gay marriage bill passed in ny .... wonderful

[tennhouse2]

Originally Posted by CWrite78

is there any proof that incest couples have "faulty (can't think of the right word right now sorry)" children?

also, how close do you have to be related to the person to run that risk?

i know a couple that are first cousins, and nothing is wrong with their child.

the one thing i can see is that, if the family is prone to a certain disease, it will double the chances of the child if it's by a sibling pair.. but still, what are the probabilities of that?

from what i understand, and dont get me wrong i havent really looked the subject up or anything, but its not a garuntee but you run a very high risk of your child having problems
and with polygamy it would complicate alot of things if you have men and women both with multiple husbands/wives created giant tangles of marriges. Then say the 1 women get pregnant, but she has multiple husbands so do they dna test for the father? and if they dont eventually people are gonna start sexing cousins they didn't even know were cousins and etc  

 

[fraij da 5 11]

 

[fraij da 5 11]

 

[nako xl]

Originally Posted by anotherprodigy

Originally Posted by ilpadrino9

SO now that gay marriage is allowed, why aren't cousins/siblings allowed to marry? or why is polygamy illegal? If it is between consenting adults with no harm to anyone, then why deny them? In the latter cases, there is a law specifically preventing marriage. Talk about inequality and second class status...

I've been wondering what the argument would be. If homosexuals are permitted equal rights, then shouldn't incest and polygamy be permissible and legalized?

incest by design will always end in genetic disaster.  children the result of incest are born with higher degrees of genetic malformation.  the laws against it are to protect against those conditions.  the ban on incest isn't a religious or political statement.  it's a common sense one.  incest babies have weaker genetic characteristics.

the counter argument, however supports polygamy:  increased genetic variability in society and stronger genetic characteristics.  also the argument that women will generally tend to marry men of wealth and health. intelligence has a high correlation with wealth so polygamy has the effect of increasing the intelligence inside the population that practices it.  therefore consenting adults should be able to enter into polygamous relationships.  the problem with polygamy world wide though is a lot if most of the women involved in such relationships aren't in them consensually.  not to say theyre not happy in those relationships, but they didn't always choose to enter into it. further the very social structure of polygamy forms inequality within the marriage bond.  there's almost always a social ladder amongst those involved.  it just isn't a practice the country wants to promote.  polygamy is also outlawed because to promote polygamy would be to encourage sleeping around with many people and possibly spreading disease.

Not to mention it'd create sooo much confusion with taxes, intestate succession (inheritances), and the like on top of that.  It'd be a legal quandary and just not worth the headache.

date, bang, knock up as many people as you want.  that's legal.  you just can't marry more than one of them at a time.

 

[nako xl]

Originally Posted by anotherprodigy

Originally Posted by ilpadrino9

SO now that gay marriage is allowed, why aren't cousins/siblings allowed to marry? or why is polygamy illegal? If it is between consenting adults with no harm to anyone, then why deny them? In the latter cases, there is a law specifically preventing marriage. Talk about inequality and second class status...

I've been wondering what the argument would be. If homosexuals are permitted equal rights, then shouldn't incest and polygamy be permissible and legalized?

incest by design will always end in genetic disaster.  children the result of incest are born with higher degrees of genetic malformation.  the laws against it are to protect against those conditions.  the ban on incest isn't a religious or political statement.  it's a common sense one.  incest babies have weaker genetic characteristics.

the counter argument, however supports polygamy:  increased genetic variability in society and stronger genetic characteristics.  also the argument that women will generally tend to marry men of wealth and health. intelligence has a high correlation with wealth so polygamy has the effect of increasing the intelligence inside the population that practices it.  therefore consenting adults should be able to enter into polygamous relationships.  the problem with polygamy world wide though is a lot if most of the women involved in such relationships aren't in them consensually.  not to say theyre not happy in those relationships, but they didn't always choose to enter into it. further the very social structure of polygamy forms inequality within the marriage bond.  there's almost always a social ladder amongst those involved.  it just isn't a practice the country wants to promote.  polygamy is also outlawed because to promote polygamy would be to encourage sleeping around with many people and possibly spreading disease.

Not to mention it'd create sooo much confusion with taxes, intestate succession (inheritances), and the like on top of that.  It'd be a legal quandary and just not worth the headache.

date, bang, knock up as many people as you want.  that's legal.  you just can't marry more than one of them at a time.

 

[thegoat121886]

Originally Posted by Nako XL

Originally Posted by anotherprodigy

Originally Posted by ilpadrino9

SO now that gay marriage is allowed, why aren't cousins/siblings allowed to marry? or why is polygamy illegal? If it is between consenting adults with no harm to anyone, then why deny them? In the latter cases, there is a law specifically preventing marriage. Talk about inequality and second class status...

I've been wondering what the argument would be. If homosexuals are permitted equal rights, then shouldn't incest and polygamy be permissible and legalized?

incest by design will always end in genetic disaster.  children the result of incest are born with higher degrees of genetic malformation.  the laws against it are to protect against those conditions.  the ban on incest isn't a religious or political statement.  it's a common sense one.  incest babies have weaker genetic characteristics.

the counter argument, however supports polygamy:  increased genetic variability in society and stronger genetic characteristics.  also the argument that women will generally tend to marry men of wealth and health. intelligence has a high correlation with wealth so polygamy has the effect of increasing the intelligence inside the population that practices it.  therefore consenting adults should be able to enter into polygamous relationships.  the problem with polygamy world wide though is a lot if most of the women involved in such relationships aren't in them consensually.  not to say theyre not happy in those relationships, but they didn't always choose to enter into it. further the very social structure of polygamy forms inequality within the marriage bond.  there's almost always a social ladder amongst those involved.  it just isn't a practice the country wants to promote.  polygamy is also outlawed because to promote polygamy would be to encourage sleeping around with many people and possibly spreading disease.

Not to mention it'd create sooo much confusion with taxes, intestate succession (inheritances), and the like on top of that.  It'd be a legal quandary and just not worth the headache.

date, bang, knock up as many people as you want.  that's legal.  you just can't marry more than one of them at a time.

 

[thegoat121886]

Originally Posted by Nako XL

Originally Posted by anotherprodigy

Originally Posted by ilpadrino9

SO now that gay marriage is allowed, why aren't cousins/siblings allowed to marry? or why is polygamy illegal? If it is between consenting adults with no harm to anyone, then why deny them? In the latter cases, there is a law specifically preventing marriage. Talk about inequality and second class status...

I've been wondering what the argument would be. If homosexuals are permitted equal rights, then shouldn't incest and polygamy be permissible and legalized?

incest by design will always end in genetic disaster.  children the result of incest are born with higher degrees of genetic malformation.  the laws against it are to protect against those conditions.  the ban on incest isn't a religious or political statement.  it's a common sense one.  incest babies have weaker genetic characteristics.

the counter argument, however supports polygamy:  increased genetic variability in society and stronger genetic characteristics.  also the argument that women will generally tend to marry men of wealth and health. intelligence has a high correlation with wealth so polygamy has the effect of increasing the intelligence inside the population that practices it.  therefore consenting adults should be able to enter into polygamous relationships.  the problem with polygamy world wide though is a lot if most of the women involved in such relationships aren't in them consensually.  not to say theyre not happy in those relationships, but they didn't always choose to enter into it. further the very social structure of polygamy forms inequality within the marriage bond.  there's almost always a social ladder amongst those involved.  it just isn't a practice the country wants to promote.  polygamy is also outlawed because to promote polygamy would be to encourage sleeping around with many people and possibly spreading disease.

Not to mention it'd create sooo much confusion with taxes, intestate succession (inheritances), and the like on top of that.  It'd be a legal quandary and just not worth the headache.

date, bang, knock up as many people as you want.  that's legal.  you just can't marry more than one of them at a time.

 

[thunderchunk69]

Originally Posted by Nako XL

Originally Posted by anotherprodigy

Originally Posted by ilpadrino9

SO now that gay marriage is allowed, why aren't cousins/siblings allowed to marry? or why is polygamy illegal? If it is between consenting adults with no harm to anyone, then why deny them? In the latter cases, there is a law specifically preventing marriage. Talk about inequality and second class status...

I've been wondering what the argument would be. If homosexuals are permitted equal rights, then shouldn't incest and polygamy be permissible and legalized?

incest by design will always end in genetic disaster. 

if this is a good argument then what does it say about gay marriages? 

 

[thunderchunk69]

Originally Posted by Nako XL

Originally Posted by anotherprodigy

Originally Posted by ilpadrino9

SO now that gay marriage is allowed, why aren't cousins/siblings allowed to marry? or why is polygamy illegal? If it is between consenting adults with no harm to anyone, then why deny them? In the latter cases, there is a law specifically preventing marriage. Talk about inequality and second class status...

I've been wondering what the argument would be. If homosexuals are permitted equal rights, then shouldn't incest and polygamy be permissible and legalized?

incest by design will always end in genetic disaster. 

if this is a good argument then what does it say about gay marriages? 

 

[0 xm 0]

lotta !**@@ on the train acting straight disrespectful to everyone around them. get in my face your gonna get more equal rights than your looking for.

 

[0 xm 0]

lotta !**@@ on the train acting straight disrespectful to everyone around them. get in my face your gonna get more equal rights than your looking for.

 

[antonlavey]

Originally Posted by CWrite78

is there any proof that incest couples have "faulty (can't think of the right word right now sorry)" children?

also, how close do you have to be related to the person to run that risk?

i know a couple that are first cousins, and nothing is wrong with their child.

the one thing i can see is that, if the family is prone to a certain disease, it will double the chances of the child if it's by a sibling pair.. but still, what are the probabilities of that?

Well it isn't a guarantee, but it is a legitimate risk. In "nature", genetic diversity should be valued because it prevents homozygosity of lethal and undesirable traits. For example many recessive diseases are  prevalent amongst many ethnic groups that rarely marry outsiders. Eg. Ashkenazi Jews and the long list of recessive diseases they are susceptible to-Tay Sachs, Niemann Pick, Cystic Fibrosis, Gaucher, Mucolipidoses to name a few.

 

[antonlavey]

Originally Posted by CWrite78

is there any proof that incest couples have "faulty (can't think of the right word right now sorry)" children?

also, how close do you have to be related to the person to run that risk?

i know a couple that are first cousins, and nothing is wrong with their child.

the one thing i can see is that, if the family is prone to a certain disease, it will double the chances of the child if it's by a sibling pair.. but still, what are the probabilities of that?

Well it isn't a guarantee, but it is a legitimate risk. In "nature", genetic diversity should be valued because it prevents homozygosity of lethal and undesirable traits. For example many recessive diseases are  prevalent amongst many ethnic groups that rarely marry outsiders. Eg. Ashkenazi Jews and the long list of recessive diseases they are susceptible to-Tay Sachs, Niemann Pick, Cystic Fibrosis, Gaucher, Mucolipidoses to name a few.

 

[tennhouse2]

Originally Posted by ThunderChunk69

Originally Posted by Nako XL

Originally Posted by anotherprodigy

I've been wondering what the argument would be. If homosexuals are permitted equal rights, then shouldn't incest and polygamy be permissible and legalized?

incest by design will always end in genetic disaster. 

if this is a good argument then what does it say about gay marriages? 

what do you mean? its not like gay couples can have baby's 

 

[tennhouse2]

Originally Posted by ThunderChunk69

Originally Posted by Nako XL

Originally Posted by anotherprodigy

I've been wondering what the argument would be. If homosexuals are permitted equal rights, then shouldn't incest and polygamy be permissible and legalized?

incest by design will always end in genetic disaster. 

if this is a good argument then what does it say about gay marriages? 

what do you mean? its not like gay couples can have baby's 

 

[ravagebx]

Originally Posted by TennHouse2

Originally Posted by ThunderChunk69

Originally Posted by Nako XL

incest by design will always end in genetic disaster. 

if this is a good argument then what does it say about gay marriages? 

what do you mean? its not like gay couples can have baby's 

That's exactly what he means.

 

[ravagebx]

Originally Posted by TennHouse2

Originally Posted by ThunderChunk69

Originally Posted by Nako XL

incest by design will always end in genetic disaster. 

if this is a good argument then what does it say about gay marriages? 

what do you mean? its not like gay couples can have baby's 

That's exactly what he means.

 

[tennhouse2]

Originally Posted by RavageBX

Originally Posted by TennHouse2

Originally Posted by ThunderChunk69

if this is a good argument then what does it say about gay marriages? 

what do you mean? its not like gay couples can have baby's 

That's exactly what he means.

soooo what does that have to do with messing up a baby's genetics?

 

[cwrite78]

Originally Posted by 0 Xm 0

lotta %%%%$ on the train acting straight disrespectful to everyone around them. get in my face your gonna get more equal rights than your looking for.

internet tough guy.

Originally Posted by AntonLaVey

Originally Posted by CWrite78

is there any proof that incest couples have "faulty (can't think of the right word right now sorry)" children?



also, how close do you have to be related to the person to run that risk?



i know a couple that are first cousins, and nothing is wrong with their child.



the one thing i can see is that, if the family is prone to a certain disease, it will double the chances of the child if it's by a sibling pair.. but still, what are the probabilities of that?

Well it isn't a guarantee, but it is a legitimate risk. In "nature" and genetic diversity should be valued because it prevents homozygosity of lethal and undesirable traits. For example many recessive diseases are  prevalent amongst many ethnic groups that rarely marry outsiders. Eg. Ashkenazi Jews and the long list of recessive diseases they are susceptible too-Tay Sachs, Niemann Pick, Cystic Fibrosis, Gaucher, Mucolipidoses to name a few.

hm, i see. thx for answering my question

 

[antonlavey]

Originally Posted by ThunderChunk69

Originally Posted by Nako XL

Originally Posted by anotherprodigy

I've been wondering what the argument would be. If homosexuals are permitted equal rights, then shouldn't incest and polygamy be permissible and legalized?

incest by design will always end in genetic disaster. 

if this is a good argument then what does it say about gay marriages? 

Logical conclusion-Gay people don't have any more of a chance of breeding and creating offspring with lethal genetic traits than their heterosexual counterparts-seeing how a gay couple can't breed with one another.  Individually gays however, could have viable, healthy children with the help of surrogate mothers/sperm donors who don't turn out to be the spawn of possession like many of you would like to believe.


Many gay couples also adopt children heterosexual couples have abandoned. I fail to see how this contributes negatively to humanity in any way.

 

[antonlavey]

Originally Posted by ThunderChunk69

Originally Posted by Nako XL

Originally Posted by anotherprodigy

I've been wondering what the argument would be. If homosexuals are permitted equal rights, then shouldn't incest and polygamy be permissible and legalized?

incest by design will always end in genetic disaster. 

if this is a good argument then what does it say about gay marriages? 

Logical conclusion-Gay people don't have any more of a chance of breeding and creating offspring with lethal genetic traits than their heterosexual counterparts-seeing how a gay couple can't breed with one another.  Individually gays however, could have viable, healthy children with the help of surrogate mothers/sperm donors who don't turn out to be the spawn of possession like many of you would like to believe.


Many gay couples also adopt children heterosexual couples have abandoned. I fail to see how this contributes negatively to humanity in any way.

 

[cwrite78]

Originally Posted by 0 Xm 0

lotta %%%%$ on the train acting straight disrespectful to everyone around them. get in my face your gonna get more equal rights than your looking for.

internet tough guy.

Originally Posted by AntonLaVey

Originally Posted by CWrite78

is there any proof that incest couples have "faulty (can't think of the right word right now sorry)" children?



also, how close do you have to be related to the person to run that risk?



i know a couple that are first cousins, and nothing is wrong with their child.



the one thing i can see is that, if the family is prone to a certain disease, it will double the chances of the child if it's by a sibling pair.. but still, what are the probabilities of that?

Well it isn't a guarantee, but it is a legitimate risk. In "nature" and genetic diversity should be valued because it prevents homozygosity of lethal and undesirable traits. For example many recessive diseases are  prevalent amongst many ethnic groups that rarely marry outsiders. Eg. Ashkenazi Jews and the long list of recessive diseases they are susceptible too-Tay Sachs, Niemann Pick, Cystic Fibrosis, Gaucher, Mucolipidoses to name a few.

hm, i see. thx for answering my question

 

[tennhouse2]

Originally Posted by RavageBX

Originally Posted by TennHouse2

Originally Posted by ThunderChunk69

if this is a good argument then what does it say about gay marriages? 

what do you mean? its not like gay couples can have baby's 

That's exactly what he means.

soooo what does that have to do with messing up a baby's genetics?

 

[so nyuh shi dae]

Originally Posted by ilpadrino9

SO now that gay marriage is allowed, why aren't cousins/siblings allowed to marry? or why is polygamy illegal? If it is between consenting adults with no harm to anyone, then why deny them? In the latter cases, there is a law specifically preventing marriage. Talk about inequality and second class status...

I've addressed this several times. NO ONE is allowed to marry a closely related individual and NO ONE is allowed to marry multiple people at the same time. Therefore, the issue of gay marriage is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT from the issues of incest and polygamy. In the case of marriage, anyone can get married except for homosexual couples which is why it's an issue of equal rights.

 

[so nyuh shi dae]

Originally Posted by ilpadrino9

SO now that gay marriage is allowed, why aren't cousins/siblings allowed to marry? or why is polygamy illegal? If it is between consenting adults with no harm to anyone, then why deny them? In the latter cases, there is a law specifically preventing marriage. Talk about inequality and second class status...

I've addressed this several times. NO ONE is allowed to marry a closely related individual and NO ONE is allowed to marry multiple people at the same time. Therefore, the issue of gay marriage is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT from the issues of incest and polygamy. In the case of marriage, anyone can get married except for homosexual couples which is why it's an issue of equal rights.