Conquer Club

b.k. barunt wrote:

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

Obviously homosexual men.

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

That's what contraceptives or vasectomies are for.

Baron Von PWN wrote:

b.k. barunt wrote:

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

Obviously homosexual men.

. . . and in answer to your question, obviously incestuous men and women.


Honibaz

DangerBoy wrote: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

Outstanding.




Honibaz

DangerBoy wrote: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

Your response doesn't really deserve a genuine answer, but I am giving one anyway.

Your references are plain wrong.

Animals don't have sibling relationships the way we do. Most herd animals discourage incest by the simple expediance of ousting or killing outright other males. IN non-herd animals, males have the urge/need to travel much more widely than the females, accomplishing roughly the same thing. However, it may happen in very small incidents because the siblings simply don't recognize each other.

Among humans, those who are brought up closely together tend not to be attracted to each other in that way. Again, there seems to be a natural tendency to reject close partners. Only if there is an outside influence, most often abuse, not, as you claim "hormonal influences" . The rejection of siblings is not caused by genetics, it is caused by the environment. If the siblings don't know they are siblings are they generally attracted to one another. This seems to be a strong "cultural" adaptation.

That can be tied to homosexuality in that one reason many cultures have strong prohibitions against homosexuality is the reduction in children. However, that is no longer the case. Homosexuals can have children now, both adopted and genetic. They do not pass on any genetic disease with any greater frequency than heterosexuals, with the possible exception of homosexuality itself. However, as has been noted elsewhere, homosexuality is no longer considered a pathology.

Incest, by contrast, does pass on negative consequences. Socieities that have employed incest or even too many close marriages of any kind, have suffered serious consequences. The Egyptian royalty seems to have persisted for a great deal of time, but, in the end, it is felt that genetics helped do them in.


Among cousins, the genetic risk is probably a lot less than was previously thought. Indeed many countries allow cousins to marry.

Ummm . . .

Player, you've been played.


Honibaz