Michigan Gay Marriage

[Underverse]

This actually isn't really true. Statistically, the chances of extreme birth defects are still extremely slim.

Not that slim. I believe it's around 10%

- - - Updated - - -

Nah, it's in a committed relationship with a Pikachu doll.

oh...oh my god...

[Deleted]

Nah, it's in a committed relationship with a Pikachu doll.

The funny thing is that Pikachu is male, so they are now able to get married in Michigan.

[Gheld]

Actually not that it's relevant, but while the chances are statistically higher it's actually more of a fact of certain genetic anomalies being compounded if predisposition exists in both partners.

The birth defects that can be caused by incest are pretty much determined by the couple and not the act of incest itself.

So you'd be looking at more of a situation where there's a 25% chance of a birth defect with some couples, and a 0% with others, which in the end works out to a roughly 10% chance (general population, uncontrolled for specific risks) .

And that argument is moot if an incestuous couple takes steps to preclude the possibility of a pregnancy.

[Anyael]

Actually not that it's relevant, but while the chances are statistically higher it's actually more of a fact of certain genetic anomalies being compounded if predisposition exists in both partners.

The birth defects that can be caused by incest are pretty much determined by the couple and not the act of incest itself.

So you'd be looking at more of a situation where there's a 25% chance of a birth defect with some couples, and a 0% with others, which in the end works out to a roughly 10% chance (general population, uncontrolled for specific risks) .

And that argument is moot if an incestuous couple takes steps to preclude the possibility of a pregnancy.

I think it is more of a "Breach of Trust" thing. It's like why teachers cannot have sex with students... They are in a position of trust, abusing it casts doubt on the whole system.

[Amnaught]

If you develop a way to legitimately gauge whether an animal is of sound mind to consent to sex with a human, then sure.

You're either a troll, a pretty despicable person, or a combination of the two. Holy hell.

Two men in a loving and committed relationship has nothing to do with what a man would choose to do to an animal who can't say no.

[Gheld]

I think it is more of a "Breach of Trust" thing. It's like why teachers cannot have sex with students... They are in a position of trust, abusing it casts doubt on the whole system.

Yes but there are many cases of people who are related being separated through adoption, and initiating a sexual relationship with each other BEFORE becoming aware that they are genetically related.

You can't argue that any "breach of trust" has occurred in that situation.

[Anyael]

Yes but there are many cases of people who are related being separated through adoption, and initiating a sexual relationship with each other BEFORE becoming aware that they are genetically related.

You can't argue that any "breach of trust" has occurred in that situation.

Can you honestly tell me that you think that would happen in any substantial amount? That is like stars aligning themselves, I assume merely because of the impossibility of this situation that this is a vast minority of incestuous relationships.

[Velaniz]

About incest, the detrimental effects are short term, while beneficial effects are long term (excising bad genes). I don't see a problem with it, especially if we can minimize detrimental effects with our modern technology.

Nothing about an incestuous affair implies you intend to have a child with that person, anyway. The argument over the products of incest is, as such, a red herring. You can ban procreation between close relatives without also banning sex between them.

[Wells]

You're either a troll, a pretty despicable person, or a combination of the two. Holy hell.

Two men in a loving and committed relationship has nothing to do with what a man would choose to do to an animal who can't say no.

You really didn't understand his post.

[Anyael]

Nothing about an incestuous affair implies you intend to have a child with that person, anyway. The argument over the products of incest is, as such, a red herring. You can ban procreation between close relatives without also banning sex between them.

That kind of stuff scars people for life, you know.

[Underverse]

Actually not that it's relevant, but while the chances are statistically higher it's actually more of a fact of certain genetic anomalies being compounded if predisposition exists in both partners.

The birth defects that can be caused by incest are pretty much determined by the couple and not the act of incest itself.

So you'd be looking at more of a situation where there's a 25% chance of a birth defect with some couples, and a 0% with others, which in the end works out to a roughly 10% chance (general population, uncontrolled for specific risks) .

And that argument is moot if an incestuous couple takes steps to preclude the possibility of a pregnancy.

Everyone has some recessive genes that can be paired up in cases of incest, leading to defects. The 0% comes from the lucky offspring of incestuous relationships - these people are essentially genetically pure. I think there's a quote from game of thrones that demonstrates this well, something about flipping a coin

- - - Updated - - -

Nothing about an incestuous affair implies you intend to have a child with that person, anyway. The argument over the products of incest is, as such, a red herring. You can ban procreation between close relatives without also banning sex between them.

Well, I'm arguing against banning procreation in these cases, then

[Wells]

How do you ban procreation?

[xuros]

Whatever, the sooner this is all over the sooner people will shut up about lgbt stuff, so I'm pretty ok with this.

This all fucking day. I can care less about this shit. This horse has been beaten to death on these boards.........

[Velaniz]

That kind of stuff scars people for life, you know.

Not when it's done between consenting adults, in which case people like you and I have no business interfering. No one's saying pedophilia should be tolerated.

[Garnier Fructis]

This all fucking day. I can care less about this shit. This horse has been beaten to death on these boards.........

The implication being that you care about it now.

[Underverse]

I think it is more of a "Breach of Trust" thing. It's like why teachers cannot have sex with students... They are in a position of trust, abusing it casts doubt on the whole system.

Not really sure why sex is a breach of trust, you're going to have to clarify that for me

I mean if anything, it would be a trust-building activity, no?

[Velaniz]

How do you ban procreation?

Same way you ban sex between them, really. Which is to say you don't really ban it, but just impose punishments for it.

[Underverse]

That kind of stuff scars people for life, you know.

A lot of things scar a lot of people, and many times it's our own fault

[Anyael]

Not really sure why sex is a breach of trust, you're going to have to clarify that for me

I mean if anything, it would be a trust-building activity, no?

If you don't think a father performing penetrative sex on his financially dependent 18 year old daughter doesn't have a chance of "breaching the trust", I don't know how else to spell it out for you.

A lot of things scar a lot of people, and many times it's our own fault

No, not at all. A lot of things scar people, but it's pretty low to blame them for it.

[Blufossa]

So the people of Michigan voted against gay marriage (marriage is not mentioned in the Constitution) and a judge can now just repeal it if he or she so pleases? What about all the gun bans and required gun licenses? Those are against the Constitution word for word and yet I don't see the progs/libs/dems up in arms about that violation of freedom.

All I can say is: nothing good will come of this.