If You Support Gay Marriage, Then What About Polygamy and Incest?

[TyrantRaveAB]

Wow.
Gay marriage crushess moral integrity?
I think that ignorace does that. But that's just my opinion.

sorry, i dont think its ignorant to agree with something that makes no natural sense.

 

[Wade1]

I don't know. It makes economic sense, insofar as it seems to tend to boost the local economies wherever it's legalized. It makes sense with regard to the social fabric, insofar as it institutionally encourages stability, monogamy, and normative social behavior in all long-term relationships, not just heterosexual ones. It makes emotional sense because gay Americans who aren't designated as second-class citizens through separate-but-equal marital laws are happier, more secure, more productive and more bonded to and responsible to the community at large. It makes more sense with regard to societal well-being because a marital institution which encourages more stable monogamous relationships creates more two-parent families into which children might be adopted or raised. And it makes moral sense, because it helps to ensure that a married gay citizen might still be covered by insurance when he or she loses a job, or that he or she can visit their loved one in the hospital, or that he or she can be more secure in survivors' rights when that loved one dies.

 

[kopfhorer1]

gay marriage has no potential purpose. i believe all it does is crush moral integrity and opens the door to usher in things like incest and polygamy.

The purpose of any kind of marriage is to afford certain legal protections to all parties involved in a relationship (even as it imposes certain obligations on them).

As for gay marriage opening the door to incest and polygamy, what led you to the conclusion that gay marriage was a gateway to the latter two things?

Speaking of moral integrity, have you been watching what's been going on on Wall Street this past week or so? Why is it OK for corporations to screw investors, but not okay for two rational human beings to screw each other?

 

[TyrantRaveAB]

I don't know. It makes economic sense, insofar as it seems to tend to boost the local economies wherever it's legalized. It makes sense with regard to the social fabric, insofar as it institutionally encourages stability, monogamy, and normative social behavior in all long-term relationships, not just heterosexual ones. It makes emotional sense because gay Americans who aren't designated as second-class citizens through separate-but-equal marital laws are happier, more secure, more productive and more bonded to and responsible to the community at large. It makes more sense with regard to societal well-being because a marital institution which encourages more stable monogamous relationships creates more two-parent families into which children might be adopted or raised. And it makes moral sense, because it helps to ensure that a married gay citizen might still be covered by insurance when he or she loses a job, or that he or she can visit their loved one in the hospital, or that he or she can be more secure in survivors' rights when that loved one dies.

k, so why not let there be incest couples since the gay ones worked out well? it would be a logical continuation.

 

[Camel26]

I just don't see how my healthy, monogamous F/F relationship in ANY WAY invokes images of incest and polygamy coming along after us...

I find it humorous that, in a forum such as this, the folks who are anti-gay rights/human equality are the ones watching the most F/F clips...and, secretly, M/M clips...

This is a TICKLING website...why is ANYONE here judging ANYONE???

Seriously...

 

[TyrantRaveAB]

The purpose of any kind of marriage is to afford certain legal protections to all parties involved in a relationship (even as it imposes certain obligations on them).

As for gay marriage opening the door to incest and polygamy, what led you to the conclusion that gay marriage was a gateway to the latter two things?

Speaking of moral integrity, have you been watching what's been going on on Wall Street this past week or so? Why is it OK for corporations to screw investors, but not okay for two rational human beings to screw each other?

ohh, i have no qualms with the legal matters of it as it stands. if two men or two women want relational benefits thats cool. but as i said, im against homosexuality.
why wouldnt it lead to those things? if jeff loving his friend steve is ok, whats stopping him from loving his brother mike? its questions like those in my opinion that start to unravel moral fiber.
and i never said that it was fine for wall street or enron to screw ppl in the ass. i dont see how thats a correlation.

 

[TyrantRaveAB]

I just don't see how my healthy, monogamous F/F relationship in ANY WAY invokes images of incest and polygamy coming along after us...

I find it humorous that, in a forum such as this, the folks who are anti-gay rights/human equality are the ones watching the most F/F clips...and, secretly, M/M clips...

This is a TICKLING website...why is ANYONE here judging ANYONE???

Seriously...

no ones judging. i was asked to share my thoughts. and i did. im missing why if someone had a monogamous f/f relationship, two lovers. why cant they be sisters?

 

[Camel26]

But why is there a "logical" connection between homosexuality and incest? There is NO correlation...there is the same percentage of heterosexual incest as there is homosexual...so why is there a "logical" connection?

Please, explain...enlighten me...

 

[Camel26]

no ones judging. i was asked to share my thoughts. and i did. im missing why if someone had a monogamous f/f relationship, two lovers. why cant they be sisters?

No one questions a straight couple in that manner...


Therefore, I ask...where is the connection?

 

[JackVanderson]

no ones judging. i was asked to share my thoughts. and i did. im missing why if someone had a monogamous f/f relationship, two lovers. why cant they be sisters?

I state again, look at some of the older posts. A good number of people agree that as long as they're not having kids, then an incest couple is okay.

 

[blackmagicjack1]

I just don't see how my healthy, monogamous F/F relationship in ANY WAY invokes images of incest and polygamy coming along after us...

I find it humorous that, in a forum such as this, the folks who are anti-gay rights/human equality are the ones watching the most F/F clips...and, secretly, M/M clips...

This is a TICKLING website...why is ANYONE here judging ANYONE???

Seriously...

Because people have too much time on their hands.

 

[TyrantRaveAB]

But why is there a "logical" connection between homosexuality and incest? There is NO correlation...there is the same percentage of heterosexual incest as there is homosexual...so why is there a "logical" connection?

Please, explain...enlighten me...

if homosexuality why not incest? it makes sense to me. a man can love a man as long as they arent brothers. a man can love a woman as long as she isnt his sister. why cant they? why isnt that more accepted?

 

[TyrantRaveAB]

I state again, look at some of the older posts. A good number of people agree that as long as they're not having kids, then an incest couple is okay.

so any kind of sexuality is fine as long as no kids are involved?

 

[JackVanderson]

so any kind of sexuality is fine as long as no kids are involved?

INCEST!!!
Incest is fine as long as no kids are being born, and incest is also fine with same sex marriage too (cuz I know you'd twist what I say and go there too).
Cuz the genes get manipulated.
stop asking questions and read some of the older posts, unless you are purposly trying to rile people up.

 

[TyrantRaveAB]

INCEST!!!
Incest is fine as long as no kids are being born, and incest is also fine with same sex marriage too (cuz I know you'd twist what I say and go there too).
Cuz the genes get manipulated.
stop asking questions and read some of the older posts, unless you are purposly trying to rile people up.

so thats a 'yes' to my question then? so if two ppl in an incest relationship get married they're not allowed to have their own kids? that doesnt make any sense... at least in incest the marriage would be more purposeful.

 

[JackVanderson]

so thats a 'yes' to my question then? so if two ppl in an incest relationship get married they're not allowed to have their own kids? that doesnt make any sense... at least in incest the marriage would be more purposeful.

I don't see a thing wrong with gay marriage. If two people of the same gender love eachother then let them get married.

Polygamy is iffy but if someone is WILLINGLY wanting to be in a polygamist relationship then I don't see a problem with it. I DO see a problem when the person who has the multiple partners lies to them and doesn't let them know that it's a polygamist relationship.

As for incest,
I completely agree that if they wanna do that then they should be snipped or tied so that then cannot bear children. The gene's just wind up f'd up and the kid pays the price.

And honeslty, the only reason why I think Incest and Polygamy get roped into the gay marriage topic is to try to discredit gay marriage, because polygamy is looked upon as being wrong and incest is viewed as being even more wrong.
(Did I word this right?)

This covers everything you've been trying to argue

 

[TyrantRaveAB]

This covers everything you've been trying to argue

no. not really. you said that if two ppl love eachother let them get married. so why not let incest relationships have the same? and you agreed with the constraints that they can not bear their children. why not? whats wrong with a couple able to produce children, producing their children? you said b/c of possible birth defects. so, then that would lead me to believe that youre ridiculous. many hetro married couples have children FULL WELL AND KNOWING that their child will be blind, or deaf, or have downe syndrome. why cant an incest couple have the same benefit of having THEIR children regardless of burden? are you supporting ignorance?
polygamy makes no sense to me either. if you love someone then you love someONE. to have multiple relations of the same degree does nothing but make love seem cheap.
so from what im understanding, and i could be wrong, the base line is that anyone can have sexual relations with anyone as long as they 'love' them.

 

[JackVanderson]

no. not really. you said that if two ppl love eachother let them get married. so why not let incest relationships have the same? and you agreed with the constraints that they can not bear their children. why not? whats wrong with a couple able to produce children, producing their children? you said b/c of possible birth defects. so, then that would lead me to believe that youre ridiculous. many hetro married couples have children FULL WELL AND KNOWING that their child will be blind, or deaf, or have downe syndrome. why cant an incest couple have the same benefit of having THEIR children regardless of burden? are you supporting ignorance?
polygamy makes no sense to me either. if you love someone then you love someONE. to have multiple relations of the same degree does nothing but make love seem cheap.
so from what im understanding, and i could be wrong, the base line is that anyone can have sexual relations with anyone as long as they 'love' them.

Yes you are right, and it's not like it can be mandated that incest couples must be snipped or tied so that they cannot bear children. And yeah, people do willingly give birth too deformed/challenged babies knowing that the baby will most likely be like that.
So that is inevitable. The incest couples being sniped or tied is just wishfull thinking, because it is unfair to the baby to have it be born with those problems when the parents KNEW that the baby would be like that.

And yes, anyone can have sex with anyone as long as BOTH parties are willing. This of course does not apply to kids because they cannot give consent, nor can animals. And even if a kid says "I love you" that is not consent.

 

[TyrantRaveAB]

Yes you are right, and it's not like it can be mandated that incest couples must be snipped or tied so that they cannot bear children. And yeah, people do willingly give birth too deformed/challenged babies knowing that the baby will most likely be like that.
So that is inevitable. The incest couples being sniped or tied is just wishfull thinking, because it is unfair to the baby to have it be born with those problems when the parents KNEW that the baby would be like that.

And yes, anyone can have sex with anyone as long as BOTH parties are willing. This of course does not apply to kids because they cannot give consent, nor can animals. And even if a kid says "I love you" that is not consent.

why isnt it consent? some ppl dont even say 'i love you' before doing it (or during.) and whos to say relations with kids is wrong? the same ppl that dun like polygamy, incest, or gay marriage?

 

[JackVanderson]

why isnt it consent? some ppl dont even say 'i love you' before doing it (or during.) and whos to say relations with kids is wrong? the same ppl that dun like polygamy, incest, or gay marriage?

*sigh*
Unless you support sex with kids, I seriously don't see how you can even ask a question like that. IT IS SICK!!! DO NOT get me started on pedofiles. Unless you've been a victim, you have no idea. I haven't been a victim either but I've seen alot of people who are horribly affected by it including friends, my aunts, and my mother. Seriously, it's sick.

 

[TyrantRaveAB]

soi soi soi

 

[Wade1]

k, so why not let there be incest couples since the gay ones worked out well? it would be a logical continuation.

I understand why you ask that, but it's actually not a logical continuation. It's the slippery slope argument, which is formally identified in logic as a fallacy--in other word, it's not logically valid.

Maybe there is an argument to be made for allowing relatives to enter into incestuous marriages (and indeed, the act of incest is not illegal in all states). But one would have to make that argument based on the merits of incest itself; saying we should legalize incestuous marriages because we legalized gay marriage is no more logical than saying we should legalize incestuous marriage because we legalized heterosexual marriage. It doesn't follow logically.

There are already gay couples coming forth and making a case for gay marriage based on its merits; if incestuous couples want to come forth and make their own case they may, but the two are not related in any logical fashion.

(Indeed, I think participants in incestuous unions would have a difficult case to make. The case for gay marriage is a civil rights and, arguably, a Constitutional one, because existing laws prohibit gay citizens from marrying anyone of the same sex, which are the only people gay citizens can reasonably be expected to want to marry. It would be difficult for proponents of incestuous marriage to argue that there exists a similarly constituted class of Americans who are attracted only and solely to people they are related to, and therefore that they are being discriminated against by existing laws.)

 

[the_jimmy_james]

There are health-related issues to incest.

Children of incestuous couples run much higher risk of genetic diseases and birth defects than those that are not. Check it yourself. I can't be assed with looking it up.

Let's kill this topic and talk about things that are actually cool.

 

[JimBoy]

I Just Wanted To Say...

I started something with this thread... I am happy that it has remained relatively civil and I feel that discussion is important.

Me being a bisexual male; I have been the victim of bigotry before based on my orientation (plus being involved in the BDSM realm as well) so I know what it is like to be persecuted against. This issue is important to me.

The only way gay marriage is connected to incest and polygamy are that they both can be under consent and that they are forms of love and sexual attraction. Just how straight sex is connected to this as well; it is involved with consenting adults.

I wanted to ask with the rise of those who push for gay marriage to be legalized if other forms of consenting relationships should be looked at as well? If you want to have more than one spouse, or have sex with a relative under consent; then what are the reasons as to why you can/cannot engage in that?

And as stated before, animals and children are not involved because they cannot consent to sex.

That was the initial purpose of my thread; to ask if government has the right to limit the sexual relations between people under consent?

 

[melanie2]

no the government does not have the right to interfere with someone's sex life i don't think...unless of course minors or children are involved..and animals..eeks...that's an infamita..