Active Users:481 Time:01/08/2026 08:32:28 PM
Re: Is that assumption valid? Isaac Send a noteboard - 09/08/2010 12:07:22 PM
I meant my reply was tangential.


LOL, I'm so used to wandering off on tangents I assume any comment of that variety is aimed my way :P

Yes, and my reply suggested that the underlying assumption of your arugment, that polygamy is bad, is problematic. I questioned your lumping of polygamy and incest into one big ball.


Polygamy = bad is not part of my argument, I am rather specifically trying not to make any argument at all, I raised both because they are relatively common 'atypical relations' that can be consensual, why necrophilia and bestiality are not mentioned. No moral judgement on any of the various relations mentioned are implied, or were meant to be implied. Obviously I do have my own views, which to save further confusion happens to be strong support of gay marriage, lukewarm support of polygamy, and a regrettable mind-bender on incest, I find it revolting but can't think of a reason it should be banned that doesn't apply to other things, hence me fishing other people's heads. ;)

Incest is a whole other ball game.

Because the babies go bad? The prohibition against incest is founded in very sound evolutionary science.


Considering the laws predate sound evolutionary science :P Anyway, two-parter, is their an ethical reason to ban incestuous marriage where there is no reason to believe bad babies will result (one or both partners sterile, old, using birth control, futuristic gene-tinkering) and 2) If 'bad babies' is a legal ground, where does that right for the state come from and is incest the only case it should be applicable? Does the state, by incest laws as precedent, have the right to ban procreation between any cases of significantly heightened genetic defects?
The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift.
- Albert Einstein

King of Cairhien 20-7-2
Chancellor of the Landsraad, Archduke of Is'Mod
Reply to message
Let's ban all Christian Marriage. - 07/08/2010 06:36:13 AM 1829 Views
Nice satire, but it raises another point for me. - 07/08/2010 07:20:49 AM 1210 Views
One small problem... - 07/08/2010 08:02:34 AM 1214 Views
Re tax. - 07/08/2010 08:47:22 AM 1261 Views
That seems sensible to me. - 09/08/2010 08:13:26 PM 1156 Views
Not sure what you mean by "demoted." - 07/08/2010 03:50:02 PM 1280 Views
Nice. *NM* - 07/08/2010 08:58:20 AM 702 Views
That would only be appropriate if Christians wanted to ban secular unions of normal people. - 07/08/2010 11:51:29 AM 1470 Views
Hey, look! There was a point over there! - 07/08/2010 03:46:41 PM 1319 Views
Who else should make those decisions? - 07/08/2010 08:00:39 PM 1237 Views
I'd totally... - 08/08/2010 04:14:15 AM 1141 Views
I'd totally... - 08/08/2010 06:17:30 AM 1303 Views
You'd defend this idiot? *NM* - 08/08/2010 06:40:34 AM 587 Views
Indeed - 08/08/2010 06:43:53 AM 1234 Views
I used to think Joel was the biggest rambler on this site. I am seriously reconsidering. - 08/08/2010 05:24:56 AM 1236 Views
And my assessment of one poster as the most content-poor, non-contributing slug is unchanged - 08/08/2010 07:17:02 PM 1147 Views
Um, ok. *NM* - 10/08/2010 12:48:19 AM 591 Views
*Shakes Head* - 08/08/2010 06:23:47 AM 1111 Views
I highly doubt Cannoli is "scared" of homosexuals *NM* - 08/08/2010 06:29:54 AM 614 Views
Perhaps not in the physical sense. - 08/08/2010 06:35:53 AM 1223 Views
Re: Perhaps not in the physical sense. - 08/08/2010 06:46:56 AM 1164 Views
Gah! You did that on purpose! - 09/08/2010 01:05:13 AM 1106 Views
whoops *NM* - 09/08/2010 02:22:49 AM 546 Views
Re: *Shakes Head* - 08/08/2010 07:43:11 PM 1166 Views
This must be the "thought out reaction" I've heard so much about. - 08/08/2010 10:45:59 PM 1111 Views
You cannot be that stupid. - 11/08/2010 03:10:55 PM 1374 Views
Incorrect. Genders are not treated equally. - 11/08/2010 07:53:00 PM 1502 Views
all you need is enough support to pass an amendment - 08/08/2010 02:46:08 PM 1101 Views
A lot of the arguments would seem to justify polygamy and incest too - 08/08/2010 11:51:24 PM 1162 Views
And what is wrong with polygamy? *NM* - 09/08/2010 10:36:53 AM 601 Views
Did I say there was anything? - 09/08/2010 11:03:10 AM 1246 Views
Plolygamy and incest are not on the same level of bad. - 09/08/2010 11:00:07 AM 1191 Views
Is that assumption valid? - 09/08/2010 11:36:26 AM 1117 Views
Re: Is that assumption valid? - 09/08/2010 11:46:42 AM 1106 Views
Re: Is that assumption valid? - 09/08/2010 12:07:22 PM 1219 Views
Not really - 09/08/2010 01:20:46 PM 1068 Views
Re: Not really - 09/08/2010 01:27:04 PM 1197 Views
Re: Not really - 09/08/2010 02:14:43 PM 1066 Views
Re: Not really - 09/08/2010 03:06:31 PM 1253 Views
Spoken like someone who does not have to insure an employee's six wives. - 11/08/2010 03:11:57 PM 1265 Views
... - 11/08/2010 03:22:50 PM 1143 Views
Mmm, but when you're strictly discussing marriage - 09/08/2010 06:13:30 PM 1258 Views
Re: Mmm, but when you're strictly discussing marriage - 10/08/2010 01:24:06 AM 1065 Views
Now I think about it, I'm not sure. - 10/08/2010 04:09:43 PM 1184 Views
Re: Now I think about it, I'm not sure. - 10/08/2010 06:12:39 PM 1095 Views
Great post Danny - 09/08/2010 08:22:27 PM 962 Views
It should be noted again... - 09/08/2010 08:59:32 PM 1225 Views
and how is it not a right? - 09/08/2010 09:19:12 PM 1135 Views
My definition of rights... - 09/08/2010 10:47:16 PM 1224 Views
mmm, but the UN has legally stated marriage as a right. - 10/08/2010 02:52:03 AM 990 Views
+1 - 10/08/2010 03:11:22 AM 1281 Views
Article 16 probably not a great example - 10/08/2010 03:44:04 AM 1088 Views
You could just as easily move the emphasis... - 10/08/2010 04:08:46 AM 1246 Views
If we need a more specific resolution... - 10/08/2010 04:22:12 AM 1431 Views
It doesn't say a man can only marry a woman or vice versa, though. - 10/08/2010 04:24:17 AM 1100 Views
It also doesn't say they can - 10/08/2010 04:41:18 AM 1099 Views
You're missing the point. It's not about gay marriage. - 10/08/2010 11:20:59 AM 1136 Views
No, I got that, I'm pointing out how it does so - 10/08/2010 01:47:00 PM 1115 Views
To clarify for you - 10/08/2010 05:36:14 AM 1091 Views
The UNSC is actually the UN's enforcement body... - 10/08/2010 07:16:31 PM 1486 Views
What the UN thinks is *completely* worthless.... - 10/08/2010 06:43:15 PM 1051 Views
and the Constitution dictates nothing about marriage. *NM* - 10/08/2010 11:46:24 PM 567 Views
That means it is up to the people. And they say "No." *NM* - 11/08/2010 03:13:12 PM 579 Views
No, but it does dictate things about rights and discrimination - 12/08/2010 03:48:02 PM 1281 Views
The actual ruling on Prop 8 specifices marriage as a freedom, not a right. - 10/08/2010 12:02:17 AM 1212 Views
Out of curiosity, what would you say to using the Ninth Amendment, possibly in conjunction... - 10/08/2010 12:20:19 AM 1269 Views
I agree - 10/08/2010 06:11:19 PM 968 Views
Yeah but this can't be used to prove that it IS a right... - 10/08/2010 07:30:57 PM 1420 Views
Note it all you want... - 10/08/2010 06:43:53 AM 976 Views
The best one yet. - 10/08/2010 07:59:17 PM 1224 Views
Yeah, I'd agree that's pretty insane - 10/08/2010 08:49:24 PM 1088 Views
Re: Yeah, I'd agree that's pretty insane - 10/08/2010 09:03:11 PM 1192 Views
Re: Yeah, I'd agree that's pretty insane - 11/08/2010 04:35:03 PM 1103 Views
Re: Yeah, I'd agree that's pretty insane - 11/08/2010 04:41:23 PM 1237 Views
Hmm - been a long time since I read my copy of the graphic novel - 11/08/2010 05:06:47 PM 1209 Views
Re: Hmm - been a long time since I read my copy of the graphic novel - 11/08/2010 05:09:23 PM 1151 Views

Reply to Message