GottSchreit's opinion on polygamy, they won't all love you and it's terrible. If I had a girl, I would love her with my life. 


  • GottSchreit likes this

"We know Everything, but not Everything"~ Me

"Don't question what I know, question what I don't know."~ Me

"Fear kills more dreams than failure ever will"~Italian UFO


#25
GottSchreit

GottSchreit

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 16 posts
  • LocationThe United States of America

For reference, I think that the main argument that opponents of legalized incest use is that 95% or 99% or 99.9% of all incestuous relationships are non-consensual (and by this, they are also including consensual relationships which are only due to attachment syndrome).

 

First of all, the actual rate of sexual abuse in even the US is unknown, because reporting and prosecution are not always pursued (unfortunately).

 

Second, I've rarely heard that argument, and it doesn't make much sense. Why should some people have to suffer because other people are hurting others? They're unrelated groups, and it's discriminatory to lump them together. The two groups would also probably love to differentiate themselves for us: most victims feel like they're trapped, but aren't confused about it being what they want, and most people in consensual relationships aren't confused either. Pedophilia would still be illegal, and that line is much easier to draw between two groups. Just look at their ages.

 

Third, there's no evidence of that. Recent work has actually shown that sibling sexual abuse is more common than parental sexual abuse, and surveys in the 80s showed that 15% of college students surveyed had had sexual contact with a sibling, and only 30% of them were involved non-consensually. That puts it at roughly 11% that were consensual. "Incest" laws criminalize all sexual contact with relatives, including youth experimentation, and reunited family having sex when they're all at least middle aged. Given that sibling abuse appears to be more common, and what evidence we do have shows that it's happened to only about 5% of the population, that puts parental abuse at less than that, which isn't surprising. A lot of abuse is not by family members, but by outsiders who are let into the family, or are given excess trust in the community - step-parents, boyfriends, religious authority figures, teachers, etc.

 

Also, if you do a cursory search on the internet, you can find plenty of cases of consensual relationships (who are inevitably only a fraction of the total number of consensual relationships, because most won't be talking about it even on the internet). The stigma, and in some places crushing legal consequences, make accurate psychological and genetic surveys of the population borderline impossible. The mere thought of leaving themselves open to outing makes most consanguineous couples piss themselves, and the few academics who've even insinuated that they're studying consensual sex between relatives have their careers threatened.


  • Futurist likes this

#26
GottSchreit

GottSchreit

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 16 posts
  • LocationThe United States of America

 

 

I hope polygamy will be legalized and acceptable even in the west. I always dreamed to have multiple wives.

 

The question is, do multiple wives dream of having you?

 

^ This. 

I do believe the both incest and polygamy will be legal in the future. With genetic mods and VR, they wouldn't be much of a problem. IMHO, I agree on only incest however. No, I don't have sexual relations or feelings with my own relatives, but in the future, people may choose to fall in love with their siblings or cousins if they happen too (like in the many news of it) and because of genetic mods, won't lead to genetic mutations. I agree with GottSchreit's opinion on polygamy, they won't all love you and it's terrible. If I had a girl, I would love her with my life. 

 

 

This is actually an important point. The advent of (soon to be commercially viable) genetic engineering and gene therapy will completely break the relationship between the genes of the parents and the genes of their children. Under such circumstances, the whole idea of policing peoples sex and reproductive lives for eugenic reasons is ridiculous.


  • TheAsianGuy_LOL likes this

#27
lechwall

lechwall

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 172 posts
  • LocationSunny England

 

 

Surveys in the 80s showed that 15% of college students surveyed had had sexual contact with a sibling, and only 30% of them were involved non-consensually.

 

Bullshit


"The future will be better tomorrow.  If we do not succeed, then we run the risk of failure.   For NASA, space is still a high priority. The Holocaust was an obscene period in our nation's history. No, not our nation's, but in World War II. I mean, we all lived in this century. I didn't live in this century, but in this century's history. Republicans understand the importance of bondage between a mother and child. We're going to have the best-educated American people in the world."  Dan Quayle

 


#28
Ryan94

Ryan94

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 439 posts
I can't believe you sick f*cks want incest legalised. (12 out of 21 voters think incest should be legalised as of when i'm writing this). Just because it's 'between two consenting adults' (as it is often repeated here), doesn't make it right. This is between many consenting adults. Want this legalised? http://mobile.news.c...v-1226777979030

#29
OrbitalResonance

OrbitalResonance

    Cosmic Emperor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,224 posts
  • LocationDeep Space

Never to incest. But normalize polyamory.

 

Relationship policy should be by consent. But incest is the exception because of genetic defects and an evolutionary implanted emotional abhoration of it. Plus we have a duty to the potential offspring to limit potential social and physical deformities.


We make our world significant by the courage of our questions and the depth of our answers. - Carl Sagan


#30
Cosmic Cat

Cosmic Cat

    Hibernating

  • Validating
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,345 posts
  • Location-

If incest is legalized so should pedophilia! Man-Boy marriage rights for all!

 

Posted Image



#31
GottSchreit

GottSchreit

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 16 posts
  • LocationThe United States of America

 

 

Surveys in the 80s showed that 15% of college students surveyed had had sexual contact with a sibling, and only 30% of them were involved non-consensually.

 

Bullshit

 

Not bullshit:

 

Sex play among siblings and older or younger children

Researcher Floyd Martinson writes that because of the constant, close interaction of siblings, sex play may occur between them, often arising out of their liking for each other. A 1980 study of college students found 10% to 15% had had a childhood sexual experience with a brother or sister. 40% had been under the age of 8 at the time. The most common activities were touching and fondling of the genitals. 30% reported positive reactions and 30% reported negative reactions, but most did not have strong feelings about these experiences. Some type of coercion had been used in one quarter of the experiences; negative reactions tend to be associated with coercion.



#32
GottSchreit

GottSchreit

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 16 posts
  • LocationThe United States of America

If incest is legalized so should pedophilia! Man-Boy marriage rights for all!

 

Child abuse is not the same as consenting sex between adults who love each other. Do I really have to explain why we need to have a legal framework in place to allow minors who are sexually abused by adults to get help from the law in getting away from their abuser(s)? The picture makes it seem like a joke, in which case the equation of consenting adults to child molesters is disgusting. It makes me wonder if you really think that two 30 year old siblings having sex is morally equivalent to a child being raped...

 

Never to incest. But normalize polyamory.

 

Relationship policy should be by consent. But incest is the exception because of genetic defects and an evolutionary implanted emotional abhoration of it. Plus we have a duty to the potential offspring to limit potential social and physical deformities.

 

So you're a fan of eugenics then? It's acceptable for the state to throw people in jail for having sex when it may result in pregnancy, and that child may have deformities? Then I'm sure you'd approve of policies that throw anyone with known genetic diseases in jail. Maybe we should throw people in jail longer, the worse their disease is. And why should we stop? What counts as ensuring the population's genetic health? Should we doom babies to suffer, growing up with low intelligence that won't allow them to be competitive in the modern economy? Maybe we should ensure that people with low test scores aren't allowed to reproduce. Reductio ad absurdum. I could keep going, getting all the way back to the original use of eugenics: "sterilizing" poor people and racial minorities.

 

Besides, even then eugenicists knew that blanket bans on having children with close kin made no sense, because some families have more or fewer genetic diseases than the general population. "We have a duty"? Who are we to decide that a child with a heart problem, or a slightly weaker immune system, is unworthy of life or can't contribute value to society, when both their parents want them and are willing to raise them? That's some seriously paternalistic, potentially anti-democratic logic, which can be used to deny human dignity to people with any kind of disability.

 

And "emotional abhoration"? Since when is bigotry a justification for bigotry? Homophobia, a lack of exposure to normal homosexual couples, and peoples personal aversion to having sex with someone they have no attraction toward, contributed (and contributes) to straight people being disgusted by the thought of homosexual sex. It's a known psychological mechanism: personal disgust inspired by someone else's actions, combined with a desire to enforce conformity, result in taboos. By your logic, any place where homophobia is rampant should be justified in outlawing homosexual sex acts and making same-sex marriage illegal. I hope we base our laws and ethics on more solid things than purely what's popular.



#33
GottSchreit

GottSchreit

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 16 posts
  • LocationThe United States of America

I can't believe you sick f*cks want incest legalised. (12 out of 21 voters think incest should be legalised as of when i'm writing this). Just because it's 'between two consenting adults' (as it is often repeated here), doesn't make it right. This is between many consenting adults. Want this legalised? http://mobile.news.c...v-1226777979030

 

Do you really not see the distinction between two siblings meeting for the first time at 30 and falling in love and having vanilla sex, and a man being eaten alive? It's not only a question of consent, but also a question of harm. Who are two relatives, or two family members (remember, step- and adopted family count under some laws) actually hurting by being in a relationship (except for making you feel uncomfortable)? You mind your business, they mind theirs, and life goes on.

 

And trust me, it happens, and it may happen to your kids whether you like it or not. Just like homosexuality, even as a minority act, it's a fact of life. Given how people like you behave, they'd likely hide it from you. Are we really trying to run our society on the dictum, "Out of sight, out of mind"? Seems like a great way to crush good relationships and let bad ones fester.

 

There's still a debate to be had on whether someone should be legally allowed to consent to being cannibalized, but it's related to the ethics of euthanasia, not consanguineous sex and marriage. They are clearly separate issues. Just because the concept of "consent" pops up in both, does not mean they have complete overlap.

 

Anyway, you skipped a lot of the prior arguments. Most of the people in loving, consenting adult relationships with a relative didn't even grow up with that person. They're relatives, but not family. And many other people fall in love with step-siblings or adopted siblings - is that or isn't it "incest"? Some states consider it "incest", but still consider having sex with a relative you never grew up with "incest". Which is it then: family, or relatives? It can't be both and still make any sense. One implies social engineering, and the other implies eugenics.

 

And why isn't it "right"? Give an actual reason besides the fact that it's what you were told, and that you personally wouldn't do it. The consenting couples I've talked to, read about, and seen, are quite normal in every other way. (Though their lives are made hard by being beaten by parents, ostracized by friends, and forced into hiding from the law.) Many of them have perfectly happy, healthy children, and many of the others can't have children or don't want to.



#34
GottSchreit

GottSchreit

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 16 posts
  • LocationThe United States of America

 

Your statistic is also incredibly high, and smacks of stereotypes and not science. Of all the reasonably well done studies I've seen, the most pessimistic estimate for genetic problems for 1st degree relatives is 30%.
 
 
^Meta-analysis of genetic defects due to incest
 
Incest is not like other recessive characteristics, the risk of serious birth defects and premature death is about 42% of births with another 14% having mild retardation making over half of children born to first degree relatives have some kind of genetic defect
 
Posted Image

 

 

Ah, yes. I have seen pieces of this one around. (I appreciate the source, by the way.)

 

The section on 2nd and 1st degree consanguineous unions is taken from Bittles' chapter (2nd chapter) in "Inbreeding, Incest, and the Incest Taboo". One of the points to remember is that the "excess" rate of defect is ~30%, which is important because the control for Bittles' meta-analysis showed a defect rate of ~8%, which is higher than would be expected. I've seen other studies (some are sighted in the cousin studies of that very paper) with defect rates of 1-4% in the general population.

 

Also, they quote Bittles himself from that same meta-analysis saying that the data for anything closer than 1st cousins is highly dubious, since finding unbiased samples is nearly impossible given the current legal consequences in most places, the social stigma almost universally, and the general lack of academic motivation on the subject. He later on says that, if only those consanguineous couples are considered who had no mental or physical defects themselves, their children don't have a significantly higher rate of defect than the control group. The samples in those studies have an elevated proportion of people who were themselves mentally or physicall disabled (many, even most of those children are the result of abuse and rape, not consensual unions). The children were also frequently found out because of mental or physical problems which tipped off doctors. Just in general, loving, consenting adult relatives (closer than 3rd degree), who chose to have their baby or chose to carry it to term without abortion, and who are not themselves mentally or physically disabled or disturbed, are the hardest group to get in studies. They're almost impossible to find, and they gain nothing from taking part.

 

I'll just point out that in the cousin studies in that paper, which have much better samples, the rate of defect above the control group was only a few percentage points. Some of those in those studies were even cross-cousins, and so count as 2nd degree relatives. Despite that, we're asked to believe that when the degree of relation is one degree closer, the probability of defect explodes. I find that questionable, and the studies on the subject are acknowledged (sometimes by those doing the studies) to have little use for generalization.

 

None of that sounds like a sound basis for abusive, draconian punishments, blind social stigma, or marital discrimination. My other point also still stands, that a population wide statistic doesn't tell you jack about any individual couple's chances, given further knowledge of their genomes, lifestyles, and family history. Even if the probability actually was that high, it still would place them, as a population, at similar or lower risk than those with known dominant deleterious genes. (I know of a few 1st degree couples with several healthy children, not to mention that a purely genetic view of "inbreeding depression" violates current scientific knowledge.) Besides, I would question single studies with small, biased samples that show such alarmingly high rates over a single generation, given all the historical cases known of where several generations of 1st degree inbreeding had little to no effect. That's another thing mentioned in "Inbreeding, Incest, and the Incest Taboo": we have the mummies of Tutankhamen, his relatives, some ancestors, and other Pharaohs who were known offspring of siblings - several generations of siblings even - and no-one has found a regular patern of deformity. The results of consanguineous marriages over many generations are heavily dependent on what kind of gene-pool the original people were coming from.



#35
FutureOfToday

FutureOfToday

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,685 posts

I can't believe you sick f*cks want incest legalised. (12 out of 21 voters think incest should be legalised as of when i'm writing this). Just because it's 'between two consenting adults' (as it is often repeated here), doesn't make it right. This is between many consenting adults. Want this legalised?http://mobile.news.c...v-1226777979030

Bit daft to compare sex with cannibalism really, but even so, if people consent to that kind of thing, then sure. Why not? It's their body, they should be able to do with it as they please.

#36
OrbitalResonance

OrbitalResonance

    Cosmic Emperor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,224 posts
  • LocationDeep Space

 

If incest is legalized so should pedophilia! Man-Boy marriage rights for all!

 

Child abuse is not the same as consenting sex between adults who love each other. Do I really have to explain why we need to have a legal framework in place to allow minors who are sexually abused by adults to get help from the law in getting away from their abuser(s)? The picture makes it seem like a joke, in which case the equation of consenting adults to child molesters is disgusting. It makes me wonder if you really think that two 30 year old siblings having sex is morally equivalent to a child being raped...

 

Never to incest. But normalize polyamory.

 

Relationship policy should be by consent. But incest is the exception because of genetic defects and an evolutionary implanted emotional abhoration of it. Plus we have a duty to the potential offspring to limit potential social and physical deformities.

 

So you're a fan of eugenics then? It's acceptable for the state to throw people in jail for having sex when it may result in pregnancy, and that child may have deformities? Then I'm sure you'd approve of policies that throw anyone with known genetic diseases in jail. Maybe we should throw people in jail longer, the worse their disease is. And why should we stop? What counts as ensuring the population's genetic health? Should we doom babies to suffer, growing up with low intelligence that won't allow them to be competitive in the modern economy? Maybe we should ensure that people with low test scores aren't allowed to reproduce. Reductio ad absurdum. I could keep going, getting all the way back to the original use of eugenics: "sterilizing" poor people and racial minorities.

 

Besides, even then eugenicists knew that blanket bans on having children with close kin made no sense, because some families have more or fewer genetic diseases than the general population. "We have a duty"? Who are we to decide that a child with a heart problem, or a slightly weaker immune system, is unworthy of life or can't contribute value to society, when both their parents want them and are willing to raise them? That's some seriously paternalistic, potentially anti-democratic logic, which can be used to deny human dignity to people with any kind of disability.

 

And "emotional abhoration"? Since when is bigotry a justification for bigotry? Homophobia, a lack of exposure to normal homosexual couples, and peoples personal aversion to having sex with someone they have no attraction toward, contributed (and contributes) to straight people being disgusted by the thought of homosexual sex. It's a known psychological mechanism: personal disgust inspired by someone else's actions, combined with a desire to enforce conformity, result in taboos. By your logic, any place where homophobia is rampant should be justified in outlawing homosexual sex acts and making same-sex marriage illegal. I hope we base our laws and ethics on more solid things than purely what's popular.

 

 

Yes, I am a fu!king Nazi. Don't you ever use slippery slope with me you small minded buffoon. Incest is immoral while polygamy and homosexuality are acceptable. My logic is one that measures consent and consideration for the end result. There will be a line drawn.


We make our world significant by the courage of our questions and the depth of our answers. - Carl Sagan


#37
Cosmic Cat

Cosmic Cat

    Hibernating

  • Validating
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,345 posts
  • Location-

 

If incest is legalized so should pedophilia! Man-Boy marriage rights for all!

 

Child abuse is not the same as consenting sex between adults who love each other. Do I really have to explain why we need to have a legal framework in place to allow minors who are sexually abused by adults to get help from the law in getting away from their abuser(s)? The picture makes it seem like a joke, in which case the equation of consenting adults to child molesters is disgusting. It makes me wonder if you really think that two 30 year old siblings having sex is morally equivalent to a child being raped...

 

 

Hey, I'm 15. I can choose my decisions. I am proof that I can consent with having sex with a 45 year old because I enjoy it and it seems more fun. It's not sexual abuse if I enjoy it and consent with it. I am proof that 14 and 15 year olds can consent.

 

See, this is the problem. With incest. A person falls in love with their sister or brother with the falsehood of being "in love" and "consent". I mean, if you want to have sex with your sister than go ahead. I don't care if it's behind closed doors. But the idea of everybody watching you while you and your sister shout it out in public is just despicable. There is a difference between gays and incestuous relationships need I remind you. In a gay relationship you have a variety of people you choose to marry and have sexual relationships. But with incest, you have sex with one person, it's not like you can move on right? There is no factual evidence that incestuous relationships are sexually orientated. Only pure bullshit of "Human rights, morality, they can love who they want". The truth is, the thing they are doing is not healthy and massively harmful to their mental state. Which, funny enough sounds a lot like pedophiles and consenting children doesn't it?



#38
Cosmic Cat

Cosmic Cat

    Hibernating

  • Validating
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,345 posts
  • Location-

 

I can't believe you sick f*cks want incest legalised. (12 out of 21 voters think incest should be legalised as of when i'm writing this).
Just because it's 'between two consenting adults' (as it is often repeated here), doesn't make it right.
This is between many consenting adults. Want this legalised?http://mobile.news.c...v-1226777979030

Bit daft to compare sex with cannibalism really, but even so, if people consent to that kind of thing, then sure. Why not? It's their body, they should be able to do with it as they please.

 

 

Yes. I enjoy suicide too.

 

Posted Image



#39
OrbitalResonance

OrbitalResonance

    Cosmic Emperor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,224 posts
  • LocationDeep Space

I need to further explain my logic as my response has been mainly emotional. This emotion is an evolutionary response because incest is evil on evolutionary terms. There is a driver in organisms that makes us want to spread our genes away from our relatives, otherwise genetic disaster could happen(recessive genes). Incest is counter to our goal of spreading our genes. It is immoral because it endangers our future generations. If this makes me a eugenicist, then I am a eugenicist in this regard.


We make our world significant by the courage of our questions and the depth of our answers. - Carl Sagan


#40
Ryan94

Ryan94

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 439 posts

 

I can't believe you sick f*cks want incest legalised. (12 out of 21 voters think incest should be legalised as of when i'm writing this). Just because it's 'between two consenting adults' (as it is often repeated here), doesn't make it right. This is between many consenting adults. Want this legalised? http://mobile.news.c...v-1226777979030

 

Do you really not see the distinction between two siblings meeting for the first time at 30 and falling in love and having vanilla sex, and a man being eaten alive? It's not only a question of consent, but also a question of harm. Who are two relatives, or two family members (remember, step- and adopted family count under some laws) actually hurting by being in a relationship (except for making you feel uncomfortable)? You mind your business, they mind theirs, and life goes on.

 

And trust me, it happens, and it may happen to your kids whether you like it or not. Just like homosexuality, even as a minority act, it's a fact of life. Given how people like you behave, they'd likely hide it from you. Are we really trying to run our society on the dictum, "Out of sight, out of mind"? Seems like a great way to crush good relationships and let bad ones fester.

 

There's still a debate to be had on whether someone should be legally allowed to consent to being cannibalized, but it's related to the ethics of euthanasia, not consanguineous sex and marriage. They are clearly separate issues. Just because the concept of "consent" pops up in both, does not mean they have complete overlap.

 

Anyway, you skipped a lot of the prior arguments. Most of the people in loving, consenting adult relationships with a relative didn't even grow up with that person. They're relatives, but not family. And many other people fall in love with step-siblings or adopted siblings - is that or isn't it "incest"? Some states consider it "incest", but still consider having sex with a relative you never grew up with "incest". Which is it then: family, or relatives? It can't be both and still make any sense. One implies social engineering, and the other implies eugenics.

 

And why isn't it "right"? Give an actual reason besides the fact that it's what you were told, and that you personally wouldn't do it. The consenting couples I've talked to, read about, and seen, are quite normal in every other way. (Though their lives are made hard by being beaten by parents, ostracized by friends, and forced into hiding from the law.) Many of them have perfectly happy, healthy children, and many of the others can't have children or don't want to.

 

Yeah, and two siblings, even though they were from the same parents, have never met each other until 30 - sounds really common!! -_-

 

Because having sex with one's sister/brother is as wrong as killing a sadist who enjoys being killed and eaten, and derives sexual pleasure out of it. And tell me why that isn't right, then? Why is killing hundreds of animals for a human's consumption fine, yet killing one human for the same purpose so wrong? 

 

I don't support cannibalism. I'm just showing you how ridiculous your argument is.

 

If you love your sister/brother. Tough. The end. Sorry rednecks.

 

Having sex with your cousin/distant relative isn't incest. Incest is having sex with immediate family members. You'll be demanding people to have the right to have sex with their pet dog or something next.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users