| Home | RSS Feeds |
| Funny Pictures | Funny Videos |
| Funny GIFs | YouTube Videos |
| Text/Links | Comic Editor |
| User Rankings | Channels |
| Copyright Removal Request | |
| |
#427
-
thechurchchurch (08/01/2012) [-]
ok, without picking a side,here's what i don't understand. A marriage of a brother and sister doesn't effect anyone elses marriage, it's between two consenting adults, and the brother and sister usually believe that they were "born" to love their sibling,and that they can't control it. The same logic that pro gay marriage people use. Even if it's not "best" for their children (only an idiot would say that having gay parents would be the same as having straight parents) it's their right to have them.So will the majority of FJ come out supporting incest please,just to prove you stand by your convictions of equality and that the other side is filled with bigots?
P.S. im just opening up a new perspective on things,im not a "bigot". Feel free to give me red thumbs anyway if you wish.
P.S. im just opening up a new perspective on things,im not a "bigot". Feel free to give me red thumbs anyway if you wish.
#508 to #427
-
thechurchchurch (08/01/2012) [-]
Give me red thumbs if you want, but i still haven't heard a good reason why a brother and sister shouldn't be married,besides having kids which isn't even necessary for marriage. Sorry for exposing this you guys but,either support both forms of taboo marriage or you're a hypocrite,simple as that.
#484 to #474
-
thechurchchurch (08/01/2012) [-]
1.that only happens through multiple generations of inbreeding,and it's not common for deformities to happen in the first generation
2.how do you know they will have kids or if their kids will be incestious?
3.Why should that stop them from expressing their love for each other by getting married?They should be banned for something they "could" do?
2.how do you know they will have kids or if their kids will be incestious?
3.Why should that stop them from expressing their love for each other by getting married?They should be banned for something they "could" do?
#490 to #484
-
N. Korean citizen (08/01/2012) [-]
I'm not against them getting married.
But I am against them having their own children.
As for 1, it's not common but it is possible. And even so, if incest becomes widespread the likelihood of people developing defects over generations increases, as they may not even know that the person they had sexual relations with was a produce of incest.
But I am against them having their own children.
As for 1, it's not common but it is possible. And even so, if incest becomes widespread the likelihood of people developing defects over generations increases, as they may not even know that the person they had sexual relations with was a produce of incest.
#462 to #451
-
thechurchchurch (08/01/2012) [-]
thats only if their kids decide to have brother and sister relationships,or what if they decide to not have kids at all?Anti gay marriage people say that if a gay couple adopts a kid then that kid could turn out gay,in the long run for society that would be bad for obvious reasons,it's hypocritical for gay people to use that same logic against incest marriage.
#472 to #463
-
thechurchchurch (08/01/2012) [-]
no problem, i dont support incest marriage btw, i dont know why,i just dont. I'm not sure how i feel about gay marriage,but i think it's unfair that anyone who might not think it's right being labeled as "stupid" or a "bigot",when the gay community shuns other groups for the exact same reasons. The truth is,unless you support both gay marriage and brother/sister marriage, you are a hypocrite because you want to ban consenting adults marrying because you think its wrong, just like the people who you preach against.
#486 to #472
-
N. Korean citizen (08/01/2012) [-] 
Genetic problems do arise from siblings getting married. Their chromosomes are too similar and they have a high chance of creating offsprings with genetic mutations. It's not just "if they're children get married after them as well". Didn't you take a science class? It is proven that couples with great genetic diversity have offsprings that "genetically stronger", if you will.
Also, again, there is scientific evidence proving that a couple's homosexuality DOES NOT effect the sexual orientation of the adopted child.
You seriously need to do some research before you make absolute statements based on what you "think" is correct as opposed to what is factually correct.
Also, again, there is scientific evidence proving that a couple's homosexuality DOES NOT effect the sexual orientation of the adopted child.
You seriously need to do some research before you make absolute statements based on what you "think" is correct as opposed to what is factually correct.
#495 to #486
-
thechurchchurch (08/01/2012) [-]
being genetically inferior doesn't imply you're going to end up with a one eyed club footed baby,those were the cases i was refering to and those usually happen after many generations of inbreeding,look it up please.And what if they dont have kids? Children arent the main reason for marriage,as i've heard many gay people try to claim,so why should they be denied MARRIAGE?
#519 to #495
-
N. Korean citizen (08/01/2012) [-]
I never said that they ended up with a one eyed club footed baby. I just said that GENETIC mutations arise and they are genetically inferior. Humans naturally are programmed to find the best suitable mate for a stronger offspring. I also never stated that I was against incestual marriages. I just offered the argument that everyone sides with. Also, do you really believe that they would be willing to say "No, I will not have any children and I will abort the children that might be fertilized."? That is a silly and non practical assumption.
Personally, I am very uncomfortable with incest. Scientifically and socially it just doesn't fly with me. I have siblings and it would be seriously disgusting if any relationship besides sibling relationships would occur. However, I really don't give a damn if other siblings do what they want. I don't care if they get married, BUT I would not want my offspring with their offspring. Their genes would have already been most likely damaged.
Personally, I am very uncomfortable with incest. Scientifically and socially it just doesn't fly with me. I have siblings and it would be seriously disgusting if any relationship besides sibling relationships would occur. However, I really don't give a damn if other siblings do what they want. I don't care if they get married, BUT I would not want my offspring with their offspring. Their genes would have already been most likely damaged.
#527 to #519
-
thechurchchurch (08/01/2012) [-]
you responded to my comment like i was stating that there wouldn't be any genetic problems with first generation incest,i stated children with "deformities" would not likely happen in the first generation. You assumed first and I was just correcting you on my stance.Some people believe it's harmful to children to be raised by two gay parents,you cant make gay people "promise" not to try to adopt kids when they get married. And im sure there are many americans who wouldn't want their child dating a child with gay parents. To some people being gay is on the same level of incest,but they're considered bigots. Why does the gay community claim they support marriage equality when they dont,and why are people who use the same standards for denying gay people marriage and adoption "stupid"(im not saying you said this) even though the gay community uses these same standards for judging bro/sis marriages? Good for you for not being a hypocrite in regards to marriage equality,but you're in the minority,and it's not inconceivable that after gay people are allowed marriage that bro/sis marriage will be legalized next,and i know i dont want that.Does that make me intolerant?
