The Battle Bar, Our Wretched Hive of Scum and Villainy

my name was mentioned! 😄

You wouldn't believe the gay right's activists who get violently angry at me when I try to equate the two, and join the two causes together though... You would think they would want to work together for equality like blacks and women did in the 50's... Instead they seem to get angry when I equate Incest with Homosexuality. I just don't understand it. Its pretty much the same cause.

to be fair one act is has a statistical likelyhood of producing retarded children while the latter does not.

The procreation of children is wrong because it does a disservice to the children. An actual romantic/sexual relationship is not.

Actually, I've been reading that the actual likelihood of genetic defects only increases by liken 1-7% in cases of incest. Don't quote me on it but that isn't really a big deal imo.

Edit: Why is the last post for the Comics versus forum 'Never'? O.o

Originally posted by Nephthys
Actually, I've been reading that the actual likelihood of genetic defects only increases by liken 1-7% in cases of incest. Don't quote me on it but that isn't really a big deal imo.

Edit: Why is the last post for the Comics versus forum 'Never'? O.o

I don't care if it was only 1%. It's still wrong.

And where are you getting these numbers? What study and who performed it?

How can you not care if its just one percent? By that logic, it just a hop and a skip to banning regular couples from having children.

Taboo #2: Inbreeding leads to defective babies.
This whole thing that inbreeding necessarily leads to babies with six fingers and brain tumors started in America, in the 50’s, by a religious jurist that concluded that after studying birds.

(I’m not kidding. Why people still believe and perpetuate this nonsense is beyond me.)

The explanation that inbreeding might pose a probability of congenital diseases in your offspring lies on the needing diversity of the pol gene, whereas similar genes may strengthen defective genes. Somehow many biologists fail to mention that similar genes also strengthen good genes and way too diverse genes pose an equal probability of causing miscarriages and defective babies. A recent Swedish study (I think?) concluded that the most successful pregnancies are between cousins of third degree (which is still technically incest. Last time I was told incest goes till fourth degree).
Truthfully, whenever an incest couple is notice the media will try dig into their sons’ medical reports and link every possible disease to the inbreeding, like the German couple’s son who had epilepsy, and consequently some news reports refer to his condition as a “mental disease possibly caused by inbreeding”. Now incest causes epilepsy

The most recent British study on inbreeding families (Pakistanis incestuous couples, specifically), whose results were confirmed by the National Society of Genetic Counselors, revealed that the risk of birth defect increases only about 3-4% (between cousins) to 4-7% (between close kin). They even admit, it’s considerably lower than what they expected.
Just so you get the picture, it’s the same probability of a +40 year old mother giving birth to a child with Down's Syndrome (and still, 75% of children with Down's Syndrome are born from couples younger than 30). For this and many other reasons I find the penalization of Incest rather pathetic and biased. Which leads to point #3.

Mainly this, but a quick google check showed other posters in various places that said similar things (and I found them convincing since they actually gave percentages rather than just going 'it increases by alot'😉.

Originally posted by Lucius
I don't care if it was only 1%. It's still wrong.

And where are you getting these numbers? What study and who performed it?

For once I agree with my liberal, gun touting compadre.

wait.... smoking while pregnant isn't illegal and it creates more health defects in children than 1%.

In fact, any number of activities can lead to down kids, and none of them are against the law.

If you have ANY downs relatives in your family lineage, your chances of having a downs baby is DRAMATICALLY increased. Should it be illegal for people with down syndrome stricken people in their extended family to reproduce?

Lucious, that question is for you.

Originally posted by truejedi
wait.... smoking while pregnant isn't illegal and it creates more health defects in children than 1%.

In fact, any number of activities can lead to down kids, and none of them are against the law.

If you have ANY downs relatives in your family lineage, your chances of having a downs baby is DRAMATICALLY increased. Should it be illegal for people with down syndrome stricken people in their extended family to reproduce?

Lucious, that question is for you.

So your point was that the government should stay out of these types of affairs? That's fine then but we as a society or hell, as humans mostly deem incest wrong.

Originally posted by truejedi
wait.... smoking while pregnant isn't illegal and it creates more health defects in children than 1%.

In fact, any number of activities can lead to down kids, and none of them are against the law.

If you have ANY downs relatives in your family lineage, your chances of having a downs baby is DRAMATICALLY increased. Should it be illegal for people with down syndrome stricken people in their extended family to reproduce?

Lucious, that question is for you.

I hadn't considered this before.

To be honest I have no idea. There are a lot of women that do things while pregnant that they really shouldn't do.

Originally posted by Dr McBeefington

So your point was that the government should stay out of these types of affairs? That's fine then but we as a society or hell, as humans mostly deem incest wrong.

For hundreds of years we as society and as humans considered black sub-human, and enslaveable as well.

My entire point is to tie incest and homosexuality together. They are essentially the SAME rights movement. However,at the moment, in many states incest is still illegal. That is essentially the same as homosexuality being illegal.

Originally posted by truejedi
For hundreds of years we as society and as humans considered black sub-human, and enslaveable as well.

My entire point is to tie incest and homosexuality together. They are essentially the SAME rights movement. However,at the moment, in many states incest is still illegal. That is essentially the same as homosexuality being illegal.

Tying incest and homosexuality together is really reaching. It's really apples and oranges. One group can procreate and cause birth defects, and this activity is practiced predominantly by the lower class. The other group can't even procreate but wants to be recognized as a married couple. Furthermore, if you really want to play with words, same sex marriages ARE illegal in most states or at least not recognized, which is essentially the hurdle homosexuals are trying to overcome.

Using 1 example to prove your entire argument doesn't work.

Gravity. The model of the solar system. Multitudes of religion. Racism. Sexism. Communism. Fascism. Leeching. Phrenology. Mysticism. The Flat Earth theory. Evolution (being looked down on). Intelligent Design. Homophobia. And Kevin Bacon. The majority are not always right, In fact they're often wrongand its a fallacy to assume they are.

I could go on. 😐

Spoiler:
Probably

Since when has homosexuality always been considered wrong? The Romans didn't even define sex as heterosexual or homosexual, but instead "passive" and "dominate" (I.E whoever is on top.) The Greeks certainly didn't see anything strange about it. Neither did the Chinese or the Japanese (until the western world came knocking.)

The ancient desert people who wrote the bible weren't into it, but that's just one group that got lucky and managed to get their beliefs copied and ripped off twice, thus spread across the planet.

By your logic, it's a fallacy to assume they're wrong. 🙂

Originally posted by Lucius
Since when has homosexuality always been considered wrong? The Romans didn't even define sex as heterosexual or homosexual, but instead "passive" and "dominate" (I.E whoever is on top.) The Greeks certainly didn't see anything strange about it. Neither did the Chinese or the Japanese (until the western world came knocking.)

The ancient desert people who wrote the bible weren't into it, but that's just one group that got lucky and managed to get their beliefs copied and ripped off twice, thus spread across the planet.

Numbers on it being predominately lower class? I disagree with your "perception". So you will need to prove it.

Originally posted by Dr McBeefington
Lucien is the king of making things up and then running with the argument. Lol@ancient desert people who wrote the Bible. Great job at inputting your meaningless opinion into the discussion. Then again, you equate liberal ideals to progressivism so its not surprising. But we weren't talking about homosexuality but same sex marriages. You should spend less time eliciting emotional appeal and more time reading properly. I definitely enjoyed your rationalization.

I consider actions wrong or right (or good or evil) based on their consequences with relation to human wellbeing (a difficult term to describe, but generally this means reducing suffering and increasing happiness.)

Two consenting homosexual adults in a relationship harm no one. They simply offend people like you when said adults demand the same rights heterosexual couples receive.

Originally posted by Lucius
I consider actions wrong or right (or good or evil) based on their consequences with relation to human wellbeing (a difficult term to describe, but generally this means reducing suffering and increasing happiness.)

Two consenting homosexual adults in a relationship harm no one. They simply offend people like you when said adults demand the same rights heterosexual couples receive.

Originally posted by Dr McBeefington
By your logic, it's a fallacy to assume they're wrong. 🙂

Thats why I haven't pinhead. I've actually used my brain to decide my stance on this.

Once again veneficus try to keep up, we are talking about same sex marriages.

I thought we were discussing Incest. 😬

Originally posted by Dr McBeefington
Once again veneficus try to keep up, [b]we are talking about same sex marriages. Keep your emotional rationalizations to yourself. [/B]

Did you miss this part of my post?

"...when said adults demand the same rights heterosexual couples receive."

Maybe I wasn't clear enough but when I use the words "same rights" I mean same sex marriage.