Deformed or inviable children aside. Think of the emotional toll this could play of both of them, especially the daughter/wife and their child. What happens if the relationship goes sour? They not only lose a husband to wife (or partner/partner) relationship; they also lose a father to daughter relationship. which in imo, is much more important.
As a parent, I can't comprehend how someone could find their child sexually attractive. I love my daughter more than I do my wife, but it's on an entirely different level.
Not saying they shouldn't be allowed to do it, as they're both adults, but they should really been more responsible and not had children.
Hey, has anyone seen the Korean movie "Old Boy"?
Originally posted by Robtard
Deformed or inviable children aside. Think of the emotional toll this could play of both of them, especially the daughter/wife and their child. What happens if the relationship goes sour? They not only lose a husband to wife (or partner/partner) relationship; they also lose a father to daughter relationship. which in imo, is much more important.As a parent, I can't comprehend how someone could find their child sexually attractive. I love my daughter more than I do my wife, but it's on an entirely different level.
Not saying they shouldn't be allowed to do it, as they're both adults, but they should really been more responsible and not had children.
Hey, has anyone seen the Korean movie "Old Boy"?
Yes, I didn't like the ending.
Originally posted by Robtard
Deformed or inviable children aside. Think of the emotional toll this could play of both of them, especially the daughter/wife and their child. What happens if the relationship goes sour? They not only lose a husband to wife (or partner/partner) relationship; they also lose a father to daughter relationship. which in imo, is much more important.As a parent, I can't comprehend how someone could find their child sexually attractive. I love my daughter more than I do my wife, but it's on an entirely different level.
Not saying they shouldn't be allowed to do it, as they're both adults, but they should really been more responsible and not had children.
Hey, has anyone seen the Korean movie "Old Boy"?
Children of the divorced parents are 50% more likely to divorce themselves in the future. Should they as a result not get married because their parents screwed up?
There are several genetic traits possible in two people which would increase the chances of their children having diseases or being deformed. Should they as a result not be allowed to have children?
How about homosexuals, the psychological damage done to children because of gay parents hasn't even been confirmed yet but lot's of people think it will damage the children, should gays by that right not be allowed to raise children? (btw: downsides are not yet universally accepted, which is strange with the huge amount of study material).
Incest is illegal not because of child defect chances or because of the trauma it would cause the children but because it's usually done under force by one of the two party's. Now in this case seeing as the two haven't seen each other since the girl was 1 years old until she was 31 years old she couldn't be forced into this relationship anymore then another woman could be forced into a relationship. We aren't making those illegal because of chances like this are we?
There is no force, they are both adults who know what they are doing, and although I won't say it's turns me on or something they should be allowed to do it.
However they should be careful with children and try not to have them anymore as there is a greater risk, although hugely overestimated.
Actually if you can trust Freud and the Westermarck effect (from my limited understanding on the subject) then it would only be logical that two people whether brother or sister father or daughter mother and son or whatever other kind of relation would be sexually attracted to each other if they spend their lives apart from each other
Freud arguing that all family members are eventually sexually attracted to each other.
Westermarck arguing that people who grow up together especially during the first six years of their life have no attraction to each other at all.
Combine those two and you would know why most people don't want to have sex with their family members but why these people would look at it completely differently.
Originally posted by Fishy
Children of the divorced parents are 50% more likely to divorce themselves in the future. Should they as a result not get married because their parents screwed up?There are several genetic traits possible in two people which would increase the chances of their children having diseases or being deformed. Should they as a result not be allowed to have children?
How about homosexuals, the psychological damage done to children because of gay parents hasn't even been confirmed yet but lot's of people think it will damage the children, should gays by that right not be allowed to raise children? (btw: downsides are not yet universally accepted, which is strange with the huge amount of study material).
Incest is illegal not because of child defect chances or because of the trauma it would cause the children but because it's usually done under force by one of the two party's. Now in this case seeing as the two haven't seen each other since the girl was 1 years old until she was 31 years old she couldn't be forced into this relationship anymore then another woman could be forced into a relationship. We aren't making those illegal because of chances like this are we?
There is no force, they are both adults who know what they are doing, and although I won't say it's turns me on or something they should be allowed to do it.
However they should be careful with children and try not to have them anymore as there is a greater risk, although hugely overestimated.
Actually if you can trust Freud and the Westermarck effect (from my limited understanding on the subject) then it would only be logical that two people whether brother or sister father or daughter mother and son or whatever other kind of relation would be sexually attracted to each other if they spend their lives apart from each other
Freud arguing that all family members are eventually sexually attracted to each other.
Westermarck arguing that people who grow up together especially during the first six years of their life have no attraction to each other at all.
Combine those two and you would know why most people don't want to have sex with their family members but why these people would look at it completely differently.
Yea, I said it in far fewer words:
Originally posted by Robtard
Not saying they shouldn't be allowed to do it, as they're both adults, but they should really have been more responsible and not had children.
Originally posted by Devil King
And let's be clear, the possible and highly-unlikely issues the child of a gay couple might have are more the result of the child's peers, not the rearing skills or supposed perversion of the parents.
That's what people are saying about this kid. People will find out that her parents are related and . . . be mean? (cause that would liek nevar happen to a kid wid normal parentses)
Originally posted by Fishy
How about homosexuals, the psychological damage done to children because of gay parents hasn't even been confirmed yet but lot's of people think it will damage the children, should gays by that right not be allowed to raise children? (btw: downsides are not yet universally accepted, which is strange with the huge amount of study material).
Children raised by two gay parents are only low confident because of the constant stigma they recieve from society about thier situation. Now....whose really at fault there? The Gay parents or society ?
Originally posted by SpearofDestiny
Children raised by two gay parents are only low confident because of the constant stigma they recieve from society about thier situation. Now....whose really at fault there? The Gay parents or society ?
blame?
well, blame is more often ascribed to action than inaction, and given that the state of the world is know prior to child rearing, the positive action of the gay couple to raise a child could be seen as them bearing the responsibility for the inactive feelings of society.
It can be worded so that the blame goes the other way, but who cares about blame, it doesn't solve any problems.
Same with the defects a child may face from the genetics of the parent. It is statistically impossible to say that any defect a child has came from X, unless in the rare cases it is passed along through one or two genes. If two people incestuously have a child with birth defects, it is nearly impossible to attribute it 100% to the incest, and not to the random chance that a child would be born defective.
Much like smoking and cancer.
incest? well s hit happens! guess what, someone out there is having sex with an chicken or a goat or their own hand.
incest is just a rare phenomenon. to some people it might be "EWW incest!" to some people like me, "incest? just another s hit in life"
I wonder if Nero the roman leader or caesar is inbred because hes pretty fukt up in the head.
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
That's what people are saying about this kid. People will find out that her parents are related and . . . be mean? (cause that would liek nevar happen to a kid wid normal parentses)
Gay parents can't have children on their own, 2 men or 2 women require a person of the opposite gender to contribute to the situation; so the likelihood that the child suffering defects would not be an action taken knowing the possibilities. I seriously doubt a lesbian couple would ask the father of the partner carrying the child to donate the sperm.
Genetics aside, it's totally a social issue. I can't think of anyone I know that would willingly procreate with a member of their own family. I'm simply pointing out that the correlation between the social stigma of a gay couple raising a child together is a far cry from the social stigma associated with incest, especially considering the over-whelming stance on the subject that would be common in both Australia and the US.
However, given the outcome of this particular situation, I'd love to know what many of our esteemed pro-lifers-except-in-the-case-of-incest would have to say on the matter. If this case were to bolster the idea that a child born of incest can live a happy, healthy and normal life, I don't see how they can hold that out to be an exception. And lest say a healthy baby were born to the victim of incestual rape and the mother doesn't want the child, but a gay couple are willing to adopt it? What then?
Originally posted by inimalist
blame?well, blame is more often ascribed to action than inaction, and given that the state of the world is know prior to child rearing, the positive action of the gay couple to raise a child could be seen as them bearing the responsibility for the inactive feelings of society.
It can be worded so that the blame goes the other way, but who cares about blame, it doesn't solve any problems.
Same with the defects a child may face from the genetics of the parent. It is statistically impossible to say that any defect a child has came from X, unless in the rare cases it is passed along through one or two genes. If two people incestuously have a child with birth defects, it is nearly impossible to attribute it 100% to the incest, and not to the random chance that a child would be born defective.
Much like smoking and cancer.
Using "purebreed" dogs as an example, their is a correlation between birth-defects and inbreeding/incest. It isn't a far reach that humans would/could suffer from the same problems. Odd that muts tend to have much better health than dogs who's family tree is equal to a bare trunk.
You really believe that there isn't a link between smoking and lung cancer/cancer rates? You actually believe what the tobacco-scientist tell you?
Edit: Cats too.
Originally posted by Robtard
Using "purebreed" dogs as an example, their is a correlation between birth-defects and inbreeding/incest. It isn't a far reach that humans would/could suffer from the same problems. Odd that muts tend to have [b]much better health than dogs who's family tree is equal to a bare trunk.You really believe that there isn't a link between smoking and lung cancer/cancer rates? You actually believe what the tobacco-scientist tell you?
Edit: Cats too. [/B]
no, I may have gone a little too tangential with that stuff, I was more trying to express that looking to "blame" someone for the death of the child is somewhat a exercise in futility (or, I guess it was more about who to blame for abuse a child raised by homosexuals receives in society).
the main thing though, is the correlation not equaling causation thing. Yes, I firmly believe that smoking causes cancer, and that incest leads to defects. However, in any individual case, there are normally so many variables involved, that isolating the single cause is not possible.
For instance, many non-smokers get lung cancer, and many smokers never develop it. There are many reasons why someone might develop lung cancer. For this reason, in any individual case of lung cancer, it is impossible to determine its specific cause(s), yet, when generalized over groups, the correlation between smoking and lung cancer becomes obvious and essentially irrefutable.
Re: Yay for incest.
Originally posted by Outbound
A South Australian woman has given birth to her father's daughter after the couple had sex.John and Jenny Deaves reunited 30 years after Mr Deaves separated from Jenny's mother.
Jenny was 31 and just two weeks after meeting, father and daughter had sex.
"John and I are in this relationship as consenting adults," Mrs Deaves told the Nine Network.
"We are just asking for a little bit of respect and understanding."
Their nine month old daughter Celeste, shown on TV, appears fit and healthy.
Mrs Deaves said soon after reuniting with her father she began to see him as a man first and her father second.
"I was looking at him, sort of going, oh, he's not too bad.
"Like you might look at a man across the bar at a nightclub."
Mrs Deaves brought two children, Samantha and Alex, into the relationship after splitting from her former partner.
Mr Deaves admitted that he "initially" thought having sex with his daughter was wrong.
"Emotions take over, as people no doubt realise, there are times during your life where emotions do rule the heart, it rules the head," he said.
"I knew it was illegal, of course I knew it was illegal but you know, so what."
Mrs Deaves said the physical relationship with her father was like "a sexual relationship with any other man".
For Mr Deaves the sexual relationship was "absolutely fantastic".
FFS, now we officially have inbreds. 😐 Funny story though.
Is this real?
Re: Re: Yay for incest.
Originally posted by BruceSkywalker
Is this real?
No, but this horrific story is:
Olympic Torch Used To Ignite Tibetan Protesters
BEIJING—A universally recognized symbol of goodwill, the Olympic torch was used to immolate hundreds of Tibetan protesters during its journey across mainland China last week, in what is being called a stirring display of competitive spirit and Chinese nationalism.
It was a thrilling experience," said torchbearer Wei Xiang, a member of the People's Liberation Army, who personally set 23 monks ablaze as he ran past their peaceful protest. "Today, I am very proud to be Chinese." As the torch travels the globe, a group of Serbian Nationalists has reportedly offered to transport the emblematic flame across the newly independent nation of Kosovo. -end