The debate "Stop comparing gays to blacks. Instead compare homosexuality to incest." was started by
March 3, 2017, 7:24 pm.
12 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 12 people are on the disagree side.
People are starting to choose their side.
There is a tie in this debate, post your arguments, call some reinforcements and break this tie.
InksEvermore posted 5 arguments, thereal posted 6 arguments to the agreers part.
Nemiroff posted 2 arguments to the disagreers part.
InksEvermore, thereal, UnderdogMike, mmjd14, Suco_169, makson, TimRSA and 5 visitors agree.
nicksgallagher, Nemiroff, juneha, PsychDave, human, braymus17 and 6 visitors disagree.
nope historybuff, you proved my point by proving youre a retard with 0 knowledge on anything.
and who was comparing gay people to blacks? they have their rights without having to relate to others.
all life is slimey.
They have tentacles and slime and stuff all over the place.
Shellfish look weird though.
I proved your point by proving you wrong? have you finally lost what little hold on reality you had left?
Historybuff, well done for proving my point lmfao.
I agree that was it's initial basis, but we now eat shellfish and pork regularly and the only restrictions are social dogma.
the same thing with incest. I'm not saying legalize it. perhaps I'm arguing for banning people with known recessive disorders from having children with each other. I'm just seeing a disconnect in the way we treat similar situations with a double standard.
But that cultural aversion to it is based on the historic consequences. Look at cultures that regard pork and shellfish as disgusting. This comes from the increased risk of getting sick, leading to a religious and/or cultural taboo. Science has reduced the risks of both inbreeding and eating riskier foods, but that taboo remains.
that is true, but we have known about the recessive disorders and which families they run through (obviously not all, but many) for a few decades now.
your absolutely right that inbreeding was much more known throughout our societies history, but the fact that it has not budged from its uber disgusting in society despite modern revelations shows that ot has become entrenched socially.
I'm not saying it is perfectly normal, I'm just saying the specific level of disgust it's treated with is entirely social, and is more about the nastiness of the relationship than the outcome for children when it is discussed amongst lay (most) circles
But until recently we didn't have the technology to screen many of these disorders, so there was no way to regulate or legislate it. It would not surprise me if someone tried to implement similar testing to what closely related people use to determine if I breeding is likely to be a problem, and it would equally not surprised me if people fought against this government infringement on their rights. The reason inbreeding is controlled is because degrees of relatedness has always been fairly easy to determine. Recessive genetic traits far less so.
we do let people with massive hereditary defects marry and have kids.
for example, 2 people with the same horrible recessive desease are not prevented even if it's almost guaranteed the child will die or suffer?
incest is nowhere near as bad as some of these recessive combinations that may even likely be known to the parents. yet no law stops them.
I can't say that I am comfortable with incest in the slightest, but objectively looking, the level of disgust can only be explained socially. the actual evidence doesn't back up that level of disgust.
thereal are you actually mentally handicapped or is it just willful stupidity? many cultures look down on homosexuality, there are certainly examples of ones that didn't. just because your religious background teaches you to be a bigot, please don't assume that everyone "from the beginning of mankind" thinks the way you do. it makes you look very stupid.
being in relationships with people more distantly related then first cousins is perfectly legal. there are lots of cousins who get married. the reason to prevent more closely related people from getting married is to prevent inbreeding.
you seem to be the one incapable of thinking outside your own culture. anyone you thinks that every culture since the dawn of time hated gay people clearly knows very little outside their own little bubble.
cousins can have the issue. I guess sterilization would solve all practical problems but that is a heck of an extreme solution.
it is a social stigma that is quite strong. as a proponent of incest, I can't see how you would not support other deviant lifestyles such as homosexuality, etc.
Historybuff, youre literally the stupidest f***ing person on this app. Do you even realise that your argument makes 0 sense or are you that stupid that youre just chatting out of your ass? you said that the reason incest is seen as wrong is because your culture says so. well guess what? since the beginning of mankind homosexuality was also wromg and still is today but you seem to be fine with opposing culture in support of that. Secondly, its worse to not have any children at all and kill of the human species than it is to have children with defects (which is less than 0.1% chance as ink already said) and not only that, but non incestuous couples can also have children with genetic disorders if they are carriers so do you think it should be illegal for them to have children as well? You really are a stupid retarded sheep. the fact that you lack the brain power to even think outside of the culture you were raised in shows how aids you are. Fuck off, youre not smart enough to deb8.
HistoryBuff then should we arrest every hetersexual couple who breeds children of bad genes? what about to freedom and loving who you want to love. isnt it conflicting to say this when you can avoid this issue by getting a vascetomy or the fact that cousins dont have this issue. incest is very natural. if not a lot of us would not be here. isnt is discriminitory to force people to stop doing something illegally if lets say theyre not harming anyone and are willing to be infertile? or even lets say they are infertile. lets say there gay. this is a moral issue that u have
let's not forget the highly pious act of priesthood which often involves a voluntary choice to not bring offspring into this earth.
the reason incest morally offends you is because our culture tells you it should. the reason our culture does this is based on very valid reasons. inbreeding causes very seriously problems. look at the medical problems the Russian royal family had for example. marrying close relatives causes problems.
gay relationships by defininition can't produce inbred offspring, ergo the situations are completely different.
and gay couples can and do have children, so that is not a valid argument. and even if they couldn't have children, I don't see religious groups lining up to attack heterosexual couples who choose not to have children. if having children is that important then that is much more important demographic to go after.
if inbreeding was a real problem then a lot of us wouldnt have exist. no matter how disgusting that is to you. its just how it is. Mainly the reason we have an issue with incest is because of our morals just like how people have there morals against homosexuality. you realize an old man can be a predater towards a young little boy. have you ever thought of the possibility that the couple could be infertile? that they could be gay or lesbian. or what if there step brothers or step sisters. what if they know longer live with each other but hold the name. yet its illegal still? you have ur morals just like i have mines no matter how hard it is for u to understand
Historybuff...There are many reasons why some incestural relationships should not be happening just like how there shouldnt be some heteresexual relatipnships happening and that is simply because of bad genes. What happened to free will? If we are really worried about bad offspring why are we not stopping hetersexual relationships that have a really great chance of having offspring with physical issues? Not only that the chances of any of the happening between cousins is below .1%
so what do you think historybuff? I am not saying incest should happen among family but there are plemty of examples of it happening between cousins, uncles, aunties, etc. Usually any feelings people have for others they are related to is because a lot of the times they dont feel like family because they dont live with them.
"there is absolutely no reason why gay people shouldn't be together other than your religiously driven, pre enlightenment moral code." well no, as you can see from my previous comment, common sense plays a huge part in it as well.
There is no reason gay people shouldnt be together? oh right, other than the fact that homosexuality ceases procreation, which is only the NUMBER ONE priority of every species ever. If some great calamity caused a significant portion of the world population to be wiped out and only, say, 50 people remained, what do yoy think would be worse, homosexuality or incest?
historybuff, youre f***img stupid and invred. can you even read? the title of the debate very clearly says "instead compare homosexuality to incest", not "comoare homosexuality to pedophilia". dumbf***. Many homosexuals are pedophiles though because they are both sexual perversions which ho hand in hand.
atheists dont follow religion. they can become anything.
only atheists can be gays
there is a valid argument why incest is a problem. when closely related people produce offspring it causes inbreeding.
there is absolutely no reason why gay people shouldn't be together other than your religiously driven, pre enlightenment moral code.
sorry. misread that.
That's one way to get off on the wrong foot
why do you assume incest means someone who isnt consenting. you realize that can happen in a homosexual relationship? but who cares right
so you want to compare a relationship between two consenting adults to that between an adult and a child who cannot legally consent?
you know that makes you an ****** right?