Gay marriages....now what about siblings parents or animals?

[Transhuman Proteus]

Only when it comes to making sure all parties are consenting in sound mind, and no further than that.

What constitutes "all parties". and why not further than that?

Consenting parties are the two (or more) people in the relationship making a commitment to one another.

And why no further than that? Because it is no body elses business. You want the state, or me and my friends, to have a say in whether you can marry your girl? I don't like her hair, so I veto your marriage proposal.

[Yankee Empire]

It could, the current dreadful state of Marriage isn't justification for Ridculously disgusting ideas.

Polygamy though i'm personally not prepared to be all that opposed to, But incest and Beastiality is another matter entirely.

The "current" dreadful state of marriage?

When wasn't marriage something abuse, discrimination, etc etc etc exist in? Back when it was a business or political transaction? Back when a white couldn't marry a black? Back when I woman couldn't leave the guy who beat her or vice versa? Marriage is better then it has ever be today.

Yeah 50 percent divorce rates, SUCCESS!

Marriage is too easy to obtain, someone in my own close family got married and then divorced in just over a years time.

It's completely idiotic.

[Gandoor]

The "current" dreadful state of marriage?

When wasn't marriage something abuse, discrimination, etc etc etc exist in? Back when it was a business or political transaction? Back when a white couldn't marry a black? Back when I woman couldn't leave the guy who beat her or vice versa? Marriage is better then it has ever be today.

Yeah 50 percent divorce rates, SUCCESS!

Marriage is too easy to obtain, someone in my own close family got married and then divorced in just over a years time.

It's completely idiotic.

So you think there should be a set of standards on who people should or shouldn't marry?

[YellowApple]

What about a man and his dog? Should they get married?

No; the dog is incapable of providing informed consent.

Or what about a man and his son? Or a brother and sister?

Is everyone involved capable of providing consent, and if so, is everyone involved actually providing consent? If both are true, then there's no problem.

---

I see this brought up by various opponents of same-sex marriage as justification for opposing same-sex marriage: "If I can marry someone of my own gender, why can I not marry a child, or my dog?". I find it interesting that these individuals do not take consent into consideration as to why paedophilia and bestiality can be regarded as unacceptable while still allowing for same-sex marriage. I also find it interesting that these individuals tend to be members of the same political parties which have aggregated the "legitimate rape" folks.

Regardless, consent is the deciding factor. If all parties involved provide consent, then it's okay. If someone doesn't consent or can't consent, then it's not okay for that person to be involved. Since animals can't consent, they cannot be involved. Since children cannot consent, they cannot be involved. Since unconscious people cannot consent, they cannot be involved. Since people who don't want to be involved refuse to provide consent, they cannot be involved. That's where the line is drawn: consent.

[Anachronous Rex]

The "current" dreadful state of marriage?

When wasn't marriage something abuse, discrimination, etc etc etc exist in? Back when it was a business or political transaction? Back when a white couldn't marry a black? Back when I woman couldn't leave the guy who beat her or vice versa? Marriage is better then it has ever be today.

Yeah 50 percent divorce rates, SUCCESS!

Marriage is too easy to obtain, someone in my own close family got married and then divorced in just over a years time.

It's completely idiotic.

Things were much better when people were essentially forced into staying in loveless relationships forever.

But hey, at least people didn't live so long back then. Especially if you're married to an English monarch. Ah, the good old days of Marriage.

[Yankee Empire]

This is beyond retarted. How is me saying Beastility and incest is disgusting and morally wrong obsessing?

I was referring to the part where you thought what consenting adults do in the privacy of their own home is apparently "societies," and by extension, "your" business.

It is society as a wholes business, because it has an effect on society.

This is beyond retarted. How is me saying Beastility and incest is disgusting and morally wrong obsessing?

The fact that you continually deny it and post something about how it's wrong ever 2 seconds, just listen to someone's opinion for once geez

Someone has to be the voice of sanity and conviction.

What constitutes "all parties". and why not further than that?

All parties as in the two or more people in the relationship.

And why not further? Because there's absolutely no goddamn reason to be.

Great argument.
Not really, there are many reasons for it to be, because it's a SOCIAL CONTRACT, it's and institution created and recognized by society why the hell shouldn't society have a say?

[Transhuman Proteus]

The "current" dreadful state of marriage?

When wasn't marriage something abuse, discrimination, etc etc etc exist in? Back when it was a business or political transaction? Back when a white couldn't marry a black? Back when I woman couldn't leave the guy who beat her or vice versa? Marriage is better then it has ever be today.

Yeah 50 percent divorce rates, SUCCESS!

Marriage is too easy to obtain, someone in my own close family got married and then divorced in just over a years time.

It's completely idiotic.

First - explain why divorce is automatically bad.

And just so we're clear: not forcing to people to stay in relationships they don't wish to be in is worse than abuse, racism, woman having no choice and marriage being all about business deals.

Marriage is worse today thenn when you, if you were a girl, could be married off at 13 to your father's 55 year old business partner? The current state of marriage is worse than at time when you couldn't leave your husband/wife if they beat you regularly?

Really, think about what your saying and explain why people being able to divorce easier is worse than those things. Oh, and divorce happens so much because it is possible and there isn't as much of a stigma associated with it. You think it wouldn't happen 200 years ago if people had the choice and no-social stigma?

uote="Yankee Empire";p="14008123"]

No, but apparently you're very interested in what such people do in private.

Methinks the lady doth protest too much.

Quite true. It seems the only people that obsess more about this kind of thing than the people that like it are those who say they don't.

This is beyond retarted. How is me saying Beastility and incest is disgusting and morally wrong obsessing?[/quote]

No, it is the part where you say and believe society should be involved in what goes on in the bedroom.

[Occupied Deutschland]

Okay ya'all:

Y'know how the folks who say "get the government out of marriage!" get dismissed pretty out of hand in gay marriage debates because there's so many facets to marriage that supposedly can't be dealt with without?

Incestuous marriage has a similar problem. Specifically, it has the problem of tax advantages. If an older generation married a younger generation, upon the death of the older generation (which is significantly more likely than the other way around) the younger generation will get the assets tax free because they will have widow status.

Now, this might not be objectionable to you (they were married after all) but such a massive loophole WILL be abused, likely quite extensively. I mean, you thought Swiss bank accounts was bad?

Edit: I'd like to note this isn't an objection I actually have to such folks as who want to marry their sister/cousin/son/et al. being BAD. Merely that there are some things which may or may not be loopholes that'd be used and would have an effect.

[Avenio]

My Fetish!?

I'm not the one who wants to marry a close relative or an Animal here.

You know, we 'liberals' aren't the ones that keep bringing up marrying our sisters or pets.

[Yankee Empire]

Yeah 50 percent divorce rates, SUCCESS!

Marriage is too easy to obtain, someone in my own close family got married and then divorced in just over a years time.

It's completely idiotic.

Things were much better when people were essentially forced into staying in loveless relationships forever.

But hey, at least people didn't live so long back then. Especially if you're married to an English monarch. Ah, the good old days of Marriage.

Your misplacing my dislike for the state of the institution of marriage with some implied sentimentality for Medieval marriages.

Which I don't have, try again.

[Awesome Break-Away of 250land]

Your timing is impeccable! Today gay marriage was made legal in New Zealand

[Yankee Empire]

My Fetish!?

I'm not the one who wants to marry a close relative or an Animal here.

You know, we 'liberals' aren't the ones that keep bringing up marrying our sisters or pets.

Yes you are, and even those that don't bring it up they imply or blatently saay that they think it's absolutely fine.

[Ovisterra]

Two or more consenting adults should be allowed to get together, if they want.

Animals can't consent, so the comparison, though common, is flawed.

[Dracoria]

My Fetish!?

I'm not the one who wants to marry a close relative or an Animal here.

You know, we 'liberals' aren't the ones that keep bringing up marrying our sisters or pets.

Hmm. Spend a lot of time denying it. And you know what they say about people denying a perversion a lot!

So, sheep or horses? I'm more a sheep man myself. Come on, speak up, no need to be baaaashful!

[Anachronous Rex]

Things were much better when people were essentially forced into staying in loveless relationships forever.

But hey, at least people didn't live so long back then. Especially if you're married to an English monarch. Ah, the good old days of Marriage.

Your misplacing my dislike for the state of the institution of marriage with some implied sentimentality for Medieval marriages.

Which I don't have, try again.

Oh, no, I'm speaking quite generally. Since you didn't specify I just decided to include all of history. Of course, that's somewhat disingenuous, because for a long time it was fairly common to discard wives after a time if (for whatever reason) they no longer pleased you.

But, in some ways, that's actually better then 50s era marriage. After all, the woman in said circumstance probably wasn't thrilled with the relationship at that point either. Besides, as I say, people didn't live so long back then.

[Ironrite]

You know, we 'liberals' aren't the ones that keep bringing up marrying our sisters or pets.

Yes you are, and even those that don't bring it up they imply or blatently saay that they think it's absolutely fine.

LADIES AND GENTLEMEN! We have a close-minded mindreader! Please give it up forrrr Yankee Empireeee

[The Democratic Republic of Davida]

In Davida it is all allowed as long that it doesn't involve people who are not yet of legal age.
You can also marry an animal but it wouldn't have any official consequences.
In such a case for all intends and purposes the human part of the marriage is still technically single.

Sex between concenting adults is always legal in Davida as long that they do it in private.

If someone wants to have sex with an animal it is also not against the law.
I am sure that it wouldn't be pretty but Davida does not think an animal would mind sex any more than being slaughtered and eaten which is also legal in Davida.

[Anachronous Rex]

You know, we 'liberals' aren't the ones that keep bringing up marrying our sisters or pets.

Yes you are, and even those that don't bring it up they imply or blatently saay that they think it's absolutely fine.

How many threads on the subject have liberals started?

How many times have liberals said, "and incest is next!"

Always it is conservatives doing this.

Frankly, I'm starting to think that you all just want these things to remain illegal so that you can still feel naughty when you do them.

[Condunum]

This is some nice copypasta.

[Gauthier]

The ever-popular association of homosexuality with pedophilia. Classy.

[Dermastina]

You know, we 'liberals' aren't the ones that keep bringing up marrying our sisters or pets.

Yes you are, and even those that don't bring it up they imply or blatently saay that they think it's absolutely fine.

Ya know, your sig lists one of your pros as Liberalism. Just sayin'.

[Ironrite]

This is some nice copypasta.

Indeed.. Indeed

[Ovisterra]

In Davida it is all allowed as long that it doesn't involve people who are not yet of legal age.
You can also marry an animal but it wouldn't have any official consequences.
In such a case for all intends and purposes the human part of the marriage is still technically single.

Sex between concenting adults is always legal in Davida as long that they do it in private.

If someone wants to have sex with an animal it is also not against the law.
I am sure that it wouldn't be pretty but Davida does not think an animal would mind sex any more than being slaughtered and eaten which is also legal in Davida.

General is OOC.

[The Democratic Republic of Davida]

It is not really an issue in Davida but now that I've said that sex with animals is legal in Davida the pig on our flag suddenly seems to have a whole new meaning.

[Transhuman Proteus]

Great argument.
Not really, there are many reasons for it to be, because it's a SOCIAL CONTRACT, it's and institution created and recognized by society why the hell shouldn't society have a say?

Ergo society - that is me and my friends - should have a say in your relationships, which I'm guessing are heterosexual. More power to us, we really should be able to veto it if we don't think it'll work.

I mean, think about it - people don't always realize they're going to end up in loveless relationships that'll make them miserable, potentially leading to costly divorce proceedings, so if we can say "no" to your relationship on those grounds, it'll be socially good.

Okay ya'all:

Y'know how the folks who say "get the government out of marriage!" get dismissed pretty out of hand in gay marriage debates because there's so many facets to marriage that supposedly can't be dealt with without?

Incestuous marriage has a similar problem. Specifically, it has the problem of tax advantages. If an older generation married a younger generation, upon the death of the older generation (which is significantly more likely than the other way around) the younger generation will get the assets tax free because they will have widow status.

Now, this might not be objectionable to you (they were married after all) but such a massive loophole WILL be abused, likely quite extensively. I mean, you thought Swiss bank accounts was bad?

The people that say "government out of marriage" are usually the ones who are against certain types of marriage.

So - if one believed to consenting adults who happen to be related to one another should be able to marry, but their is a loop hole to do with tax advantages... the government closes the loop hole.

Besides which - incest is a incredibly low occurring thing. I don't think "ok, you can marry your sister" is suddenly going to see a huge spike in the numbers because family members are going to be sitting down going "we can take advantage of the system!", certainly not to the point where you can be saying "the younger generation will get the assets tax free because they will have widow status". You make it sound like after Gen X, Y, Z you'd have "Gen Incest"