Marriage Equality Isn't Equal

So, recently I made a comment on a friend's Facebook post about gay marriage, implying that incestuous couples would be next to demand marriage. At the time it was just a comment with no thought behind it - until she asked if I really believed what I'd said. That forced me to actually think about it.

So, in an incestuous relationship between two consenting adults (whom knowingly will not have offspring), could they realistically use the LGBT community's arguments for themselves to push for marriage equality? With adoption and IVF, there is the possibility of people falling in love without even knowing they are related.

Most states have laws prohibiting close blood relatives to marry so I would say: No.

First they would have to convince the people of the state to get rid of all laws expressively prohibiting it and then after that passed (it won't) they could possibly use a similar argument to make their case.

a reply to: Elton

Homosexuality was also illegal at one stage, but the same arguments can be used for the incestuous couple. They don't hurt anyone.

Hoe closely related must they be too, it is possible for half brothers and sisters to fall in love and not know they are related. Can they get married without having found out?

a reply to: DaesDaemar

Yes,

How could anyone deny their right to love and the advantages of the State with a marriage contract? What does it matter if they are not going to have children?

Same with Polygamy and or group marriages. Why Not?

See how that works.

" Marriage Equality Isn't Equal "

That's because everybody keeps pointing out differences.

Differences diminish the meaning of equality.

a reply to: infolurker

If they don't hurt anyone and everything is consensual, what's the difference.

Love is love

a reply to: DaesDaemar

If you want to marry your sibling go ahead, if you want to marry five of your siblings go ahead, i think you would even get a pass from the church as there was incest and polygamy in the Bible

a reply to: Darth_Prime

But would it be approved by the state?

originally posted by: Darth_Prime
a reply to: DaesDaemar

If you want to marry your sibling go ahead, if you want to marry five of your siblings go ahead, i think you would even get a pass from the church as there was incest and polygamy in the Bible

I won't get into the religious aspects and sure won't condone it is a good thing but "culturally / historically" there is much more weight, precedence, and acceptance for Polygamy than anything else.

Harems, etc.

I would think the LGBT community should be helping other minorities to get marriage equality, or had this all just been about them?

originally posted by: DaesDaemar
I would think the LGBT community should be helping other minorities to get marriage equality, or had this all just been about them?

The others are of no consequence since it doesn't fit into the Progressive agenda of smashing the Christians.

Next step, litigation, thought crimes, and hate speech.

To even say you don't agree with the Progressive philosophies and believes will be considered Blasphemy and you will be made to pay.

Tolerance of anything on their agenda is not the goal. Forced acceptance and conformity on everyone else is. Agree with us, think like us, or pay the price.

a reply to: DaesDaemar

I've asked this very same thing. In fact, I had a thread that was mysteriously deleted that discussed this.

If you support gay marriage, you must support incestuous marraige. All the same arguments apply; love is love!, what happens between two consenting adults is none of your business, etc.

The ones who disagreed with incestuous marraige, but not gay marriage, only could use the argument that offspring would be potentially unproductive to society due to genetic defects.

Those who postulated the above ultimately agreed that eugenics wasn't a negative concept. They dismissed reproductive rights for the freedom to marry because they couldn't find an argument that separated incestuous vs homosexual marraiges among consenting adults. Ultimately, they were no different than those who oppose gay marriage (while they supported it) in their methodology in regards to incestuous marraiges.

~Ghost




Side note; I condone neither

a reply to: infolurker

Glad that I'm not the only person who thinks that!

The ruling opened the doors for any kind of marriage that could take place between consenting adults. To be logically consistent, you have to also support polygamy and incestuous marriages. I can also see situations where you can have marriages within marriages. So I can be married to my wife, but she could be married to someone else.

The entire argument for gay marriage was all that mattered was two adults were in love. If that is all that matters, then you must support any kind of other variation of marriage.

originally posted by: DaesDaemar
a reply to: infolurker

Glad that I'm not the only person who thinks that!

I should re-phrase that. Smashing the Christians that present any opposition to their causes is what I should have said.

There were churches in Nazi Germany that would put the swastika banner on the outside church doors. Not because they were Nazi's but to let the Nazi thugs know that they would not "oppose" them.

They would conform and shut up if the Nazi's left them alone. You will see certain denominations do the same thing soon.

They will conform, keep their mouths shut and become nice little progressive indoctrination centers. They will not oppose anything that the National Socialist find "disagreeable".

www.washingtontimes.com...

Why we are concerned with how two consenting adults love each other is beyond unproductive to any society, and should be regarded as such.

a reply to: DaesDaemar

Well, not all Minorities help other Minorities..

Clarence Thomas is an example at the moment

a reply to: infolurker

Yes, you are smart enough to see past our fight for equality and see our real goal. i don't know if you have been invited to any Gay Mafia meetings, or the High order of the Queer agenda, but next meeting you can be my plus one if you want

I bet it's fun for you to throw out all of those big buzz words "Progressive" and "Liberal" saying things on the internet, getting other people to agree with you, in fact i think you actually believe yourself.. which is fine ignorance is bliss for you guys

Hate speech.. lets see.. "Abomination" "Mental Illness" "Defect" "Unnatural" "Abnormal".. shall i continue? all Hate Speech allegedly coming from the Bible

you guys want to marry your siblings i fully support you

a reply to: Darth_Prime

I don't think homosexuals are involved in some bigger conspiracy or agenda, it's just that their fight fits the agenda of others. Not sure if that is what he meant, but that's how I took it.

I wouldn't be inclined to marry a sibling, but I'm sure they appreciate the support and that they reciprocate by fully supporting the rights of others to perform sodomy.

a reply to: Darth_Prime

Shaming tactics have no place in an honest debate. It's an ingenious way to disguise your own perceived faults.

If you support gay marriage and incestuous marraige.....good for you? Why do you support incestuous relationships?

"Hate speech"?! Get real. Do you wonder why people perceive this as an attack on the 1st amendment? Freedom of speech is the freedom to voice an opinion whether you like it or not.

Further, who says that agnostics and athiests can't have an issue with gay marriage? Why is it only religious folk can be opposed?