• Incest and necrophilia 'should be legal' according to youth branch of Swedish Liberal People's Party
    412 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Sir Whoopsalot;49886136]How am I being ridiculous when you keep bringing up the effects of 'long-term inbreeding' and 'societies that promote incest'?[/QUOTE] You're being ridiculous by exaggerating my point by claiming that somehow everybody will begin cousin-fucking immediately. The point is that this will gradually unfold over decades and centuries - but that nobody will notice or care because "I don't see the problem, both sides consent and there is no harm done".
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;49886197]You're being ridiculous by exaggerating my point by claiming that somehow everybody will begin cousin-fucking immediately. The point is that this will gradually unfold over decades and centuries - but that nobody will notice or care because "I don't see the problem, both sides consent and there is no harm done".[/QUOTE] By that point we will probably be able to correct the genetic defects generated from that. And on top of this how many people practice incest? is there a number we could look at? because if it's low, from those people how many do you think will have children?
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;49886197]You're being ridiculous by exaggerating my point by claiming that somehow everybody will begin cousin-fucking immediately. The point is that this will gradually unfold over decades and centuries - but that nobody will notice or care because "I don't see the problem, both sides consent and there is no harm done".[/QUOTE] If nobody notices or cares then what fucking difference does it make? Centuries down the line you'll be dust and everyone else won't give the slightest damn that you didn't approve of it.
[QUOTE=Craigewan;49886174]Except A.) I don't think Incest will be widely practiced and B.) Using animal populations as a model, it takes generations before widespread inbreeding becomes a problem and this only ever happens in populations with low numbers anyway.[/QUOTE] there's already plenty of human populations where inbreeding among families has resulted in a higher incidence of genetic diseases - mainly in northern africa and western asia. The populations here suffer as a result of long-term inbreeding that affects many people and harms children likewise
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;49886222]there's already plenty of human populations where inbreeding among families has resulted in a higher incidence of genetic diseases - mainly in northern africa and western asia. The populations here suffer as a result of long-term inbreeding that affects many people and harms children likewise[/QUOTE] Oh hey, your argument perfectly proves MY point - Low population size, insular. Nothing that applies to western societies. [quote]B.) Using animal populations as a model, it takes generations before widespread inbreeding becomes a problem and this only ever happens in populations with low numbers anyway.[/quote]
[QUOTE=Lium;49886217]If nobody notices or cares then what fucking difference does it make? Centuries down the line you'll be dust and everyone else won't give the slightest damn that you didn't approve of it.[/QUOTE] Because we're allowing our future descendants to slowly accumulate genes that harm their health? I mean this is obvious because it will impose a growing burden upon healthcare and other facets of society. [QUOTE=Craigewan;49886227]Oh hey, your argument perfectly proves MY point - Low population size, insular. Nothing that applies to western societies.[/QUOTE] Western societies had similar rates of inbreeding up until the early middle ages. Also the point about inbreeding is that it causes families to breed outside of the family unit less. It becomes a problem because the gene pool becomes increasingly restricted to just an extended family. There is decreased admixture within populations - which is what leads to the problem. [QUOTE=eirexe;49886215]By that point we will probably be able to correct the genetic defects generated from that. And on top of this how many people practice incest? is there a number we could look at? because if it's low, from those people how many do you think will have children?[/QUOTE] Relying on future scientific advances to solve a problem easily preventable today isn't really the best of ideas. I mean this is really really simple. All we have to do here is just discourage incest through various means in society. Considering that this is something already fairly widespread in Europe this is not hard to achieve and maintain considering that parts of Europe have been doing it for 1500 years uninterrupted.
if you want to fuck a body, reason is probably that you are completely lost in the head [editline]7th March 2016[/editline] you can't really argue that it's not something that should be illegal either, unless you're the type who would do it :v: the only people who REALLY would want it legal, are the ones doing it [editline]7th March 2016[/editline] Incest shouldn't be allowed because it'll only encourage more people to reproduce and more children with horrible genetic disorders to crop up, regardless of whether or not you make THAT part of it illegal. If you want to pretend that, that isn't a HUGE issue then I have no idea what is wrong with you. you may have never passed middle school health class
[QUOTE=Craigewan;49886227]Oh hey, your argument perfectly proves MY point - Low population size, insular. Nothing that applies to western societies.[/QUOTE] [IMG]https://facepunch.com/image.php?u=44164&dateline=1405622413[/IMG] [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Shitpost" - Craptasket))[/highlight]
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;49886235]Because we're allowing our future descendants to slowly accumulate genes that harm their health? I mean this is obvious because it will impose a growing burden upon healthcare and other facets of society.[/QUOTE] isn't this an argument in favor of eugenics like, any population that doesn't have some form of selective pressure exerted on it will accumulate unwanted traits over time
[QUOTE=Amazing79;49886249][IMG]https://facepunch.com/image.php?u=44164&dateline=1405622413[/IMG][/QUOTE] What exactly are you hoping to achieve by posting pictures of people's avatars?
[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;49886253]isn't this an argument in favor of eugenics like, any population that doesn't have some form of selective pressure exerted on it will accumulate unwanted traits over time[/QUOTE] Modern human populations still have a lot of selection pressures on them. Europeans and Asians are very different in terms of phenotypes compared to their ancestors from the early Neolithic.
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;49885188]But muh freedom tho Who cares about the poor fucking kids that have to live with the result of their parents being dumb and taking a massive risk with a kids health, what matters is whether I can pork my hot sister or not.[/QUOTE] People who know they have heritable genetic abnormalities should be banned from having sex with anyone then. No sex for dwarfs, think about "the poor fucking kids that have to live with the result of their parents being dumb."
[QUOTE=Da Bomb76;49886274]People who know they have heritable genetic abnormalities should be banned from having sex with anyone then. No sex for dwarfs, think about "the poor fucking kids that have to live with the result of their parents being dumb."[/QUOTE] Basically, yeah, if your argument boils down to "Muh genetics", then there are groups which have a far greater risk of producing detrimental genetic side effects in future generations than incestuous relationships. But we don't prevent them from having children (and rightly so), so the genetic argument against incest is moot and basically just shows no understanding of the genetics of inbreeding.
[QUOTE=Lium;49886256]What exactly are you hoping to achieve by posting pictures of people's avatars?[/QUOTE] Dude, putting actual effort into a reply is hard, you know? Why bother picking apart someone's argument when you just copy and paste a link, put img tags around it and have an epic zinger?
[QUOTE=Da Bomb76;49886274]People who know they have heritable genetic abnormalities should be banned from having sex with anyone then. No sex for dwarfs, think about "the poor fucking kids that have to live with the result of their parents being dumb."[/QUOTE] I kinda agree tbh with the dwarfs, have you ever seen porn of them? Really weird But being serious, fully agree with you. Just because there's a risk, doesn't mean it should be stopped. Either that, or it should be completely stopped, which I don't think is the right way to go
[QUOTE=Craigewan;49886288]Basically, yeah, if your argument boils down to "Muh genetics", then there are groups which have a far greater risk of producing detrimental genetic side effects in future generations than incestuous relationships. But we don't prevent them from having children (and rightly so), so the genetic argument against incest is moot and basically just shows no understanding of the genetics of inbreeding.[/QUOTE] The argument generally includes the fact it spearheads a shift towards clannish/extended families - which is usually bad news for all involved. I mean there's a reason that people in the Arabian world suffer from loads of genetic illnesses - part of that is related to the clannish family structure which promotes inbreeding (due to the fact that economic and political reasons encourage this tendency). While legalizing it in the west wouldn't have an immediate impact - long term the result will be a gradual increase of clannish families as prohibitions against incest are either dropped or ignored.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;49886310]The argument generally includes the fact it spearheads a shift towards clannish/extended families - which is usually bad news for all involved.[/QUOTE] How do you manage to reach that conclusion? This is similar to saying that allowing gay marriage will turn more people gay.
[QUOTE=Lurr;49884953][URL="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/incest-and-necrophilia-should-be-legal-youth-swedish-liberal-peoples-party-a6891476.html#gallery"][/QUOTE] Incest for me is in a grey area but necrophilia,i don´t have words to express how much that disgusts me.It is appauling on moral,ethical,and basic human rights.That should never be legalised.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;49886310]The argument generally includes the fact it spearheads a shift towards clannish/extended families - which is usually bad news for all involved.[/QUOTE] It really doesn't. That sort of thing can and does happen, true, but we aren't suddenly going to get families forswearing against non-blood relations en-masse until nothing is left but a slowly-drying gene pool. Very, very few people would take advantage of these laws being repealed, the vast majority of those being individual cases that won't affect more than one generation. Seven billion people, increasing every year. Something as minor as this wouldn't even be a drop in the ocean.
[QUOTE=Da Bomb76;49886323]How do you manage to reach that conclusion? This is similar to saying that allowing gay marriage will turn more people gay.[/QUOTE] It's not even comparable to gay marriage at all, at least until somebody sticks a functioning uterus in a man or something. Even then I don't see how it's applicable.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;49886348]It's not even comparable to gay marriage at all, at least until somebody sticks a functioning uterus in a man or something. Even then I don't see how it's applicable.[/QUOTE] I don't see/understand your argument then. Why would having incest babies increase the chance of incest occurring in the future?
[QUOTE=Lium;49886337]It really doesn't. That sort of thing can and does happen, true, but we aren't suddenly going to get families forswearing against non-blood relations en-masse until nothing is left but a slowly-drying gene pool. Very, very few people would take advantage of these laws being repealed, the vast majority of those being individual cases that won't affect more than one generation. Seven billion people, increasing every year. Something as minor as this wouldn't even be a drop in the ocean.[/QUOTE] you're ignoring the fact that this law is being proposed in a small country with a small population. again i have to reiterate this is over a long period of time. stop claiming things like "we aren't suddenly going to get families forswearing against non-blood relations en-masse" because you're missing the point we are looking at a gradual growth that will barely register at first - maybe a few percent growth. the point is that growth compounds and if this keeps up you will eventually arrive at the situation i described (in maybe a few centuries). [QUOTE=Da Bomb76;49886358]I don't see/understand your argument then. Why would having incest babies increase the chance of incest occurring in the future?[/QUOTE] because families which practice incest generally have children who grow up thinking incest is normal. by this i refer to cousin marriage, which (if it becomes socially acceptable) will only become more common
[QUOTE=Da Bomb76;49886274]People who know they have heritable genetic abnormalities should be banned from having sex with anyone then. No sex for dwarfs, think about "the poor fucking kids that have to live with the result of their parents being dumb."[/QUOTE] Obviously it can only be taken to a certain level, but since incest is already illegal theres no reason to legalise it. But honestly if you do have a known genetic defect then you're a bit of a cunt if you decide to have a kid. Obviously the whole point of not having incestuous sex is to reduce the chances of having genetic defects, doing something that you know actively increases the risk is silly.
So I'm a cunt for wanting kids even though I have ADHD and that's genetic?
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;49886348]It's not even comparable to gay marriage at all, at least until somebody sticks a functioning uterus in a man or something. Even then I don't see how it's applicable.[/QUOTE] I already got enough nightmares from Junior, let's not repeat that.
[QUOTE=bdd458;49886381]So I'm a cunt for wanting kids even though I have ADHD and that's genetic?[/QUOTE] No just don't have sex with your sister and it's a lot less likely to pass on. Is ADHD even proven to be genetic?
I mean this won't lead to increased abuse and pedophilia. [editline]7th March 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=carcarcargo;49886395]No just don't have sex with your sister and it's a lot less likely to pass on. Is ADHD even proven to be genetic?[/QUOTE] ADHD is genetic. It runs in family lines.
[QUOTE=Da Bomb76;49886274]People who know they have heritable genetic abnormalities should be banned from having sex with anyone then. No sex for dwarfs, think about "the poor fucking kids that have to live with the result of their parents being dumb."[/QUOTE] I genuinely agree with this.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;49886370]you're ignoring the fact that this law is being proposed in a small country with a small population. again i have to reiterate this is over a long period of time. stop claiming things like "we aren't suddenly going to get families forswearing against non-blood relations en-masse" because you're missing the point we are looking at a gradual growth that will barely register at first - maybe a few percent growth. the point is that growth compounds and if this keeps up you will eventually arrive at the situation i described (in maybe a few centuries).[/QUOTE] but again, doesn't this exact same argument apply to allowing people with genetic defects to breed medical science allows people who otherwise would have died to procreate, and over time traits that would have been removed grow and spread. Eugenics seems like the logical conclusion of your argument
[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;49886414]but again, doesn't this exact same argument apply to allowing people with genetic defects to breed medical science allows people who otherwise would have died to procreate, and over time traits that would have been removed grow and spread. Eugenics seems like the logical conclusion of your argument[/QUOTE] Or maybe multiracial couples?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.