Teenager Who Has Been Dating Her Father For Two Years Reveals The Pair Are Planning To Get Married..

[bripat9643]

The apologists for gay marriage in this thread are objecting to a father-daughter marriage, nimrod.

Gay couples can't inbreed can they? What's the genetic objection to gay marriage?

The objection is that they can't breed at all. However, the apologists for gay marriage claim reproduction isn't the reason marriage exists, so what are you objecting to?

There is no 'breeding' requirement for opposite sex marriage therefore it is clearly discriminatory to introduce a breeding requirement issue into the argument against same sex marriage.

Then the same is true of incestuous marriages. So what's your objection?

I just told you my position on incestuous marriages.

Yes, you just old me your hypocritical position on incestuous marriages. You obviously don't have a problem with being a hypocrite. That's all you proved.

 

[NYcarbineer]

QUOTE="bripat9643, post: 10607117, member: 29100"][
Yes, you just old me your hypocritical position on incestuous marriages. You obviously don't have a problem with being a hypocrite. That's all you proved.[/QUOTE]

My position is in #333. Tell me what's hypocritical about it.

 

[bripat9643]

Yes, you just old me your hypocritical position on incestuous marriages. You obviously don't have a problem with being a hypocrite. That's all you proved.

My position is in #333. Tell me what's hypocritical about it.

Well, you're still wrong because when people who are related that have transmissible genetic defects have children, the defects are many times more likely to be transmitted.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Yes, you just old me your hypocritical position on incestuous marriages. You obviously don't have a problem with being a hypocrite. That's all you proved.

My position is in #333. Tell me what's hypocritical about it.

Well, you're still wrong because when people who are related that have transmissible genetic defects have children, the defects are many times more likely to be transmitted.

And if it was decided that those risks were so great what we would deny them would be sexual relations, not marriage, especially if they could not produce children.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Yes, you just old me your hypocritical position on incestuous marriages. You obviously don't have a problem with being a hypocrite. That's all you proved.

My position is in #333. Tell me what's hypocritical about it.

Well, you're still wrong because when people who are related that have transmissible genetic defects have children, the defects are many times more likely to be transmitted.

That makes the ban on incestuous relationships, including marriage,

eugenics.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Actually, I just read of that exact scenario.

IMO, consenting adults and IF legal, none of my business.

It is your business if they are at risk of creating a human that becomes a burden to society. I do believe incest generates that physiological risk.
Single moms who leave dads out of the child rearing equation also create a potential problem for society.

 

[danielpalos]

A father and daughter are planning to get married, and she says they are gonna try to have kids. She is of consenting age. What's your thoughts?

I guess it should be ok as long as there is no alcohol or city founding involved.

 

[Nosmo King]

A father and daughter cannot get married. The marriage contract creates a new legal entity, a next of kin relationship where no such relationship exists.

If they want to have children of their own, that's incest and such children will be unduly burdened by genetic flaws.

Are you asking if we approve of incest, or are you clumsily trying to express a misguided notion on marriage laws?

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

A father and daughter cannot get married. The marriage contract creates a new legal entity, a next of kin relationship where no such relationship exists.

If they want to have children of their own, that's incest and such children will be unduly burdened by genetic flaws.

Are you asking if we approve of incest, or are you clumsily trying to express a misguided notion on marriage laws?

That marriage contract stipulation you mentioned is in jeopardy since homos are rewriting the laws.

 

[jknowgood]

A father and daughter cannot get married. The marriage contract creates a new legal entity, a next of kin relationship where no such relationship exists.

If they want to have children of their own, that's incest and such children will be unduly burdened by genetic flaws.

Are you asking if we approve of incest, or are you clumsily trying to express a misguided notion on marriage laws?

There is no real definition of marriage anymore. It has been rewritten.

 

[Nosmo King]

A father and daughter cannot get married. The marriage contract creates a new legal entity, a next of kin relationship where no such relationship exists.

If they want to have children of their own, that's incest and such children will be unduly burdened by genetic flaws.

Are you asking if we approve of incest, or are you clumsily trying to express a misguided notion on marriage laws?

That marriage contract stipulation you mentioned is in jeopardy since homos are rewriting the laws.

The marriage contract is contract law. The provisions of the marriage contract are: two consenting adults without a previous next of kin relationship. The benefits of the marriage contract are: estate transfer, hospital visitation and medical consent, certain tax benefits, a stable society, the melding of property and estates.

Should two adult, consenting, tax paying, sober citizens be denied those benefits? Should the state exclude two adults from the benefits of the marriage contract? Should a same sex couple marry, what harm will result? Would your marriage or mine be any different as a result? Could you please demonstrate specifically what dangers are there in marriage equality? Because you find a lifestyle 'icky', is that a reason to exclude folks from the protections and benefits afforded under the marriage contract?

 

[bripat9643]

Yes, you just old me your hypocritical position on incestuous marriages. You obviously don't have a problem with being a hypocrite. That's all you proved.

My position is in #333. Tell me what's hypocritical about it.

Well, you're still wrong because when people who are related that have transmissible genetic defects have children, the defects are many times more likely to be transmitted.

And if it was decided that those risks were so great what we would deny them would be sexual relations, not marriage, especially if they could not produce children.

Huh? Are you saying the government can prevent people from having sex?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Yes, you just old me your hypocritical position on incestuous marriages. You obviously don't have a problem with being a hypocrite. That's all you proved.

My position is in #333. Tell me what's hypocritical about it.

Well, you're still wrong because when people who are related that have transmissible genetic defects have children, the defects are many times more likely to be transmitted.

And if it was decided that those risks were so great what we would deny them would be sexual relations, not marriage, especially if they could not produce children.

Huh? Are you saying the government can prevent people from having sex?

It's not like we don't already. Lock one up and they won't be getting it on.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

A father and daughter cannot get married. The marriage contract creates a new legal entity, a next of kin relationship where no such relationship exists.

If they want to have children of their own, that's incest and such children will be unduly burdened by genetic flaws.

Are you asking if we approve of incest, or are you clumsily trying to express a misguided notion on marriage laws?

That marriage contract stipulation you mentioned is in jeopardy since homos are rewriting the laws.

The marriage contract is contract law. The provisions of the marriage contract are: two consenting adults without a previous next of kin relationship. The benefits of the marriage contract are: estate transfer, hospital visitation and medical consent, certain tax benefits, a stable society, the melding of property and estates.

Should two adult, consenting, tax paying, sober citizens be denied those benefits? Should the state exclude two adults from the benefits of the marriage contract? Should a same sex couple marry, what harm will result? Would your marriage or mine be any different as a result? Could you please demonstrate specifically what dangers are there in marriage equality? Because you find a lifestyle 'icky', is that a reason to exclude folks from the protections and benefits afforded under the marriage contract?

It is a contract, I agree. But the homofascist agenda is forcing changes in the contract stipulations so anything is possible.

 

[bodecea]

The defenders of homo marriage said it couldn't happen, yet here it is:

Teenager who has been dating her father for two years reveals the pair are planning to get married - and have children Daily Mail Online

Teenager Who Has Been Dating Her Father For Two Years Reveals The Pair Are Planning To Get Married - And Have Children An 18-year-old girl is revealing in a new interview that she has been dating her father for two years The pair were estranged for 12 years, but met up again when she was 16, having sex the week they were reunited They were soon dating and are now planning their wedding

After their wedding they plan on moving to New Jersey and having children, were adult incest is legal By CHRIS SPARGO 16 January 2015 A young girl who is planning her upcoming wedding may have some trouble getting her mother to attend the ceremony - as she is marrying her father.​

Those are heteros, aren't they? Seems that it's the heteros who have this incest problem. Don't put it on us.

 

[Nosmo King]

A father and daughter cannot get married. The marriage contract creates a new legal entity, a next of kin relationship where no such relationship exists.

If they want to have children of their own, that's incest and such children will be unduly burdened by genetic flaws.

Are you asking if we approve of incest, or are you clumsily trying to express a misguided notion on marriage laws?

That marriage contract stipulation you mentioned is in jeopardy since homos are rewriting the laws.

The marriage contract is contract law. The provisions of the marriage contract are: two consenting adults without a previous next of kin relationship. The benefits of the marriage contract are: estate transfer, hospital visitation and medical consent, certain tax benefits, a stable society, the melding of property and estates.

Should two adult, consenting, tax paying, sober citizens be denied those benefits? Should the state exclude two adults from the benefits of the marriage contract? Should a same sex couple marry, what harm will result? Would your marriage or mine be any different as a result? Could you please demonstrate specifically what dangers are there in marriage equality? Because you find a lifestyle 'icky', is that a reason to exclude folks from the protections and benefits afforded under the marriage contract?

It is a contract, I agree. But the homofascist agenda is forcing changes in the contract stipulations so anything is possible.

Why is guaranteeing rights to all citizens considered by you as a quasi-fascist agenda?

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

A father and daughter cannot get married. The marriage contract creates a new legal entity, a next of kin relationship where no such relationship exists.

If they want to have children of their own, that's incest and such children will be unduly burdened by genetic flaws.

Are you asking if we approve of incest, or are you clumsily trying to express a misguided notion on marriage laws?

That marriage contract stipulation you mentioned is in jeopardy since homos are rewriting the laws.

The marriage contract is contract law. The provisions of the marriage contract are: two consenting adults without a previous next of kin relationship. The benefits of the marriage contract are: estate transfer, hospital visitation and medical consent, certain tax benefits, a stable society, the melding of property and estates.

Should two adult, consenting, tax paying, sober citizens be denied those benefits? Should the state exclude two adults from the benefits of the marriage contract? Should a same sex couple marry, what harm will result? Would your marriage or mine be any different as a result? Could you please demonstrate specifically what dangers are there in marriage equality? Because you find a lifestyle 'icky', is that a reason to exclude folks from the protections and benefits afforded under the marriage contract?

It is a contract, I agree. But the homofascist agenda is forcing changes in the contract stipulations so anything is possible.

Why is guaranteeing rights to all citizens considered by you as a quasi-fascist agenda?

Concessions based on conditions is not a right.

 

[Iceweasel]

A father and daughter cannot get married. The marriage contract creates a new legal entity, a next of kin relationship where no such relationship exists.

If they want to have children of their own, that's incest and such children will be unduly burdened by genetic flaws.

Are you asking if we approve of incest, or are you clumsily trying to express a misguided notion on marriage laws?

That marriage contract stipulation you mentioned is in jeopardy since homos are rewriting the laws.

The marriage contract is contract law. The provisions of the marriage contract are: two consenting adults without a previous next of kin relationship. The benefits of the marriage contract are: estate transfer, hospital visitation and medical consent, certain tax benefits, a stable society, the melding of property and estates.

Should two adult, consenting, tax paying, sober citizens be denied those benefits? Should the state exclude two adults from the benefits of the marriage contract? Should a same sex couple marry, what harm will result? Would your marriage or mine be any different as a result? Could you please demonstrate specifically what dangers are there in marriage equality? Because you find a lifestyle 'icky', is that a reason to exclude folks from the protections and benefits afforded under the marriage contract?

What a steamy pile. Marriage is male and female by law in a number of places (still) and the law was interpreted to include same genders in other places. It did not say "two adults", you're making shit up.

Where is stable society mentioned in marriage law? But good on you for throwing out the icky comment, I guess that's the code language now for homosexual activists. Most guys don't see two females as icky, at least not that I've seen or heard from.

You bounce around from contract law to your emotional beliefs as if it's one in the same. Father and daughter do not have the same contract and husband and wife, you are simply imposing your sense of morality but don't want to own up to it. There's a legal relationship but I've never heard of a contract being forbidden because there is already some legal relationship. Who's to say it can't become something more?

Whether or not it damages someone else's marriage isn't the point, that's your opinion over ridding everyone else's opinion. Marriage has a special meaning, who to say it means less to some people of two dudes can marry? They don't have a right to their opinions?

And none of that means laws can't also be changed to incude three or more for marriage, that's just another opinion, not a legal limit.

 

[Iceweasel]

Why is guaranteeing rights to all citizens considered by you as a quasi-fascist agenda?

All men and all women do have the same rights. Relationships are not a person though and you cannot go to the ladies room if you're a man just because it's your warped perception of equality.

 

[ChrisL]

That doesn't matter. That relationship STILL exists into adulthood with your parents. Also, this girl was not really an adult. She had all of 16 years experience on this earth and this man is her FATHER. Don't see anything wrong with that? Then you are just as sick. Seek help.

You're introducing all kinds of issues that aren't part of the argument. Assume the relationship didn't start until they were both adults. Why should it be illegal for them to marry?

Yeah, I see something wrong with that. I also see something wrong with Adam and Steve getting married.

Ugh, I don't even want to think about it anymore. It's gross.

That's right, run away like a scarred little puppy with its tail between its legs.

Lol, I'm not afraid to admit that I would run away from incest. Maybe you would like it.

Typical liberal: when you're losing an argument, you accuse your opponent of some kind of foulness. Then you'll wine like a baby if I apply the labels to you that accurately describe you.

I don't think I lost any arguments. I think my points still stand. You have not refuted any of them except to say they are both "adults." I already told you that the girl was only 16 years old. You admitted you see a problem with it.