Incest rears its ugly head

[seedubs1]

We're working on changing them. Lots of people are sick and tired of the nanny state, and working to change things. I for one, am sick and tired of a government that tries to regulate things that harm nobody and are just another form of taxation on the populace (ex. seat belt laws, marriage in general, the "war" on drugs, etc...). Hope you get over that "icky" feeling once new laws are passed.

You wanna live down here in the valley, shut the f**k up, change the law, or move to another valley.

 

[Arthur Dent]

I oppose the courts making what amounts to constitutional amendments on things that should be left to the people and the states.

Interracial marriage was decided by the Supreme Court in 1967, Loving vs Virginia.

 

[Arthur Dent]

We're working on changing them. Lots of people are sick and tired of the nanny state, and working to change things. I for one, am sick and tired of a government that tries to regulate things that harm nobody and are just another form of taxation on the populace (ex. seat belt laws, marriage in general, the "war" on drugs, etc...). Hope you get over that "icky" feeling once new laws are passed.

You know what all those victimless crimes do? They generate money for somebody. Somebody profits from those so don't expect it to change.

 

[Woobie]

I disagree with government having a hand in marriage at all. But as long as we allow them to be in that role, they will define it as they feel buys them the most votes or garners them the most power. There are a lot of side issues that are simply a cost of doing business when you let the govt get involved in this and other social issues. It doesn't matter what laws you write. As long as people want to behave a certain way, they will. If people are engaged in truly sick behavior, such as incest, the problem is the person, not the legal system. The reason we should outlaw rape is not because it is an unsavory act to most of us, but because there is a victim. I just don't see a use for government in regulating consenting behavior. Immorality should be addressed, but not by a man with a gun. As a Christian I believe certain things are sinful. That doesn't mean God needs Congress to help Him sort those things out.

 

[hornadylnl]

I disagree with government having a hand in marriage at all. But as long as we allow them to be in that role, they will define it as they feel buys them the most votes or garners them the most power. There are a lot of side issues that are simply a cost of doing business when you let the govt get involved in this and other social issues. It doesn't matter what laws you write. As long as people want to behave a certain way, they will. If people are engaged in truly sick behavior, such as incest, the problem is the person, not the legal system. The reason we should outlaw rape is not because it is an unsavory act to most of us, but because there is a victim. I just don't see a use for government in regulating consenting behavior. Immorality should be addressed, but not by a man with a gun. As a Christian I believe certain things are sinful. That doesn't mean God needs Congress to help him sort those things out.

Some seem to be under the impression that government is the Holy Spirit.

-------------------------

What we are seeing with marriage is the equivalent of those of a particular craft or trade wanting to protect themselves. So they turn to government to license and regulate those in that trade or craft. They now have weight of law to control others. Then when government decides to change the parameters of the licensing and regulations, they cry foul. Never did they conceive in their tiny little minds that they may no longer get to set the parameters to their benefit.

 

[zippy23]

I have had this argument with a liberal very recently. He says incest is wrong and should be illegal but gay marriage is ok. He says if two consenting adults love each other then they should be able to get married. I told him he cant have it both ways and must be in favor of incest if a 50 year old man and 25 year old son wanna marry. Of course thats wrong to them but gay marriage is ok. I've hammered away on this person for a while, they just dont care about logic, facts, or the truth. They are pure political hacks. Its really amazing how the left can brainwash their voters, literally to the point that nothing matters other than their talking points. They become worse than religious fanatics. If you could prove god doesnt exist with facts that would make you question your faith. You can prove a liberal wrong all day long and they will trash talk you, lie, squirm and then run away and hold on to their dear lies even tighter. Its unreal

 

[findingZzero]

I have had this argument with a liberal very recently. He says incest is wrong and should be illegal but gay marriage is ok. He says if two consenting adults love each other then they should be able to get married. I told him he cant have it both ways and must be in favor of incest if a 50 year old man and 25 year old son wanna marry. Of course thats wrong to them but gay marriage is ok. I've hammered away on this person for a while, they just dont care about logic, facts, or the truth. They are pure political hacks. Its really amazing how the left can brainwash their voters, literally to the point that nothing matters other than their talking points. They become worse than religious fanatics. If you could prove god doesnt exist with facts that would make you question your faith. You can prove a liberal wrong all day long and they will trash talk you, lie, squirm and then run away and hold on to their dear lies even tighter. Its unreal

Congrats, you found a non-thinking liberal. Try talking to a smart one next time. I bet I could find a squashy conservative to prove my talking points. I would say the thing these two folks have in common is not their politics, but their soggy thinking.

 

[Dean C.]

Some seem to be under the impression that government is the Holy Spirit.

-------------------------

What we are seeing with marriage is the equivalent of those of a particular craft or trade wanting to protect themselves. So they turn to government to license and regulate those in that trade or craft. They now have weight of law to control others. Then when government decides to change the parameters of the licensing and regulations, they cry foul. Never did they conceive in their tiny little minds that they may no longer get to set the parameters to their benefit.

One of the truest statements mad in this thread so far! It is funny I am waiting for the persecution card to be pulled myself.

 

[seedubs1]

This is is what we should be working to overcome. Prosecution of victimless crimes as an additional taxation and source of revenue from the populace is not right.

You know what all those victimless crimes do? They generate money for somebody. Somebody profits from those so don't expect it to change.

 

[HoughMade]

Interracial marriage was decided by the Supreme Court in 1967, Loving vs Virginia.

Based upon....go figure....actual Constitutional Amendments, you know, that little known or used process where the legislative process is actually used to change the Constitution. The 14th Amendment was designed to address the end of slavery and to specifically address racial equality, upon which Loving is based.

Constitutional amendments...the legislative process....so old fashioned.

 

[hornadylnl]

Based upon....go figure....actual Constitutional Amendments, you know, that little known or used process where the legislative process is actually used to change the Constitution. The 14th Amendment was designed to address the end of slavery and to specifically address racial equality, upon which Loving is based.

Constitutional amendments...the legislative process....so old fashioned.

Does the constitution prohibit gay or incestual marriages?

 

[HoughMade]

Does the constitution prohibit gay or incestual marriages?

The Constitution doesn't prohibit murder. What's your point?

 

[hornadylnl]

The Constitution doesn't prohibit murder. What's your point?

We only have rights that which the constitution grants?

 

[indiucky]

The Royal's are at it again huh...They sho enuff love they kin folk over there....

 

[HoughMade]

We only have rights that which the constitution grants?

Who said that?

 

[hornadylnl]

Who said that?

Did it take a constitutional amendment for interracial couples to have the right to get married?

 

[rw496]

Did it take a constitutional amendment for interracial couples to have the right to get married?

Yes. the 14th.

 

[hornadylnl]

Yes. the 14th.

So unless the constitution stated it, that right didn't exist?

 

[rw496]

So unless the constitution stated it, that right didn't exist?

It did, it was just one of the many undiscovered natural and fundamental rights of man implied in the 14th Amendment being deprived by a State

 

[Liberty Sanders]

There are two issues here.

Gay marriage doesn't harm anyone, nor is there any reason to oppose it.

Incestuous marriage MIGHT harm someone, to wit: the unborn who might result.

What I do NOT know about the genetic ramifications here would fill volumes. Is there a way around this issue? I dunno.

For ME anyway, the jury is still out on this. I need more information.