Forums | MacLife

Incest is illegal, isn't it? Homosexuality isn't.

Is marriage between cousins illegal?

Once again we have misguided fools confusing sexual acts with sexual orientations: (one more time for Mr. Santorum)

Heterosexual, homosexual and bisexual are unchangeable conditions, things that people are-not things they do.

Incest, bigamy, polgamy, adultery, sodomy, child molestation are things people do, not things people are. Anyone in the first group can commit acts of the second group, but none of the acts in the second group are exclusive behaviours of any one of the first group.

:humpfgrr:

Biologically speaking - incest always produces genetically less-fit offspring in mammals. It may not be sever or overt, but is will be there. It could be as subtle as a weaker immune system or a higher susceptibility to cancer.

Closely related humans who produce offspring cannot avoid producing defective offspring either in the immediate following generation or in subsequent generations.

A female who uses drugs/smokes/drinks while pregnant may or may not produce less fit offspring with a nonrelated male.

Once again we have misguided fools confusing sexual acts with sexual orientations: (one more time for Mr. Santorum)

Heterosexual, homosexual and bisexual are unchangeable conditions, things that people are-not things they do.

Incest, bigamy, polgamy, adultery, sodomy, child molestation are things people do, not things people are. Anyone in the first group can commit acts of the second group, but none of the acts in the second group are exclusive behaviours of any one of the first group.

:humpfgrr:

ha ha...that's the biggest load of bs i've ever heard.

unchangeable situations?  then how come one of my friends was straight until he was in his 30's due to a girl ending their engagement?  how come one of my friends mom went lesbian after her husband left her in her 40's?  how come ellen degeneres' lover went straight after their long relationship?

so you're saying that a person practicing homosexuality can't help wanting to make out with a guy, but a child molestor can help wanting to touch a child?

please think about your statement.

you said that none in the second group could comit acts done in the first group?  again...bs.

bisexuals are the perfect example that people choose who they're with.

look, i won't denounce the fact that people have certain feelings for things that they feel they can't change.  heck, i hated salads growing up, but now i love salads!  you couldn't have paid me $500 to eat a salad when i was 12.

but saying that homosexuality isn't a choice is ignorance.

now, whether it's wrong or not comes down to a whole new ballgame: morals.

The act is a choice, the orientation isn't

agreed to an extent...but the orientation can/does change.

there are people that feel like they have to drink alcohol or else they can't have a good day, or people that have urges to steal everytime they're in a store, or they have attractions to animals.

where you draw the line on those things is your morals...which is why i was curious as to what some of the people who thought that legalizing gay marriages thought about same family marriages.

I'm waiting to see what XYZ says about this.

Once again we have misguided fools confusing sexual acts with sexual orientations: (one more time for Mr. Santorum)

Heterosexual, homosexual and bisexual are unchangeable conditions, things that people are-not things they do.

Incest, bigamy, polgamy, adultery, sodomy, child molestation are things people do, not things people are. Anyone in the first group can commit acts of the second group, but none of the acts in the second group are exclusive behaviours of any one of the first group.

:humpfgrr:

Wow! That was so well put.

Sure, you're right, let's carry everything to an extreme.  If a brother and sister or brother and brother or sister and sister wanna smurf like jackrabbits, go for it.  Not like a law would stop them.  Sure, legalize it too, I'm sure it'll go over great in Arkansas and Kentucky.  Part of the part of respecting people's personal liberty is well, they get to do things you don't agree with.  So, if you wanna boink a relative, keep it in the family, go ahead.  Many would find it morally reprehensible (at least most gays and lesbians aren't related and chance of offspring is well, pretty nonexistent and they aren't hurting anyone else), but that's their problem.  So, Mr. Santorum, allow it.  Have fun with your sibling, your two headed retarded children and house with white picket fence...

As for polygamy, allow that too.  I'm sure the state of Utah would rejoice.  No, really.  I'm serious about this one.  As long as everyone consents, I'm all for it.

you said that none in the second group could comit acts done in the first group?  again...bs.

actually that's not what he said at all. Can't you read before spouting off?

Anyone in the first group can commit acts of the second group, but none of the acts in the second group are exclusive behaviours of any one of the first group.

you read the same thing, right?  ok, just checking.

He didn't say "none in the second group could commit acts done in the first group." You even reposted the comments, and I just don't see that anywhere.

He said none of the acts in the second group are exclusive behaviours of the first group. You understand what this means?

The law in Pakistan probably allows this but I don't know how they get around the law in the States. 

I'm not really sure there is a law in the US prohibiting first cousins from marrying-if there is it's most likely a state law and not a federal one. I believe that Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt were first cousins. And I seem to remember just recently hearing on the news that 'geneticists' have determined the risk of genetic abnormalities to be minimal or nearly non-existent for offspring from first cousins.

All my first cousins were male. Which is a good thing as my aunt and uncle would have been my aunt and uncle anyway even if one of them weren't either my mother's brother or my father's sister.

Once again we have misguided fools confusing sexual acts with sexual orientations: (one more time for Mr. Santorum)

Heterosexual, homosexual and bisexual are unchangeable conditions, things that people are-not things they do.

Incest, bigamy, polgamy, adultery, sodomy, child molestation are things people do, not things people are. Anyone in the first group can commit acts of the second group, but none of the acts in the second group are exclusive behaviours of any one of the first group.

:humpfgrr:

ha ha...that's the biggest load of bs i've ever heard.

unchangeable situations?  then how come one of my friends was straight until he was in his 30's due to a girl ending their engagement?  how come one of my friends mom went lesbian after her husband left her in her 40's?  how come ellen degeneres' lover went straight after their long relationship?

so you're saying that a person practicing homosexuality can't help wanting to make out with a guy, but a child molestor can help wanting to touch a child?

please think about your statement.

you said that none in the second group could comit acts done in the first group?  again...bs.

bisexuals are the perfect example that people choose who they're with.

look, i won't denounce the fact that people have certain feelings for things that they feel they can't change.  heck, i hated salads growing up, but now i love salads!  you couldn't have paid me $500 to eat a salad when i was 12.

but saying that homosexuality isn't a choice is ignorance.

now, whether it's wrong or not comes down to a whole new ballgame: morals.

Oh my God.  You...

You...there is no word for it.  Feelings do not change, you smurfing moron.  Why the hell would gay people continue to be gay if they could?

It's people like you, not us, that the world could do without.