Wuestion
QuoteWuestion
Incest probably due to complications with having kids.Define any other type of relationship. If you mean stuff like children or animals then it's an issue of consent.
Quote from: Simseoh on March 30, 2016, 02:14:07 PMIncest probably due to complications with having kids.Define any other type of relationship. If you mean stuff like children or animals then it's an issue of consent.Gay people have complications with kids too lolOther relationships could be with animals, kids, and inanimate objectsYou're right Consent would be the issue here but then there's polygamy And mental/physically impaired people getting married which could have ramifications on the kids too
Gay people can't have kids, but they can adopt/IVF or whatever. The issue with incest is when you get a family member pregnant and the kid has genuine disabilities which could have been avoided by not having sex, that doesn't happen with gay couples, because they can't have kids.You could argue that incest couples just don't have kids, but that wouldn't work because it would happen, just like accidents happen with regular couples.
Polygamy is consent based as well, but the truth is it's not much of an issue for society at the moment, and that's probably the reason for a lot of other stuff as well.Very few in society care about polygamy, so there is no push behind a societal change that becomes accepting of it.
I'm talking about the raising of adopted childrenThere's obviously a difference in the upbringing of a child when you have gay vs traditional couples
Quote from: Simseoh on March 30, 2016, 02:38:57 PMGay people can't have kids, but they can adopt/IVF or whatever. The issue with incest is when you get a family member pregnant and the kid has genuine disabilities which could have been avoided by not having sex, that doesn't happen with gay couples, because they can't have kids.You could argue that incest couples just don't have kids, but that wouldn't work because it would happen, just like accidents happen with regular couples.I'm talking about the raising of adopted childrenThere's obviously a difference in the upbringing of a child when you have gay vs traditional couplesAnd there are plenty of ways for incest couples to prevent pregnancyVasectomy, tubes tied, condoms, birth control, ectWould it be an issue if kids were taken out of the equation?
QuotePolygamy is consent based as well, but the truth is it's not much of an issue for society at the moment, and that's probably the reason for a lot of other stuff as well.Very few in society care about polygamy, so there is no push behind a societal change that becomes accepting of it.Well even soIt's a principle argument Where do we draw the line?
Obviously the whole "Age of consent, minds not developed enough" thing, but that also raises the question: How come we deem them able to consent to sexual intercourse to people their own age (I'm talking children who were old enough to take Sex Ed in HS) but not towards anyone older?
Because high school flings are usually innocentWhereas older people tend to take advantage of kids BesidesHigh school flings are just high school flings whereas adults are trying to make something moreKids can't make decisions that serious
As long as they take adequate precautions against pregnancy, or are prepared to raise a child with disabilities, I really don't have an issue here. As long as everyone is concenting and adult, what I personally find icky shouldn't play into what is legal and illegal.
It's not wrong.It's only wrong when they have children, but that goes for everybody.
Incest isn't wrong, neither is polygamy. Any kind of consensual relationship can't be moral or immoral.
That's what I said in the following sentence. Quote from: Precious Tritium on March 30, 2016, 05:13:30 PMBecause high school flings are usually innocentWhereas older people tend to take advantage of kids BesidesHigh school flings are just high school flings whereas adults are trying to make something moreKids can't make decisions that serious
So why would you ask a wuestion you answered??
If their was no probability of kids I would definitely say it would be a lot more acceptable for incest couples to be together. In terms of upbringing, I honestly don't think there's that much of a difference. Shitty parents are shitty no matter what the sexuality, I didn't even consider that an issue, it was mainly about having disabled children.There's also people who would argue that generations of inbreeding isn't bad no matter what scientific evidence you show them, so they'll carrying on inbreeding.
The line is drawn in history, if it was deemed wrong in the past, and there's been no change in opinions on it over time, it's probably still seen as bad. I imagine polygamy specifically is something to do with religion.I have no issues with polygamy given everyone is consenting, like I said before, it's about society caring, and they don't.
For something to be morally wrong, non-consenting others have to be involved. There's nothing wrong with incest in any way, and you're backwards if you think there is.
Quote from: SecondClass on March 30, 2016, 05:17:56 PMFor something to be morally wrong, non-consenting others have to be involved. There's nothing wrong with incest in any way, and you're backwards if you think there is.So consent is the only measure for morality??
Quote from: Precious Tritium on March 30, 2016, 05:28:25 PMQuote from: SecondClass on March 30, 2016, 05:17:56 PMFor something to be morally wrong, non-consenting others have to be involved. There's nothing wrong with incest in any way, and you're backwards if you think there is.So consent is the only measure for morality??Um, duh. Especially when dealing with things that can't give consent. But when you're dealing with humans, it's pretty cut and dry.
Quote from: SecondClass on March 30, 2016, 05:30:07 PMQuote from: Precious Tritium on March 30, 2016, 05:28:25 PMQuote from: SecondClass on March 30, 2016, 05:17:56 PMFor something to be morally wrong, non-consenting others have to be involved. There's nothing wrong with incest in any way, and you're backwards if you think there is.So consent is the only measure for morality??Um, duh. Especially when dealing with things that can't give consent. But when you're dealing with humans, it's pretty cut and dry.But a parent's job, the very definition of parenthood, is to take care of your child and make sure they grow up into a good personSo that would be ok to destroy in the name of consent?
You guys actually think there's nothing morally wrong with incest?
Quote from: Precious Tritium on March 30, 2016, 06:25:33 PMQuote from: SecondClass on March 30, 2016, 05:30:07 PMQuote from: Precious Tritium on March 30, 2016, 05:28:25 PMQuote from: SecondClass on March 30, 2016, 05:17:56 PMFor something to be morally wrong, non-consenting others have to be involved. There's nothing wrong with incest in any way, and you're backwards if you think there is.So consent is the only measure for morality??Um, duh. Especially when dealing with things that can't give consent. But when you're dealing with humans, it's pretty cut and dry.But a parent's job, the very definition of parenthood, is to take care of your child and make sure they grow up into a good personSo that would be ok to destroy in the name of consent?Are you trolling? Gay, single-parent, and polygamous households can all raise children just as well as standard ones. Is it more work? Probably. But a someone who is able to express their love and be themselves is going to be a better, happier parent than someone who's forced to repress themselves and be stuck in a loveless marriage. The fact you think the second option is preferable to the child is laughable and cruel.
Wuestion
