Reflections From a Murky Pond

In the wake of the SCOTUS declaring that all 50 states must allow queers to marry it is now, more than ever, a good time to ask, is incest best. Should you put your sister or daughter to the test? Is it true that the family that lays together stays together?

We’ve been greasing that slope for decades and it now the time to ask these questions.

Really! Given the dogma surrounding the queers’ demands, i.e., “Love is Love,” and that what two consenting adults do to and with each other carnally is nobody’s business, what basis are we left with to say that, as long as your sister and/or daughter is of the age of consent, it’s legally wrong to fornicate with her?

We certainly can no longer claim to disallow adult – as defined as of the Age of Consent – incest must be illegal because it is immoral; proponents of “sexual freedom” have declaimed time and time again that morality must not be the basis of law. Likewise, we no longer claim to disallow incest because it is abhorrent and repugnant to the majority of Americans; homosexuality is similarly abhorrent and repugnant to the majority of Americans and they are allowed to sodomize each other and marry each other. So what are we left with?

Yep! Right now there’s probably a Liberal reading this whose head is about to explode because he, she, or it will not or cannot think beyond their hatred of normative American culture.

Of course, consensual incest between adults is legal already legal in a surprising number of nations, including those in Europe. Indeed, in Germany where incest – there defined solely as vaginal intercourse – is illegal, the government’s Ethics Council recommended last year to legalize incest between adult siblings, stating that it is not appropriate for a criminal law to preserve a social taboo. They further claimed that the law against incest “put couples in a tragic situation.”

In the case of consensual incest among adult siblings, neither the fear of negative consequences for the family, nor the possibility of the birth of children from such incestuous relationships can justify a criminal prohibition.

The fundamental right of adult siblings to sexual self-determination has more weight in such cases than the abstract protection of the family.

The German Ethics Council’s recommendation sounds like a disturbingly familiar and horrifically successful argument to me. At this point what counterargument are we left with?

And sadly, the laws on the books concerning incest in the United States vary greatly from state to state, with some forms of incest already being perfectly legal in more jurisdictions than one might think or hope for. Hence, the same foundation as that used to make queer marriage the law of the land has already been laid.

Face it, with the Liberals and Progressives stripping of “bright lines” from the law there’s nothing left to stop incest between adults from being made legal. Nor is there any still legally sound means of preventing other, similar atrocities from being legalized, especially when they are based solely upon arbitrary social conventions and mores.

Tags: America | Cultural Mores | Ethics & Morality | Homosexuals | Incest | LGBT | Liberals | Politics | Progressives | Sex | Taboo

This entry was posted on Wednesday, July 1st, 2015 at 11:05 am and is filed under Ethics & Morality, Politics, Society. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

The Slippery Slope is generally considered to be a fallacy. It is an argument in which a person asserts that some event must inevitably follow from another, prior event without any providing any argument for the inevitability of the event in question. In most cases, there are a series of steps or gradations between the eventual event and the one being argued against but no reason is given as to why the intervening steps or gradations will simply be bypassed or enacted in their turn.

In general I agree. The Slippery Slope is a fallacy and, much more often than not, sloppy thinking. But what if we’re greasing the slope as it were?

Many laws, especially those dealing with sexual partnering, sexual acts, and sexual relationships are wholly or primarily based upon societal mores and cultural “prejudices.” Many of those laws that once had valid scientific rationales at one time have lost those rationals due to medical advances. Others had and still have outcome-based basis in the effects such things have upon the titular children of such unions, yet those negative consequences have been ignored in favor of a new ideology.

As you chip away at those laws that are based upon societal mores and cultural “prejudices” or apply new societal mores and cultural “prejudices” to existing situations you can make it so that each increase in permissiveness makes the next incremental increase that much more likely through normalizing or “main streaming” what was once unthought-of, abhorrent, and/or outre.

Western, especially American, jurisprudence also has to be taken into account because it’s inherently based upon Common Law and under the US interpretation of such court cases are decided based upon prior argument, precedents, and judicial pronouncements rather than solely on legislative enactments. in other words, arguments and verdicts in prior, similar court cases can be compelling or even binding precedents in current and future cases.

The Slope As It Was, Is, and Will Probably Be

Progress Is Opinion. Progression Is Mathematics

The battle to overturn the laws against miscegenation was long and hard-fought but it was victorious. But many of the same arguments that were successfully used Loving v. Virginia to end those “Jim Crow” statutes were later used in Lawrence v. Texas to abolish or make largely enforceable the various laws against: Sodomy, Fornication, Adultery, and violent sexual fetishism (BDSM). In turn, arguments from both Loving and Lawrence have been used to legalize Gay Marriage in various states and to overturn DOMA at the federal level.

Each set of court cases added their levels of grease to the slope, making it increasingly slippery. Hence, there is no logical reason not to predict that this progression will continue and that these increasingly entrenched arguments and precedents will be used to legalizing polygamy, incest, and some forms and/or levels of pedophilia.

Tags: America | BDSM | Children | Courts | Crime | Cultural Mores | Ethics & Morality | Homosexuals | Incest | Law | Marriage | Miscegeny | Paraphilia | Pedophilia | Politics | Polygamy | Sex | Slippery Slope | Society

This entry was posted on Wednesday, October 23rd, 2013 at 6:40 am and is filed under Ethics & Morality, Politics, Society. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

In the past I’ve made some sarcastic posts about DOMA and traditional aka biblical marriage. To continue in that vein here’s an instructional video by Betty Bowers on traditional marriage as defined by biblical precedent:

Betty Bowers on Traditional Marriage Per The Bible

Yes, the video is needlessly harsh, insulting, and sarcastic. It also uses some pretty far-fetched interpretation of biblical passages – e.g., there’s no theological basis for saying Eve seduced Cain; it’s far more likely that he took one of his unnamed in the Bible sisters to wife. That doesn’t, however, mean that it doesn’t contain a number of simple truths about what Yahweh supposed endorses by way of marriage.

Christians, you need to read your Bible; it is, after all, your holy book and, as such, more than worthy of individual study.

In it are many passages that show that Abraham’s God seemed to have little or no problem with many forms of marriage beyond “one man and one woman.” Indeed, nowhere’s in the Bible is monogamy ever explicitly described as a requirement or even the preferred choice.

Divorce, contrariwise, was expressly forbidden in both Old and New Testaments.

On the other hand, the Bible does maintain that same-sex marriage, along with a number of other acts now generally considered OK, is right out, forbidden, and an abomination to be treated with abhorrence and lethal violence.

Remember, God hates fags – though possibly not lesbians, multi-cropping / under-planting, poly-cotton blends, gaudy jewelry, and shellfish. 😛

So, my dear Christian sometimes-allies, have some fun with this if you can. Think a bit on it though; there’s truth buried in any bit of humor, elsewise it wouldn’t be funny.

Tags: Adultery | Betty Bowers | Christianity | Christians | Defense of Marriage | DOMA | Gay Rights | Homosexuals | Humor | Incest | LGBT | Marriage | Monogamy | Politics | Polygamy | Rape | Religion | Video | War

This entry was posted on Monday, April 4th, 2011 at 7:49 am and is filed under Humor, Politics, Religion. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.