____
Gold Member
Offline
Australian Politics
Posts: 33410
Australia
Gender: 
|
longweekend58 wrote on Jul 3 rd, 2015 at 7:24pm: ____ wrote on Jul 3 rd, 2015 at 7:17pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jul 3 rd, 2015 at 7:05pm: ____ wrote on Jul 3 rd, 2015 at 6:49pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jul 3 rd, 2015 at 6:35pm: ____ wrote on Jul 3 rd, 2015 at 6:31pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jul 3 rd, 2015 at 6:23pm: ____ wrote on Jul 3 rd, 2015 at 6:21pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jul 3 rd, 2015 at 6:09pm: ____ wrote on Jul 3 rd, 2015 at 6:05pm: So Longweekend, what is wrong with two consenting adult brothers having sex, since there is no chance of reproduction, and so inbreeding.
Please note this is a question, not a statement of my position on the topic. Spelling it out since you seem a little slow on the topic.
even asking that question implies you support for gay incest. you do realise that 'inbreeding' is only one of the reasons for the ages-long taboo against incest? The question concerned morality and how you justified it within your mind. Obviously, it is beyond your intelligence to rationalise such a complex process. I now understand your cultist life, in that you don't have to think for yourself. what would YOU know about morality (or any other topic for that matter)? YOU are the pro-incest weirdo, not me. I am hoping to learn from your concept of morality. Now I'm not a brain dead zombie in a bible class so you will require a logical position to win me over. What are the perimeter so to frame your moral position on bro on bro incest? id be more interested to hear your position on sis-bro incest or sis-sis or are you only able to think in purely gay terms? if you are pro-incest then you are pro ALL incest not just gay incest lest you be accused loudly of being against 'incest equality'! My position is pivotal and waiting on your explanation of how your moral position is formed concerning a bro on bro relationship. If you can sell me on this, then I will likely be lock, stock, and barrel in agreement with you on a number ot things. Can you sell your position to me and all the other reader? Jesus is waiting for you to shine his light here ... don't disappoint him. pivotal? moral positions are pivotal? is that how badly you understand what morals even are? Here you are supporting incest because you are devoid of morals. Morals, are guiding influences so to keep humans on track. Inbreeding via the children of, from closely related relationships were outlawed so to protect the species. How am I going so far ... do you agree so far?. Now if humanity are not at risk if adult brothers start bastardising each other, since as we know two guys can't create a baby, why do you claim bro on bro sex is still covered by morality? Is the real truth, you know you have nothing and out of pigheadedness, you will not admit it? because morality is far more than a serious of beliefs simply to protect. Morality implies the rightness of something regardless of circumstances. It is why Peccahead opposes the death penalty despite the scum who logically deserve it. Morality doesnt change because a technology alters it. incest can easily be 'breeding-free' but that is not any justification for it and I do mean male-female incest since you are so unfamiliar with teh concept of heterosexuality. you dont really understand morality at all. in your simplistic view, if no one is harmed, then why not? So peoples like the americans are morality free since they support the death penalty? I think you are confusing ethics with morality. It is ethical for the state to not murder an innocent person found guilty by a not so perfect legal system. I suggest the issue here is not that I don't understand the difference between the two, it's you who are confused. As for adult brothers sodomising each other, it's not morality that covers this activity, it's the people involves, it's their ethical decision that decides.
|
Forum
Pages: 
Greens to launch a drive to legalise incest (Read 14143 times)
