Homosexuality and Teens Having Sex

[Mourro]

As far as homosexuality goes if a son does it that ends the familial connection if a girl does it well it is called being a girl it is just part of life.

... wait, what?

Girls are expected to perform "lesbian" acts as a matter of course, because these acts entertain heterosexual males. A girl who performs sexuality in a manner that pleases males is not a problem.

However, males are never supposed to perform sexuality for anybody else, because doing so reduces them to the level of "woman." This is a dramatic plunge in status, and is unacceptable, and thus any male who disgraces himself in this manner must be shunned.

There is some truth to this. In fact, I agree but there is more to it. The only time that it is sinful to sleep with a woman is if you are related or if she is married and you are not her husband. It is never wicked for a woman to be with a woman. To approach life by saying that if women can have lesbian sex then men can have gay sex is juvenile because it is premised on modern "whiny" views of equality instead of the traditions that we inherited from our ancestors. This breaches our links with the past and attacks the family and society.

You are serious. I'm ... lost for words.

Are you interested in explaining why and how exactly male homosexuality harms society and families?

No problem. Male homosexuality is a biblical crime that society has to answer for if they do not oppose it. In this regard, male homosexuality and witchcraft are the only such crimes that I am aware of. Usually, wickedness is personal, but with the case of male homosexuality it has a communal component.

Since we live in a country where male homosexuality is a legal right we cannot lock em up anymore. But we as a society have to adapt in order to fulfill our communal obligations. This is why I think familial shunning is the way to go about meeting our obligation to somehow punish this sort of activity.

If the state's legal authorities do not punish these folks, who will? I think it has to be done by the familial authorities.

Look at you, trying to punish everybody. Get off your high-horse and open your bloody eyes. You can't stop things that are natural to people, you can only suppress them, which never does anybody any good. As I mentioned before, my opinion is that a lot of religion is pure control and its very fundamentals of love and liberty have been totally corrupted and misinterpreted by people like you.

Look at you, trying to tolerate all manner of filth and depravity. Get down on your knees and close your eyes and open your heart up to God. You can't dictate the nature of reality. He is the author of creation and honoring him can do you and everyone else a lot of good. Love and liberty are fundamental aspects of all of the major religions and you corrupt these principles with the notion that evil must be coddled, tolerated, and accepted by people like you.

I would not get down on my knees for anybody who condemns me for loving another man. I would have as much right to do so as anybody else loving any other person. How do I corrupt the principles of love and liberty? My argument is that everybody should be free to love and to be liberated. What is corrupt about that? If that's corrupt then 'love' and 'liberty's' definitions need to be changed to 'virtues that mean one can be freely in love and liberated, but actually it's just for show because some 'author' doesn't want you to live how you want to live'.

[Czardas]

They stated that as long as the sex is consensual, it's acceptable. Logically, if incest is consensual, then they would believe it's okay, even if they might find it to be icky. If there's no logical reason to reject it, then there's no reason to reject it.

Incest and homosexuality aren't really comparable though, since incest is usually coercive. A sexual/romantic relationship between a parent and child or an older and younger sibling is not much different from a relationship between a teacher and a student or a boss and an employee.

The only two incestuous relationships I ever heard about were consensual and involved siblings. A teacher and a student is horrible if we are talking about a teacher and a child student. I do not see a problem with a professor and a college or grad student though. In that situation we are dealing with adults. I do not see how loving your teacher or student would make you less able to teach them or be taught by them. Heck, my wife and I teach each other stuff all of the time.
A boss and an employee is also fine assuming that we are talking about adults. I do not see how loving your boss or employee will interfere with your job duties.

It's the disparity in authority -- generally, in any situation where one individual holds power over another, relationships are not usually considered acceptable (unprofessional in the workplace and the school, abusive in the family). If your boss propositions you, and you refuse, he could fire you, or lower your pay, or exact retribution for your slight in numerous other ways. And you will generally be aware of this, and may consent despite not actually desiring the sexual encounter simply so that you will not suffer any negative consequences from refusing -- consent under coercion, which is basically not consent at all. Obviously, this has to be judged on a case-by-case basis.

You haven't answered my question btw.

[Sdaeriji]

They stated that as long as the sex is consensual, it's acceptable. Logically, if incest is consensual, then they would believe it's okay, even if they might find it to be icky. If there's no logical reason to reject it, then there's no reason to reject it.

Incest and homosexuality aren't really comparable though, since incest is usually coercive. A sexual/romantic relationship between a parent and child or an older and younger sibling is not much different from a relationship between a teacher and a student or a boss and an employee.

There are incestuous relationships that don't involve a unbalanced power dynamic. Twins or cousins wouldn't necessarily be comparable to teacher/student or employer/employee.

I never really understood the whole power argument. How does love prevent education? How does love prevent the work from getting done?

Honestly? This is one of the single biggest concerns for HR professionals in the workplace. If a boss is having sex with one of his subordinates, and that subordinate doesn't do her job, you can't understand how the boss MIGHT not punish the subordinate the same way he might punish one he isn't sleeping with?

[Ifreann]

I would want nothing more to do with a gay son. No son of mine will be gay if I have a son and he goes gay he will no longer be my son...

If that's the case, he's probably better off without you as a parent. I don't see how someone can raise a child and love them as their own, and then turn them out for something as minor as that. Fickle much?

If I buy a car in order to cruise down the highway getting 40+ mpg, but after several thousand miles a rare bug in the onboard computer fuel management system (or whatever the hell) fries the system and I get 15 mpg, I'm either going to try and fix it or get rid of it. Because I bought into a 40+ mpg car, not a 15 mpg one.

This strikes me as incredibly selfish. Having a child to fulfil some purpose. Not that I can fathom what purpose you could have for a son that his being gay prevents him from fulfilling.

I think it's a similar scenario, although I'm sure there may be some who contest the specifics of the comparison. When people choose to have a child, some want it to be a certain way. I do not think it is an unreasonable assumption based on percentages to plan on the child being straight. So if the child turns out gay, obviously you're going to be displeased and either try to 'fix' them or get rid of them.

It's one thing to assume your son will be straight. It's another thing to require he be straight or he's just no good as a son and will have to be replaced.

[Jello Biafra]

They stated that as long as the sex is consensual, it's acceptable. Logically, if incest is consensual, then they would believe it's okay, even if they might find it to be icky. If there's no logical reason to reject it, then there's no reason to reject it.

Incest and homosexuality aren't really comparable though, since incest is usually coercive. A sexual/romantic relationship between a parent and child or an older and younger sibling is not much different from a relationship between a teacher and a student or a boss and an employee.

I agree; I'm unconvinced that incest can ever be consensual. But they were of the opinion that it was.

They stated that as long as the sex is consensual, it's acceptable. Logically, if incest is consensual, then they would believe it's okay, even if they might find it to be icky. If there's no logical reason to reject it, then there's no reason to reject it.

Incest and homosexuality aren't really comparable though, since incest is usually coercive. A sexual/romantic relationship between a parent and child or an older and younger sibling is not much different from a relationship between a teacher and a student or a boss and an employee.

There are incestuous relationships that don't involve a unbalanced power dynamic. Twins or cousins wouldn't necessarily be comparable to teacher/student or employer/employee.

I never really understood the whole power argument. How does love prevent education? How does love prevent the work from getting done?

Incest isn't necessarily about love, just sex. Surely you can see how coercing somebody into sex is wrong?

[Hyperadion]

Anger can make some pretty pickly pancakes. But do not despair, for the solution is simple: Live and let Die Hard!

[Cloddhopper-Love]

They stated that as long as the sex is consensual, it's acceptable. Logically, if incest is consensual, then they would believe it's okay, even if they might find it to be icky. If there's no logical reason to reject it, then there's no reason to reject it.

Incest and homosexuality aren't really comparable though, since incest is usually coercive. A sexual/romantic relationship between a parent and child or an older and younger sibling is not much different from a relationship between a teacher and a student or a boss and an employee.

I agree; I'm unconvinced that incest can ever be consensual. But they were of the opinion that it was.

Incest can be consentual. I know twins who are deeply in love with each other.

They stated that as long as the sex is consensual, it's acceptable. Logically, if incest is consensual, then they would believe it's okay, even if they might find it to be icky. If there's no logical reason to reject it, then there's no reason to reject it.

Incest and homosexuality aren't really comparable though, since incest is usually coercive. A sexual/romantic relationship between a parent and child or an older and younger sibling is not much different from a relationship between a teacher and a student or a boss and an employee.

There are incestuous relationships that don't involve a unbalanced power dynamic. Twins or cousins wouldn't necessarily be comparable to teacher/student or employer/employee.

I never really understood the whole power argument. How does love prevent education? How does love prevent the work from getting done?

Incest isn't necessarily about love, just sex. Surely you can see how coercing somebody into sex is wrong?

Sometimes love leads to sex. So incest can be about love. It's a case by case situation.

[Glorious Freedonia]

They stated that as long as the sex is consensual, it's acceptable. Logically, if incest is consensual, then they would believe it's okay, even if they might find it to be icky. If there's no logical reason to reject it, then there's no reason to reject it.

Incest and homosexuality aren't really comparable though, since incest is usually coercive. A sexual/romantic relationship between a parent and child or an older and younger sibling is not much different from a relationship between a teacher and a student or a boss and an employee.

There are incestuous relationships that don't involve a unbalanced power dynamic. Twins or cousins wouldn't necessarily be comparable to teacher/student or employer/employee.

True. One would have to judge on a case-by-case basis (and iirc until fairly recently in most places marrying your cousin was legal, although I suspect that's changed). There's no biblical prohibition of incest anyway, though, so GF can't exactly make a case involving it.

Deuteronomy and Leviticus both have prohibitions against incestuous relationships. The list is not exhaustive of every possible relationship because some relationships were probably just too obviously bad.

[Jello Biafra]

They stated that as long as the sex is consensual, it's acceptable. Logically, if incest is consensual, then they would believe it's okay, even if they might find it to be icky. If there's no logical reason to reject it, then there's no reason to reject it.

Incest and homosexuality aren't really comparable though, since incest is usually coercive. A sexual/romantic relationship between a parent and child or an older and younger sibling is not much different from a relationship between a teacher and a student or a boss and an employee.

I agree; I'm unconvinced that incest can ever be consensual. But they were of the opinion that it was.

Incest can be consentual. I know twins who are deeply in love with each other.

Just because they're twins doesn't mean it's consensual.

They stated that as long as the sex is consensual, it's acceptable. Logically, if incest is consensual, then they would believe it's okay, even if they might find it to be icky. If there's no logical reason to reject it, then there's no reason to reject it.

Incest and homosexuality aren't really comparable though, since incest is usually coercive. A sexual/romantic relationship between a parent and child or an older and younger sibling is not much different from a relationship between a teacher and a student or a boss and an employee.

There are incestuous relationships that don't involve a unbalanced power dynamic. Twins or cousins wouldn't necessarily be comparable to teacher/student or employer/employee.

I never really understood the whole power argument. How does love prevent education? How does love prevent the work from getting done?

Incest isn't necessarily about love, just sex. Surely you can see how coercing somebody into sex is wrong?

Sometimes love leads to sex. So incest can be about love. It's a case by case situation.

Romantic love sometimes leads to sex. Familial love does (should) not.

[Glorious Freedonia]

They stated that as long as the sex is consensual, it's acceptable. Logically, if incest is consensual, then they would believe it's okay, even if they might find it to be icky. If there's no logical reason to reject it, then there's no reason to reject it.

Incest and homosexuality aren't really comparable though, since incest is usually coercive. A sexual/romantic relationship between a parent and child or an older and younger sibling is not much different from a relationship between a teacher and a student or a boss and an employee.

I agree; I'm unconvinced that incest can ever be consensual. But they were of the opinion that it was.

They stated that as long as the sex is consensual, it's acceptable. Logically, if incest is consensual, then they would believe it's okay, even if they might find it to be icky. If there's no logical reason to reject it, then there's no reason to reject it.

Incest and homosexuality aren't really comparable though, since incest is usually coercive. A sexual/romantic relationship between a parent and child or an older and younger sibling is not much different from a relationship between a teacher and a student or a boss and an employee.

There are incestuous relationships that don't involve a unbalanced power dynamic. Twins or cousins wouldn't necessarily be comparable to teacher/student or employer/employee.

I never really understood the whole power argument. How does love prevent education? How does love prevent the work from getting done?

Incest isn't necessarily about love, just sex. Surely you can see how coercing somebody into sex is wrong?

I had a case where two siblings left their spouses in order to have a sexual relationship with each other. There was no coercion there.

[Dyakovo]

Romantic love sometimes leads to sex. Familial love does (should) not.

shouldn't ≠ doesn't

[Mourro]

They stated that as long as the sex is consensual, it's acceptable. Logically, if incest is consensual, then they would believe it's okay, even if they might find it to be icky. If there's no logical reason to reject it, then there's no reason to reject it.

Incest and homosexuality aren't really comparable though, since incest is usually coercive. A sexual/romantic relationship between a parent and child or an older and younger sibling is not much different from a relationship between a teacher and a student or a boss and an employee.

There are incestuous relationships that don't involve a unbalanced power dynamic. Twins or cousins wouldn't necessarily be comparable to teacher/student or employer/employee.

True. One would have to judge on a case-by-case basis (and iirc until fairly recently in most places marrying your cousin was legal, although I suspect that's changed). There's no biblical prohibition of incest anyway, though, so GF can't exactly make a case involving it.

Deuteronomy and Leviticus both have prohibitions against incestuous relationships. The list is not exhaustive of every possible relationship because some relationships were probably just too obviously bad.

Oh, I see(!), the list is not exhaustive! Therefore you could basically tell us anything is wrong and we're obliged to believe it(!)

[Cloddhopper-Love]

They stated that as long as the sex is consensual, it's acceptable. Logically, if incest is consensual, then they would believe it's okay, even if they might find it to be icky. If there's no logical reason to reject it, then there's no reason to reject it.

Incest and homosexuality aren't really comparable though, since incest is usually coercive. A sexual/romantic relationship between a parent and child or an older and younger sibling is not much different from a relationship between a teacher and a student or a boss and an employee.

I agree; I'm unconvinced that incest can ever be consensual. But they were of the opinion that it was.

Incest can be consentual. I know twins who are deeply in love with each other.

Just because they're twins doesn't mean it's consensual.

They love each other. As in, the feeling is mutual. As in, they both feel that way. As in, when they have sex, they both want to. As in, it's consensual.

They stated that as long as the sex is consensual, it's acceptable. Logically, if incest is consensual, then they would believe it's okay, even if they might find it to be icky. If there's no logical reason to reject it, then there's no reason to reject it.

Incest and homosexuality aren't really comparable though, since incest is usually coercive. A sexual/romantic relationship between a parent and child or an older and younger sibling is not much different from a relationship between a teacher and a student or a boss and an employee.

There are incestuous relationships that don't involve a unbalanced power dynamic. Twins or cousins wouldn't necessarily be comparable to teacher/student or employer/employee.

I never really understood the whole power argument. How does love prevent education? How does love prevent the work from getting done?

Incest isn't necessarily about love, just sex. Surely you can see how coercing somebody into sex is wrong?

Sometimes love leads to sex. So incest can be about love. It's a case by case situation.

Romantic love sometimes leads to sex. Familial love does (should) not.

Just because you don't agree with it, doesn't mean it shouldn't be so. I don't agree mustard should ever be eaten, that doesn't mean it should be banned. I don't see why blood should get in the way of love

[Bottle]

Anyone having a child with highly specific expectations of them being a certain way and refusing to accept them being any other way is both completely unrealistic AND not fit to be a parent.

Millions of gallons of this.

People who view children as dollies or pets or possessions are, themselves, entirely too immature to be parenting.

Making your love contingent upon your child's sexuality is as stupid as declaring that you will stop loving your child if their hair color turns out to be darker than you wanted it to be.

[Glorious Freedonia]

They stated that as long as the sex is consensual, it's acceptable. Logically, if incest is consensual, then they would believe it's okay, even if they might find it to be icky. If there's no logical reason to reject it, then there's no reason to reject it.

Incest and homosexuality aren't really comparable though, since incest is usually coercive. A sexual/romantic relationship between a parent and child or an older and younger sibling is not much different from a relationship between a teacher and a student or a boss and an employee.

There are incestuous relationships that don't involve a unbalanced power dynamic. Twins or cousins wouldn't necessarily be comparable to teacher/student or employer/employee.

I never really understood the whole power argument. How does love prevent education? How does love prevent the work from getting done?

Honestly? This is one of the single biggest concerns for HR professionals in the workplace. If a boss is having sex with one of his subordinates, and that subordinate doesn't do her job, you can't understand how the boss MIGHT not punish the subordinate the same way he might punish one he isn't sleeping with?

So if you are in love with someone you cannot discipline them fairly? That is like saying that parents cannot be expected to discipline their children because they love them.

[Jello Biafra]

They stated that as long as the sex is consensual, it's acceptable. Logically, if incest is consensual, then they would believe it's okay, even if they might find it to be icky. If there's no logical reason to reject it, then there's no reason to reject it.

Incest and homosexuality aren't really comparable though, since incest is usually coercive. A sexual/romantic relationship between a parent and child or an older and younger sibling is not much different from a relationship between a teacher and a student or a boss and an employee.

I agree; I'm unconvinced that incest can ever be consensual. But they were of the opinion that it was.

They stated that as long as the sex is consensual, it's acceptable. Logically, if incest is consensual, then they would believe it's okay, even if they might find it to be icky. If there's no logical reason to reject it, then there's no reason to reject it.

Incest and homosexuality aren't really comparable though, since incest is usually coercive. A sexual/romantic relationship between a parent and child or an older and younger sibling is not much different from a relationship between a teacher and a student or a boss and an employee.

There are incestuous relationships that don't involve a unbalanced power dynamic. Twins or cousins wouldn't necessarily be comparable to teacher/student or employer/employee.

I never really understood the whole power argument. How does love prevent education? How does love prevent the work from getting done?

Incest isn't necessarily about love, just sex. Surely you can see how coercing somebody into sex is wrong?

I had a case where two siblings left their spouses in order to have a sexual relationship with each other. There was no coercion there.

How well did you know them? If you looked into their lives, you could probably find some amount of coercion or manipulation there.

Romantic love sometimes leads to sex. Familial love does (should) not.

shouldn't ≠ doesn't

Certainly, which is why I phrased it the way I did. If I thought it did, I'd have said "familial love does/should not".

[Ifreann]

The list is not exhaustive of every possible relationship because some relationships were probably just too obviously bad.

Or because God has no problem with those relationships he didn't mention.

[Flameswroth]

And to throw out a child because they "did not turn out the way you wanted" is fickle. It means you had no love for the child to begin with. It's as fickle as throwing out a left-handed child because you wanted a right-handed one, because the mainstream is right-handed so it's not unreasonable to expect a right-handed child.

Sure it is. It's as fickle as returning the red dress shirt you got because it doesn't look as good as you wanted and you'd rather have a black one. I don't see anything bad about that though; if it isn't what you wanted, you get rid of it or fix it.

Some people are more fickle than others, obviously; some might be alright with keeping the red shirt for future use, and only toss it once they've outgrown it. I'm just not sure where you draw the line between fickle being a "bad thing" and fickle just being normal.

Take for example, Downs Syndrome - TONS of fetuses are aborted in the womb after they are diagnosed as having the disorder. Now don't get me wrong, I have no problem with this...hell I'd do it myself. However, it's an example on the other end of the spectrum where parents who intended to have a child decide to return it, or refuse to buy it when they find out it is going to be different than they intended. I'm not sure what the stance of those who feel turning a kid out of the house for teh ghey is 'fickle' is on this case.

Similarly, a child that becomes an addict, bringing drugs and danger to the house. Is it fickle to say, "Well I didn't intend for my son to be like this, I'm going to toss him out?" Some might say it is, yes. But I think that 'some' would be fewer than those who oppose casting out the gay.

The point I'm making is that many of the things we decide to do can be considered 'fickle' if the motivator is based purely on a personal view of a situation. I think the scale of where 'fickle' becomes a bad thing, rather than the norm, varies from person to person. In my personal case, 'fickle' is okay right up to something as trivial as a child's sexuality. Whether or not any individual thinks that such a mantra negates the ability to be a good parent is irrelevant, up until such time that they can pass legislation that somehow ensures that such people cannot have children...and I don't think that'll happen anytime soon.

[Glorious Freedonia]

They stated that as long as the sex is consensual, it's acceptable. Logically, if incest is consensual, then they would believe it's okay, even if they might find it to be icky. If there's no logical reason to reject it, then there's no reason to reject it.

Incest and homosexuality aren't really comparable though, since incest is usually coercive. A sexual/romantic relationship between a parent and child or an older and younger sibling is not much different from a relationship between a teacher and a student or a boss and an employee.

There are incestuous relationships that don't involve a unbalanced power dynamic. Twins or cousins wouldn't necessarily be comparable to teacher/student or employer/employee.

True. One would have to judge on a case-by-case basis (and iirc until fairly recently in most places marrying your cousin was legal, although I suspect that's changed). There's no biblical prohibition of incest anyway, though, so GF can't exactly make a case involving it.

Deuteronomy and Leviticus both have prohibitions against incestuous relationships. The list is not exhaustive of every possible relationship because some relationships were probably just too obviously bad.

Oh, I see(!), the list is not exhaustive! Therefore you could basically tell us anything is wrong and we're obliged to believe it(!)

The fact that you do not get the fact that it is wrong for dad and daughter to make sweet love is revolting. I do not see why I need to tell you this it is self evident.

[Bottle]

They stated that as long as the sex is consensual, it's acceptable. Logically, if incest is consensual, then they would believe it's okay, even if they might find it to be icky. If there's no logical reason to reject it, then there's no reason to reject it.

Incest and homosexuality aren't really comparable though, since incest is usually coercive. A sexual/romantic relationship between a parent and child or an older and younger sibling is not much different from a relationship between a teacher and a student or a boss and an employee.

There are incestuous relationships that don't involve a unbalanced power dynamic. Twins or cousins wouldn't necessarily be comparable to teacher/student or employer/employee.

I never really understood the whole power argument. How does love prevent education? How does love prevent the work from getting done?

Honestly? This is one of the single biggest concerns for HR professionals in the workplace. If a boss is having sex with one of his subordinates, and that subordinate doesn't do her job, you can't understand how the boss MIGHT not punish the subordinate the same way he might punish one he isn't sleeping with?

So if you are in love with someone you cannot discipline them fairly? That is like saying that parents cannot be expected to discipline their children because they love them.

No, it's like saying that if you are a 3rd grade teacher, and your own child is in your class, then you are going to have a bias that will impact how you treat your own child relative to the other children, and your child will also behave differently toward you then they would behave toward a teacher who is not their parent, and even if (by some miracle) both you and your child managed to be the kind of human robots who are capable of totally setting aside your connection then there STILL would be the issue of other people always questioning if your child genuinely earned their grades or if you fudged them a little to help your kid, and thus it's best for all involved if your child is assigned a different teacher.

[Mourro]

They stated that as long as the sex is consensual, it's acceptable. Logically, if incest is consensual, then they would believe it's okay, even if they might find it to be icky. If there's no logical reason to reject it, then there's no reason to reject it.

Incest and homosexuality aren't really comparable though, since incest is usually coercive. A sexual/romantic relationship between a parent and child or an older and younger sibling is not much different from a relationship between a teacher and a student or a boss and an employee.

There are incestuous relationships that don't involve a unbalanced power dynamic. Twins or cousins wouldn't necessarily be comparable to teacher/student or employer/employee.

I never really understood the whole power argument. How does love prevent education? How does love prevent the work from getting done?

Honestly? This is one of the single biggest concerns for HR professionals in the workplace. If a boss is having sex with one of his subordinates, and that subordinate doesn't do her job, you can't understand how the boss MIGHT not punish the subordinate the same way he might punish one he isn't sleeping with?

So if you are in love with someone you cannot discipline them fairly? That is like saying that parents cannot be expected to discipline their children because they love them.

Your idea of discipline is not 'fair'. Fair would be something that considers all parties, but you only seem to care about your selfish need for everything to go the way you want it to go.

[Jello Biafra]

They love each other. As in, the feeling is mutual. As in, they both feel that way. As in, when they have sex, they both want to. As in, it's consensual.

A parent and child could also be in this situation. Simply because they're siblings doesn't mean there's no power imbalance.

Just because you don't agree with it, doesn't mean it shouldn't be so.

Certainly. The reason I don't agree with it is because it shouldn't be so.

I don't agree mustard should ever be eaten, that doesn't mean it should be banned. I don't see why blood should get in the way of love

Blood? I didn't say 'blood'. I'm concerned with power dynamics I think the comparisons to a teacher and a student are accurate, if less intense.

[Mourro]

They stated that as long as the sex is consensual, it's acceptable. Logically, if incest is consensual, then they would believe it's okay, even if they might find it to be icky. If there's no logical reason to reject it, then there's no reason to reject it.

Incest and homosexuality aren't really comparable though, since incest is usually coercive. A sexual/romantic relationship between a parent and child or an older and younger sibling is not much different from a relationship between a teacher and a student or a boss and an employee.

There are incestuous relationships that don't involve a unbalanced power dynamic. Twins or cousins wouldn't necessarily be comparable to teacher/student or employer/employee.

True. One would have to judge on a case-by-case basis (and iirc until fairly recently in most places marrying your cousin was legal, although I suspect that's changed). There's no biblical prohibition of incest anyway, though, so GF can't exactly make a case involving it.

Deuteronomy and Leviticus both have prohibitions against incestuous relationships. The list is not exhaustive of every possible relationship because some relationships were probably just too obviously bad.

Oh, I see(!), the list is not exhaustive! Therefore you could basically tell us anything is wrong and we're obliged to believe it(!)

The fact that you do not get the fact that it is wrong for dad and daughter to make sweet love is revolting. I do not see why I need to tell you this it is self evident.

I'm not even talking about incest. My point is on 'homosexuality' -_-;

[Glorious Freedonia]

They stated that as long as the sex is consensual, it's acceptable. Logically, if incest is consensual, then they would believe it's okay, even if they might find it to be icky. If there's no logical reason to reject it, then there's no reason to reject it.

Incest and homosexuality aren't really comparable though, since incest is usually coercive. A sexual/romantic relationship between a parent and child or an older and younger sibling is not much different from a relationship between a teacher and a student or a boss and an employee.

The only two incestuous relationships I ever heard about were consensual and involved siblings. A teacher and a student is horrible if we are talking about a teacher and a child student. I do not see a problem with a professor and a college or grad student though. In that situation we are dealing with adults. I do not see how loving your teacher or student would make you less able to teach them or be taught by them. Heck, my wife and I teach each other stuff all of the time.
A boss and an employee is also fine assuming that we are talking about adults. I do not see how loving your boss or employee will interfere with your job duties.

It's the disparity in authority -- generally, in any situation where one individual holds power over another, relationships are not usually considered acceptable (unprofessional in the workplace and the school, abusive in the family). If your boss propositions you, and you refuse, he could fire you, or lower your pay, or exact retribution for your slight in numerous other ways. And you will generally be aware of this, and may consent despite not actually desiring the sexual encounter simply so that you will not suffer any negative consequences from refusing -- consent under coercion, which is basically not consent at all. Obviously, this has to be judged on a case-by-case basis.

You haven't answered my question btw.

What question have I not answered? Also, the fact that someone has power over another does not mean that someone will abuse it. I am as opposed to sexual harassment as anyone can be. However, I do not see a problem with power that is not abused and love existing between professors and students and employees and bosses.

[Sdaeriji]

They stated that as long as the sex is consensual, it's acceptable. Logically, if incest is consensual, then they would believe it's okay, even if they might find it to be icky. If there's no logical reason to reject it, then there's no reason to reject it.

Incest and homosexuality aren't really comparable though, since incest is usually coercive. A sexual/romantic relationship between a parent and child or an older and younger sibling is not much different from a relationship between a teacher and a student or a boss and an employee.

There are incestuous relationships that don't involve a unbalanced power dynamic. Twins or cousins wouldn't necessarily be comparable to teacher/student or employer/employee.

I never really understood the whole power argument. How does love prevent education? How does love prevent the work from getting done?

Honestly? This is one of the single biggest concerns for HR professionals in the workplace. If a boss is having sex with one of his subordinates, and that subordinate doesn't do her job, you can't understand how the boss MIGHT not punish the subordinate the same way he might punish one he isn't sleeping with?

So if you are in love with someone you cannot discipline them fairly? That is like saying that parents cannot be expected to discipline their children because they love them.

Who said anything about love? We're talking about managers and employees fucking, not being in love.