[tdadams]

You're wrong. Trace answered that, but to recap, she is part of your family and as a father with authority over her, a sexual relationship with her is considered exploitation per se, to a criminal extent. Plus you're a sick man if you do that.

Got any other strawmen?

[VRWC_minion]

You're wrong. Trace answered that, but to recap, she is part of your family and as a father with authority over her, a sexual relationship with her is considered exploitation per se, to a criminal extent. Plus you're a sick man if you do that.

Like homosexuality, the miodern concept of family, the roles of fathers and sexual taboos are all religious constrainsts. You have no right to impose your religion or your view of morality on me and my daughter. She is 16 and she is at the age of consent. There are even numerous studies that say sex between parent and child is good for the child . Some cultures demand it.

so, again. Why should the state have any say over our consenual sex.

As far as a strawman argument gos, the whole point that myself and others are against deciding this as a privacy rights issue is because of the various arguments unrelated to homosexual sex that are at stake and cannot be supported with consistant logic after this ruiling.

[Grando Calrissian]

Got any other strawmen?

Yes. This ruling will make it manditory that all church services begin with sacrificial sodomy to Liberace.