kluang

So you're saying incest, inbreeding is ok because we have birth control?

Even so, morally it's still wrong. Not to mention ickly.

And genetically the kid born from inbreeding is likely to have genetic disorder, die early and hemophilia.

Yes we have birth control. But if they got married, they want kids too right? I'm saying the impact of inbreeding to that kid genetically.

Not to mention the psychology factor when that kid finds out her mommy is her aunty.

What to call her eh? Mommy or Aunty?

Incest is not pedophile. Its totally different.

A four year old girl walks into the bathroom while her father is taking a shower, pulls back the shower curtain and asks: "When will I get something like that between my legs?"
"About 15 minutes after Mommy leaves for work." answers her father.

Now thats pedophile and incest at the same time.

__________________

Miburo

Yep, except inbreeding isn't necessarily a part of incest. Incest is sex with a family member, inbreeding is actually having children with them. They're different things.

Also, normal non-incestuous couples can have the potential of having a higher chance of birth defects or genetic disorders as well. Should they not be allowed to have sex either? These things aren't in anyway unique to incest.
Immoral? No. Icky? Sure, for a lot of people it is. Though, there's an easy solution for those people: Don't bang family members. Your personal opinion on what's gross shouldn't be applied to other people though.

Raping kids is bad. What's that got to do with anything? Like you said, they're two different things. Some dude could rape mommy while she's at the bus stop waiting to go to work. Rape and heterosexual sex at the same time. Zomg, heterosexual sex is teh immoral. >.<;

Ninja48

Here is your argument, Lumineon:

Incest is icky. Therefore it's wrong. Lots of people think it's icky, so those people would be harsh to do-ers of incest and cause social disruption.

Now, watch this.

Interracial sex is icky. Therefore it's wrong. Lots of people think it's icky, so those people would be harsh to do-ers of interracial sex and cause social disruption.

Same shit. Since your logic can be applied to interracial sex in the same way, it is also wrong?

__________________

Lumineon

That makes sense. It also explains why I refuse to change my stance on the issue. If a valid counter-argument isn't presented, why change the way I feel? You've wrote a lot, but the only logical reason you've given to prove that there's nothing wrong with incest (completely ignoring that it defies the emotional human disposition to believe that incest is WRONG) is that it doesn't harm anybody. And that may be true in some cases, but you can't truthfully say that some families won't be destroyed because of it. I fear that a perfectly normal family will be left in shambles by something like this. Yeah, I'm not denying that homosexuality/interracial relationships can have similar effects, but you also can't deny that incest will leave things incredibly awkward for many members in the family. And I'm just wondering "is that worth it?" Just to be in love. Ruining your family irreparably. Is that really worth it?

Now, in instances where incest is accepted by the entire family and no one feels awkward, uncomfortable, or anything, I say all the power to them. But the truth remains that a majority of families don't operate this way. And I'm not saying that with any substantial evidence, but question yourself this: how many families do you know who would be okay with it?

Also, the boundaries of this argument have not been clearly laid out. Incest involving which family members (obviously the whole cousin/cousin is different from sibling, wouldn't you agree? I mean, the people who are INVOLVED in cousin/cousin relationships don't even approve of sibling relationships), of what age, under what circumstance? Two consenting adults are fully matured and aren't likely to let hormonal inbalances (puberty) speak for them. However I would hope that not only their morality would tell them not to engage in a familial relationship, but their will to prevent unnecessary drama/damage. But hey, as I said. If everything works out and everyone's happy, then be my guest. I still don't agree with their actions.

Who said I'm thinking poorly of these people? I'm not belittling them in any sense. I am saying that what they're doing is wrong, but I don't think they're necessarily bad people. I happen to think that the girls in my school who open their legs willingly for any guy are wrong by being whores, but I don't think poorly of them. They're still people whom I don't know. They deserve respect too, right?

No, I understand what you're saying but I refuse to believe that the strain of a homosexual/interracial relationship could be as damaging as that of an incestuous relationship. Just like you refuse to believe that homosexuality/interracial vs. incest is different because of the parameters I highlighted previously (I mean unless you just skipped over that part. I haven't seen you logically address the issue yet), I refuse to believe that they're the same.

lolol. Tell your family that you're gay. Then a week later tell you're family you've been fucking a family member. Then come back and tell me which one they disapprove of more.


You never said it couldn't potentially ruin a family but you're unwilling to acknowledge how often it could and will.

I would, but what exactly have you said that I can disprove as being illogical? All you've really said is that incest is right because no one's being harmed and two people agree to it. That's true. No one's physically being harmed and no one's being held against his or her will. But the after-effects of incest are partially what make me opposed to it.

I'm sure they were. But again, "mom I'm gay" is a lot easier to digest than "mom I've been having sex with Auntie Anne."

It makes it all the more reason not to do it.

I actually resent that. The most obvious argument against incest is that it's icky, yet I don't believe I've included that in any of my arguments, which has been extremely challenging. The main reason, truthfully, why I think incest is wrong is that it's icky. But I've put that reason on the backburner during this whole argument because it's not, as you say, a logical reason to condemn something. I think that by saying that it's disastrous to a family has been more than fair enough an argument. But if you refuse to see that, then I guess you have selective hea--err, reading?-- and, of course, "selective logic"

Nah it's tiring to have to keep reiterating my points and deal with the extra bullshit that you're bringing into the debates, such as "logic" and "how to debate." I realize that you spend an awful large amount of time on these debate forums, posting and making your opinion heard to the world of Narutards, which is slightly commendable in a rather "thank god that's not me" sense, but I really don't think that such discussions are relevant to a debate. Or wait, are you still trying to make yourself look A++ intelligent as opposed to A+ by saying that I can't debate? I see what you're doing there.

And trust me, it's no skin off my back either. When this argument is said and over I'm still going to be against incest. You and Ninja can go and have sex with as many family members as you please and I'll think it's wrong.

So you don't consider bringing homosexuality and interracial marriages into the issue diverting? Are you kidding me? This whole argument has consisted of anecdote and analogy. Yeah your analogies may work but you're not arguing incest itself. You're arguing for incest, saying it's right by conducing that "homosexuality/interracial relationships are right, so obviously incest must be right."

yeah I ROFL'D when i saw his post.

__________________

this heart that beats,
it beats for whom?

Ninja48

Nicely done. Attack us personally.

Holy shit. Analogy is logic, and is fully relevant to the debate. If you believe one thing is wrong, and that thing is incredibly similar to another thing, you must also believe it is wrong. Same goes for if you believe it's right.


Okay. Here's something. What if incest was widely accepted everywhere, would it suddenly be right? Because then, it won't damage families at all. I swear, "it damages families" is really not a good argument, because if you hypothetically say, for example, tomato eaters damage a family, you can't go and say tomato eating is wrong.

Oh sure, a majority doesn't think that tomato eating is wrong. But what if they did? Seriously. What if they did? Would it be wrong? What the majority believes is irrelevant. That's like traveling back in time to the days of slavery, and arguing that slavery is right because everyone does it.

__________________

Assaulter

Who's to say the family would truly be ruined. Like I've said before a true family would deal with it. I'm not saying it wouldn't deal a heavy blow to them, but when it comes to kids its looked at a hell of a lot differently than your perceiving it I'm sure of this. Also when it comes the "emotional human disposition to believe that incest is WRONG." How do you think that happened? A bunch of money grubbing people said it was wrong and you have no word otherwise, and after years of it being what was said, people lost who said it. This all created the belief that it is bad. Also what Miburo was pointing out is the main point of this thread. Just because a family says it shouldn't happened, doesn't mean its wrong for it to happen.

What makes them so different. Thats the "ick" factor playing in again. Just because they are cousins doesn't mean they not blood related. Once again the morales of a child are built on how the parents raise them. Just because it is morally wrong for you, obviously means that it is not morally wrong for them, or of course they wouldn't do it. With that they don't know about what it would do because they are following their heart, and it seems pure to them. If you were in love with someone your family did not agree with, you would do the exact same thing. I'm almost willing to bet on it.



Just because you respect them doesn't cancel out the fact that you consider them to be going through their life wrong with their choices. When you do that you look at them with distaste, that is considered looking at them poorly. If you didn't think poorly of them you would engage into a conversation maybe about incest, and you wouldn't say anything truly negative about it.



Um. From what you said incest's emotional damage is all towards the family. If you had a family that disagreed with homosexual/interracial relationships as much as they do incest you would have an instance where they would do equal damage. I've seen it several times, where a kid gets disowned because he is dating a black girl. Same with homosexual end. There truly is nothing that makes them different. The only reason you are seeing them as different is because of the words. Strip it down to bare facts. It is two people loving each other, but the public sees them all as unnatural.



I would have to say the gay part. Wanna know why? Most families do not like their children being gay because of the fact that they can not reproduce more of that family. Usually when it is the only boy in the family it gets really bad. The incest part is AUTOMATICALLY assumed as, "What did we do wrong for this to happen?"



Its called an example. If it was diverting it would have nothing to do with the issue, but in truth it does. They have both been considered unnatural just like incest and as of this day is still looked at by ignorant people as wrong and shouldn't happen. Even though if it came down to it that they loved a member of the opposite sex or even race both they would do it without worry what others think.

__________________

Lumineon

Don't try to wiggle your way into this. I wasn't attacking you personally. Perhaps Miburo would consider that an insult but I do think I gave him something of a compliment by saying that he's at A+ intelligence even without the "OMG UR STUPID U CANT DEBATE", right? ;]

Okay, and maybe analogy is logic. But anecdote appeals emotionally. You can argue this all you want using all the logic you have, but that still wouldn't mean it's emotionally acceptable. We, as human beings, are wired to be emotional creatures. What appeals and doesn't appeal to us is influenced largely on our emotional dispositions. Again, you may consider your stance to be pure logic, but I would think that as a cultivated human being you would separate yourself from mere animalistic tendencies and know that romantic love should not be confused with the way you should love a family member. Feel free to use logic as your only defense. I've seen it done plenty already in this topic.

If incest were widely accepted everywhere, I'd still be against it. Your tomato eating example is pure shit. Obviously tomatoes don't damage families. BUT FUCKING YOUR AUNT OR UNCLE CERTAINLY WILL. Seriously, it's pathetic how your only argument is fueled by other "analogies." Stop dodging the issue and tell me how incest will keep a family together. Stop looking at the surface, because you're coming off as very superficial. Stop being selfless and arguing for the fact that it's a debate. This is obviously a topic that digs a lot deeper. You're accepting of incest, but you're not explaining why. "BECAUSE IT DOESN'T HARM ANYONE." But what about the instances in which it DOES harm an entire family? Are you still accepting of it then? 'Cuz I'm not.

Depends on how tomato eating would be wrong. If it could break up a family, make things awkward irreparably, irreversibly change the way two family members feel towards eachother, never allow things to ever be the same again, cause those two family members to live with the guilt of having to tell their posterior of their actions with other family members (aunts, uncles, etc.)... then sure, I'd certainly be against it. And, of course, if tomato eating was as icky as incest, that too. ;D

And this is for Assaulter, because I was fucking ROLLING off my chair after reading this.

Right, and fucking your sister will allow you to reproduce as well. I SEE THE LOGIC IN THAT LOL. We're off the reproduction issue. Seriously, where do you stand here? Are you for it or are you against it, because the way you've been arguing it seems like you're borderline. You're supporting both sides with weak points.

__________________

this heart that beats,
it beats for whom?

Maisauce

This is so simple, and yet you people have to make it complicated. The fact that you're from the south is responsible for your stance in this argument. GET FUCKED. YOU'RE FUCKING WEIRD.

Ninja48

Well, you did say I could fuck my own family members if I liked. Which I wouldn't, of course.


You're still not understanding. I'm just saying what if a side of a majority of families were incredibly strongly against the morality of tomato eating? What if it was so strong, if a tomato eater suddenly revealed themselves to their family? One side of the family will be disgusted, and will break up the family. Though, just because it does this, it doesn't make tomato eating wrong.

And yo, just because it doesn't necessarily help a family mean it's wrong, either.


In this paragraph, you seemed to understand me a bit more. If you really believe that it would be wrong if it just happened to destroy families, then my argument is done. I really can't convince you if you believe that. But just consider that it's silly as hell for you to think tomato eating can even be remotely wrong. Lol.

Also, I hate tomatoes. They're so "icky." How the hell someone could eat raw tomatoes is beyond me. My stance on tomato eating is the same as my stance on incest. :)

Finally, what if incest did not destroy families. Would you be fine with it then?

__________________

Assaulter

Eh I'm for it. You don't read well do you. My statements are open minded, not closed minded ignorance. I'm not supporting both sides neither. The ones you think I'm supporting is against inbreed, not incest. I'm not arguing neither, being how you have not once presented a point that could even remotely sway my belief. All you have stated is several statements on how you feel a family would react with no powerful logic behind any of it.

Also Maisauce. I'm from Indiana and I have to say the midwest has never been confused with the south in the whole time I've lived there. I live in Alabama now and being how I'm very positive you have never visited such a place I don't think you should throw them into your comment.

__________________

Maisauce

YOU CAN'T USE ENGLISH PROPERLY. JUST SHUT THE FUCK UP.

Lumineon

You could. I said that's your decision. If you choose to do it, I'd still think it's wrong. I wouldn't take it as an insult, because you obviously wouldn't do it, right?

But see, the problem with this analogy is that you're not explaining why tomato-eating, in this instance, would be wrong. I think I've already overexhausted myself in explaining why I think incest is dangerous to families. And as I said before, if tomato-eating would cause similar effects on families as incest does, I'd probably be against that too! (And yeah, I agree, I can't see how people could eat raw tomatoes. That juicy disgusting liquidy consistency just isn't appetizing. ).

True, but if it causes more harm than good, it's something that I'd advise not to do.

Ah, I'm glad I'm starting to come around and see the light.

If incest did not destroy families and cause all of the interpersonal chaos that it does, it would be no different from anything else that is socially acceptable in this world.

no sorry i are absent the day they teached me how to read good in 1st grade i should have been gone to a school in indiana i would come out so much more sucesful there im sure

Your statements may be open-minded, but that doesn't mean they're right. I mean, if you honestly think that a family will ever learn to deal with the fact that two people in the family are getting it on, you're wrong. And I love how you're the first to criticize a "lack of powerful logic," yet you're saying that the same people who are against homosexuality because it closes the possibility of procreating would be for incest. Yeah, that's logical man.

__________________

this heart that beats,
it beats for whom?

Maisauce

That's how it goes. GET FUCKED.

Ninja48

You implied that I would, really. Your italicized "right" is also implying that I would, because it's like you're doubting my sureness.

I was comparing it to incest by saying it's icky, and can hypothetically destroy a family. Of course it wouldn't realistically destroy a family.

Interracial marriage used to cause chaos within families. Doesn't mean that it was ever wrong. Incest is only not accepted in this world because it's seen as disgusting.

But for you, if interracial marriage or tomato eating would destroy families everywhere, then it shouldn't be done. So, damn.

__________________

Miburo

Okay, I just told them that I was banging my aunt, and that I've now decided that I'm gay. They were more upset about me being gay. What now?

Actually, I never once disagreed with that. I've actually been more than willing to acknowledge the fact that it may potentially disrupt a family. All I'm saying is that it doesn't effect it's morality any.

You're saying that it's wrong based on the fact that it can destroy a family. That's your entire argument.

Premises:
1. destroying a family is morally wrong.
2. incest has to potential to destroy a family

Conclusion: Incest is morally wrong.

Now look at this:

Premises:
1. destroying a family is morally wrong
2. homosexuality/interracial relationships have the potential to destroy a family.

Conclusion: Homosexuality and interracial relationships are morally wrong.

You've agreed to all these premises in previous posts in this thread. You've admitted that homosexuality and interracial relationships can have similar effects in regards to destroying a family. However, you've said that there's absolutely nothing wrong with either homosexuality or interracial relationships.

How can that logically be? Note that I'm not saying that they're both as wrong as incest, because you've stated that you feel that incest is more harmful overall (Source of information that supports this claim would be appreciated, by the way. XD). However, they are still harmful to a comparatively lesser degree. So they should be morally wrong to a lesser degree by your own logic. They cannot in anyway be morally right using your train of logic though.

See the inconsistency here? My argument is based around that inconsistency. Because now it leaves you with very few options. You can admit that homosexuality and interracial relationships are morally wrong by your logic; admit that there is a flaw in the only premise that you've provided (anything that potentially destroys a family is morally wrong); or admit that your beliefs aren't logical. That's pretty much all you can reasonably do. Hence the purpose of my analogies.

And no, this isn't avoiding the topic of incest itself. Because I'm attempting to demonstrate to you why exactly I believe that there is nothing wrong with incest itself. Remember, my entire argument is that there is nothing morally wrong with incest; which is based on lack of credible evidence to suggest that there is anything morally wrong with it. That's all.