Play Free War Battle Games Online, Multiplayer Games, Strategy Games, Top MMORPG

aister · **Posted:** Wed Jan 25, 2012 7:40 pm

Did I say anything about sex and baby?

Why do u guys keep associating something this simple to such things as sex and baby?

Such things such as forcing the other to have sex or "luring" the other, is always illegal, no matter if it's incest or not.

Wat I'm debating is about love, the true love (not just a family love) between two family members, be it brother-sister or cousin. And sex is just a follow-up.

And plus, the deformed baby problem.

I've said in tons of time before when I started debating, that the two parties should have full, scientific and psychologic information about their status, such as can't have kids, or kids will have a high chance of deformation. And then let them decide for themselves if they still want to continue it despite those facts.

The same to every other unusual kind of love that is or will exist.

As I said, times ago, ppl aren't allowed to marry the same gender, or different race, different religion, some place didn't allow marriage between ppl from two different villages, and today there are still places that see love between younger man and older woman is not acceptable.

So tell me, why is it that ppl were prohibited from those kind of love? Did they think that those kind of love are wrong, immoral, sick? And how do u feel about those now?

I said it already, but now I'll say it again, I don't care who u love, I don't care about their age, gender, religion, personality, social status, or their relationship to you or even if it's a robot or an immaginary character that you or someone thought of. As long as you really love him/her and really understand everything about that kind love, I don't see any problem.

hegemonic · **Posted:** Wed Jan 25, 2012 8:33 pm

vaultdweller101 wrote:

And surely you will be here for all eternity, explaining this to all the people in the world, so they understand its not for babies or anything serious. And after that ride a black schoolbus and go up the rainbow. This isnt a fairy tale here: you might understand how to deal with a legal incest, but the ppl in the future wont have the same mentality we do. They will be born in a world where humping absolutely any1 not under age, as long as they consent, is legal. Take the absurdness of the idea away: think about what could very possibly happen.

Erm Okay? I don't mind.

Quote:

1- They WOULD have babies. Seriously, you think there wont be crazies out there nowadays that don't have grandsons with their daughters already? Even when its not legal? Will everyone be as "sane" as you to obey this "rule"?

I never suggested a rule. I would suggest that a 'rule' wouldn't stop it. It will happen either way, so why persecute. More importantly, why debate? This isn't the debate in question.

Quote:

2- Insecure? You bet were insecure! How can you be so sure that this wont lead to worse consecuences, either in the long run or even inmediately? Im afraid of a world in which everything would be ok. I mean, people already think it is, and look where we are... not enough censored words can described how messed up we ALL are.

Not an argument. What you are afraid of does not constitute a moral agenda. If you have issue I will deal with them specifically.

Quote:

3- Its funny, as not many ppl here think this theme is funny. I for one think its worrying. Even when Im not surprised that a lot of ppl just dont give a damn for anything beyond their nose, it worries me if they are the most.

But why? No one is making you do anything? Most[ people think like you, and most go with what you say,

Quote:

And btw, the ones who associated this with other limited and controversial taboos of the past wasnt us (the oposition). Most of the ones on this side have steered clear of that, because its not the same. The law against incest is, by no means, regarding any group as inferior, in absolutely any way. What does is put a boundary between hurtful behavior and "acceptable" behavior.

Hurtful, only potentially, to a child. That is very removed. I will debate elsewhere but not here.

I would reply to the rest, but why?

rederoin · **Posted:** Thu Jan 26, 2012 1:22 am

vaultdweller101 wrote:

1- They WOULD have babies. Seriously, you think there wont be crazies out there nowadays that dont have grandsons with their daughters already? Even when its not legal? Will everyone be as "sane" as you to obey this "rule"?
Keep the whole getting babies part illegal. Problem (Want to be allies? Sometimes I like to pretend I am a princess riding a pony..) solved.

2- Insecure? You bet were insecure! How can you be so sure that this wont lead to worse consecuences, either in the long run or even inmediately? Im afraid of a world in which everything would be ok. I mean, people already think it is, and look where we are... not enough censored words can described how messed up we ALL are.
1 word : freedom. Just becease you think something is "messed up" does not mean it should get banned. If it acteally harms people, then it should get banned. People also think porn is messed up, would it be okay if we banned that?

tellerofpointedstones · **Joined:** Mon Dec 14, 2009 9:25 pm **Posts:** 2445

Love how all my post are ignored... But meh. I'll agree with red on this topic for sure 100%

mfreak · **Posted:** Thu Jan 26, 2012 6:40 am

Quote:

I was debating this at the start, then got distracted. I have come back and it is the same debate. It isn't even s if it is incommensurable, it is just a continuous baseless assertion of opinion for the most part.

As I can summarise it, the following are the main objections;

1) It results in funny babies.

Response is that this debate is about sex and not procreation so this objection is null and void. You may argue around this, but your objection is weaker (in a philosophical sense) if it is limited to child bearing cases.

From this defenders can either preclude procreation from their respective defences, or enter a whole new debate. Either way that is not the discussion here.

2) It is sick/immoral/weird/not what I like.

Response is get over yourself. Forgetting procreation, or at least placing it in parenthesis for the reasons stated above, it is harmless. Reductio ad absurdum response will relate to gay relations, age gaps, interracial relations or other limited and perceived cultural taboos.

Essentially it doesn't matter. If you feel that you need to exclaim how 'sick' it is you are either very religious and saving us from ourselves, or very insecure. If you harp on about child rearing then you are parroting a tired and irrelevant old diatribe without reading the scope and limitations of this debate.

Nuff said?

That.

I dont understand why most dont get the fact that this is all we are debating about. The question is simple: Should sex with relatives be considered illegal? If so WHY?

Why would you send someone to jail, about something YOU dont agree with, when you are not even affected by it? If you think its sick, disgusting or inhuman, dont do it. No one is forcing you to. You dont even need to associate yourselves with people like that. But what right does anyone have to send someone to jail for having sex with a relative?

Secondly, how would you prove someone actually commited incest even now? Word of mouth doesnt fly in a court of law. How effective is the illegal status now and how will it make things worse, if its legalized? I hope you guys understand what the difference between legal and illegal is? Its not the same as right and wrong. Or moral and immoral.

And Vault. You should stop going to church. :lol:

SnOwDoG · **Joined:** Tue Jul 27, 2010 12:09 am **Posts:** 476

rederoin wrote:

I'll be going with "yes" on this one.
Anybody opposes this?

SERIOUSLY!!! I do not even know why I am replying to this thread because I feel dumber for reading it. How can you even think of posting such a post.

tellerofpointedstones · **Joined:** Mon Dec 14, 2009 9:25 pm **Posts:** 2445

For people like me to agree on it.

rederoin · **Posted:** Thu Jan 26, 2012 10:04 am

SnOwDoG wrote:

rederoin wrote:

I'll be going with "yes" on this one.
Anybody opposes this?

SERIOUSLY!!! I do not even know why I am replying to this thread because I feel dumber for reading it. How can you even think of posting such a post.

Becease I support freedom.
If you're not going to debate, don't post.

tellerofpointedstones wrote:

Love how all my post are ignored... But meh. I'll agree with red on this topic for sure 100%

<3

SnOwDoG · **Joined:** Tue Jul 27, 2010 12:09 am **Posts:** 476

Not for nothing, I am all for freedom. Lets face reality, people (royalty) have been keeping it in the family for ages. Personally, I feel it is careless and selfish. Lets not ignore all of the potential side effects that can come along with it. That is just my humble opinion. My previous comment on this was one out of shock

anarchy69x · **Joined:** Sun Sep 27, 2009 11:14 pm **Posts:** 13

Didn't bother reading all the posts the title alone is clear enough for me. So basically what you're saying is if it was legal you'd get your own mother pregnant? What would your motive be for this? What would you think of your offspring? What do you think of the impact on the population doing this?

You're all ignorant to think having sex with a direct relative is a symbol of being "free". It's illegal cause there are harmful effects both physically and mentally. Procreation is what runs this world, obviously. But do you not think of the side effects of procreating with direct relatives?

Incest as I hope all of you posting here knows that it's odds of giving the baby a bevy of disorders that I personally do not feel need to be even more incorporated into society more so than it even is now. Sounds harsh but I believe in a productive society.

However, I see that majority of you are speaking more to the point of making it legal to have sex with a relative and not the baby part. What's the point of having sex if it's not for procreating? Are you ignorant enough to realize that any sort of penetration between a man and a woman ALWAYS has a chance to conceive regardless of protection.

I do not care if it's my personal opinion or immoral it's just a fact that incest leads to more harm than good. Which is why majority of laws are made and you're foolish to think it's "freedom" to have the opportunity to do what you want sometimes. I'm the first person to be against laws and rules but even common sense shows that incest should never be legal or considered an option.

About all that is needed to say on this topic, lost lots of respect for all the people showing support for this. Wish I could call each of your mothers and tell them how disgusting you all are. I know they would have never taught you anything like this at all.

Should incest be legal?