Acid,

Quote:


Not really to bash Australian values. Just to highlight that if you really believe in hedonism then this is the next logical step after homosexuality being 'normalised'.

The same people who paved the way for adultery and fornication to be normalised, were not too happy about homosexuality, then those who campaigned for homosexuality to be normalised are now not too comfortable with incest. I'm just curious where it's all gonna end, what's next? On second thoughts I don't think i wanna know.

I know most Australians don't condone incest. But a few generations ago most Australians didn't condone homosexuality, and before that fornication etc. I'm sure you can see where it's all heading. Australia has adopted a moral framework which is decaying.

Interestingly the exact same arguments used to normalise homosexuality are now being applied to incest:

"Proponents of incest between consenting adults draw clear boundaries between the behavior of consenting adults and rape, child molestation, and abuse."

"You can't help who you fall in love with, it just happens. I fell in love with my sister and I'm not ashamed"

Phil,

Quote:


Marriage between cousins is not incest.

And it's not against the law in most countries, I think Australia being one of them. It is however illegal in a few states of the USA, some of those real backwater states where you're not allowed to marry outside your own direct family. 

merou,

Quote:


Must've taken you a while to come up with that argument. Is that why there's a 3 month gap between my post and your reply?

merou wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2008 at 9:13pm:


If your post is anything to go by, it would appear to be a very sad life.

merou,

Quote:


Actually this stereotype should more rightly go the other way, after all so many more innocent Muslims have been killed by militant infidels. In the first month of the Afghanistan war alone, more innocent Aghani civilians had been killed by militant Americans than Americans were killed in the WTC attacks. I doubt most Westerners really gave a damn though, just third world numbers, not real people with real lives and real families and real feelings like us

Are you intelligent enough to realise this? Or will you just brush it aside as Muslim propaganda?

Need to see pictures of babies with their heads blown off by US bombs? So you can match them up in the sympathy banks of your mind with the pictures of Americans leaping out of WTC windows?

Quote:


As I said, implying as such wasn't the intent of my post. I am well aware most Aussies find incest completely unacceptable. During my parents generation, most people felt the same way about homosexuality, and during their parents generation, most people felt the same about adultery. So my point was, during our kids generation, will incest become socially acceptable? As those taboos from previous generations are now acceptable, much to their horror.

Quote:


Do you mean you really want me to answer the criticisms? Or you want me to give you nice little fluffy and cuddly explanation that's palatable to you? If it's the former, I can - feel free to express your criticisms/concerns about Islam in the Islamic forum, if it's the latter, no.

Quote:


Interesting Pender.  This is the first time I've heard that the Greens are advocating that 12 year olds have freedom of choice which could lead to endangerment.

Is this a new policy or just political propaganda to slander the Greens - who are now becoming a threat to the 2 major parties?  

abu_rashid wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2008 at 10:09pm:


I think my post came across in the wrong way, I think you have, on many muslim related topics, given the explanations that most people need to hear in order to gain a deeper understanding of muslim people.
Well done.
My sarcasm sometimes comes across in the wrong context .

Well that is a change of heart FD, I thought it was the "Parents' Rights" you were so vigorously defending recently?

Not to the exclusion of children's rights. I doubt many children would choose to be deformed.

The rights of children did not even get a look in, in that debate.

Yes they did, and I was defending them. You wanted to take the rights away from both the children and the parents. You did not want children to have rights, you wanted to take over the role of parents for other people's children. There is no such thing as a right to never be exposed to religion or any other ideology you happen to disagree with. You can make an objective case that deformities are bad for children. Your case against religion exists only in your head. Pretending that freedom from 'dnagerous ideas' is a fundamental right is a hallmark of oppression. It is always an excuse for oppression. You lost that argument.

I know most Australians don't condone incest. But a few generations ago most Australians didn't condone homosexuality, and before that fornication etc.

I hate to burst your buble Abu, but there is a big difference between condoning an act and legalising it. Laws do not merely reflect what people think is right and wrong. They also reflect what people think the role of government should be and what the role of personal responsibility should be. Just because something is wrong does not mean the government has a place in our bedrooms. These issues have more than one dimension.