but isnt incest fading away?? is there actually more now?

1. I guess you haven't been listening. As this news seems to evidence that it's still around.

2. My issue was never about incest to begin with. It was about 2 consenting adults be allowed to do unto each other as they please; whether it be having sex with one's grandma, participating in auto-erotica asphyxiation, putting a gerbil in one's ass.

Just because it's fucked up doesn't mean they shouldn't have the liberty to do unto themselves as they wish.

3. It's suddenly become about you telling what other people should or shouldn't do. It's an arrogance that I'm most certainly willing to call-and-raise.

why are u making everything vague?
my question was if it was increasing or decreasing,
trying to make a point that if its decreasing (IMO i think it is[i dont have evidence]), that means that people are getting more and more close minded, so in ur means, the majority of society deserve to die. everyone in this thread who said thats fucked up should die.

in essence u urself is condeming one thing, and "allowing" another. (not that im allowing rape, pedophillia, etc)

oh shit, It's suddenly become about you telling what other people should or shouldn't do. It's an arrogance that I'm most certainly willing to call-and-raise.

ur avoiding my essential questions like, and even u admit that as a child, u cant blame a child if most* of society is against incest and he is just following.
its safe to say that more than 1 kid will make fun of this soon to be born. harm will be done to him. and to ur moral compass harm to a child is unacceptable so therefore this kid shouldnt be born.

Wow. You're a pretty big idiot. And here's why.

I'm not making anything vague. It's just been no argument that these things have always been a minority. Just like people who engage in homosexuality, BDSM sex, swinging, and whatever else people do nowadays.

Just because these groups do not follow the "majority" practice does not mean we should limit their liberties to that of the standard societal norm.

I think you've missed something there. Yes I've condemned one thing and allwed the other. Guess what, the line I drew is with physical harm in acts of rape and pedophilia in comparison to 2 consenting adults engaging in unusual sex.

So I don't know what this part of your argument is about but if you're trying to turn my argument against me, you're just shooting blanks there junior.


Oh yeah, if you are so concerned for a child's welfare with respect to "teasing." Maybe we should also bar heterosexual-but-social-outcast couples from procreating.

God knows we don't need any more geeky kids around. People will make fun of them no? People like you?


And yes, I've very well made fun of others in my youth. And is exactly the reason why I do what I'm doing. There's a lot of ground I have to make up for. However, as a Christian, you probably won't know what I'm talking about because all you do is pray to your God, ask forgiveness and all is good right? No need to right your wrongs ;)

Maybe that's why you and your 2 billion other christians can keep ridiculing others who don't follow suit.

u know that u said
are you calling ur self out? do u not see that ur drawing lines based on ur moral compass while ur telling me not to draw lines based on mine? srsly?

What the fuck kind of argument is that? Are you running out of steam? Is my shooting blanks assessment not too far off the truth?

Yes. Because short of criminal sex, my moral compass isn't restrictive or prejudiced.

"u know that u said" was the intro to my premise, not an argument itself. i dont see how my argument is shooting blanks. ur argument was that i shouldnt be judging other people, and i was pointing out that you were judging me.

criminal sex.....
incest is a crime in many places.
we live in a world of restrictions. maybe the world isnt the place for u.
open up ur mind.
do u condone polygamy? where do u stand on asian discipline, do u think its right for parents to hit their kids? prbbly not b/c u dont condone physical harm.
this argument will go nowhere becasue ur being a hypocrit.
Whatever u say to me, i can say the same back to you.
your argument in core is saying dont judge, but infact ur judging me.
ur telling me im arrogant, unintelligable, mathematically deserve to die. lol

Yeah... how does it feel? Do you think it's warranted? Not so good when the favour is returned isn't it. Or maybe you think judgement should only be one sided?

Criminal only to states who's laws are religiously influenced. You know, kind of like those states that deem it illegal for a woman to show any parts of her body other than her eyes. States that deem it's legal to rape one's wife as she's considered her husband's property.

Again, I'm not endorsing incest or any other unusual forms of copulation. I am endorsing that every individual can do unto themselves whatever they wish onto themselves.


Oh, and by the way, with respect to polygamy. If 1 woman shares her husband by choice, that's her right of choice. It is neither my place nor my concern to take that away from her. Unlike you.

And just in case you're wondering, there are women that exist that approve of sharing. You'd be surprised how big the swinging community is locally, and internationally and those who participate in it. They're not just restricted to your rural backwards countryside hick redneck ;) But of course, you may be a little bit too sheltered for this world.

would u let someone commit suicide infront of u? < if u answer yes, than ok. ur views are clearly very open and unrestrictive. i am close minded, i lose.
.

Spanking a child isn't what I consider harmful. Beating or abusing your child is. That's what I think about with respect to discipline.

Differences in opinion with respect to life & death are vastly different than differences in opinion with respect to sex; Or are you just wildly trying to reach a justification to prohibit now.

And with respect to your query, although no people would willingly push a healthy distraught person of a bridge, many a people have taken relatives who are comatose, brain damaged, close-to-death off of life support.

Though I wouldn't necessarily make the same decision for myself personally, there are many people who have and I have no qualms with their choices.

So yes, you lose. What else you got junior?

wasnt asking if u were gonna push, which is a murder. not talking about someone brain-dead, close to death sshit, knowing background.
not asking for qualms with other peoples choice. im asking about your choice.

a stranger standing infront of a bridge. ready to jump. ur the only person near him and he doesnt see u. would u try to pull him back? or would you give him the liberty to make his own decision on his life.

Of course, why wouldn't I try?

However if he still succeeds in his intentions though, it shouldn't be labelled as if it were my fault. It was his decision to follow through with it. Not mine. His life is neither mines nor your responsibility. It's his.

Anything else Einstein? Because you've gone wayyy off topic on this.

ur preventing his liberty of death in which u have focused so dearly upon.
how is that different than me trying to forbid incest. if they do go on im not gonna lose sleep. but i would rather have no incest vs have incest, as u would with life vs death.

edit. its an opinion and we all have one. doenst make me mathematically less deserving to live. and whats with the junior, einstein lol.

If you've missed the parrallel I was trying to make, that's is your shortcoming.

I was never preventing any liberties; of life or death or the other. Though I would strongly disagree with suicide, the ultimate decision is not mine to make. Just like I disagree with incest but it's not my decision to make what 2 other consenting adults can or cannot do to each other.

You for some reason have convinced yourself that it's yours to make for everyone else.

Yeah that's what you end with now but it sure is hell isn't how you started; and you certainly thought kids in unusual families are less deserving to live; as you've stated, they shouldn't even be born. See how your own dose of yourself felt?

Because you deserve the ridicule. If you were at all correct, society should've restricted your parents in having you, considering how much you're being teased right now. ;)

actually no because society wouldnt know how i would turn out based on my parents. however, my first post remains true in how the child to be born will have to call his family and a lot of people will frown upon it. tis world is not made for the child to be born. and that is how my first post started and its a fact + opinion.

u said that u would pull him back but the ultimate decision is not urs to make????? how do i understand that.
what do u mean i have convinced myself that its my decision to tell others what to do, maybe u understood it that way? do u see me goig to this couple and telling them not to do it? lol. get ur head out of ur ass. i said its better for the child not to be born in this world right now as u have stated that its better for me not to be born for this world.

i see where this is coming from.
u believe whatever someone type on revscene is the law.
actually everything ive typed here is an opinion whatnot and i was disagreeing with urs.
whether my opinion is a restrictive one and urs is a liberating one they are both opinions.
idiot.

everyone calm down. Let's just all put our hands in our pockets.

Exactly but only by people like you. People like me couldn't care less.

I've proven teasing happens regardless of whether you're from of an unusual circumstance, or a normal one. To decide upon others that due to the higher risk of unusuality, they should refrain from procreating is highly self-righteous.

Should we stop midgets from procreating lest they bear another midget and they get teased? Yes, I guess the world is better off without the likes of you.

(How does it feel when I've followed your same conviction of having someone thinking your existence probably should've been denied?) ;)

So are you backpeddling? Are you saying that it may not be the greatest idea but should they go through with it, all the power to them? Are you actually trying to say exactly what I've been saying? :)

You're only arguing "difference of opinion" at this point in time because you've seriously got nothing left in the tank.

* You've argued the immorality of incest - I countered with the liberty of 2 consenting adults to do unto themselves as they wish.

* You've argued kids being born into a life of adversity - I countered with other kids who are born into adversity but still shouldn't have had their life denied to them.

We've even gone off-topic too...

* You've argued my stance of disciplining children - I countered that discipline only until the point of abuse.

* You've argued regarding suicide - I countered that we have every responsibility to help others but not control others.

You're just grasping on straws now and hoping to win your argument not on merit, but by the last word. You're not fooling me with your last 3 posts.

Tsk tsk. That's not very Christian of you. Now you see why the weight of Christian values isn't regarded so highly by others?

i go off topic and argue in "difference in opinion" because this is what it is. your arguing based on ur opinions but ur saying you "proved it" lol. fallacies....

Here are the statements you've made but contradict each other.
I've said that this child is born with an abnormal family tree as a fact and that can be avoided. You "countered" with the chances of adversity.....
incest is unnatural. heightened chances of deformed body if a baby is had. (im not forgetting that this is a surrogate though)

It looked like you were thinking that my opinion meant that i will take action. I was only saying that its not. I will always disagree with incest and that was my point.

and in the end, i talk about difference of opinion because this argument is tiring and never ending. You can counter with your opinion and ill have my opinion ready to counter. hence i was trying to end it without "winner." not becaue i have nothing in the tank but we both have too many. and then ull probably reply with, "looks like you've ran out and your shooting blanks" which is also another opinion.

not to mention that you've admitted your attempts in teasing and riduculing me.
the very reason that made you say i deserve to die. lol

Actually, incest is not unnatural. You just need to do some research to see that animals will breed with whatever is convenient--male or female, related or not. The chance for birth defects does go up, but that doesn't mean that it's unnatural.

There is, however, the Westermarck Effect, which results in people having an aversion to becoming intimate with people they developed with. Ie: those who grew up together feel uncomfortable or awkward developing relationships with them. This may be an evolved response to the fragile human genome. Now that that's been said...


A) Some people don't care, some people do. This is fact. Those that do care are those who feel that ambivalence of things they don't like is equated to tacit approval. Ie: "If I don't say no, I'm saying yes". Which is a complete and total logical fallacy.

B) Everyone gets made fun of. This is fact. At one point or another, EVERYONE is the butt of SOME kind of joke. Yes, he's gonna have a fucked up family life and rough shit. But you know what? He (she?) was the product of a loving relationship and the parents ('cause they're white) are most likely going to say something like "Honey, no matter what happens, no matter what people say, We're your parents, and we love you. We want you to be happy and we'll always be here for you." Adversity, somehow, manages to often pull the best out of people. Funny how that goes. I know a lot of people of many denominations which have religious obligations to their children and family who fuck off and spend more time on "causes" or business rather than with their family.

C) Equating this issue to that of a man who is commiting suicide is bullshit. This kid (especially since s/he isn't the product of an incestuous sexual relationship) will have no genomic issues and will be perfectly healthy, parents' birth defects notwithstanding. This is yet another "If I don't say no I am saying yes" issues.

D) Everyone can only make their own choices. No matter how many laws we pass, people will make their own decisions. Look at Bountiful. Look at the crackheads on hastings. Look at Premier Gordo the drunk driver (who just passed more strict DD laws. I can taste the ironing). PEOPLE WILL DO WHATEVER THEY WANT TO DO LAWS OR NOT.

The biggest difference is that if it's legal, you can give people safer and better ways to do things.




As an aside, why is it illegal for me to tap my ex-step-mom? I mean, she's not even biologically related, but it's illegal even if we're both the age of consent. What bullshit!

retard alert

You've taken what I've been wanting to say in the last 3 pages and articulated it far better than I could ever have done with your one single post.


Midgets are unnatural. Are saying we should restrict their right to procreate in the off chance they produce another midget and subject it to a life of adversity?

You're still dodging that. Like many of the other comparisons I've made that you've completely ignored. :rolleyes:

No. You weren't just disagreeing. You were flat out condemning it to the point that you think no one should ever do it, and endorsing the restriction of rights for those who've engaged in such practice.

To say that you just have a difference in opinion is such a mild euphemism of the stance you took from the beginning of this discussion. Again, you're not fooling anyone. You're back pedaling.

It's funny that you call me out for the exact same thing you yourself stated that you and your 2 billion Christians would've done to a child born of unusual circumstance. What? You don't like you're own medicine? That's just too bad.

i thought i adressed that.
I do straight out condemn it. If disagreeing with it says something else than that, im sry i used the wrong words. If i can create a world law to stop it i would but i acknowledge the fact that i cant do shit about it. if sister and brother was having sex in germany, what can i do. But, this acknowledgment doesnt mean that i condone their liberty to incest.

Even graeme admits that its a fucked up family in statement B. which is what my first post points out.
Why create a 100% chance to bring a kid in a fucked up family when it can be avoided.
the key point being 100% compared to ur "counters" with chances. THIS is my main argument from the beginning. although we've gone astray.
Graeme_s C, i was seeking how far his statement of
goes.
and other comparisons u say i "ignored", i felt i answered with
your talking as if you make an opposing opinion, it makes u right.
what can i do about that?

My main argument is that this surrogate is 100% born in a fucked up family. Why do that when it can be avoided by not having the baby.

Graeme d: I am saying they can do what they want but only because i cant do anything to stop them. But this should not be seen as an agreement in their liberty to incest.

When I was a kid in grade 3, I had just been moved to a new school. I was nerdy, tall, I had no friends, no social skills, I had no idea of what was going on or what I had to do.

At one point, one kid called me a "bastard". I had no idea what this meant, so I looked it up in the dictionary that night.
That's me. My parents weren't married when I was born. In fact, they were never married. My mother has an ex-husband. My father has a wife and two ex-wives. As a result, I have both a step-mother and an ex-step-mother.

I was made fun of relentlessly. 20 years before I was born, children in my situation were made fun of even more often and powerfully. In many places in asia and around the world, you are seen as inferior if your parents had marital problems. So you're saying that children who are born out of wedlock or as products of affairs etc shouldn't be born? Just because they'll be ridiculed?

I was cut up, and I had a ridiculously unhappy childhood because of my situation. It was really tough for me living without a real male role model. But would I say "you know, I wish I wasn't born"? Fuck no.

If your main argument is that him being born in a fucked up family, then I think you need to reassess your argument. Ever watched Maury? Where three or four girls all have the same father for their children? What about divorcees, adoptees, orphans, mixed-race/language/culture kids?

Where's the line for you?


Let's look at a non-western example, shall we? There's a village which is located far far away from the Western World. In it, the people have had almost no exposure to electronics, culture, religion, patriarchy, etc. In their culture, men are not fathers of children. Men are not involved in any way in "fathering" or producing children. Men who have sex with women "allow the women to release children". As a result, they have no concept of non-matrilineal incest. A child is the child of the village, not of an individual man.

Are you condemning the entire village because of the possibility that they may end up in incestuous relationships? If so, what is your basis for the condemnation?
Posted via RS Mobile

1stly, there is no certainty that any child will be born into adversity. You're replacing probability with certainty because you and your 2 billion Christians would make life hell for people like them. In that respect, as I've said before, the problem is not them, the problem is you therefore the responsibility of resolution lies with you and not on others. If you cannot acknowledge that, then it is you who is inadequate, not them.

2ndly, if steps can be avoided for a child to be born of a life of certain adversity, infants conceived with defects "SHOULD" be aborted. Not "MAY", "SHOULD." And what of parents who have hereditary medical complications? Should they be restricted from procreation.

How about redneck Nazi white supremacist families? Surely any child born into that will be born into a life of adversity. Should we sanction a state mandate restricting their right to procreate?

Even I said myself I disagree with incest. It's the bolded part that is why we're in heavy discussion for the last 2 days.

My point is, who are you wish less liberty on others should they not follow your idealism? People wearing hikabs unsettle me because of my inate nature to be cautious with people who hide their identities. Should I wish less liberty on what one can wear or not wear specific to some individuals?

The point is: (And I'll bold it for you)
The idea of tresspassing on the rights of others when others have done nothing to tresspass on yours is highly pompous. What makes you so justified in not acknowledging the liberties of others?

You're showing your real intellectual capacity if that's all you really got out of his "Point B." Or maybe you're just picking out which segments in the arguments of others that you are willing to dwell and which ones to entirely ignore.

Well, I guess bottom line is, they'r happy, they'r not hurting anybody, let them be.