|
Fog Tripper posted:where are animals and corpses on your list? 
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 00:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 22:07 |
|
|
i think having sex with a family member is wrong and bad- apparently a controversial opinion on the Something Awful forums now
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 00:40
|
|
|
The Snark posted:However, if it became considered legal as a whole I am not so optimistic as to believe foolish/disgusting people would be beyond grooming younger siblings or even their own children to be future fuckbuddies. To prove they did would probably be quite difficult so as long as they're willing to wait until they hit majority before going public- huzzah! see but your whole argument is predicated on the assumption that people don't do this poo poo for the sole reason that it is illegal, which I feel like isn't true. hosed up people that would do this usually don't care about legal consequences. it's like the statistical data that shows the death penalty has no effect as a deterrent because murders are either done in the heat of the moment so you're not thinking of consequences, or they are either planned and no one plans to get caught. CharlestonJew posted:i think having sex with a family member is wrong and bad- apparently a controversial opinion on the Something Awful forums now It's not a controversial opinion - it's just that a lot of people don't think the state should have anything to say about two consenting adults loving in any circumstances. It's not an issue for the legal system unless there is psychological manipulation or rape involved, and those things are already illegal as their own crimes.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 01:06
|
|
|
1gnoirents posted:ehhhh this is one of those things you just turn around and talk about something else to someone else
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 01:10
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 01:40
|
|
|
Miltank posted:I think he is trying to say that hating motherfuckers is just like hating gays. Close, I'm trying to say that banning incest between consenting adults because you think it's icky is like banning gay sex between consenting adults because you think it's icky. You see, many people are capable of disapproving of or even hating an action while simultaneously recognizing a person's right to do that action.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 01:58
|
|
|
why y'all still talking about incest
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 02:00
|
|
|
I think this thread would get more interesting if the title changed to "Insects"
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 02:01
|
|
|
Captain Candiru posted:I think this thread would get more interesting if the title changed to "Insects" what two consenting adults and a member of the order Lepidoptera do between themselves is none of my business
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 02:03
|
|
|
wanna gently caress my sis, my mom, my bro, my dad, ur dad, his sis, their mom, then a hot threesome with ur mom and her dad who gives a poo poo, why all u goons wanna be peepin in my window watching
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 02:18
|
|
|
good thing, in the long run. people should be criminalized for exposing wang in their own bedrooms, no matter which consensual and willing party is involved.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 02:27
|
|
|
soon the party will eliminate the orgasm
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 02:28
|
|
|
I always assumed that all the gross fuckers watching incest porn were enjoying some sort of vaguely abstract fantasy taboo and not using it in lieu of their real desire to gently caress their own family members. I guess there isn't much reason to believe that beyond it being less gross.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 02:41
|
|
|
End Of Worlds posted:why y'all still talking about incest yeah sis let me have that sweet poosay
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 04:39
|
|
|
Remember when all those idiots said making homosexuality legal was a slippery slope and that soon people would be arguing to legalize actually awful things? No one will thank you for proving them right. At least, no one you want thanks from. The Snark fucked around with this message at 05:07 on Sep 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 05:04
|
|
|
so does this mean germany is gonna be churning out a shitload of retards in the near future????
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 05:11
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:Close, I'm trying to say that banning incest between consenting adults because you think it's icky is like banning gay sex between consenting adults because you think it's icky. Its not really like that though because they are different things? Why recognize a person's nonexistent right to gently caress their daughter when I can correctly say that such a right doesn't exist and throw them into jail?
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 05:16
|
|
|
Dr. Carwash posted:so does this mean germany is gonna be churning out a shitload of retards in the near future???? Near future?
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 05:17
|
|
|
Miltank posted:Its not really like that though because they are different things? Why recognize a person's nonexistent right to gently caress their daughter when I can correctly say that such a right doesn't exist and throw them into jail? Because you can use that same line of reasoning to outlaw homosexuality, which is the point I'm trying to make. "I don't like thing therefore thing should be banned" is generally not a persuasive argument. Fister Roboto fucked around with this message at 05:32 on Sep 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 05:30
|
|
|
BottledBodhisvata posted:I have seen enough pornography to know that people are kind of way more into incest than they admit. or the sudden proliferance of mom and daughter threesome films
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 05:31
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:Because you can use that same line of reasoning to outlaw homosexuality, which is the point I'm trying to make. Neither is 'if we don't legalize incest they might outlaw homosexuality'. It's the slippery slope in the wrong direction. The slippery upslope, as stupid as it sounds. Riker is shocked and disgusted to be associated with your posts.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 05:41
|
|
|
actually all criminal justice consists of moral judgments, there's no real logic behind the arrangement that if you steal and assault people you need to spend time in a room for a few years. it's actually a social contract and not something we came to do after a cold logical analysis of hard facts.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 05:45
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:Because you can use that same line of reasoning to outlaw homosexuality, which is the point I'm trying to make. We already make arbitrary distinctions in our laws (age of consent for example) so why shouldn't incest be included? If you think incest is the same thing as gay sex then that is your hangup dude. Like, I get why you are making that comparison but how does it make you any different from someone wanting to keep gay marriage illegal to prevent creeping polygamy/incest/zoophilia? Gays don't have to be a slippery slope.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 05:48
|
|
|
basically posters itt heard Bill O'reily say that gay marriage leads to moral collapse and they were like, "ok".
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 05:52
|
|
|
joxxuh posted:actually all criminal justice consists of moral judgments, there's no real logic behind the arrangement that if you steal and assault people you need to spend time in a room for a few years. it's actually a social contract and not something we came to do after a cold logical analysis of hard facts. Don't bring actual logic into this thread. Some people just gotta get all their opinions about how incest should totally be legal, but how they personally never would think of such a thing, but while we're here can somebody help them hide their iphone in the bathroom so they can watch their sister take a poo poo. Unsurprisingly it looks like a lot of the same people who were arguing in favor of cartoon childporn in that other thread. I wonder if there is some sort of common interest they all share that might tip us off to their weird creepy opinions before the fact. Hobohemian fucked around with this message at 05:58 on Sep 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 05:55
|
|
|
i am not an anime please do not be deceived by my cute pokemon av
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 06:02
|
|
|
HASSENPFEFFER FARFEGNUGAN!!
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 06:17
|
|
|
Im just of the opinion that two consenting adults should be able to have sex with each other if they want to. Rape and pedophilia is already illegal so if we remove factors such as "does not consent" and "Is incapable of consent" then if two adult siblings want to bone it seems ridiculous to make a law specifically against that just because you or I think it's gross. “Criminal law is not the appropriate means to preserve a social taboo,” is a fantastic conclusion and we really should implement such a philosophy more often. Drug laws for example would be instantly repealed if we looked towards reducing harm rather than legislating morality. Restrictions of freedoms should be based on tangible evidence that it causes more harm to society as a whole to have that freedom unrestricted. It directly hurts me if I get mugged or murdered, it doesn't hurt me if my neighbors are related and gently caress each other. If it doesn't hurt them either then what is the point of outlawing it?
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 06:33
|
|
|
why do we even listen to germany, they are world leaders in genocide world wars and poo poo eating.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 06:38
|
|
|
ArbitraryC posted:Im just of the opinion that two consenting adults should be able to have sex with each other if they want to. Rape and pedophilia is already illegal so if we remove factors such as "does not consent" and "Is incapable of consent" then if two adult siblings want to bone it seems ridiculous to make a law specifically against that just because you or I think it's gross. “Criminal law is not the appropriate means to preserve a social taboo,” is a fantastic conclusion and we really should implement such a philosophy more often. Drug laws for example would be instantly repealed if we looked towards reducing harm rather than legislating morality. Criminal law is literally nothing but the enforcement of social taboo.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 06:45
|
|
|
ArbitraryC posted:Im just of the opinion that two consenting adults should be able to have sex with each other if they want to. Rape and pedophilia is already illegal so if we remove factors such as "does not consent" and "Is incapable of consent" then if two adult siblings want to bone it seems ridiculous to make a law specifically against that just because you or I think it's gross. “Criminal law is not the appropriate means to preserve a social taboo,” is a fantastic conclusion and we really should implement such a philosophy more often. Drug laws for example would be instantly repealed if we looked towards reducing harm rather than legislating morality. This is pretty much all that needs to be said, thank you and god bless.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 06:45
|
|
|
Miltank posted:Criminal law is literally nothing but the enforcement of social taboo. lol
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 06:46
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:This is pretty much all that needs to be said, thank you and god bless. Circle jerking people as wrong as you does not make you less wrong, it just aids self deception. These gross oversimplifications have already been addressed, you horrid trekkie.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 06:49
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:It also doesn't specifically protect gay marriage either.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 06:49
|
|
|
Miltank posted:Criminal law is literally nothing but the enforcement of social taboo.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 06:51
|
|
|
what is your neat and tidy definition of social taboo?
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 06:52
|
|
|
ArbitraryC posted:And that results in the awful justice system the US has where it's basically a modern socailly acceptable way of oppressing minorities and other economic underclasses. Law should be based on reducing overall harm to society. You should find the most objective metric as possible for that (such as stuff that financially or physically hurts people), then make laws around reducing that harm. In cases like this where you can't present any sort of harm outside of laws that would already be covered (ie laws against sexual abuse), then there's really no reason to outlaw the fringe "two thirty year olds who didn't know they were related met and fell in love" case. If you can think of cases where no one involved is evenly remotely negatively affected by what's going on, but the law saws it's illegal, it's probably a bad law. Can I have a picture of your mother, I bet she is loving smokin'. My laminated copy of microwave's mom is getting a bit rough.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 06:52
|
|
|
Hobohemian posted:Can I have a picture of your mother, I bet she is loving smokin'. My laminated copy of microwave's mom is getting a bit rough.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 06:53
|
|
|
This thing is icky and goes against my beliefs therefore I believe I have the right to imprison and generally ruin the lives of the people who do it even though it does not harm anyone and there are much more important issues that we can deal with. Now, let me tell you about how religion is a Good Thing and we should cut welfare spending in favor of planes that blow up on the runway. For Freedom.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 06:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 22:07 |
|
|
Most people don't want it to be legal, legalizing doesn't really make sense. Or that's at least my impression, but maybe germany is different. If it is, then that brings up interesting questions.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 06:56
|
|
