...this might get some people mad
Disclaimer: I do not support incest. Like most of you I think it’s just plain GROSS!
All manners of arguments have been used to justify same-sex marriage. One of the most common is the “If two people love each other and want to get married, they should have the same rights as anyone else regardless of gender” argument. Who are we to object? Why should we even care? Heck, if a guy wants to marry his sister, why can’t he? Just play along with me. They’re in love and it’s not just brotherly love. What’s so wrong about them getting married? How about two sisters? How is that any different?
Now don’t jump to any emotional arguments. Just think logically and factually. The one problem that jumps out is inbreeding can bring out harmful recessive traits. But who says the couple will procreate? Same-sex couples can’t have kids, biologically speaking. So if they should still be allowed to marry, we’ve established the idea that marriage is not all about procreation.
While gay people have been around for ages, homosexuality was never as talked about as it is now. Fifty years ago, it wasn’t as socially acceptable as it is now. Sure, there are many people who oppose it and many people who discriminate against homosexuals today. But that people are able to discuss it shows we have come a long way, whether for better or worse. Today, incest is not socially acceptable or openly discussed. It is just plain wrong, gross, and unnatural. But who knows, maybe fifty years from now, brothers and sisters will be fighting for their right to get married. It may seem unlikely, but if you went back in time and told someone fifty years ago that Congress would be deciding whether or not gay people should be allowed to marry each other, they just might think you were crazy. If you think a woman marrying her brother is wrong, why? Think of a rational reason, not one based on emotions or preconceptions. And whatever reason you come up with, does it apply to same-sex marriages as well?
I’m not writing this with the intention of advocating incest or discouraging homosexuality. But if you oppose one, how can you accept the other? Is there not a double standard in that type of thinking?
posted by Warmongers Anonymous @ 12:12 AM
10 Comments
10 Comments:
Good question!
It is a good question, and a valid one, and if both adults are consenting then I really don't think it does matter to much if they don't procreate. If they do, it is a little different because it is creating a societal burden in looking after an inbred child, whilst also contributing to the Darwinian extinction of that lineage, which they are choosing.
If you look at the Royal families, you will see that incest didn't go out of fashion all that long ago.
The bottom line is, if these people are in happy loving relationships and are well informed consenting adults, where is the Governments place in telling them how to live, or curbing their freedom by economic manipulation and inequality - assuming we live in a free society?
I like the article and i agree there are certain things that still really need to be looked at but i stand by the opinion that gays should be allowed the same rights as other couples. I will say you made valid points and it really made me think about why i thought gay marriages were ok.
Ladybug: Need I get graphic here? Your comparison is like comparing apples and oranges. For the brother-sister couple to have a child, they must have the sort of sex that results in pregnancy; that is, sperm must be transferred from the male to the female and enter an egg. Homosexual couples cannot, physically, have this type of sex. They do not possess the necessary combination of organs for this type of sex to be possible. They can have other types of sex and express their love in other ways, which I will not get into here. My point is, you are comparing two different types of sex which have different results. If the brother-sister couple were to have the type of sex the homosexual couple has, there would be no pregnancy and no “handicapped child" would be produced. Your logic seeks to limit the brother-sister couple’s rights because they have more capabilities than the homosexual couple, regardless of whether or not they would use these capabilities- homosexual couples do not have these capabilities and function fine without using them.
I can't believe you’re actually comparing incest and gay marriage. And even when it would be very hard to accept, if the brother and sister are old enough to make a consented decision well.. there's not much we can do is there? If you think gay marriage is soooo gross or perverted or whatever, that does not change the fact that they are two consenting, UNRELATED adults who are making an adult decision that does not affect anyone in any way, actually not letting them get married when its all they want will only make them unhappy.
Anonymous: You said the difference is that the gay couple are two consenting, UNRELATED adults. Yes, the brother-sister couple are related, but why does that make things any different? How can people think it's gross for two related people to get married, yet think it's perfectly normal for two ladies to marry each other as long as they are "consenting adults".. why is the "UNRELATED" part so important? That's what I'm asking, and while I understand and respect that you disagree with me, at least give me some valid points.
theres a HUGE difference between being gay and being incest!
they are not the same thing!!!...its just stupid how you people think!....wait...do you even think at all????....
Anonymous:
Please tell me what this HUGE difference is. I have thought about it and could not come up with anything that can't be refuted.
-Didn't you say that the brother and sister were able to have a child but not so for the homosexuals? Isn't that a difference between them? I keep getting asked these questions and I'm looking for a way to answer I want your opinion on them: What is love? How many types of love are there? What really is the definition of "normal"? If I were to accept something new to my environment that others haven't yet taken in does it make that thing so called normal if so why is it not for others? I don't want to come off sounding discriminating, I wouldn't want people to say, "here comes a hetero." So how do I address you, without sounding like I was "gay bashing"? Why engage in marriage if you love someone why feel the need to ask permisso? I witnessed people getting married and after the "novelties" of marriage are over you soon see true colors show then all the disfunctions appear- alcohol abuse mingled with violence, suspision, distrust that leads to infidelity that inturn fuels the first an ongoing viscous circle all because we fail to actually know the person we choose to become "life partners" that term can as well be used for straights or is marriage only meant to be temporary instead of ...'til death do us part. The thought, meaning and expression for marriage has been lost sight of it's not about permission to have kids, it's not meant to become a tax right off or any other form of governmental aid and it is certainly not as many take it as a game to where we can say I quit let's start over. I keep getting asked what does marriage mean to me? How do I respond? I heard that the ring or wedding band at first a long time ago was only given to the wife as a sign of ownership later the ring was "exchanged" I was listening to a man that for this and other reasons didn't wear a ring people then thought he wasn't married so when he told them he was they asked where is your ring? he told them the story followed by saying that, "the ring is around my heart I don't need a ring to say I'm married I let my mouth and my life speak for that." Everything has been "commercialized" with the promise that if you aren't satisfied then like that ring you can return it. It doesn't matter if 2 people of the same sex get "married" look what we did to that concept anyway? What is marriage? Is it only the consent between two adults? I watched a program that was giving little children in marriage because they had a terminal illness or condition that would kill them before they could have the chance to "experience" the married life. Is marriage supposed to be defined by an individual's personal opinion, idea, belief or even on a feeling? What are the so called rules, regulations or I use the term statutes of marriage? Who made them? If they're is nothing there to keep it unique to stand out against everything else why does it even exsist? We made it a common practice like going to the bathroom. Is marriage a right granted by the government or is it set up some other way? If there is no basis or foundation to build upon then what's the use? Everyone has their "special" way of initializing the "rite" I've seen a few "bizarre" forms of this tradition why don't the gay community do the same so what the government doesn't approve I watched an episode of Jerry Springer the husbands to be brought their wives to be only to turn them down on national television for a gay partner and a minister married them I have no idea if there is any truth to this but if in some places it is allowed then move there get married move back even though where you live it is not recognized like I said why marry? If you want to adopt I known a few people who aren't married and even single adopt it's not that common though but possible I'm sure that given enough time and by the strength of numbers the people will have legislation pass a law allowing these things to come to pass. Trust me there will come a day when the people will mostly out of fear flock to legislation and and will enforce or enact -- for the conclusion and for any comments or inquiries e-mail us at: ThomasandJohnson@q.com I wouldn't want to spam or monopolize this site and ruin it for others we get alot of letters on our addresses so it may take a while to respond but we will answer and thanks for listening it's appreciated
-Selv.
I certainly agree with you that the definition of marriage has become something confusing, and different people have different views of what constitutes a marriage. However, in my blog post I was referring to the United States' current stance on marriage, and the legalities associated with it. I wasn't aiming to advocate homosexual marriage or incest, nor to oppose either. I simply wanted to compare the two and determine why they are on different moral levels. I haven't been able to determine this, and so came to the conclusion that it is hypocrisy to support one but not the other. I said nothing about the traditional form of marriage; an unrelated man and woman. This post wasn't specifically addressing those who hold that to be the only acceptable form, because then the label of “hypocrisy” wouldn’t apply, and an entirely separate issue is involved.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home