Why Not Incestuous Marriage?

Marriage and sex are indpendent of each other. I have demonstrated this.

 

Again... you're not able to make an argument why incest should not be allowed without contradicting your homosexual argument. It's an impossibility.

 

Reason number 6 in question number 2

https://www.ohiobar.org/ForPublic/Resources/LawYouCanUse/Pages/LawYouCanUse-199.aspx

6) Your marriage was never consummated. This means that you and your spouse failed to have physical relations at any time following the marriage ceremony. Such an annulment action also must be filed within two years of the date of the marriage.

- - - Updated - - -

Yeah if I were you I'd try to make the topic about something else to keep from getting my ass handed to me too lol

 

Marriage and sex are independent of eachother. Nothing you have posted refutes that.

 

OK when the time comes to vote gay marriage in, ONLY if we bring up another topic (incest), I will begin that debate. But that time will never come, just FYI.

 

Mostly playing Devil's Advocate here but; Legal marriage is about official recognition of a relationship. An incestuous couple already has an official recognition of their relationship by definition, meaning not only is legal marriage not necessary but risks presenting legal contradictions by introducing two incompatible formal relationships.

 

Bigotry and stereotyping noted.

 

[MENTION=63344]TheImmortal[/MENTION]

While you highlight the reasoned logic towards those you choose to challenge with this argument, it is actually beyond them to comprehend. The truth of the matter, is that progressivism/modern liberal ideology, gradually has to fragment societally downwards to always accommodate the next "freedom" in their minds. They risk chaos as an ideology, which is societally destructive over generations of it's layered applications.

Why it is beyond them, is the graduated consequence of moral relativism. They basically, really, do NOT have the ability to comprehend. Even as an atheist, I completely get what you are stating, because I am not locked into an ideological trap of indoctrinated moral relativism.

 

Does our species and society have a vested in interest in incest, is incest vital to our survival as a species and as a society such that we should encourage and promote and sanction it?

 

All morality is relative.

 

Notice everybody he refuses to even attempt to defend his position anymore.

That's the one of the only options they have. Either they simply refuse to talk about it, they accept it or they engage in hypocrisy.

But you CANNOT support homosexuality and not support incest without engaging in hypocrisy. It's an impossibility. And while this guy may dishonestly argue that the precedent set will be irrelevant... the courts are well aware that they are not.

BTW why is it relevant for homosexuals to bring up heterosexual marriage when trying to gain support for their position but it's not relevant for incestuous to bring up homosexual marriage when trying to gain support for their position? Please provide the reasoning behind this.

- - - Updated - - -

No it does not. Does it have a vested interest in homosexuality?

 

No one needs to argue with you since it's not relevant. If it were, it'd be an argument for the law itself, which it's not. It's just you.

 

Does our species have a vested interest in marriage?

 

The OP requested opinions on "Incestual Marriage", and I used the procreation argument based on this question....Either your ability to read is compromised, or you simply wish to argue for arguments sake.

The other option would likely be considered an insultin attack by the Moderation team so I will refrain.

 

and that is part of the issue, how can a child or sibling fully consent to a marriage. Family influence will always play a role.

 

Who is talking about children?

 

The OP... maybe you don't understand the words he said this:

I'm challenging anybody (ESPECIALLY those who support homosexual marriage) to come and explain to me why my mother and I can't get married. She's 55 and I'm 19.

 

You made it sound like you were talking about a 5 year old.

When someone turns 18 they're able to make their own decisions unless proven otherwise.

 

And I am well aware of that fact. And as long as you're consistent with your argument we won't have an issue. However, you cannot claim that procreation is relevant to marriage for one group of people that you disagree with and then claim it's not relevant for a group of people that you agree with.

As much as the left would like to believe these things occur in a vacuum, they do not.

- - - Updated - - -

Not sure what country you're in but 18 is an adult in mine.

 

Why shouldn't you be able to get married to your mother?

In a free society, we do not have to explain why things should be legal.

 

my son is 18 and he is still my child.....

 

But is an adult and allowed to make his own decisions under the law.

 

I am not sure how to better explain that a child of someone is not free of influence and thus consent cannot be assumed.

 

So you'd be against parents and children entering into any contract?

 

The "child" in this case is an adult.

Are you are suggesting that parents have too much influence over even adult children for them to consent to such a marriage?