Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'd hope they carefully weight the risks before having another child, but otherwise I see no reason they shouldn't spend their lives together if they so choose. It's not as though they grew up together -- I'm not sure I understand the "ick" factor.
People used to have the ick factor back in the day when the word “gay/lesbian couple” was mentioned. Now, they are seen marching down the streets in their pride parades and what not. If you don’t root for them you are considered the worst of the worst. So for people to say “yuck, siblings getting married…yuck, a 50 year old woman/man with a 15 year old lover…yuck, that woman/man in a relationship with the poodle…” just watch a couple of years down the road. Besides, isn’t the USA all about tolerating differences, respecting loving relationships, celebrating diversity, accepting others as they are, being open minded, being modern, etc.?
Congratulations on comparing a homesexual relationship to pedophilia; clearly two consenting adults (like these siblings as well) are the same as taking advantage of a child.
Congratulations on comparing a homesexual relationship to pedophilia; clearly two consenting adults (like these siblings as well) are the same as taking advantage of a child.
A 15 year old is not a child. It sounds icky to you now just like lesbian/gay relationships sounded icky many years ago. Hey, I am not sure about all these so called “preferences/orientations” out there but the USA is a modern open minded country so I wouldn’t be surprised if I visited the USA and I saw other preferences/orientations marching and parading down the streets asking for support. Homosexuals have gone as far as changing laws, don’t be surprised when other laws are changed to accommodate other preferences/orientations.
You don't think a 15-year-old is a child? That's pretty disturbing.
OK then, it's a child. But same thing, people in the USA become more "open minded" as years go by so whatever seems icky at the moment later on becomes cool, a fad, acceptable, and so on. Just wait for the next generation.
Actually it's quite easy to make the argument that the U.S. and western culture in general has become more protective of children in the last couple of generations. So the slippery slope is going the other direction on this issue.
Actually it's quite easy to make the argument that the U.S. and western culture in general has become more protective of children in the last couple of generations. So the slippery slope is going the other direction on this issue.
Tell me something, what did the USA think of homosexuality back in the day. What do we see now?
The Amish are incestuous too and their kids all pay the price, you see a lot of birth defects, illness, etc. I met a midwife once who was solely delivering babies for Amish families and she's the one who told me about all of the incest, birth defects,etc...
Sad but true!
I think your statement (and the midwife's statement) was misguided. I do not, for an instant, believe that Amish families condone incest. The fact of the matter is that these people live in very closed groups. They are probably on their 15th - 20th generation since they came to this country in the 1700s and the gene pool is just not that diverse. After awhile you are going to have issues if you do not introduce new genetic material. I believe this is why the Royal Family began to allow marriage to non-royalty.
Since, unlike Mormons, the Amish do not actively seek converts into their fold, this kind of thing is inevitable. Perhaps they need to start importing diverse genetic lines in from the "old country".
OK then, it's a child. But same thing, people in the USA become more "open minded" as years go by so whatever seems icky at the moment later on becomes cool, a fad, acceptable, and so on. Just wait for the next generation.
This is a bit of a "slippery slope" fallacy you are engaged in here. Acting like one thing will become acceptable just because another thing has. Saying pedophilia will become acceptable just because homosexuality has is about as sensical as saying murder will become acceptable because hunting has.
It is apples and oranges really. Each subject needs to be considered on it's own merits and demerits - whether that subject be homosexuality, incest, pedophilia, bestiality, polygamy or whatever. In each case seperately we must has "What are the moral arguments for and against this thing".
When you find yourself leaving one of those subjects and simply saying "If you allow X then eventually we will allow Y" all you are doing is that you have run out of cogent arguments against X so you are going to try and make it guilty by association. No matter how forced and unreal that association actually is.
You don't think a 15-year-old is a child? That's pretty disturbing.
I found the whole post disturbing.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
