Kuroikaze Posted April 19, 2009 Share Posted April 19, 2009 Which, as Thur pointed out above, is at best a hollow concern, on account of there are no laws or social mores restricting or discouraging mentally retarded people from breeding, which carries essentially the same potential for genetic abnormalities in children. Yes, and I'm certainly no fan of big brother coming in and controlling our reproductive rights. We need less government not more, at least when it comes to this sort of thing. Besides evolution has done its thing for millions of years without government intervention, I think it can get along fine without us mucking with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodsmoke Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 Agreed. They may do it on their own time, but self-correcting mechanisms will do their thing eventually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vomit Comet Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 Question for you guys: Your long lost twin sister that you never, ever knew about turns up. And she's way fucking hot. And she starts coming on to you. Do you bite? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurisaz Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 I will answer that question if it should ever really happen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodsmoke Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 I've never really wanted kids, and on the off chance that changes I've always been a fan of adoption... As a side note, I've an older cousin who I didn't see terribly often growing up who is pretty damn hot, as well as another from mom's side of the family who I just "met" via facebook and immediately had to remind myself she's both too young and a blood relative. Hell, I'm even capable of looking at my sister as a woman and seeing her physical appeal, though it doesn't turn me on any. It's a good thing none of my friends (let alone my family) read ExC. They'd probably disown me if they ever realized how truly libertine I am. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abiyoyo Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 Even if it turns out it isn't based in genetics, people should still be allowed to be themselves. Did you know there is a movement that wants to legalize adult incest, making it legal to marry within family at an adult age? Dad could marry adult daughter. Mom could marry adult son, etc. Anyhow, like you said, people should be allowed to just be themselves, right? So what? If all participants are adult, sane and consensual, what harm is done? And before you try to play the "risk of genetically defect offspring" card: 1. that's a thing of procreation not of sex itself, 2. as long as otherwise genetically handicapped people are allowed to have sex, any law that prohibits incestual sex is not fair. Many won't like that POV, no doubt... but if laws are supposed to be just then this is what it should be like. So you would be ok if your 18year old child decided to marry your brothers/sisters sibling? I wouldn't be ok with that. That is freaking sick man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abiyoyo Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 ...And? How does Jimbo marrying his little sister in the deep south affect you anymore than Francis and his boyfriend marrying each other in Massachusetts? The chances of either of them knocking on your door and attempting to break up your marriage and/or convert you are essentially the same - i.e. Not Gonna' Happen. Come on, YoYo, you've been trolling here long enough to know you're going to have to come up with something way more sensational than that to get any appreciable response out of us. It's the same thing Woodsmoke, smoke just fogging those glasses my friend. I don't see anyone roasting the OP that said Gay lifestyle just didn't make evolutionary sense to them Crucify the Christians! Damn those Christians! Anyway. I agree with the OP, it doesn't make evolutionary sense to me as well, and I just wanted to see the comments from people about the incest deal. Most seem to not really care about it. Honestly, I commend the gay lifestyle more so than incest relationship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abiyoyo Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 YoYo should watch this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PooEhBxh0NY...feature=related For some reason or another, all I get from youtube is the audio, no visual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abiyoyo Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 The only real issue is one of genetics, in that there is a greater risk of genetic defects for children of these couples. Which, of course, is the most likely reason we have evolved an aversion to such relationships in the first place. However some people either don't have this aversion or overcome it. Beyond a concern that they not give birth babies with birth defects I'm not terribly concerned about it. Yeah, I think it's in the teens though, the percentage. I DO know one couple though through a friend that got married, and were first gen cousins. They had kids, and they all got web feet, no joke. I don't know if that has to do with genetics or anything, but it's weird. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodsmoke Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 Crucify the Christians! Damn those Christians! It's about time. I was beginning to wonder if you'd ever catch on. Anyway. I agree with the OP, it doesn't make evolutionary sense to me as well, and I just wanted to see the comments from people about the incest deal. Most seem to not really care about it. Honestly, I commend the gay lifestyle more so than incest relationship. Aye, that's fair enough, but I explained above how it does make evolutionary sense on a larger scale. The homosexual organism may not be propagating its genes, but it is improving the lot of the group, and that usefulness ensures it a place of acceptance and security therein. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abiyoyo Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 Crucify the Christians! Damn those Christians! It's about time. I was beginning to wonder if you'd ever catch on. Anyway. I agree with the OP, it doesn't make evolutionary sense to me as well, and I just wanted to see the comments from people about the incest deal. Most seem to not really care about it. Honestly, I commend the gay lifestyle more so than incest relationship. Aye, that's fair enough, but I explained above how it does make evolutionary sense on a larger scale. The homosexual organism may not be propagating its genes, but it is improving the lot of the group, and that usefulness ensures it a place of acceptance and security therein. I can't remember who it was, or which thread; but someone said they thought the gay lifestyle was a counteraction to overpopulation. That makes more sense to me on an evolutionary level than any. Even before I was religious, I never understood the gay lifestyle. But, my stepbrother is gay, so I had first hand interaction toward it, and understand gay people are people as well, and do deserve rights as any other American. There should be a separation of church and state more indepth in my opinion. The state functions in the union of marriage, yet the church ordains who gets married?? It is directly influenced by early church in America, and the notion of abomination of the gay lifestyle. America is not the same America as then. I believe things should be dealt with on a here and now basis, which is equality to all peoples in the land of America, not just the so called ''righteous''. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neon Genesis Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 For some reason or another, all I get from youtube is the audio, no visual.That's weird, did you try refreshing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmmaRose Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 YoYo should watch this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PooEhBxh0NY...feature=related That video was amazing--actually pretty educational but still hilarious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kuroikaze Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 So you would be ok if your 18year old child decided to marry your brothers/sisters sibling? I wouldn't be ok with that. That is freaking sick man. So are you in favor of using the "gross out factor" as the basis for the ethical limits we place on society. I think you can understand why we don't use that as the basis for our laws. Its not about what I find personally acceptable, but about what we feel justified in making illegal. Case in point, I find many of the values touted by the Christian right to be totally aberrant, but I don't favor passing laws to limit their freedom to have those views. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurisaz Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 So you would be ok if your 18year old child decided to marry your brothers/sisters sibling? I wouldn't be ok with that. That is freaking sick man. learn2read n00b I didn't claim I would like that. I stated that legislation, if it's to be a just one, has to allow it (or else, ban sex between otherwise genetically-handicapped people too). I would probably be personally uneasy with that indeed. But I did not refer to my personal views. Clear enough? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sexton Blake Posted April 27, 2009 Share Posted April 27, 2009 Homosexuality is something people have strong views about, particularly if they are gay or if they are a fundamental christian. It is obviously not evolutionary and as it is not genetic. It could be down to a simple matter of testosterone in the womb when the foetus is there. Lots of it and you'll like women. A little of it and you'll like men. That is regardless of what sex you are. If so, it would mean that people can be born gay or lesbian, so more evidence against god who considers it an abomination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ephymeris Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 The state functions in the union of marriage, yet the church ordains who gets married?? It is directly influenced by early church in America, and the notion of abomination of the gay lifestyle. America is not the same America as then. I believe things should be dealt with on a here and now basis, which is equality to all peoples in the land of America, not just the so called ''righteous''. As I recall, I didn't need to have my marriage "ordained" by a church to make it legal. I was technically "married" a week before my ceremony by signing my marriage license at the court house. If you think marriage really requires church "ordainment" to be valid, then I guess you think all nonchristians are not truly married. That's a lot of people. Interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Marty Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 Actually, the area of the brain that maps the sex organs is right next to the section that maps the feet. It's weird how the brain maps the body out, but that's how it is. The thought is that there can be some cross wiring of the sections, or "bleed through" that makes feet a sexual turn on for some people and not others. I have a slight foot fetish, so I understand what you mean! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I Broke Free Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 I watched this documentary yesterday and I thought it was really interesting but about the whole brother theory thing. Even though I'm gay, I only have one older sister and no brothers, so does that say anything at all about it? Except for my straight twin brother, I also only have an older sister. However my sister is a lesbian, we came out to our parents two weeks apart! They loved that! I have gay male cousins on both sides of the family too, so I do think there is both a genetic and a hormonal component to homosexuality. Or it could be an environmental factor in your family's lives. Either way, I always viewed gay-ness in a similar light to fetishes- that is to say, if I have a foot-fetish, it's just what turns me on. I doubt highly that there's a genetic cause for this. Actually, probably what turns me on about it, is how taboo it is. If my family was very conservative about certain things, that may very well contribute to my turn-ons later in life. If two people end up gay in a family, I wouldn't put it out of the question that up-bringing had something to do with it. That being said, I don't think it's neccessarily cause-and-effect. I wouldn't blame my parents for a foot fetish, no matter what contributed to it. It's just a sum of my life experiences, it would seem. For me, though, I don't have a foot fetish. it's actually a turn off for me. Just like a vagina is apparently a turn off for gay people. I'm not sure I see a difference... I don’t rule anything out and it is possible that our environment had something to do with both me and my sister being gay. The only problem with the theory is that if it was the kind of environment my sister and I grew up in that made us gay then Beaver Cleaver should have been gay too. If a Christian were to write down all the criteria that they think are necessary to ensure a heterosexual child, my childhood had it all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Marty Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 I love it when xtians say that gay adoption will lead to more kids being gay. I ask them how many people who are currently gay had straight heterosexual parents and the classic xtian in the headlights stare comes online! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts