Swedish Liberals want to legalise necrophilia and incest

[Rossene]

Placeholder text.

[American Imperial State]

I disagree with it, but it's their country.

[The Rich Port]

Oh incest, when the American South did it, it was taboo and frowned upon, when Sweden does it, they are the champion of human rights. I guess it's not the act that people don't like, it's the people group doing it.

... Well, yeah, actually.

Honestly, I never really minded kissing cousins because they were usually nice and humble about it.

Seriously, the South has had worse problems than incest... And that's saying a lot.

[Allanea]

I don't think anyone seriously think that it's a big huge problem that people in the South marry their cousins. Because it is not.

[The Rich Port]

[quote="Allanea";p="27910751"]I don't think anyone seriously think that it's a big huge problem that people in the South marry their cousins. Because it is not.[/quote

Inbreeding CAN become a problem purely by random chance.

I respect relatives who don't have children and feel immense relief and happiness when they have normal kids. That's kinda a sign of good luck, isn't it? A blessed union by any measure.

But... When the kids come out wrong... What else can you feel besides disappointment, you know?

And I get it, you know? My cousins were great girls and incredibly hot... But that's just not something many people agree to. It's sorta human nature to be opposed to incest.

Yes, it's wrong, but humans are rarely correct.

Now, necrophilia, that's something I don't get, but it does bring up several of the many, many flaws of "conservatism", so why not endorse it.

[Sanctissima]

I don't think anyone seriously think that it's a big huge problem that people in the South marry their cousins. Because it is not.

It kind of is when interbreeding goes on for several generations and genetic disabilities start to pop up.

[The Rich Port]

I don't think anyone seriously think that it's a big huge problem that people in the South marry their cousins. Because it is not.

It kind of is when interbreeding goes on for several generations and genetic disabilities start to pop up.

People who engage in incestuous relationships are often well-aware of such problems and take active measures against them, more so than even the non-incestuous who should probably be re-checking their family trees for genetic problems... Like heart conditions and scoliosis.

Also, incest is probably more common than you think, you just haven't noticed because of the magic of BIRTH CONTROL!

And then there's all the people who are anti-abortion you can blame, too.

In Puerto Rico, for example, there's been a rash of microcephaly cases due to the Zika virus arriving recently. Due to the large anti-abortion demographic on the island, lots of new disability checks are gonna get cashed out and lots of people holding onto living, Eldritch bags of unthinking nubile flesh out of an irrational emotional attachment... *shivers*

God, this must be what it felt like to be a anti-miscegenation advocate.

[Allanea]

It kind of is when interbreeding goes on for several generations and genetic disabilities start to pop up.

Yes, but there is not a MAJOR PROBLEM WITH MILLIONS OF HORRIFYING MUTANTS in the South caused by incest.

Deliverance is not a documentary.

[The Rich Port]

It kind of is when interbreeding goes on for several generations and genetic disabilities start to pop up.

Yes, but there is not a MAJOR PROBLEM WITH MILLIONS OF HORRIFYING MUTANTS in the South caused by incest.

Deliverance is not a documentary.

Uh... He might have a point there.

The Republican Party. Duh.

[Allanea]

Yes, but there is not a MAJOR PROBLEM WITH MILLIONS OF HORRIFYING MUTANTS in the South caused by incest.

Deliverance is not a documentary.

Uh... He might have a point there.

The Republican Party. Duh.

I'm a right-winger, you know. Are you implying something about my genetics or my education level?

[Mordakia]

Yes, but there is not a MAJOR PROBLEM WITH MILLIONS OF HORRIFYING MUTANTS in the South caused by incest.

Deliverance is not a documentary.

Uh... He might have a point there.

The Republican Party. Duh.

Regrettably, it is true to say that they tend to vote Republican

[The Rich Port]

Uh... He might have a point there.

The Republican Party. Duh.

I'm a right-winger, you know. Are you implying something about my genetics or my education level?

I might be implying your mother was a cotton gin repair-woman, the I.T. of the good old days.

Ah, but seriously, at this point, I think inbreeding might be an improvement.

Gotta roll the dice on that hot cousin for the sake of the species, guy.

[Calimera II]

They aren't harming anyone, so let them. People say incest can't be allowed due to the risk of genetic inbreeding. So, if either partner are of the same sex, would that be ok?

Homosexuality is not the same as incest.

Call me 'conservative' whatsoever, but I think that allowing incest is crossing the so-called, badly defined, general border of acceptance. *Yuck*

[The Rich Port]

They aren't harming anyone, so let them. People say incest can't be allowed due to the risk of genetic inbreeding. So, if either partner are of the same sex, would that be ok?

Homosexuality is not the same as incest.

As has already been explained, the inbreeding issue is moot, and, frankly, an antiquated worry.

It's kinda like worrying if your sister has child-bearing hips or milk-heavy breasts.



Check and check.

[Fartsniffage]

They aren't harming anyone, so let them. People say incest can't be allowed due to the risk of genetic inbreeding. So, if either partner are of the same sex, would that be ok?

Homosexuality is not the same as incest.

Call me 'conservative' whatsoever, but I think that allowing incest is crossing the so-called, badly defined, general border of acceptance. *Yuck*

If I remember correctly, you currently live in the Netherlands? Guess what's 100% legal there?

[The Sapiens]

I'm okay with both being legalized.

[The Rich Port]

They aren't harming anyone, so let them. People say incest can't be allowed due to the risk of genetic inbreeding. So, if either partner are of the same sex, would that be ok?

Homosexuality is not the same as incest.

Call me 'conservative' whatsoever, but I think that allowing incest is crossing the so-called, badly defined, general border of acceptance. *Yuck*

Also... Not necrophilia?

... WTF.

Homosexuality is not the same as incest.

Call me 'conservative' whatsoever, but I think that allowing incest is crossing the so-called, badly defined, general border of acceptance. *Yuck*

If I remember correctly, you currently live in the Netherlands? Guess what's 100% legal there?

It's not 100% legal, sadly.

Parents and children, grandparents and grandchildren, and brothers and sisters are VERBOTEN.

[Wallenburg]

False dichotomy.

Not really. Rape is a human rights/crime issue, incest and necrophilia are social health issues. Necrophilia is actually a disease.

No, it isn't. Necrosis is a disease. Necrophilia is not.

Incest is something that is proven to increase birth defects.

Barely

Rape is something that is harmful to rape victims.

Absolutely.

All three are bad things.

Why, and how?

[Fartsniffage]

Homosexuality is not the same as incest.

Call me 'conservative' whatsoever, but I think that allowing incest is crossing the so-called, badly defined, general border of acceptance. *Yuck*

Also... Not necrophilia?

... WTF.

If I remember correctly, you currently live in the Netherlands? Guess what's 100% legal there?

It's not 100% legal, sadly.

Parents and children, grandparents and grandchildren, and brothers and sisters are VERBOTEN.

Oh, I was going off this.

Consensual incest between adults is legal in the Netherlands.[6] Parents and children, grandparents and grandchildren, and brothers and sisters are forbidden to marry in the Netherlands, although a dispensation may be granted if the partners are adopted siblings.[57]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_rega ... etherlands

[The Rich Port]

Not really. Rape is a human rights/crime issue, incest and necrophilia are social health issues. Necrophilia is actually a disease.

No, it isn't. Necrosis is a disease. Necrophilia is not.

Incest is something that is proven to increase birth defects.

Barely

Rape is something that is harmful to rape victims.

Absolutely.

All three are bad things.

Why, and how?

Ah, yes, some clarification:

Necrophilia is a paraphilia. There's a reason it isn't classified strictly as a mental health disorder, and that's because mental illnesses MUST be PATHOLOGICAL.

As in, they cause distress and harm to the person or those around them by interfering in a person's relationships or profession.

Compared to other paraphilias, necrophilia can become problematic, even where consent is involved.

There ten distinct kinds of necrophilia observed:

Role players: People who get aroused from pretending their live partner is dead during sexual activity.

Romantic necrophiliacs: Bereaved people who remain attached to their dead lover's body.

Necrophilic fantasizers: People who fantasize about necrophilia, but never actually have sex with a corpse.

Tactile necrophiliacs: People who are aroused by touching or stroking a corpse, without engaging in intercourse.

Fetishistic necrophiliacs: People who remove objects (e.g., panties or a tampon) or body parts (e.g., a finger or genitalia) from a corpse for sexual purposes, without engaging in intercourse.

Necromutilomaniacs: People who derive pleasure from mutilating a corpse while masturbating, without engaging in intercourse.

Opportunistic necrophiliacs: People who normally have no interest in necrophilia, but take the opportunity when it arises.

Regular necrophiliacs: People who preferentially have intercourse with the dead.

Homicidal necrophiliacs: People who commit murder in order to have sex with the dead.

Exclusive necrophiliacs: People who have an exclusive interest in sex with the dead, and cannot perform at all for living partners.

All of these come with their own issues.

The issue is not as simple as incest, or, say, a foot fetish.

[Allanea]

But what is bieng legalized is not the "disease", what is being legalized is the act.

[Wallenburg]

No, it isn't. Necrosis is a disease. Necrophilia is not.

Barely

Absolutely.

Why, and how?

Ah, yes, some clarification:

Necrophilia is a paraphilia. There's a reason it isn't classified strictly as a mental health disorder, and that's because mental illnesses MUST be PATHOLOGICAL.

As in, they cause distress and harm to the person or those around them by interfering in a person's relationships or profession.

Claiming "sexual perversion" isn't exactly a solid argumentative foundation, especially when there are people who believe that any sex except marital, heterosexual, vaginal sex is "deviant".

Compared to other paraphilias, necrophilia can become problematic, even where consent is involved.

No more than any other kind of sexual interest.

There ten distinct kinds of necrophilia observed:

Role players: People who get aroused from pretending their live partner is dead during sexual activity.

Romantic necrophiliacs: Bereaved people who remain attached to their dead lover's body.

Necrophilic fantasizers: People who fantasize about necrophilia, but never actually have sex with a corpse.

Tactile necrophiliacs: People who are aroused by touching or stroking a corpse, without engaging in intercourse.

Opportunistic necrophiliacs: People who normally have no interest in necrophilia, but take the opportunity when it arises.

Regular necrophiliacs: People who preferentially have intercourse with the dead.

Exclusive necrophiliacs: People who have an exclusive interest in sex with the dead, and cannot perform at all for living partners.

All of these come with their own issues.

I don't see any issues with those whatsoever.

Fetishistic necrophiliacs: People who remove objects (e.g., panties or a tampon) or body parts (e.g., a finger or genitalia) from a corpse for sexual purposes, without engaging in intercourse.

Necromutilomaniacs: People who derive pleasure from mutilating a corpse while masturbating, without engaging in intercourse.

Homicidal necrophiliacs: People who commit murder in order to have sex with the dead.

These are really the only cases where there is real cause for worry.

The issue is not as simple as incest, or, say, a foot fetish.

I never said it was simple.

[Allanea]

Since nobody is legalizing murdering people for their corpses it's kind of a moot issue.

[The Rich Port]

Ah, yes, some clarification:

Necrophilia is a paraphilia. There's a reason it isn't classified strictly as a mental health disorder, and that's because mental illnesses MUST be PATHOLOGICAL.

As in, they cause distress and harm to the person or those around them by interfering in a person's relationships or profession.

Claiming "sexual perversion" isn't exactly a solid argumentative foundation, especially when there are people who believe that any sex except marital, heterosexual, vaginal sex is "deviant".

Compared to other paraphilias, necrophilia can become problematic, even where consent is involved.

No more than any other kind of sexual interest.

There ten distinct kinds of necrophilia observed:

Role players: People who get aroused from pretending their live partner is dead during sexual activity.

Romantic necrophiliacs: Bereaved people who remain attached to their dead lover's body.

Necrophilic fantasizers: People who fantasize about necrophilia, but never actually have sex with a corpse.

Tactile necrophiliacs: People who are aroused by touching or stroking a corpse, without engaging in intercourse.

Opportunistic necrophiliacs: People who normally have no interest in necrophilia, but take the opportunity when it arises.

Regular necrophiliacs: People who preferentially have intercourse with the dead.

Exclusive necrophiliacs: People who have an exclusive interest in sex with the dead, and cannot perform at all for living partners.

All of these come with their own issues.

I don't see any issues with those whatsoever.

Fetishistic necrophiliacs: People who remove objects (e.g., panties or a tampon) or body parts (e.g., a finger or genitalia) from a corpse for sexual purposes, without engaging in intercourse.

Necromutilomaniacs: People who derive pleasure from mutilating a corpse while masturbating, without engaging in intercourse.

Homicidal necrophiliacs: People who commit murder in order to have sex with the dead.

These are really the only cases where there is real cause for worry.

The issue is not as simple as incest, or, say, a foot fetish.

I never said it was simple.

... I'm not disagreeing with you on whether it's as wrong as incest. If anything, this would support what your were arguing with Jumalaarik about.

However... You think it's simple, otherwise you wouldn't immediately jump on the bandwagon saying it's "no more different than any other sexual interest".

It's PLENTY different.

A foot fetish isn't even the same SPORT as necrophilia.

Since nobody is legalizing murdering people for their corpses it's kind of a moot issue.

My point is, the psychological dynamics of necrophilia are farm more problematic than incest or anything else.

People have been known to escalate. It's not something that's completely understood.

Which is why I object to it being paired with consensual incest on the same bill.

It's like some guy trying to legalize zoophilia along with homosexuality.

It's the cliche people use to oppose homosexuality, for crissakes.

[Wallenburg]

... I'm not disagreeing with you on whether it's as wrong as incest. If anything, this would support what your were arguing with Jumalaarik about.

You specifically called necrophilia a sexual perversion.

It's the cliche people use to oppose homosexuality, for crissakes.

---

However... You think it's simple, otherwise you wouldn't immediately jump on the bandwagon saying it's "no more different than any other sexual interest".

It's PLENTY different.

A foot fetish isn't even the same SPORT as necrophilia.

http://www.yourlogicalfallacyis.com/strawman

Which is why I object to it being paired with consensual incest on the same bill.

It's like some guy trying to legalize zoophilia along with homosexuality.

No, it isn't. That's a false analogy. Zoophilia inherently involves a lack of consent.