Should incest be banned?

[Sunstone]

well ,someone needs to.

And your qualifications are....?

 

[McBell]

incest will warp the idea of family which has been a cornerstone of sociey for many centuries.

Bold unsubstantiated claim used to monger fear.

legalising it sends out the wrong message to society - banning let's people know its wrong (bear in mind that some people in certain areas may be of low intellect and cannot work this out for themselves).

You have yet to show how it is wrong outside your thinking it yucky.

 

[blackout]

And your qualifications are....?

I could take a couple of guesses,
but they might get me banned....

 

[McBell]

well ,someone needs to.

And what makes you think that YOU are qualified?

the world needs to be protected from itself - form the hidden fascist agenda hiding within the liberal sheeps' clothing.

Then take off your sheep's skin....

equality and entitlement really mean seflishness, ego and 'me first'.

Wow, the irony....

 

[McBell]

I could take a couple of guesses,
but they might get me banned....

At the risk of praising the "one and only true god of Egypt..."

Amen!

 

[nnmartin]

I could take a couple of guesses,
but they might get me banned....

it is time to come out with what you know you want to say.

why on Earth should it get you banned?

(just word it politely)

 

[nnmartin]

At the risk of praising the "one and only true god of Egypt..."

Amen!

ah, I see - so this is what UV wants to say.

something about the Christian God I take it?

well that doesn't bother me a jot - I have some fairly unorthodox beliefs in this regard anyway so I am all ears and cannot be offended.

 

[nnmartin]

Then take off your sheep's skin....

Wow, the irony....

no, it's not me who is the fascist.

quite the opposite really - I am far more inclined to the Socialist Worldview.

I used to have a signature of Mao Tse Tung - many of his ideals I aspire to.

it would be called 'equality with authority'.

(some slight modifications would be necessary I admit)

 

[McBell]

ah, I see - so this is what UV wants to say.

something about the Christian God I take it?

well that doesn't bother me a jot - I have some fairly unorthodox beliefs in this regard anyway so I am all ears and cannot be offended.

You assume to much.

My post is a jab at the thread where it is claimed that the term "amen" is in praise of Amen-ra.

But feel free to go with what ever you like on the matter....

 

[McBell]

no, it's not me who is the fascist.

quite the opposite really - I am far more inclined to the Socialist Worldview.

I used to have a signature of Mao Tse Tung - many of his ideals that I aspire to.

it would be called 'equality with authority'.

(some slight modifications would be necessary I admit)

Perhaps you should look up the definition of fascism?

"WordNet (r) 3.0 (2006)"
fascism
n 1: a political theory advocating an authoritarian hierarchical
government (as opposed to democracy or liberalism)
​

now apply the definition to your wanting to dictate to the world what is and what is not moral and how you want to arbitrarily ban everything you find yucky....

 

[blackout]

it is time to come out with what you know you want to say.

why on Earth should it get you banned?

(just word it politely)

You are here for your own interests, purposes and amusements.

That is as polite as I can be.

Asking me to be less polite,
would be immoral.

 

[9Westy9]

well ,someone needs to.

the world needs to be protected from itself - form the hidden fascist agenda hiding within the liberal sheeps' clothing.

equality and entitlement really mean seflishness, ego and 'me first'.

and you are the chosen messiah?

 

[9Westy9]

no, it's not me who is the fascist.

quite the opposite really - I am far more inclined to the Socialist Worldview.

I used to have a signature of Mao Tse Tung - many of his ideals I aspire to.

it would be called 'equality with authority'.

(some slight modifications would be necessary I admit)

Yet you're against same sex marriage. you do know what equality means right?

 

[nnmartin]

You are here for your own interests, purposes and amusements.

That is as polite as I can be.

Asking me to be less polite,
would be immoral.

surely that is why most people are on a forum for though anyway?

we all have our own purpose for being here but I'm sure its mainly for some kind of personal benefit.

 

[nnmartin]

and you are the chosen messiah?

yes, perhaps I am.:candle:

 

[nnmartin]

Yet you're against same sex marriage. you do know what equality means right?

there is liberal equality and then there is commonsense equality - I prefer the second option.

if we allow for same sex marriage then we must also allow for single person marriage otherwise that would be discrimination against single people - agree?

 

[McBell]

there is liberal equality and then there is commonsense equality - I prefer the second option.

Define "common sense"

if we allow for same sex marriage then we must also allow for single person marriage otherwise that would be discrimination against single people - agree?

you're really showing your desperation...

Or your ignorance...

I will let you tell us which it is...


Remember now, marriage is a legal contract.
All the glitz, glitter, show boating, window dressing, importance, sanctity, etc. is all beside the point and quite frankly irrelevant to the fact that marriage is a legal contract.

 

[nnmartin]

not at all - can you show why this should not be allowed.

if we can redefine definitions of concepts then who decides on the rules?

we can just as easily change man and woman to man and man so lets have man and himself instead. It's the same logic.

completely ridiculous.

 

[McBell]

not at all - can you show why this should not be allowed.

Because marriage is a legal contract.
Please at least try to pay attention.

if we can redefine definitions of concepts then who decides on the rules?

Since your favourite definition of marriage is a fairly new one, one wonders why you would even be mentioning "redefining".

we can just as easily change man and woman to man and man so lets have man and himself instead. It's the same logic.

Not even close.

completely ridiculous.

You really should have put this warning about your post at the beginning instead of here at the end.

 

[9Westy9]

yes, perhaps I am.:candle:

How humble...

there is liberal equality and then there is commonsense equality - I prefer the second option.

what is commonsense equality? Your opinion?

if we allow for same sex marriage then we must also allow for single person marriage otherwise that would be discrimination against single people - agree?

What would be the point of single marriage? Also I don't see single people who want to marry themselves.