|
I agree OP, we should definitely be banning certain people from having sex, despite both parties being consenting adults, based on how icky society thinks it is.
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2014 19:59
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 09:47 |
|
|
DoctorStrangelove posted:goons sincerely defending sister fuckers itt. goons sincerely wanting to ban consenting adults having sex because they think it's gross itt
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2014 23:16
|
|
|
CharlestonJew posted:why do you want to gently caress your sister only gay people support gay rights
|
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2014 04:52
|
|
|
well poo poo i better start sucking dick then
|
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2014 07:43
|
|
|
So I guess grooming is 100% A-OK as long as you're not related to the victim.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2014 19:42
|
|
|
Miltank posted:no its still bad. Then why are incest laws necessary to prevent it?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2014 20:35
|
|
|
Hugh Malone posted:Article 16. It also doesn't specifically protect gay marriage either.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2014 21:12
|
|
|
Miltank posted:hmm don't know what your asking and I don't care. Incest is bad and grooming is bad. Agreed, so is gay sex, according to many, or even most.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2014 22:22
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 09:47 |
|
|
Kyrie eleison posted:The First Incestual President That would be FDR (married his 5th cousin once removed) and probably several others with even closer ties before that.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2014 09:10
|
|