On a Positive Note, You Can Now Marry Your Niece in NY

[AZGrizFan]

Since you're hanging your hat on birth defects, this would mean you inevitably want genetic screening as a condition of marriage. Unless they consent to sterilization.

Red herring again. What is it that you would be screening for that has both the seriousness and frequency of birth defects as incest?



edit to say: I really shouldn't be surprised that the Conks are out in swarms to defend incest.

I just find it interesting you support two guys marrying, but not if they're cousins.

[Skjellyfetti]

I just find it interesting you support two guys marrying, but not if they're cousins.

if you would have read the thread you would know that i'd be fine with that.

[89Hen]

I know tons of people who are married that don't have kids, and plenty of people who aren't married that do. Next.

But, I don't know many married people who have never had sex with each other. There are quite a few accidental pregnancies... even among married couples.

As I've said in these threads before: I'm fine with incestuous marriages as long as it's between consenting adults and one or both of them are sterile.

Ohhh, so you are OK for defining marriage, as long as it is YOUR definition.

[89Hen]

How do you feel about two down syndrome adults marrying and having kids? The odds of THEIR children being handicapped are high, no?

No. Down syndrome is RARELY hereditary. It's a random mutation. Down syndrome parents have very close to same chance of giving birth to a healthy child as anyone else.

1% of down syndrome parents have a gene they can pass on to a child.

Incestuous parents have a MUCH higher risk of producing birth defects.

So do couples over 40. Should we make them divorce or sterilize one of them?

[89Hen]

I just find it interesting you support two guys marrying, but not if they're cousins.

if you would have read the thread you would know that i'd be fine with that.

Not exactly true.

[Skjellyfetti]

So do couples over 40. Should we make them divorce or sterilize one of them?

Again.

I'm not saying that any couple with ANY chance of having birth defects should not be able to marry.

Couples over 40 do not have a chance of having birth defects that are as serious or as likely as an incestuous couple.

Keep throwing out more red herrings.

[89Hen]

So do couples over 40. Should we make them divorce or sterilize one of them?

Again.

I'm not saying that any couple with ANY chance of having birth defects should not be able to marry.

Couples over 40 do not have a chance of having birth defects that are as serious or as likely as an incestuous couple.

Keep throwing out more red herrings.

Keep imposing YOUR opinions on who can and can't marry and then claim that other's opinions don't matter or are silly.

[Skjellyfetti]

Meh. I'm with JSO that the government should have no role in marriage whatsoever.

I'm certainly not wanting to impose who can and can't marry.

Only giving the rationale for why incestuous marriage isn't analogous to gay marriage (your first red herring that started this)

[89Hen]

I'm certainly not wanting to impose who can and can't marry.

Only giving the rationale for why incestuous marriage isn't analogous to gay marriage (your first red herring that started this)

Please insert the words "I believe" after the why.

[Skjellyfetti]

I'm certainly not wanting to impose who can and can't marry.

Only giving the rationale for why incestuous marriage isn't analogous to gay marriage (your first red herring that started this)

Please insert the words "I believe" after the why.

So, you still believe it is analogous. Why?

[travelinman67]

Since you're hanging your hat on birth defects, this would mean you inevitably want genetic screening as a condition of marriage. Unless they consent to sterilization.

Red herring again. What is it that you would be screening for that has both the seriousness and frequency of birth defects as incest?



edit to say: I really shouldn't be surprised that the Conks are out in swarms to defend incest.

Generalization. Be specific.

Is conk "swarm" to defend marriage equality any worse than liberal defense of pedophilia?

[AZGrizFan]

So do couples over 40. Should we make them divorce or sterilize one of them?

Again.

I'm not saying that any couple with ANY chance of having birth defects should not be able to marry.

Couples over 40 do not have a chance of having birth defects that are as serious or as likely as an incestuous couple.

Keep throwing out more red herrings.

So, where do you draw the line? 1% chance? 5% chance? 20% chance?

[89Hen]

Please insert the words "I believe" after the why.

So, you still believe it is analogous. Why?

I do because it is two consenting adults. That seems to be the measuring stick for marriage equality.

[kalm]

I find myself agreeing with JSO and Skelly on this one.

[89Hen]

I find myself agreeing with JSO and Skelly on this one.

Two consenting adults should be allowed to have sex with each other whether they are uncle and niece, brother and sister, mother and son, two guys, two girls, whatever. None of government's business.

Bully for you.

[kalm]

I find myself agreeing with JSO and Skelly on this one.

Two consenting adults should be allowed to have sex with each other whether they are uncle and niece, brother and sister, mother and son, two guys, two girls, whatever. None of government's business.

Bully for you.

I didn't say I approve, but it's really none of my business, nor a potential epidemic.

[YoUDeeMan]

Red herring again. What is it that you would be screening for that has both the seriousness and frequency of birth defects as incest?



edit to say: I really shouldn't be surprised that the Conks are out in swarms to defend incest.

The birth defects don't start showing up at a significantly higher rate until the second or third generation of incestuous relationships. The probability of the uncle and niece producing a child with birth defects is pretty low. Now, if they have a boy and girl who produce offspring together, it's probable that they'll produce some Appalachian-looking abomination.

He knows. He definitely knows.

[Ivytalk]

But can you marry your dog in NY? Or your pet rat?

[travelinman67]

But can you marry your dog in NY? Or your pet rat?

DUDE!!

Niche law idea!!!

Pet pre-nuptials!!

[YoUDeeMan]

I find myself agreeing with JSO and Skelly on this one.

That's interesting...because JSO and Skelly aren't agreeing on this one, so how are you agreeing with them both?

Jesus, you should run for office.

[kalm]

I find myself agreeing with JSO and Skelly on this one.

That's interesting...because JSO and Skelly aren't agreeing on this one, so how are you agreeing with them both?

Jesus, you should run for office.

I agree with you too.

[CID1990]

I find myself agreeing with JSO and Skelly on this one.

Aww look at SK and klam.... newfound libertarian butt buddies

The liberal rabbit hole argument for gay marriage has uncovered some inconvenient and indefensible truths so you run off to libertarianville on marriage

how does that feel?

[kalm]

I find myself agreeing with JSO and Skelly on this one.

Aww look at SK and klam.... newfound libertarian butt buddies

The liberal rabbit hole argument for gay marriage has uncovered some inconvenient and indefensible truths so you run off to libertarianville on marriage

how does that feel?

I fully support your right to obsess on the anus!

[Skjellyfetti]

It also seems like Conks love distancing themselves from social conservative whackos.... and, then every thread on a social issue take up the same stance as social conservative whackos.

[CitadelGrad]

It also seems like Conks love distancing themselves from social conservative whackos.... and, then every thread on a social issue take up the same stance as social conservative whackos.

Um, earlier in this thread didn't you accuse Conks of being in support of incest? Maybe I'm a little confused here, but I don't think support of incest is a socially conservative position.

There's a difference between "family values" and "keepin' it in the family values". Oh wait, you're from Appalachia. Now I understand why you are unable to recognize that difference.