'Incest is no longer a taboo,' says Australian judge Garry Neilson

a reply to: adjensen

At first, I thought I read the title wrong...now that I realize I didn't and after reading the article, in my opinion, this is just so wrong...

I cannot help but wonder about this judge's past or mental equilibrium. Small depiction of the crazy world we live in.

To start, incest is just not the same as homosexuality. At all. Never has, never will. And to think that a man being interested in a boy is a thing of the past, damn...this guy's a judge for real ?? Around here, that is called pedophilia and it's criminal. Period.

Plain sick.

a reply to: adjensen

Dear adjensen,

As much as I don't want to, I have to agree. The State has had rules on sexuality since the beginning, and I would wager that most of the rest of the world has, too.

Whether we should have or not, we have removed laws against adultery, miscegenation, sodomy, fornication. Other practices are lining up to have their prohibiting laws abolished. Pedophilia, bestiality, polygamy, incest, and probably several other forms of which I know nothing.

What, then, is the argument for prohibiting those activities based on? It no longer has a foundation and we're just marking time until everything is legal.

Certainly there's no harm in becoming overly affectionate with some barnyard animal. If a child can consent, on her own, to have an abortion at 12 or 13, why can't she consent to sex? And don't forget the wonderful Muslim culture which seems to me to think that 9 is about the right age. Even the North American Man Boy Love Association still exists. Their slogan is "Eight is too late."

Since a movement to stop these things has thrown away reason, the only weapons left are emotion and political power. I'm not good at those. Besides, the judges will do what they want.

With respect,
Charles1952

originally posted by: intrepid


Because it's f'n gross and TOTALLY wrong. I'm the oldest, my sister the youngest. I half raised her. Hell, I changed her diapers. If anyone can't see why that's wrong I can't help you.

Well you obviously didn't bother to read my original post. I stated it was natural for us to have a feeling of disgust if we have similar genetics, and grow up in close environments. Notice I said that I found my COUSINS hot.

This whole "wrong" thing is what I was trying to call out. It makes no logical sense anymore for why it should be thought of as morally unacceptable. If you aren't okay with what has been an accepted norm (abortion) for decades, then maybe you have a case. That's about it.

originally posted by: intrepid
a reply to: research100

That's pedophilia, not polygamy.

In those cultures, it's very often both as the man in question often has well more than one wife.

originally posted by: JohnnyCanuck

originally posted by: Fylgje
I know a lot of banjo-playing people who'd I'd like to see you say something like that in front of.

How about you show your 'lots of banjo-playing people' this thread, and they can explain it to you.

They will explain to you the same thing that I have; That it is disgusting and wrong and should never even be considered and anyone who considers such things should have their heads checked, at the very least. It doesn't matter if it's "two consenting adults". What's next? People pushing beastiality as "normal", or a right between a consenting adult and a consenting animal? This leads to the destruction of a society. It seems like an intentional assault.

Should it be illegal? Maybe. Is it as taboo as ever? Most definitely, unless of course, you ask one of these "new age thinkers" who think they are above everyone else intellectually.

A while back, I encountered some people on another forum who was condoning pedophilia, and discussing it casually, and hinting that the age of consent should be lowered.

Bizarre times we are in

originally posted by: Fylgje

originally posted by: JohnnyCanuck

originally posted by: Fylgje
I know a lot of banjo-playing people who'd I'd like to see you say something like that in front of.

How about you show your 'lots of banjo-playing people' this thread, and they can explain it to you.

They will explain to you the same thing that I have; That it is disgusting and wrong and should never even be considered and anyone who considers such things should have their heads checked, at the very least. It doesn't matter if it's "two consenting adults". What's next? People pushing beastiality as "normal", or a right between a consenting adult and a consenting animal? This leads to the destruction of a society. It seems like an intentional assault.

Should it be illegal? Maybe. Is it as taboo as ever? Most definitely, unless of course, you ask one of these "new age thinkers" who think they are above everyone else intellectually.

A while back, I encountered some people on another forum who was condoning pedophilia, and discussing it casually, and hinting that the age of consent should be lowered. Bizarre times we are in

OK..pretend I'm speaking slowly. If you were watching movies in the '70s, you'd have seen 'Deliverance'. There is a key scene in the film where there is a musical play-off between one of the protagonists and a distinctly ''wrong' looking mountain kid. There is an inference of inbreeding as a factor.

The resultant song, 'Dueling Banjos', won a Grammy. It was heard all over the place. It was probably the most popular banjo performance in the general public eye since Flatt & Scruggs did "The Ballad of Jed Clampett". So, folks of an age associate banjos with that song. That song evokes the scene from the movie. That kid didn't look right. So relax.

Banjo music does not indicate an endorsement of inbreeding...not that I've seen in the tourist literature, anyway.

On tonight, live from 10PM Eastern time!

Show thread with listening information

Looks like I get to side with the "reprehensible" folks.
But first, let me say my response to this thread is not aimed at any particular members comments or stance. Including the OP. Whom I consider a friend, whether he claims me as such or not. That said...

Who I choose to have intimate relations with is none of anybody's damn business. That includes my relatives. As long as the two(or more) people involved have the maturity to consent with understanding, neither the church, nor the government, has any business telling me who I can love, or lust after.

Incest is a fact of human nature, and has been "practiced" for multiple thousands of years worldwide. It still is, and will be for thousands more. Those often called royals and bloodliners historically being at the forefront, to preserve their precious bloodline. I would also suggest that many of you would not be here today if it were not for incest.

This is a rant I could write pages on. It is a pet peeve of mine against a hypocritical, antiquated, societal taboo that is nothing more than another way to make sure sex stays dirty, the people stay controlled and guilty, and those who enforce such nonsense are just as guilty as those they punish for it. Namely, both the church, and the governing "authorities".

Having said all that...
Anyone who practices incest in our modern society is heartless if they have children with a close relative. Birth defects aside. You are cursing that poor child to carry your "shame" throughout their life, in a society that has little in the way of critical thinking skills left, and will never be accepted by anyone who knows their parents.

If we were a society that tended to our own business, instead of our neighbors business, perhaps we wouldn't be so dysfunctional and dystopian at this point in our social evolution.

I have a banjo and will travel. We may not be related but we can pretend. joe dirt comes to mind.

a reply to: Klassified

Klassified!

Even though you're disagreeing with me, it's great to see you!