Just 5 days later: Man Applies for Marriage License to Have Two Wives

[ChrisL]

Why are you against gay marriage? I really do not understand why people would be so dead set against it. I find it stunning the amount of resistance there is to giving all of our citizens the same rights and privileges. Does it really matter who they sleep with when it comes to be treated as an equal in our country? We are better than that, I think.

I've said why many times. Do you approve of two brothers marrying? To be consistent you would need to, I don't want marriage defined to include anyone. There's no equality issue with brothers marrying.The word equality is being misused.

But I've also said that it should be up to the people of a state the way it has been. Society has the right to define itself.

Why does what "you" want matter to anyone else except when applied to your own situation?

How many times do I need to say it should be up to the population in a state, not me or you.

No it shouldn't. It should not be up to anyone but the parties involved in the marriage. Why should anyone else have a say in your marriage?

 

[ChrisL]

So... how is having more than one wife or husband "immoral"?​

I

Why are you against gay marriage? I really do not understand why people would be so dead set against it. I find it stunning the amount of resistance there is to giving all of our citizens the same rights and privileges. Does it really matter who they sleep with when it comes to be treated as an equal in our country? We are better than that, I think.

I've said why many times. Do you approve of two brothers marrying? To be consistent you would need to, I don't want marriage defined to include anyone. There's no equality issue with brothers marrying.The word equality is being misused.

But I've also said that it should be up to the people of a state the way it has been. Society has the right to define itself.

No I do not. I do not have to approve of incest to approve of gay marriage. Why do you say that? Gay people work, pay taxes and contribute to the economy. Why do you want to deny them the opportunity to be married?

Edit: Sorry Ashtara, I quoted your post accidentally.

How can two brothers cause a deformed baby? Incest laws are in place to prevent such things and most people find it immoral. So you are saying you would be against it because it's illegal? Where's the consistency? Brothers work and pay taxes too. You simply wanted morality defined your way.

No. You answer MY questions.

I did. It's still there.

Not really. Why do you want to deny gay people the same opportunities of marriage that you have? They work, they pay taxes, and they contribute to our economy.

 

[ChrisL]

So... how is having more than one wife or husband "immoral"?​

I

Why are you against gay marriage? I really do not understand why people would be so dead set against it. I find it stunning the amount of resistance there is to giving all of our citizens the same rights and privileges. Does it really matter who they sleep with when it comes to be treated as an equal in our country? We are better than that, I think.

I've said why many times. Do you approve of two brothers marrying? To be consistent you would need to, I don't want marriage defined to include anyone. There's no equality issue with brothers marrying.The word equality is being misused.

But I've also said that it should be up to the people of a state the way it has been. Society has the right to define itself.

No I do not. I do not have to approve of incest to approve of gay marriage. Why do you say that? Gay people work, pay taxes and contribute to the economy. Why do you want to deny them the opportunity to be married?

Edit: Sorry Ashtara, I quoted your post accidentally.

How can two brothers cause a deformed baby? Incest laws are in place to prevent such things and most people find it immoral. So you are saying you would be against it because it's illegal? Where's the consistency? Brothers work and pay taxes too. You simply wanted morality defined your way.

Incest is, most times, the result of some form of abuse. I do not have to accept that just because I accept homosexual marriage.

 

[Pop23]

So... how is having more than one wife or husband "immoral"?​

I

Why are you against gay marriage? I really do not understand why people would be so dead set against it. I find it stunning the amount of resistance there is to giving all of our citizens the same rights and privileges. Does it really matter who they sleep with when it comes to be treated as an equal in our country? We are better than that, I think.

I've said why many times. Do you approve of two brothers marrying? To be consistent you would need to, I don't want marriage defined to include anyone. There's no equality issue with brothers marrying.The word equality is being misused.

But I've also said that it should be up to the people of a state the way it has been. Society has the right to define itself.

No I do not. I do not have to approve of incest to approve of gay marriage. Why do you say that? Gay people work, pay taxes and contribute to the economy. Why do you want to deny them the opportunity to be married?

Edit: Sorry Ashtara, I quoted your post accidentally.

How can two brothers cause a deformed baby? Incest laws are in place to prevent such things and most people find it immoral. So you are saying you would be against it because it's illegal? Where's the consistency? Brothers work and pay taxes too. You simply wanted morality defined your way.

It's arguing tradition, which is odd. Incest was illegal to keep bloodlines separate for inbreeding purposes.

How in the hell that applies to gay siblings is beyond me.

It can only be the icky factor I suppose.

The arguments that lead to gay marriage are equal to same sex sibling marriage. What am I missing?

Oh, btw, I oppose incest, but if the arguments for SSM are valid, I can't see how the arguments for allowing same sex siblings can't also be the same.

The only reasonable argument I've come across is that opposite sex siblings COULD procreate so all sibling marriage should be banned.

To do that you must argue someone else's ability to procreate is applicable to your relationship? That's absurd.

 

[ChrisL]

So... how is having more than one wife or husband "immoral"?​

I

Why are you against gay marriage? I really do not understand why people would be so dead set against it. I find it stunning the amount of resistance there is to giving all of our citizens the same rights and privileges. Does it really matter who they sleep with when it comes to be treated as an equal in our country? We are better than that, I think.

I've said why many times. Do you approve of two brothers marrying? To be consistent you would need to, I don't want marriage defined to include anyone. There's no equality issue with brothers marrying.The word equality is being misused.

But I've also said that it should be up to the people of a state the way it has been. Society has the right to define itself.

No I do not. I do not have to approve of incest to approve of gay marriage. Why do you say that? Gay people work, pay taxes and contribute to the economy. Why do you want to deny them the opportunity to be married?

Edit: Sorry Ashtara, I quoted your post accidentally.

How can two brothers cause a deformed baby? Incest laws are in place to prevent such things and most people find it immoral. So you are saying you would be against it because it's illegal? Where's the consistency? Brothers work and pay taxes too. You simply wanted morality defined your way.

It's arguing tradition, which is odd. Incest was illegal to keep bloodlines separate for inbreeding purposes.

How in the hell that applies to gay siblings is beyond me.

It can only be the icky factor I suppose.

The arguments that lead to gay marriage are equal to same sex sibling marriage. What am I missing?

Oh, btw, I oppose incest, but if the arguments for SSM are valid, I can't see how the arguments for allowing same sex siblings can't also be the same.

The only reasonable argument I've come across is that opposite sex siblings COULD procreate so all sibling marriage should be banned.

To do that you must argue someone else's ability to procreate is applicable to your relationship? That's absurd.

I explained that above.

 

[ChrisL]

So... how is having more than one wife or husband "immoral"?​

I

Why are you against gay marriage? I really do not understand why people would be so dead set against it. I find it stunning the amount of resistance there is to giving all of our citizens the same rights and privileges. Does it really matter who they sleep with when it comes to be treated as an equal in our country? We are better than that, I think.

I've said why many times. Do you approve of two brothers marrying? To be consistent you would need to, I don't want marriage defined to include anyone. There's no equality issue with brothers marrying.The word equality is being misused.

But I've also said that it should be up to the people of a state the way it has been. Society has the right to define itself.

No I do not. I do not have to approve of incest to approve of gay marriage. Why do you say that? Gay people work, pay taxes and contribute to the economy. Why do you want to deny them the opportunity to be married?

Edit: Sorry Ashtara, I quoted your post accidentally.

How can two brothers cause a deformed baby? Incest laws are in place to prevent such things and most people find it immoral. So you are saying you would be against it because it's illegal? Where's the consistency? Brothers work and pay taxes too. You simply wanted morality defined your way.

It's arguing tradition, which is odd. Incest was illegal to keep bloodlines separate for inbreeding purposes.

How in the hell that applies to gay siblings is beyond me.

It can only be the icky factor I suppose.

The arguments that lead to gay marriage are equal to same sex sibling marriage. What am I missing?

Oh, btw, I oppose incest, but if the arguments for SSM are valid, I can't see how the arguments for allowing same sex siblings can't also be the same.

The only reasonable argument I've come across is that opposite sex siblings COULD procreate so all sibling marriage should be banned.

To do that you must argue someone else's ability to procreate is applicable to your relationship? That's absurd.

What is absurd is to INSIST that if someone accepts gay marriage, that they accept incest between family members. That is the epitome of absurdity. So then, if you accept marriage as between a man and woman, then you must accept marriage between brother and sister?

 

[ChrisL]

So... how is having more than one wife or husband "immoral"?​

I

Why are you against gay marriage? I really do not understand why people would be so dead set against it. I find it stunning the amount of resistance there is to giving all of our citizens the same rights and privileges. Does it really matter who they sleep with when it comes to be treated as an equal in our country? We are better than that, I think.

I've said why many times. Do you approve of two brothers marrying? To be consistent you would need to, I don't want marriage defined to include anyone. There's no equality issue with brothers marrying.The word equality is being misused.

But I've also said that it should be up to the people of a state the way it has been. Society has the right to define itself.

No I do not. I do not have to approve of incest to approve of gay marriage. Why do you say that? Gay people work, pay taxes and contribute to the economy. Why do you want to deny them the opportunity to be married?

Edit: Sorry Ashtara, I quoted your post accidentally.

How can two brothers cause a deformed baby? Incest laws are in place to prevent such things and most people find it immoral. So you are saying you would be against it because it's illegal? Where's the consistency? Brothers work and pay taxes too. You simply wanted morality defined your way.

It's arguing tradition, which is odd. Incest was illegal to keep bloodlines separate for inbreeding purposes.

How in the hell that applies to gay siblings is beyond me.

It can only be the icky factor I suppose.

The arguments that lead to gay marriage are equal to same sex sibling marriage. What am I missing?

Oh, btw, I oppose incest, but if the arguments for SSM are valid, I can't see how the arguments for allowing same sex siblings can't also be the same.

The only reasonable argument I've come across is that opposite sex siblings COULD procreate so all sibling marriage should be banned.

To do that you must argue someone else's ability to procreate is applicable to your relationship? That's absurd.

YOU are absurd, IMO.

 

[Pop23]

So... how is having more than one wife or husband "immoral"?​

I

Why are you against gay marriage? I really do not understand why people would be so dead set against it. I find it stunning the amount of resistance there is to giving all of our citizens the same rights and privileges. Does it really matter who they sleep with when it comes to be treated as an equal in our country? We are better than that, I think.

I've said why many times. Do you approve of two brothers marrying? To be consistent you would need to, I don't want marriage defined to include anyone. There's no equality issue with brothers marrying.The word equality is being misused.

But I've also said that it should be up to the people of a state the way it has been. Society has the right to define itself.

No I do not. I do not have to approve of incest to approve of gay marriage. Why do you say that? Gay people work, pay taxes and contribute to the economy. Why do you want to deny them the opportunity to be married?

Edit: Sorry Ashtara, I quoted your post accidentally.

How can two brothers cause a deformed baby? Incest laws are in place to prevent such things and most people find it immoral. So you are saying you would be against it because it's illegal? Where's the consistency? Brothers work and pay taxes too. You simply wanted morality defined your way.

Incest is, most times, the result of some form of abuse. I do not have to accept that just because I accept homosexual marriage.

Are you seriously arguing that two heterosexual brothers would marry because of some kind of abuse?

No, more likely they just see the financial benefits they could reap until they found women to marry.

You do understand that you don't need to be in love or have sex to marry?, right,

If that's the case, what legal basis do you have to deny a license to any sibling couple without discriminating?

 

[Pop23]

So... how is having more than one wife or husband "immoral"?​

I

Why are you against gay marriage? I really do not understand why people would be so dead set against it. I find it stunning the amount of resistance there is to giving all of our citizens the same rights and privileges. Does it really matter who they sleep with when it comes to be treated as an equal in our country? We are better than that, I think.

I've said why many times. Do you approve of two brothers marrying? To be consistent you would need to, I don't want marriage defined to include anyone. There's no equality issue with brothers marrying.The word equality is being misused.

But I've also said that it should be up to the people of a state the way it has been. Society has the right to define itself.

No I do not. I do not have to approve of incest to approve of gay marriage. Why do you say that? Gay people work, pay taxes and contribute to the economy. Why do you want to deny them the opportunity to be married?

Edit: Sorry Ashtara, I quoted your post accidentally.

How can two brothers cause a deformed baby? Incest laws are in place to prevent such things and most people find it immoral. So you are saying you would be against it because it's illegal? Where's the consistency? Brothers work and pay taxes too. You simply wanted morality defined your way.

It's arguing tradition, which is odd. Incest was illegal to keep bloodlines separate for inbreeding purposes.

How in the hell that applies to gay siblings is beyond me.

It can only be the icky factor I suppose.

The arguments that lead to gay marriage are equal to same sex sibling marriage. What am I missing?

Oh, btw, I oppose incest, but if the arguments for SSM are valid, I can't see how the arguments for allowing same sex siblings can't also be the same.

The only reasonable argument I've come across is that opposite sex siblings COULD procreate so all sibling marriage should be banned.

To do that you must argue someone else's ability to procreate is applicable to your relationship? That's absurd.

YOU are absurd, IMO.

What is the arguments then?

Interesting isn't it. Take procreation out of the picture and you can't deny a license to anyone.

 

[ChrisL]

So... how is having more than one wife or husband "immoral"?​

I

Why are you against gay marriage? I really do not understand why people would be so dead set against it. I find it stunning the amount of resistance there is to giving all of our citizens the same rights and privileges. Does it really matter who they sleep with when it comes to be treated as an equal in our country? We are better than that, I think.

I've said why many times. Do you approve of two brothers marrying? To be consistent you would need to, I don't want marriage defined to include anyone. There's no equality issue with brothers marrying.The word equality is being misused.

But I've also said that it should be up to the people of a state the way it has been. Society has the right to define itself.

No I do not. I do not have to approve of incest to approve of gay marriage. Why do you say that? Gay people work, pay taxes and contribute to the economy. Why do you want to deny them the opportunity to be married?

Edit: Sorry Ashtara, I quoted your post accidentally.

How can two brothers cause a deformed baby? Incest laws are in place to prevent such things and most people find it immoral. So you are saying you would be against it because it's illegal? Where's the consistency? Brothers work and pay taxes too. You simply wanted morality defined your way.

Incest is, most times, the result of some form of abuse. I do not have to accept that just because I accept homosexual marriage.

Are you seriously arguing that two heterosexual brothers would marry because of some kind of abuse?

No, more likely they just see the financial benefits they could reap until they found women to marry.

You do understand that you don't need to be in love or have sex to marry?, right,

If that's the case, what legal basis do you have to deny a license to any sibling couple without discriminating?

Again, you are absurd and wrong.

 

[ChrisL]

So... how is having more than one wife or husband "immoral"?​

I

I've said why many times. Do you approve of two brothers marrying? To be consistent you would need to, I don't want marriage defined to include anyone. There's no equality issue with brothers marrying.The word equality is being misused.

But I've also said that it should be up to the people of a state the way it has been. Society has the right to define itself.

No I do not. I do not have to approve of incest to approve of gay marriage. Why do you say that? Gay people work, pay taxes and contribute to the economy. Why do you want to deny them the opportunity to be married?

Edit: Sorry Ashtara, I quoted your post accidentally.

How can two brothers cause a deformed baby? Incest laws are in place to prevent such things and most people find it immoral. So you are saying you would be against it because it's illegal? Where's the consistency? Brothers work and pay taxes too. You simply wanted morality defined your way.

It's arguing tradition, which is odd. Incest was illegal to keep bloodlines separate for inbreeding purposes.

How in the hell that applies to gay siblings is beyond me.

It can only be the icky factor I suppose.

The arguments that lead to gay marriage are equal to same sex sibling marriage. What am I missing?

Oh, btw, I oppose incest, but if the arguments for SSM are valid, I can't see how the arguments for allowing same sex siblings can't also be the same.

The only reasonable argument I've come across is that opposite sex siblings COULD procreate so all sibling marriage should be banned.

To do that you must argue someone else's ability to procreate is applicable to your relationship? That's absurd.

YOU are absurd, IMO.

What is the arguments then?

Interesting isn't it. Take procreation out of the picture and you can't deny a license to anyone.

Why not? The fact is, most incestual relations are the result of child abuse. FACT.

 

[Pop23]

So... how is having more than one wife or husband "immoral"?​

I

Why are you against gay marriage? I really do not understand why people would be so dead set against it. I find it stunning the amount of resistance there is to giving all of our citizens the same rights and privileges. Does it really matter who they sleep with when it comes to be treated as an equal in our country? We are better than that, I think.

I've said why many times. Do you approve of two brothers marrying? To be consistent you would need to, I don't want marriage defined to include anyone. There's no equality issue with brothers marrying.The word equality is being misused.

But I've also said that it should be up to the people of a state the way it has been. Society has the right to define itself.

No I do not. I do not have to approve of incest to approve of gay marriage. Why do you say that? Gay people work, pay taxes and contribute to the economy. Why do you want to deny them the opportunity to be married?

Edit: Sorry Ashtara, I quoted your post accidentally.

How can two brothers cause a deformed baby? Incest laws are in place to prevent such things and most people find it immoral. So you are saying you would be against it because it's illegal? Where's the consistency? Brothers work and pay taxes too. You simply wanted morality defined your way.

It's arguing tradition, which is odd. Incest was illegal to keep bloodlines separate for inbreeding purposes.

How in the hell that applies to gay siblings is beyond me.

It can only be the icky factor I suppose.

The arguments that lead to gay marriage are equal to same sex sibling marriage. What am I missing?

Oh, btw, I oppose incest, but if the arguments for SSM are valid, I can't see how the arguments for allowing same sex siblings can't also be the same.

The only reasonable argument I've come across is that opposite sex siblings COULD procreate so all sibling marriage should be banned.

To do that you must argue someone else's ability to procreate is applicable to your relationship? That's absurd.

What is absurd is to INSIST that if someone accepts gay marriage, that they accept incest between family members. That is the epitome of absurdity. So then, if you accept marriage as between a man and woman, then you must accept marriage between brother and sister?

Acceptance and legal reasoning are two completely different concepts.

I agree, I find incest repulsive. But apparently, icky isn't enough to ban it, legal reasoning would be, but now there is none.

 

[ChrisL]

So... how is having more than one wife or husband "immoral"?​

I

I've said why many times. Do you approve of two brothers marrying? To be consistent you would need to, I don't want marriage defined to include anyone. There's no equality issue with brothers marrying.The word equality is being misused.

But I've also said that it should be up to the people of a state the way it has been. Society has the right to define itself.

No I do not. I do not have to approve of incest to approve of gay marriage. Why do you say that? Gay people work, pay taxes and contribute to the economy. Why do you want to deny them the opportunity to be married?

Edit: Sorry Ashtara, I quoted your post accidentally.

How can two brothers cause a deformed baby? Incest laws are in place to prevent such things and most people find it immoral. So you are saying you would be against it because it's illegal? Where's the consistency? Brothers work and pay taxes too. You simply wanted morality defined your way.

It's arguing tradition, which is odd. Incest was illegal to keep bloodlines separate for inbreeding purposes.

How in the hell that applies to gay siblings is beyond me.

It can only be the icky factor I suppose.

The arguments that lead to gay marriage are equal to same sex sibling marriage. What am I missing?

Oh, btw, I oppose incest, but if the arguments for SSM are valid, I can't see how the arguments for allowing same sex siblings can't also be the same.

The only reasonable argument I've come across is that opposite sex siblings COULD procreate so all sibling marriage should be banned.

To do that you must argue someone else's ability to procreate is applicable to your relationship? That's absurd.

What is absurd is to INSIST that if someone accepts gay marriage, that they accept incest between family members. That is the epitome of absurdity. So then, if you accept marriage as between a man and woman, then you must accept marriage between brother and sister?

Acceptance and legal reasoning are two completely different concepts.

I agree, I find incest repulsive. But apparently, icky isn't enough to ban it, legal reasoning would be, but now there is none.

Like I said, there is a very good reason, because most often it is a form of abuse.

 

[Pop23]

I
No I do not. I do not have to approve of incest to approve of gay marriage. Why do you say that? Gay people work, pay taxes and contribute to the economy. Why do you want to deny them the opportunity to be married?

Edit: Sorry Ashtara, I quoted your post accidentally.

How can two brothers cause a deformed baby? Incest laws are in place to prevent such things and most people find it immoral. So you are saying you would be against it because it's illegal? Where's the consistency? Brothers work and pay taxes too. You simply wanted morality defined your way.

It's arguing tradition, which is odd. Incest was illegal to keep bloodlines separate for inbreeding purposes.

How in the hell that applies to gay siblings is beyond me.

It can only be the icky factor I suppose.

The arguments that lead to gay marriage are equal to same sex sibling marriage. What am I missing?

Oh, btw, I oppose incest, but if the arguments for SSM are valid, I can't see how the arguments for allowing same sex siblings can't also be the same.

The only reasonable argument I've come across is that opposite sex siblings COULD procreate so all sibling marriage should be banned.

To do that you must argue someone else's ability to procreate is applicable to your relationship? That's absurd.

YOU are absurd, IMO.

What is the arguments then?

Interesting isn't it. Take procreation out of the picture and you can't deny a license to anyone.

Why not? The fact is, most incestual relations are the result of child abuse. FACT.

List those between straight brothers or straight sisters

 

[Iceweasel]

I
No I do not. I do not have to approve of incest to approve of gay marriage. Why do you say that? Gay people work, pay taxes and contribute to the economy. Why do you want to deny them the opportunity to be married?

Edit: Sorry Ashtara, I quoted your post accidentally.

How can two brothers cause a deformed baby? Incest laws are in place to prevent such things and most people find it immoral. So you are saying you would be against it because it's illegal? Where's the consistency? Brothers work and pay taxes too. You simply wanted morality defined your way.

It's arguing tradition, which is odd. Incest was illegal to keep bloodlines separate for inbreeding purposes.

How in the hell that applies to gay siblings is beyond me.

It can only be the icky factor I suppose.

The arguments that lead to gay marriage are equal to same sex sibling marriage. What am I missing?

Oh, btw, I oppose incest, but if the arguments for SSM are valid, I can't see how the arguments for allowing same sex siblings can't also be the same.

The only reasonable argument I've come across is that opposite sex siblings COULD procreate so all sibling marriage should be banned.

To do that you must argue someone else's ability to procreate is applicable to your relationship? That's absurd.

YOU are absurd, IMO.

What is the arguments then?

Interesting isn't it. Take procreation out of the picture and you can't deny a license to anyone.

Why not? The fact is, most incestual relations are the result of child abuse. FACT.

Ah but you're deflecting. Since we are discussing marriage we are not talking about children.

 

[ChrisL]

How can two brothers cause a deformed baby? Incest laws are in place to prevent such things and most people find it immoral. So you are saying you would be against it because it's illegal? Where's the consistency? Brothers work and pay taxes too. You simply wanted morality defined your way.

It's arguing tradition, which is odd. Incest was illegal to keep bloodlines separate for inbreeding purposes.

How in the hell that applies to gay siblings is beyond me.

It can only be the icky factor I suppose.

The arguments that lead to gay marriage are equal to same sex sibling marriage. What am I missing?

Oh, btw, I oppose incest, but if the arguments for SSM are valid, I can't see how the arguments for allowing same sex siblings can't also be the same.

The only reasonable argument I've come across is that opposite sex siblings COULD procreate so all sibling marriage should be banned.

To do that you must argue someone else's ability to procreate is applicable to your relationship? That's absurd.

YOU are absurd, IMO.

What is the arguments then?

Interesting isn't it. Take procreation out of the picture and you can't deny a license to anyone.

Why not? The fact is, most incestual relations are the result of child abuse. FACT.

List those between straight brothers/sister.

List what? Are you okay?

 

[Pop23]

I
No I do not. I do not have to approve of incest to approve of gay marriage. Why do you say that? Gay people work, pay taxes and contribute to the economy. Why do you want to deny them the opportunity to be married?

Edit: Sorry Ashtara, I quoted your post accidentally.

How can two brothers cause a deformed baby? Incest laws are in place to prevent such things and most people find it immoral. So you are saying you would be against it because it's illegal? Where's the consistency? Brothers work and pay taxes too. You simply wanted morality defined your way.

It's arguing tradition, which is odd. Incest was illegal to keep bloodlines separate for inbreeding purposes.

How in the hell that applies to gay siblings is beyond me.

It can only be the icky factor I suppose.

The arguments that lead to gay marriage are equal to same sex sibling marriage. What am I missing?

Oh, btw, I oppose incest, but if the arguments for SSM are valid, I can't see how the arguments for allowing same sex siblings can't also be the same.

The only reasonable argument I've come across is that opposite sex siblings COULD procreate so all sibling marriage should be banned.

To do that you must argue someone else's ability to procreate is applicable to your relationship? That's absurd.

What is absurd is to INSIST that if someone accepts gay marriage, that they accept incest between family members. That is the epitome of absurdity. So then, if you accept marriage as between a man and woman, then you must accept marriage between brother and sister?

Acceptance and legal reasoning are two completely different concepts.

I agree, I find incest repulsive. But apparently, icky isn't enough to ban it, legal reasoning would be, but now there is none.

Like I said, there is a very good reason, because most often it is a form of abuse.

Between straight same sex siblings?

Your deflecting

 

[ChrisL]

How can two brothers cause a deformed baby? Incest laws are in place to prevent such things and most people find it immoral. So you are saying you would be against it because it's illegal? Where's the consistency? Brothers work and pay taxes too. You simply wanted morality defined your way.

It's arguing tradition, which is odd. Incest was illegal to keep bloodlines separate for inbreeding purposes.

How in the hell that applies to gay siblings is beyond me.

It can only be the icky factor I suppose.

The arguments that lead to gay marriage are equal to same sex sibling marriage. What am I missing?

Oh, btw, I oppose incest, but if the arguments for SSM are valid, I can't see how the arguments for allowing same sex siblings can't also be the same.

The only reasonable argument I've come across is that opposite sex siblings COULD procreate so all sibling marriage should be banned.

To do that you must argue someone else's ability to procreate is applicable to your relationship? That's absurd.

YOU are absurd, IMO.

What is the arguments then?

Interesting isn't it. Take procreation out of the picture and you can't deny a license to anyone.

Why not? The fact is, most incestual relations are the result of child abuse. FACT.

Ah but you're deflecting. Since we are discussing marriage we are not talking about children.

Educate yourself please.

Sibling Sexual Abuse Uncovering the Secret

 

[Pop23]

It's arguing tradition, which is odd. Incest was illegal to keep bloodlines separate for inbreeding purposes.

How in the hell that applies to gay siblings is beyond me.

It can only be the icky factor I suppose.

The arguments that lead to gay marriage are equal to same sex sibling marriage. What am I missing?

Oh, btw, I oppose incest, but if the arguments for SSM are valid, I can't see how the arguments for allowing same sex siblings can't also be the same.

The only reasonable argument I've come across is that opposite sex siblings COULD procreate so all sibling marriage should be banned.

To do that you must argue someone else's ability to procreate is applicable to your relationship? That's absurd.

YOU are absurd, IMO.

What is the arguments then?

Interesting isn't it. Take procreation out of the picture and you can't deny a license to anyone.

Why not? The fact is, most incestual relations are the result of child abuse. FACT.

List those between straight brothers/sister.

List what? Are you okay?

The abuse between straight same sex siblings.

You seem confused.

 

[ChrisL]

How can two brothers cause a deformed baby? Incest laws are in place to prevent such things and most people find it immoral. So you are saying you would be against it because it's illegal? Where's the consistency? Brothers work and pay taxes too. You simply wanted morality defined your way.

It's arguing tradition, which is odd. Incest was illegal to keep bloodlines separate for inbreeding purposes.

How in the hell that applies to gay siblings is beyond me.

It can only be the icky factor I suppose.

The arguments that lead to gay marriage are equal to same sex sibling marriage. What am I missing?

Oh, btw, I oppose incest, but if the arguments for SSM are valid, I can't see how the arguments for allowing same sex siblings can't also be the same.

The only reasonable argument I've come across is that opposite sex siblings COULD procreate so all sibling marriage should be banned.

To do that you must argue someone else's ability to procreate is applicable to your relationship? That's absurd.

What is absurd is to INSIST that if someone accepts gay marriage, that they accept incest between family members. That is the epitome of absurdity. So then, if you accept marriage as between a man and woman, then you must accept marriage between brother and sister?

Acceptance and legal reasoning are two completely different concepts.

I agree, I find incest repulsive. But apparently, icky isn't enough to ban it, legal reasoning would be, but now there is none.

Like I said, there is a very good reason, because most often it is a form of abuse.

Between straight same sex siblings?

Your deflecting

Family members should not be able to marry one another, because in most instances incest is abuse. Getting it yet?