NATION

PASSWORD

Swedish Liberals want to legalise necrophilia and incest

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
Aelex
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11398
Founded: Jun 05, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Aelex » Wed Feb 24, 2016 10:10 am

Coalition of Minor Planets wrote:Since there is no good reason for it to remain illegal. Your idea of gross should not dictate law. Many people find sex with a female gross. Others find sex with a male gross. Sex with obese people? Many find that gross. Sex with elderly people? Pretty gross. Sex with Donald Trump....do you even want to think about that?

There is no reasons for it to be illegal but there is no reason for it to be legal neither. Such things should stay in the limbs where society had put them.
Citoyen Français. Bonapartiste Républicain (aka De Gaule's Gaullisme) with Keynesian leanings on economics. Latin Christian.

User avatar
Hyggemata
Diplomat
 
Posts: 873
Founded: Oct 27, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Hyggemata » Wed Feb 24, 2016 10:19 am

Coalition of Minor Planets wrote:
Hyggemata wrote:

Do you realize what are the differences between a consent to sex and a contractual obligation? Please go find out before coming back to me. A dead person is no longer an "adult capable of giving consent", unless you somehow make it speak. Consent cannot be delivered by testament.


Consent can be made before death. That's already a legal reality. Otherwise you would have no legal say in how your remains are handled/disposed.

:palm: I have been telling you that consent cannot be given when unconscious. LET IT BE KNOWN THAT CONSENT CANNOT BE GIVEN WHILE UNCONSCIOUS. If you have counterproof under Swedish law, let's see it. If you can legally construe a dead person to be conscious, let's also see it.

Coalition of Minor Planets wrote:
Hyggemata wrote:
That directly contradicts your own statements about it.



That is not the same as saying that I oppose it. I thought it should not be legalized because at this point all they are proposing is decriminalization, which is not the same as legalization. The decriminalized law still opposes it, not I.


That is, in fact, a statement of opposition to it. You quite clearly stated that you think it should NOT be legalized.

Hortative should/would does not necessarily convey personal opinion. You're clearly no grammarian.


Coalition of Minor Planets wrote:
Hyggemata wrote:I'm not confused about what I mean. My point has been one and the same throughout, and it was you who insisted on splitting hairs with my posts.


You're the one contradicting yourself. That's not my fault

Nor is it mine. I never said I opposed it, only that there is something in the criminal code of Sweden that opposes it. Even if that bit was struct out, which is what they are now proposing, it would still be illegal. See how "would" does not convey personal opinion? "Should" is merely the 1st person form of "would".

Coalition of Minor Planets wrote:
Hyggemata wrote:There is no reason, and I don't dispute that. I am saying that necrophilia, even if decriminalized, may remain illegal if regarded as sex, and I justified my argument on legal grounds. It's not an argument about right or wrong, it's about legal and illegal. I hope you will be able to see the difference between these two notions.


So what you're saying is that you fully intend to avoid the question rather than answer it. The fact is that you stated support for keeping it illegal. I'm just asking you why

I refuse to answer a question that I have already answered. I define what the facts are when they pertain to what I have said. Unless you propose that you can read my mind, I alone have power, and of right ought have power, to clarify what I said.
Conservative logic: every slope is a slippery slope.
Liberal logic: climb every mountain; ford every stream.
Washington Resistance Army wrote:Fuck the common good

User avatar
Genivaria
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 69785
Founded: Mar 29, 2011
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Genivaria » Wed Feb 24, 2016 10:22 am

The Texan Union wrote:
Ifreann wrote:You never answered my questions.

What questions? "Now what?" and "Is society still doomed?"?

Because that's easy:
"Now what?" Now, tell me: What is wrong with bestiality?

"Is society still doomed?" Society will always be doomed, but that's not the point.

If we ever genetically engineer furries or some shit then bestiality might become more okay, right now they can't consent.
Anarcho-Communist, Democratic Confederalist
"The Earth isn't dying, it's being killed. And those killing it have names and addresses." -Utah Phillips

User avatar
Allanea
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 25267
Founded: Antiquity
Capitalist Paradise

Postby Allanea » Wed Feb 24, 2016 10:22 am

Arioslavia wrote:Disgusting and disgraceful. But Sweden is heading towards cultural suicide for a long time so no surprise :p


People have been predicting Swedish Cultural Suicide for literally as long as I can remember doing political debate on the Internet.
#HyperEarthBestEarth

Sometimes, there really is money on the sidewalk.

User avatar
Stagnant Axon Terminal
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 16568
Founded: Feb 24, 2014
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Stagnant Axon Terminal » Wed Feb 24, 2016 10:26 am

The Texan Union wrote:
Ifreann wrote:Obviously it's cruel to animals. But why are you asking?


So, animals are held more sacred than the body of a human being? Okay.
Your assertion that people will support bestiality has been shown wrong. Indeed, as far as I can recall only one poster has ever supported legalising bestiality, and he was fucking his cat and isn't welcome here any more, in no small part, I imagine, because he kept going on about how he was fucking his cat.


I never said I expected people to support bestiality. Read that again.
"Is society still doomed?" Society will always be doomed, but that's not the point.

It certainly seems like the point. What is the point meant to be, if not that?


The point is that one's opinion regarding what is done with the human body is just that: opinion. And law should not be influenced by opinions.[/quote]
Living animals can very much dislike what Its being done to them. A corpse can't really feel anything. A corpse isn't a person, it's an object.
TET's resident state assessment exam
My sworn enemy is the Toyota 4Runner
I scream a lot.
Also, I'm gonna fuck your girlfriend.
Nanatsu No Tsuki wrote:the fetus will never eat cake if you abort it

Cu Math wrote:Axon is like a bear with a PH.D. She debates at first, then eats your face.
The Empire of Pretantia wrote:THE MAN'S PENIS HAS LEFT THE VAGINA. IT'S THE UTERUS'S TURN TO SHINE.

User avatar
Ifreann
Post Overlord
 
Posts: 154130
Founded: Aug 07, 2005
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Ifreann » Wed Feb 24, 2016 10:33 am

The Texan Union wrote:
Ifreann wrote:Obviously it's cruel to animals. But why are you asking?


So, animals are held more sacred than the body of a human being? Okay.

Sacredness or lack thereof doesn't enter into it. Animals experience suffering. Corpses don't experience anything.
Your assertion that people will support bestiality has been shown wrong. Indeed, as far as I can recall only one poster has ever supported legalising bestiality, and he was fucking his cat and isn't welcome here any more, in no small part, I imagine, because he kept going on about how he was fucking his cat.


I never said I expected people to support bestiality. Read that again.

You very clearly do expect people to support it, though.
It certainly seems like the point. What is the point meant to be, if not that?


The point is that one's opinion regarding what is done with the human body is just that: opinion. And law should not be influenced by opinions.

That's possibly the stupidest thing I have ever heard.


Aelex wrote:
Coalition of Minor Planets wrote:Since there is no good reason for it to remain illegal. Your idea of gross should not dictate law. Many people find sex with a female gross. Others find sex with a male gross. Sex with obese people? Many find that gross. Sex with elderly people? Pretty gross. Sex with Donald Trump....do you even want to think about that?

There is no reasons for it to be illegal but there is no reason for it to be legal neither. Such things should stay in the limbs where society had put them.

Stay in the what?


Genivaria wrote:
The Texan Union wrote:What questions? "Now what?" and "Is society still doomed?"?

Because that's easy:
"Now what?" Now, tell me: What is wrong with bestiality?

"Is society still doomed?" Society will always be doomed, but that's not the point.

If we ever genetically engineer furries or some shit then bestiality might become more okay, right now they can't consent.

I'm told that the very hirsute are indeed permitted to sex it up.
Last edited by Ifreann on Wed Feb 24, 2016 10:34 am, edited 1 time in total.
no war but class war
He/Him

User avatar
Coalition of Minor Planets
Diplomat
 
Posts: 604
Founded: Jan 14, 2016
Ex-Nation

Postby Coalition of Minor Planets » Wed Feb 24, 2016 10:51 am

Serrian wrote:As usual,

Who gives a flying fuck what people want to do privately?


As usual: quite a few people. Apparently their business is boring, because they want to be in everyone else's

User avatar
Coalition of Minor Planets
Diplomat
 
Posts: 604
Founded: Jan 14, 2016
Ex-Nation

Postby Coalition of Minor Planets » Wed Feb 24, 2016 10:52 am

Aelex wrote:
Coalition of Minor Planets wrote:Since there is no good reason for it to remain illegal. Your idea of gross should not dictate law. Many people find sex with a female gross. Others find sex with a male gross. Sex with obese people? Many find that gross. Sex with elderly people? Pretty gross. Sex with Donald Trump....do you even want to think about that?

There is no reasons for it to be illegal but there is no reason for it to be legal neither. Such things should stay in the limbs where society had put them.


So, lacking a reason to be illegal, they should go ahead and get rid of laws against it....which would mean it would be legal

User avatar
Bartina
Political Columnist
 
Posts: 4
Founded: Feb 23, 2016
Ex-Nation

Postby Bartina » Wed Feb 24, 2016 10:53 am

disgusting freaks.
POPULATION: 65 million
CAPITAL CITY: San Maria
BIGGEST CITY: Reynosa

User avatar
Zenatias
Civilian
 
Posts: 1
Founded: Feb 24, 2016
Ex-Nation

Postby Zenatias » Wed Feb 24, 2016 10:58 am

It's obvious to me that incest is only a legal issue when one or both parties are minors. If a 35 year old man has sexual relations with his 12 year old daughter, that is an issue. Otherwise, that is their choice. A disturbing and rather ignorant one, but their decision nonetheless. Necrophilia? That is both disrespectful to the corpse as well as the deceased's family. Similar to US law, it is my opinion that Sweden prosecute necrophilia cases as minor offenses.

User avatar
Allanea
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 25267
Founded: Antiquity
Capitalist Paradise

Postby Allanea » Wed Feb 24, 2016 11:01 am

Zenatias wrote:It's obvious to me that incest is only a legal issue when one or both parties are minors. If a 35 year old man has sexual relations with his 12 year old daughter, that is an issue. Otherwise, that is their choice. A disturbing and rather ignorant one, but their decision nonetheless. Necrophilia? That is both disrespectful to the corpse as well as the deceased's family. Similar to US law, it is my opinion that Sweden prosecute necrophilia cases as minor offenses.


Why are we ignoring the deceased's opinion on the issue?
#HyperEarthBestEarth

Sometimes, there really is money on the sidewalk.

User avatar
Val Halla
Post Czar
 
Posts: 38977
Founded: Oct 09, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Val Halla » Wed Feb 24, 2016 11:02 am

Bartina wrote:disgusting freaks.

... Care to elaborate?
LOVEWHOYOUARE~
WOMAN

She/her

User avatar
Coalition of Minor Planets
Diplomat
 
Posts: 604
Founded: Jan 14, 2016
Ex-Nation

Postby Coalition of Minor Planets » Wed Feb 24, 2016 11:13 am

Hyggemata wrote:
Coalition of Minor Planets wrote:
Consent can be made before death. That's already a legal reality. Otherwise you would have no legal say in how your remains are handled/disposed.

:palm: I have been telling you that consent cannot be given when unconscious. LET IT BE KNOWN THAT CONSENT CANNOT BE GIVEN WHILE UNCONSCIOUS. If you have counterproof under Swedish law, let's see it. If you can legally construe a dead person to be conscious, let's also see it.


Which, if you had bothered to pay attention, has nothing to do with my statement. Giving consent while unconscious has exactly nothing to do with any of the arguments. You seem steadfastly intend on diverting towards irrelevancies.

Hyggemata wrote:
Coalition of Minor Planets wrote:
That is, in fact, a statement of opposition to it. You quite clearly stated that you think it should NOT be legalized.

Hortative should/would does not necessarily convey personal opinion. You're clearly no grammarian.


You're clearly still a bit new to the language. My daughter learned about the meaning of an opinion in second grade. If you haven't made it to that stage yet, then you're certainly in no place to be criticizing someone else for their knowledge of the concept. There is no honestly denying that you conveyed a personal opinion.


Hyggemata wrote:
Coalition of Minor Planets wrote:
You're the one contradicting yourself. That's not my fault

Nor is it mine. I never said I opposed it, only that there is something in the criminal code of Sweden that opposes it. Even if that bit was struct out, which is what they are now proposing, it would still be illegal. See how "would" does not convey personal opinion? "Should" is merely the 1st person form of "would".


That is one usage of should, but not the one at hand. The question to which you responded was about your opinion of what they should do. The question was not about the likelihood of it. You later confirmed your opposition in our further discussion, though with the implication that you think civil law rather than criminal law is more appropriate.


Hyggemata wrote:
Coalition of Minor Planets wrote:
So what you're saying is that you fully intend to avoid the question rather than answer it. The fact is that you stated support for keeping it illegal. I'm just asking you why

I refuse to answer a question that I have already answered. I define what the facts are when they pertain to what I have said. Unless you propose that you can read my mind, I alone have power, and of right ought have power, to clarify what I said.


Unfortunately, you also refuse to answer a question that you have yet to answer. Reading your mind has nothing to do with it. I only read your posts. If you don't post what you mean.....well that is firmly on you.

Allow me to ask you an even easier question: do you want such sex acts to be illegal or legal?

User avatar
Kauthar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1535
Founded: Oct 21, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Kauthar » Wed Feb 24, 2016 11:14 am

Zaldakki wrote:
San Lumen wrote:What insanity is this? Legalize Necrophilia and incest? Are these people out of their Vulcan minds? It would never get passed by any parliament nor do i see any court ruling in favor of it.

I could easily see incest being legalized.

they made sodomy legal so it can't be far behind
Pronouns: Deus/Vult
☩Fight Islam, Fight Degeneracy, and Defend Europa, the Fatherland☩
SMASH CULTURAL MARXISM, KEEP EUROPE EUROPEAN
Resources on Islam
I am a Clerical Fascist and European Nationalist
Trump and Palin 2016!
Favourite Politicians: Wilders, Sturgeon, Mussolini, Putin, Franco, Orban
Pro: Fascism, Nationalism, Ethnic Pride, Traditionalism, Distributism, Third Positionism, Militarism, Dominionism, Scotland, White Nationalism, Conservatism, Bionationalism
Anti: Capitalism, Socialists, Communism, Cultural Marxism, Feminism, Islam, Zionism, Islamization of Europa, Progressivism, Unionism, Tories, Labour, the EUSSR, Skinheads, Pan-Africanism
The Blaatschapen wrote:We're not marxists.

We're maxists.

User avatar
Latlandia
Attaché
 
Posts: 88
Founded: Nov 03, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Latlandia » Wed Feb 24, 2016 11:29 am

I just saw the title, it almost make me choke daamn. This is a point where the liberals have gone too far. Or maybe it is so because those liberals are themselves necrophiles who also practice incest.
What`s next, legalising pedophilia?
Last edited by Latlandia on Wed Feb 24, 2016 11:30 am, edited 1 time in total.
*PEACE* *Anti-War* *Anti-Communism* *Absolute Power* *Nationalist* *Anti-Nazism* *Social Equality*

User avatar
Aelex
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11398
Founded: Jun 05, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Aelex » Wed Feb 24, 2016 11:57 am

Coalition of Minor Planets wrote:So, lacking a reason to be illegal, they should go ahead and get rid of laws against it....which would mean it would be legal

If there is no law stopping you from marrying your cat, it's thus not illegal.
But if there is no law letting you do it neither, it's thus not legal.
Incest should stay in this middle-state, in this "limbo", where it's kind of a loophole and neither expressively accepted nor forbidden.
Citoyen Français. Bonapartiste Républicain (aka De Gaule's Gaullisme) with Keynesian leanings on economics. Latin Christian.

User avatar
Western Socialist Union
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 64
Founded: Feb 24, 2016
Ex-Nation

Postby Western Socialist Union » Wed Feb 24, 2016 11:59 am

As long as you are not telling everyone, sure!
Yeezy 2020!

Now it's a thing!

User avatar
Des-Bal
Post Czar
 
Posts: 31161
Founded: Jan 24, 2010
Compulsory Consumerist State

Postby Des-Bal » Wed Feb 24, 2016 12:10 pm

Aelex wrote:If there is no law stopping you from marrying your cat, it's thus not illegal.
But if there is no law letting you do it neither, it's thus not legal.
Incest should stay in this middle-state, in this "limbo", where it's kind of a loophole and neither expressively accepted nor forbidden.


That's not how laws work. The middle state you're describing is "legal."
Cekoviu wrote:DES-BAL: Introverted, blunt, focused, utilitarian. Hard to read; not verbose online or likely in real life. Places little emphasis on interpersonal relationships, particularly with online strangers for whom the investment would outweigh the returns.
Desired perception: Logical, intellectual
Public perception: Neutral-positive - blunt, cold, logical, skilled at debating
Mindset: Logos

User avatar
The Texan Union
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 461
Founded: Jan 25, 2015
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby The Texan Union » Wed Feb 24, 2016 12:13 pm

Ifreann wrote:
The Texan Union wrote:
So, animals are held more sacred than the body of a human being? Okay.

Sacredness or lack thereof doesn't enter into it. Animals experience suffering. Corpses don't experience anything.

I never said I expected people to support bestiality. Read that again.

You very clearly do expect people to support it, though.

The point is that one's opinion regarding what is done with the human body is just that: opinion. And law should not be influenced by opinions.

That's possibly the stupidest thing I have ever heard.


Aelex wrote:There is no reasons for it to be illegal but there is no reason for it to be legal neither. Such things should stay in the limbs where society had put them.

Stay in the what?


Genivaria wrote:If we ever genetically engineer furries or some shit then bestiality might become more okay, right now they can't consent.

I'm told that the very hirsute are indeed permitted to sex it up.

Did I do something piss you off? Because you're being a bit of a bitch.
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
-Thomas Jefferson


Pro: Human Decency, Books, Movies, The X-Files, Art, Science, Liberty, Happiness, and Astronomy.
Anti: Abortion (Exceptions to this), U.N., E.U., N.A.T.O., The Walking Dead, Extremism, Idiocy (Feminism), and Doubt.

I'm a 16-year-old Caucasian male from Texas. I'm a non-denominational Christian. INFJ personality type. Brownish-blonde hair, blue eyes. I love to read. Politically annoyed. Possible insomniac. Fear of doctors. I hate physical interaction, unless it's with someone I know pretty well. I love rainy days and clear nights. That's about it.



User avatar
Ostroeuropa
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 57005
Founded: Jun 14, 2006
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Ostroeuropa » Wed Feb 24, 2016 12:17 pm

Latlandia wrote:I just saw the title, it almost make me choke daamn. This is a point where the liberals have gone too far. Or maybe it is so because those liberals are themselves necrophiles who also practice incest.
What`s next, legalising pedophilia?


The difference is that both necrophilia and incest can happen while respecting the consent of everyone involved, but children cannot consent.
On what basis do you regulate these behaviors?
The feminism that only exists in feminists heads is real, and the feminism that impacts society isn't real.

User avatar
Des-Bal
Post Czar
 
Posts: 31161
Founded: Jan 24, 2010
Compulsory Consumerist State

Postby Des-Bal » Wed Feb 24, 2016 12:25 pm

Latlandia wrote:I just saw the title, it almost make me choke daamn. This is a point where the liberals have gone too far. Or maybe it is so because those liberals are themselves necrophiles who also practice incest.
What`s next, legalising pedophilia?


I'm a libertarian (it means I don't hate freedom) and my default standpoint is "fuck off government." Can you give me a single reason why the government shouldn't fuck off while keeping in mind that I don't think the government should start picking things off somebody else's plate because you don't like it?
Cekoviu wrote:DES-BAL: Introverted, blunt, focused, utilitarian. Hard to read; not verbose online or likely in real life. Places little emphasis on interpersonal relationships, particularly with online strangers for whom the investment would outweigh the returns.
Desired perception: Logical, intellectual
Public perception: Neutral-positive - blunt, cold, logical, skilled at debating
Mindset: Logos

User avatar
Latlandia
Attaché
 
Posts: 88
Founded: Nov 03, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Latlandia » Wed Feb 24, 2016 12:46 pm

Des-Bal wrote:
Latlandia wrote:I just saw the title, it almost make me choke daamn. This is a point where the liberals have gone too far. Or maybe it is so because those liberals are themselves necrophiles who also practice incest.
What`s next, legalising pedophilia?


I'm a libertarian (it means I don't hate freedom) and my default standpoint is "fuck off government." Can you give me a single reason why the government shouldn't fuck off while keeping in mind that I don't think the government should start picking things off somebody else's plate because you don't like it?

Where did I mentioned all libetals in general?? I was talking about THOSE Swedish liberals what is this thread about. Of course, someone is always pissed off.
About the govenment fucking off, I suggest anarchy. Anyone can use heavy drugs, steal, kill people and basically do everything that`s illegal. Government is needed to keep things normal.
Last edited by Latlandia on Wed Feb 24, 2016 12:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
*PEACE* *Anti-War* *Anti-Communism* *Absolute Power* *Nationalist* *Anti-Nazism* *Social Equality*

User avatar
Hjallaland
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 363
Founded: Dec 20, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Hjallaland » Wed Feb 24, 2016 12:47 pm

I don't really see a problem with this, if both parties agree to it then who are we to stop it?

Visegradian Poland wrote:Can't this spread disease?


If the dead person has no desease that survives long enough then no. It can cause worms though...

User avatar
Allanea
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 25267
Founded: Antiquity
Capitalist Paradise

Postby Allanea » Wed Feb 24, 2016 12:48 pm

You don't think there's some problem with saying "oh, these persons want to legalize incest and necrophilia, they must be secret incest necrophiles"?

I mean, aside from the logical problem.
#HyperEarthBestEarth

Sometimes, there really is money on the sidewalk.

User avatar
Syrixia
Diplomat
 
Posts: 813
Founded: Oct 11, 2014
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Syrixia » Wed Feb 24, 2016 12:49 pm

Bang whoever you wanna bang. Your rights, your dong, and your inbreeding consequences.
SYRIXIA
Former TNP Minister of Culture and Champion Shitposter

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Enormous Gentiles, Forsher, Grinning Dragon, Jewish Underground State, Juristonia, Kingdom of Intermaria, Mountains and Volcanoes, Necroghastia, Salus Maior, Sylh Alanor, Turkish Milfs, Ulajhan, Washington Resistance Army

Advertisement

Remove ads