Skip to comments.
Should [Adult]Incest Be Legal?
Time ^
| Apr. 05, 2007
| Michael Lindenberger
Posted on 04/09/2007 11:52:32 AM PDT by Lorianne
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 121-135 next last
1
posted on
04/09/2007 11:52:33 AM PDT
by
Lorianne
To: Lorianne
I guess this was inevitable.
2
posted on
04/09/2007 11:53:50 AM PDT
by
3AngelaD
To: Lorianne
Should [Adult]Incest Be Legal? sure, why not, we're close to having absolutely NO morals in this country whatsoever, why stop now, legalize adult incest, why the hell not....in fact, I'm betting GAYSACHUSETTS is the first state to do so.......
3
posted on
04/09/2007 11:56:26 AM PDT
by
rockabyebaby
(Say what you feel, those that matter don't mind, those that mind, don't matter!)
To: Lorianne
"State laws against bigamy, same-sex marriage, adult incest, prostitution, masturbation, adultery, fornication, bestiality, and obscenity are ... called into question by today's decision," wrote Justice Antonin Scalia, in a withering dissent he read aloud page by page from the bench.
Darn you, you pushers of the masturbation agenda!
4
posted on
04/09/2007 11:56:30 AM PDT
by
arderkrag
(Libertarian Nutcase (Political Compass Coordinates: 9.00, -2.62 - www.politicalcompass.org))
To: Lorianne
Why is it that people are surprised when dominoes start falling after some degenerate policy gets affirmed by the subpreme court?
5
posted on
04/09/2007 11:56:31 AM PDT
by
MHGinTN
(If you've had life support. Promote life support for others.)
To: Lorianne
6
posted on
04/09/2007 11:58:04 AM PDT
by
Migraine
(...diversity is great (until it happens to you)...)
To: Lorianne
They have already failed to do so once. The Ohio Supreme Court rejected the plantiffs' argument that Lawrence created a new fundamental privacy right that made laws restricting consensual, private sex among adults unconstitutional. Instead, prosecutors successfully argued that Lawrence said only that anti-sodomy laws bore no rational relationship to a legitimate state interest This is probably why you will never see a study of the life span of gays ever make it to a scientific journal. If they could establish just how dangerous the gay lifestyle is they could establish a legitimate state interest in outlawing it.
To: Lorianne
It's very hard to read Lawrence in a way that doesn't hold out for protection of adult incest.
To: arderkrag
Darn you, you pushers of the masturbation agenda! LOL...that caught my eye as well. Now, masturbation being a sin I understand. But are there actually laws against it?
Secondly, I have never really considered sex between step-relations to be incest. Sure, it's gross and immoral, but there isn't any blood relationship there. Is it really incest?
9
posted on
04/09/2007 11:58:48 AM PDT
by
CT-Freeper
(Said the perpetually dejected Mets fan.)
To: Lorianne
Incest is still viewed as outside the mainstream. But other forms of consensual sexual behavior may gain legal protection thanks to
Lawrence. "Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
10
posted on
04/09/2007 11:59:25 AM PDT
by
goldstategop
(In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
To: arderkrag
“Darn you, you pushers of the masturbation agenda!”
Did Scalia REALLY include masturbation in that list?
To: CT-Freeper
“Secondly, I have never really considered sex between step-relations to be incest. Sure, it’s gross and immoral, but there isn’t any blood relationship there. Is it really incest?”
I’m with you here — it’s icky and wrong and not something I would EVER think of doing even if I did have a step-daughter, but I can’t see a law against it.
To: Lorianne
No way should it be legal. It would lead to tremendous confusion, such as one’s uncle is also one’s father, etc. But it will become legal if same sex marriage is recognized, with marriage available to anybody with anybody as Brad Pitt so desperately wants.
13
posted on
04/09/2007 12:02:19 PM PDT
by
Dante3
To: Lorianne
It used to be considered unnatural. Now our enlightened society understands that the govt cannot tell us what is natural or what isn’t. Except homosexuality, that is natural. And global warming, that is not natural.
14
posted on
04/09/2007 12:03:09 PM PDT
by
Graymatter
(FREDeralist)
To: arderkrag
Darn you, you pushers of the masturbation agenda!
Which states have laws against it?
15
posted on
04/09/2007 12:03:20 PM PDT
by
Borges
To: arderkrag
Darn you, you pushers of the masturbation agenda!Now there! They're some of the most selfless folks you could ever meet.
To: Lorianne

"When will we sheep finally be able to be-e-e-e-e-d anyone we want?"
17
posted on
04/09/2007 12:03:46 PM PDT
by
Yaelle
To: Lorianne
Within another 10 years I’ll be able to marry my refrigerator and draw social security for both of us! Whoopee! What a country! Better yet, the fridge will be able to apply for citizenship and sue if it doesn’t get it!
To: 3AngelaD
this explains the Book of Leviticus
To: rockabyebaby
sure, why not, we're close to having absolutely NO morals in this country whatsoever... You do realize you can have morals without making those morals laws, don't you?
20
posted on
04/09/2007 12:04:57 PM PDT
by
Junior
(Free speech is great because it makes it easy to identify the idiots.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 121-135 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson