Conquer Club

ViperOverLord wrote:

Baron Von PWN wrote:Relevant to the discussion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_regarding_incest. As far as I can tell it is simply a taboo. Who the hell would want to marry their brother or sister though? don't they know they have cooties?

So you want to condemn those factions that condemn gay marriage and say they are not tolerant but you won't be tolerant of a brother and sister wanting to have a relationship? HYPO-CRITE!

Where do I suggest I would be intolerant of such a relationship? I was stating my personal aversion to it. However again assuming consenting adults I don't see the problem other than societal taboos.

Baron Von PWN wrote:

ViperOverLord wrote:

Baron Von PWN wrote:Relevant to the discussion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_regarding_incest. As far as I can tell it is simply a taboo. Who the hell would want to marry their brother or sister though? don't they know they have cooties?

So you want to condemn those factions that condemn gay marriage and say they are not tolerant but you won't be tolerant of a brother and sister wanting to have a relationship? HYPO-CRITE!

Where do I suggest I would be intolerant of such a relationship? I was stating my personal aversion to it. However again assuming consenting adults I don't see the problem other than societal taboos.

So are you or are you not advocating incestual marriage rights?

ViperOverLord wrote:

Baron Von PWN wrote:

ViperOverLord wrote:

Baron Von PWN wrote:Relevant to the discussion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_regarding_incest. As far as I can tell it is simply a taboo. Who the hell would want to marry their brother or sister though? don't they know they have cooties?

So you want to condemn those factions that condemn gay marriage and say they are not tolerant but you won't be tolerant of a brother and sister wanting to have a relationship? HYPO-CRITE!

Where do I suggest I would be intolerant of such a relationship? I was stating my personal aversion to it. However again assuming consenting adults I don't see the problem other than societal taboos.

So are you or are you not advocating incestual marriage rights?

I don't think there is any real demand for it, but I see no theoretical problem with it either. So I am not opposed to it. Why should I be?

Baron Von PWN wrote:

ViperOverLord wrote:

Baron Von PWN wrote:

ViperOverLord wrote:

Baron Von PWN wrote:Relevant to the discussion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_regarding_incest. As far as I can tell it is simply a taboo. Who the hell would want to marry their brother or sister though? don't they know they have cooties?

So you want to condemn those factions that condemn gay marriage and say they are not tolerant but you won't be tolerant of a brother and sister wanting to have a relationship? HYPO-CRITE!

Where do I suggest I would be intolerant of such a relationship? I was stating my personal aversion to it. However again assuming consenting adults I don't see the problem other than societal taboos.

So are you or are you not advocating incestual marriage rights?

I don't think there is any real demand for it, but I see no theoretical problem with it either. So I am not opposed to it. Why should I be?

Other than the literally retarded children that would result, I have no legal argument against it.

If you guys are so used to making deformed little babies that you don't see the flaw in comparing homosexual sex to incest, even in jest, then you are bigger fools than I previously thought, which is an impressive thing to overcome.

Army of GOD wrote:What if I assfuck myself?

How many laws would I break?

The laws of physics.
And, I'm sorry, but you canna change the laws of physics.

Oh, and plagiarism.

Neoteny wrote:If you guys are so used to making deformed little babies that you don't see the flaw in comparing homosexual sex to incest, even in jest, then you are bigger fools than I previously thought, which is an impressive thing to overcome.

Who are 'you guys?' And how about you enlighten us on the difference in the merits of homosexual relationships and inestuous relationships. Please refrain from the one obvious difference (the offspring factor).

jonesthecurl wrote:

Army of GOD wrote:What if I assfuck myself?

How many laws would I break?

The laws of physics.
And, I'm sorry, but you canna change the laws of physics.

I'm sure you have a dildo that says otherwise.

ViperOverLord wrote:

jonesthecurl wrote:

Army of GOD wrote:What if I assfuck myself?

How many laws would I break?

The laws of physics.
And, I'm sorry, but you canna change the laws of physics.

I'm sure you have a dildo that says otherwise.

You sell taking dildos?
What do they say?
"Sure is dark in here"?

jonesthecurl wrote:

ViperOverLord wrote:

jonesthecurl wrote:

Army of GOD wrote:What if I assfuck myself?

How many laws would I break?

The laws of physics.
And, I'm sorry, but you canna change the laws of physics.

I'm sure you have a dildo that says otherwise.

You sell taking dildos?
What do they say?
"Sure is dark in here"?

Your attempt at machismo is quite boorish and for the umpteenth time you have proven that you are uncouth.

I've never been accused of attempting machismo before.
You sure have a fresh view of things.

ViperOverLord wrote:

Neoteny wrote:If you guys are so used to making deformed little babies that you don't see the flaw in comparing homosexual sex to incest, even in jest, then you are bigger fools than I previously thought, which is an impressive thing to overcome.

Who are 'you guys?' And how about you enlighten us on the difference in the merits of homosexual relationships and inestuous relationships. Please refrain from the one obvious difference (the offspring factor).

Merit? What are you on?

Incest creates a problem for children and homosexuality does not. Homosexual offspring don't have that added bonus of increased homozygous recessives (now if only they could get over that whole not being able to exist thing...).

Neoteny wrote:

ViperOverLord wrote:

Neoteny wrote:If you guys are so used to making deformed little babies that you don't see the flaw in comparing homosexual sex to incest, even in jest, then you are bigger fools than I previously thought, which is an impressive thing to overcome.

Who are 'you guys?' And how about you enlighten us on the difference in the merits of homosexual relationships and inestuous relationships. Please refrain from the one obvious difference (the offspring factor).

Merit? What are you on?

Incest creates a problem for children and homosexuality does not. Homosexual offspring don't have that added bonus of increased homozygous recessives (now if only they could get over that whole not being able to exist thing...).

So in otherwords aside from the offspring factor you don't see a difference in the merit of homosexual and incestual marriage? And yes I did use the word, 'merit.' That is the type of word you'll see in these discussions. Welcome to life.

Uh oh guys. ViperOverLord found this thread and ruined another one. Time to evacuate!

Oic, so the protection of minors isn't worth your attention. Other than that , you just want to have an argument on how your skewed view of reality should be enforced on the romantic endeavors of others. Tell me, what is the relative merit of banning incestual and homosexual relationships, them being icky notwithstanding?

Baron Von PWN wrote: Who the hell would want to marry their brother or sister though?

Who the hell would want another man's dick up their ass?


Honibaz

Neoteny wrote: Homosexual offspring don't have that added bonus of increased homozygous recessives.

"Homosexual offspring"???

Even for you neo, that's amazingly stoopit. Just saying . . .


Honibaz

b.k. barunt wrote:

Neoteny wrote: Homosexual offspring don't have that added bonus of increased homozygous recessives.

"Homosexual offspring"???

Even for you neo, that's amazingly stoopit. Just saying . . .


Honibaz

What, gay people don't have functional testicles?

Neoteny wrote:Oic, so the protection of minors isn't worth your attention. Other than that , you just want to have an argument on how your skewed view of reality should be enforced on the romantic endeavors of others. Tell me, what is the relative merit of banning incestual and homosexual relationships, them being icky notwithstanding?

Rather than sit there and try to put words into my mouth, how about you answer my question. If you expect me to engage in a discussion then we will do this properly. I will not engage in your childish banter.

So in other words aside from the offspring factor you don't see a difference in the merit of homosexual and incestual marriage?

Homosexual and Incestuous marriage are completely different when talking about possible diseases. Homosexual marriages only really pass on AID's and the such. They don't increase the chances for further disease. Incest on the other hand, be it a one time deal or generations of incest can cause and increase chances for serious physical and mental conditions.

But Incest marriage should be legalized as its a persons choice.

b.k. barunt wrote:

Neoteny wrote: Homosexual offspring don't have that added bonus of increased homozygous recessives.

"Homosexual offspring"???

Even for you neo, that's amazingly stoopit. Just saying . . .


Honibaz

Even for you, the ability to gnash your gums in delight at catching someone more stupid than yourself before taking the time to read the entire sentence is pretty impressive. I know tongue in cheek humor is a bit beyond your grasp, but you can at least give yourself the dignity of actually reading an entire post.

Just sayin'.

ViperOverLord wrote:

Neoteny wrote:Oic, so the protection of minors isn't worth your attention. Other than that , you just want to have an argument on how your skewed view of reality should be enforced on the romantic endeavors of others. Tell me, what is the relative merit of banning incestual and homosexual relationships, them being icky notwithstanding?

Rather than sit there and try to put words into my mouth, how about you answer my question. If you expect me to engage in a discussion then we will do this properly. I will not engage in your childish banter.

So in other words aside from the offspring factor you don't see a difference in the merit of homosexual and incestual marriage?

Well, I don't expect you to be engaged in anything even vaguely representing discussion. If by "merit," you mean "social approval," then there is a slight difference. If you mean "inherent positive contributions" then there will be no difference between either of the two types of relationships or a normal heterosexual one. Incest is taboo, but only for recent familial diastoma. We're all related if you go back far enough. Do you understand where these taboos come from, and can you give me a good reason such things should be outlawed by the state (religions are free to be as discriminatory as they like)?

Neoteny wrote:

ViperOverLord wrote:

Neoteny wrote:Oic, so the protection of minors isn't worth your attention. Other than that , you just want to have an argument on how your skewed view of reality should be enforced on the romantic endeavors of others. Tell me, what is the relative merit of banning incestual and homosexual relationships, them being icky notwithstanding?

Rather than sit there and try to put words into my mouth, how about you answer my question. If you expect me to engage in a discussion then we will do this properly. I will not engage in your childish banter.

So in other words aside from the offspring factor you don't see a difference in the merit of homosexual and incestual marriage?

Well, I don't expect you to be engaged in anything even vaguely representing discussion. If by "merit," you mean "social approval," then there is a slight difference. If you mean "inherent positive contributions" then there will be no difference between either of the two types of relationships or a normal heterosexual one. Incest is taboo, but only for recent familial diastoma. We're all related if you go back far enough. Do you understand where these taboos come from, and can you give me a good reason such things should be outlawed by the state (religions are free to be as discriminatory as they like)?

- I think the word 'merit' refers to value or worthiness. It's as simple as that.

- As far as the 'social approval' of incest and gay marriages - I think you'll find there is not a slight difference. You want to talk about 'in the closet'? Nobody is encouraging people to come out of the incest closet.

- I agree at least on a superficial level with your 'inherent positive contributions' analysis so I'll bypass that.

- When it comes to marriage, I think I've made it clear that heterosexual marriage serves a higher purpose than the other proposed types of marriages. I can't say that I'm advocating incest marriage or gay marriage. I was trying to decipher what the real difference is between the two if any. And aside from the children aspect goes then there really isn't a functional difference.

- Yes I do understand the word 'taboo.' But you must remember that 30 years ago, homosexuality was also taboo. So to simply state they are on different playing fields because of the 'taboo' factor I think would be a little short sighted.

Thank you for your well thought response.

Family members don't choose to be attracted to each other and have sex. There are genes which force them to have those feelings. Prenatal hormones also account for some incestuous sexual behavior. Experiments conducted describe the interaction of sex hormones on the developing brain, particularly the region known as the hypothalamus. For instance, when female rats are administered hormones pre-natally, they exhibit incestuous sexual behavior during adulthood. Similarly, when male rats are pre-natally administered a steroid drug to counteract their normally self-produced male hormone, the animals exhibited incestuous sexual behavior on their sisters.

In all cases, the sexual activity was consensual. No animals attempted to refrain from the humping and thrusting. So I would say legalize it. It benefits society because it keeps families together and enhances sibling affection to a level which non-incestuous people cannot begin to fathom. It's quite beautiful actually and only bigots would disagree.


I hope that helps out, hapsmo

If a brother and sister want to get married, but not have offspring, then I don't see a problem with it. I don't see why anyone would want to, but there are all kinds of people in this world, and as long as you're not harming anyone by your actions I say go for it.

If homosexuals want to marry each other, what's the problem with it? It's their life, let them live it as they see fit. If 2 consenting adults want to do something that doesn't even concern you, let alone harm you in any way, why would you be denying it for them?