gay marriage bill passed in ny .... wonderful

[cwrite78]

im surprised they didn't bring in old/young (under aged) couples or animals.

it usually goes that way.

if gays can get married, why can't a guy/girl marry a less than 18 year old, or why can't this guy/girl marry his dog or why can't this guy/girl marry 100 people and so on

 

[cwrite78]

im surprised they didn't bring in old/young (under aged) couples or animals.

it usually goes that way.

if gays can get married, why can't a guy/girl marry a less than 18 year old, or why can't this guy/girl marry his dog or why can't this guy/girl marry 100 people and so on

 

[ravagebx]

Originally Posted by TennHouse2

Originally Posted by RavageBX

Originally Posted by TennHouse2

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?

Nothing. I think he's just playing devil's advocate saying its worse to be counterproductive to procreation than to deal with potential genetic defect.

 

[antonlavey]

Originally Posted by CWrite78

im surprised they didn't bring in old/young (under aged) couples or animals.

it usually goes that way.

if gays can get married, why can't a guy/girl marry a less than 18 year old, or why can't this guy/girl marry his dog or why can't this guy/girl marry 100 people and so on

Yo if gays can get married, why can't I marry my blow-up doll.

 

[ravagebx]

Originally Posted by TennHouse2

Originally Posted by RavageBX

Originally Posted by TennHouse2

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?

Nothing. I think he's just playing devil's advocate saying its worse to be counterproductive to procreation than to deal with potential genetic defect.

 

[so nyuh shi dae]

Originally Posted by Nako XL

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 problem with this is that, as far as I know, there are no laws that restrict couples that could potentially breed children with genetic diseases from attempting to have children.

Edit: dude above me addressed what I addressed.

 

[so nyuh shi dae]

Originally Posted by Nako XL

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 problem with this is that, as far as I know, there are no laws that restrict couples that could potentially breed children with genetic diseases from attempting to have children.

Edit: dude above me addressed what I addressed.

 

[ilpadrino9]

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? 

Do we not also allow people who have a genetic disorder and have an increased chance of passing along the disorder to have children? Do we not allow people with Tay-Sachs, or muscular dystrophy, or any other heritable disease to have children? We can't say we're protecting children from genetic disorders when in every other way we allow it to happen anyway. The only reason incest is illegal is the "ick" factor. Besides, they can just get an abortion... 
Regarding polygamy, nowadays we appear to have serial polygamy, whereas we have multiple partners sequentially rather than all at once. Nevertheless, polygamy as we think of it still has no good counter-argument other than we think it's wrong. There is no argument one can make against these two scenarios that also wouldn't apply to gay marriage or any other form of legally allowed marriage. 

 

[antonlavey]

Originally Posted by CWrite78

im surprised they didn't bring in old/young (under aged) couples or animals.

it usually goes that way.

if gays can get married, why can't a guy/girl marry a less than 18 year old, or why can't this guy/girl marry his dog or why can't this guy/girl marry 100 people and so on

Yo if gays can get married, why can't I marry my blow-up doll.

 

[ilpadrino9]

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? 

Do we not also allow people who have a genetic disorder and have an increased chance of passing along the disorder to have children? Do we not allow people with Tay-Sachs, or muscular dystrophy, or any other heritable disease to have children? We can't say we're protecting children from genetic disorders when in every other way we allow it to happen anyway. The only reason incest is illegal is the "ick" factor. Besides, they can just get an abortion... 
Regarding polygamy, nowadays we appear to have serial polygamy, whereas we have multiple partners sequentially rather than all at once. Nevertheless, polygamy as we think of it still has no good counter-argument other than we think it's wrong. There is no argument one can make against these two scenarios that also wouldn't apply to gay marriage or any other form of legally allowed marriage. 

 

[ilpadrino9]

Originally Posted by 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.

By that rational, gay people aren't denied the right to marry. They can marry any person of the opposite sex that they want. The argument the gay community makes is that they can't marry the person they want to. Under that premise, my argument is valid. 

 

[ilpadrino9]

Originally Posted by 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.

By that rational, gay people aren't denied the right to marry. They can marry any person of the opposite sex that they want. The argument the gay community makes is that they can't marry the person they want to. Under that premise, my argument is valid. 

 

[nako xl]

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? 

how many gay couplings produce genetically deformed children?

 

[nako xl]

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? 

how many gay couplings produce genetically deformed children?

 

[tennhouse2]

Originally Posted by ilpadrino9

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? 

Do we not also allow people who have a genetic disorder and have an increased chance of passing along the disorder to have children? Do we not allow people with Tay-Sachs, or muscular dystrophy, or any other heritable disease to have children? We can't say we're protecting children from genetic disorders when in every other way we allow it to happen anyway. The only reason incest is illegal is the "ick" factor. Besides, they can just get an abortion... 
Regarding polygamy, nowadays we appear to have serial polygamy, whereas we have multiple partners sequentially rather than all at once. Nevertheless, polygamy as we think of it still has no good counter-argument other than we think it's wrong. There is no argument one can make against these two scenarios that also wouldn't apply to gay marriage or any other form of legally allowed marriage. 

the difference is with people who are born with genetic disorders its no ones fault, they just happen to be born that way. It would be messed up to not let some marry who is competent for something they just happen to be born with through no fault of anyone. With incest its two healthy individuals who could 100% not have sex with each other and go to other people instead of more then likely having a child with a genetic disorder but they just dont care about the consiquences.

and i went through polygamy earlier

 

[tennhouse2]

Originally Posted by ilpadrino9

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? 

Do we not also allow people who have a genetic disorder and have an increased chance of passing along the disorder to have children? Do we not allow people with Tay-Sachs, or muscular dystrophy, or any other heritable disease to have children? We can't say we're protecting children from genetic disorders when in every other way we allow it to happen anyway. The only reason incest is illegal is the "ick" factor. Besides, they can just get an abortion... 
Regarding polygamy, nowadays we appear to have serial polygamy, whereas we have multiple partners sequentially rather than all at once. Nevertheless, polygamy as we think of it still has no good counter-argument other than we think it's wrong. There is no argument one can make against these two scenarios that also wouldn't apply to gay marriage or any other form of legally allowed marriage. 

the difference is with people who are born with genetic disorders its no ones fault, they just happen to be born that way. It would be messed up to not let some marry who is competent for something they just happen to be born with through no fault of anyone. With incest its two healthy individuals who could 100% not have sex with each other and go to other people instead of more then likely having a child with a genetic disorder but they just dont care about the consiquences.

and i went through polygamy earlier

 

[antonlavey]

Ok, here's a question that really needs to be asked....is there really a significant population of people out there that want to marry their sibling?

Incestuous parent-child couplings should be completely off limits, and there should be no room for discussion there because of the potential for abuse. But I'm curious as to how many incestuous couples out there that would fight for this law....if there aren't any then this discussion is all speculation.


I understand with polygamy there is a substantial following, and a rights movement for their right to marry isn't far-fetched by any means. But I'm curious as to if there is a similar following for incest.

 

[antonlavey]

Ok, here's a question that really needs to be asked....is there really a significant population of people out there that want to marry their sibling?

Incestuous parent-child couplings should be completely off limits, and there should be no room for discussion there because of the potential for abuse. But I'm curious as to how many incestuous couples out there that would fight for this law....if there aren't any then this discussion is all speculation.


I understand with polygamy there is a substantial following, and a rights movement for their right to marry isn't far-fetched by any means. But I'm curious as to if there is a similar following for incest.

 

[thunderchunk69]

Originally Posted by Nako XL

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? 

how many gay couplings produce genetically deformed children?

0
0 can produce healthy offspring as well.

 

[thunderchunk69]

Originally Posted by Nako XL

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? 

how many gay couplings produce genetically deformed children?

0
0 can produce healthy offspring as well.

 

[nako xl]

Originally Posted by So Nyuh Shi Dae

Originally Posted by Nako XL

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 problem with this is that, as far as I know, there are no laws that restrict couples that could potentially breed children with genetic diseases from attempting to have children.

Edit: dude above me addressed what I addressed.

right, but just having a genetic disorder doesnt mean you'll pass it along.  that's why those traits are recessive.

if you are a carrier of a recessive trait and then have a child with your sister who is probably also a carrier, then there's an even greater chance of passing that along to your children as opposed to if you breed with someone from outside of your family.

it's not just the "ick" factor.  it's very logical.

 

[nako xl]

Originally Posted by So Nyuh Shi Dae

Originally Posted by Nako XL

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 problem with this is that, as far as I know, there are no laws that restrict couples that could potentially breed children with genetic diseases from attempting to have children.

Edit: dude above me addressed what I addressed.

right, but just having a genetic disorder doesnt mean you'll pass it along.  that's why those traits are recessive.

if you are a carrier of a recessive trait and then have a child with your sister who is probably also a carrier, then there's an even greater chance of passing that along to your children as opposed to if you breed with someone from outside of your family.

it's not just the "ick" factor.  it's very logical.

 

[tennhouse2]

Originally Posted by ilpadrino9

Originally Posted by 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.

By that rational, gay people aren't denied the right to marry. They can marry any person of the opposite sex that they want. The argument the gay community makes is that they can't marry the person they want to. Under that premise, my argument is valid. 

yea but with the gay community they werent allowed to marry anyone of the gender that they were attracted to at all  not just 1 or 2 people, like incest

 

[tennhouse2]

Originally Posted by ilpadrino9

Originally Posted by 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.

By that rational, gay people aren't denied the right to marry. They can marry any person of the opposite sex that they want. The argument the gay community makes is that they can't marry the person they want to. Under that premise, my argument is valid. 

yea but with the gay community they werent allowed to marry anyone of the gender that they were attracted to at all  not just 1 or 2 people, like incest

 

[tennhouse2]

Originally Posted by ThunderChunk69

Originally Posted by Nako XL

Originally Posted by ThunderChunk69

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

how many gay couplings produce genetically deformed children?

0
0 can produce healthy offspring as well.

lol but we were talking about having children with genetic disorders, so what does not being able to have kids at all have to do with this?