PDA

View Full Version : Warning: Oklahoma lawmaker defends anti-abortion bill, says rape and incest are ‘will of God’



Bethere
03-27-2017, 01:26 PM
Are cases of rape and incest the will of God?

http://nytlive.nytimes.com/womenintheworld/2017/03/23/oklahoma-lawmaker-defends-anti-abortion-bill-says-rape-and-incest-are-will-of-god/

Oklahoma State Representative George Faught, the author of a controversial bill (http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2017-18%20SUPPORT%20DOCUMENTS/BILLSUM/House/HB1549%20CS%20BILLSUM.PDF) that would make it illegal in the state to pursue an abortion in the case of a genetic abnormality, made a powerful and potentially disturbing declaration of faith during questioning about the bill on the floor of the Oklahoma House on Tuesday. Asked by fellow state Representative Cory Williams about whether he considered rape to be the “will of God,” Faught boldly, if not necessarily unabashedly, answered in the affirmative.
“Well, you know, if you read the Bible, there’s actually a couple circumstances where that happened,” said Faught. “The Lord uses all circumstances. I mean, you can go down that path, but it’s a reality unfortunately.”

Abby08
03-27-2017, 01:30 PM
That state representative, should be committed.

Bethere
03-27-2017, 01:33 PM
That state representative, should be committed.
I am sure that he views himself as a committed state rep.

Sad!


Thanks for your thoughtful input.

Abby08
03-27-2017, 01:37 PM
I am sure that he views himself as a committed state rep.

Sad!


Thanks for your thoughtful input.

He needs to be, a committed in- patient.

AZ Jim
03-27-2017, 01:38 PM
Same ole story old white men controlling women's body. Bible used as his weapon.

Bethere
03-27-2017, 01:41 PM
Same ole story old white men controlling women's body. Bible used as his weapon.

Such duplicity apparently is God's will.

decedent
03-27-2017, 01:43 PM
Oklahoma.

Bethere
03-27-2017, 01:46 PM
Oklahoma.
.... where the wind comes sweeping down the plain!

hanger4
03-27-2017, 02:04 PM
While I don't believe rape or incest is the will of God, I also don't believe an innocent child conceived during such should be condemned to death either.

DGUtley
03-27-2017, 02:27 PM
In Romans 12:21 Paul says that we should not be conquered by evil but that we should conquer evil with good. The act of rape is a grave sin and an injustice that claims too many people, most often women and children, as victims. The Church teaches that victims of rape deserve immediate medical, emotional and spiritual care. The Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Health Care Services (#36) states that Catholic healthcare providers have a duty to provide this care and to prevent the contraction of disease or the conception of a child. However, if a child is conceived in a pregnancy caused by rape, then this child is just as innocent and precious as the woman who was victimized and he or she should not be killed because of the actions of the rapist. The Church teaches that through mercy and love, a non-violent solution for both mother and child is far superior to helping a victim of violence (the raped woman) commit violence against her own child through abortion.

Abby08
03-27-2017, 02:39 PM
I was raised in a devout Catholic family.

There is nothing, or, no one, that could force me to carry my rapist's child....... nothing.

Bethere
03-27-2017, 02:46 PM
I was raised in a devout Catholic family.

There is nothing, or, no one, that could force me to carry my rapist's child....... nothing.

You represent approximately half of Catholicism. Dave represents the other half.

Interesting enough:

If contraception=abortion, and in Dave's eyes it does, then the Pope supports abortion in the fight against Zika.

hanger4
03-27-2017, 02:55 PM
I was raised in a devout Catholic family.

There is nothing, or, no one, that could force me to carry my rapist's child....... nothing.

What's sad is equating the barbarous act of rape or incest on an innocent child.

Abby08
03-27-2017, 03:05 PM
What's sad is equating the barbarous act of rape or incest on an innocent child.

I feel no guilt or shame, in saying, I would want no reminder of the violent act perpetrated upon me, by a monster, that's exactly what that child would represent.

There's no way I could bring myself to nurture it, allow it to grow in my body..... period.

If your body is ever violated like that, then, you can do what you wish.

Abby08
03-27-2017, 03:08 PM
Your next argument, should it be, "the child didn't ask to be created" my response would be, "I was not a willing participant in it's creation, rapists don't exactly ask for permission".

hanger4
03-27-2017, 03:20 PM
Your next argument, should it be, "the child didn't ask to be created" my response would be, "I was not a willing participant in it's creation, rapists don't exactly ask for permission".

It's still an innocent child. I won't condemn you for your decision, I just don't believe I could condemn an innocent for the acts of another.

del
03-27-2017, 03:21 PM
smarmy is as smarmy does

Abby08
03-27-2017, 03:22 PM
smarmy is as smarmy does

Are you speaking from experience?

To whom, is your comment addressed?

FindersKeepers
03-27-2017, 03:24 PM
Are cases of rape and incest the will of God?



Of course not, and I support abortion in the first trimester.

But, why do people keep adding "incest" as if it's a viable reason to abort? I mean, I support choice for any woman who is impregnated by anyone and she wants to abort - but why keep saying "incest?"

If incest was against the woman's will -- it's just "rape." It it was with her consent -- well -- you see what I'm saying?

Safety
03-27-2017, 03:49 PM
Of course not, and I support abortion in the first trimester.

But, why do people keep adding "incest" as if it's a viable reason to abort? I mean, I support choice for any woman who is impregnated by anyone and she wants to abort - but why keep saying "incest?"

If incest was against the woman's will -- it's just "rape." It it was with her consent -- well -- you see what I'm saying?

Because not all times are people intelligent enough to know incest is a bad thing. So, it may not be "rape" but still a bad decision to carry the fetus to term.

Safety
03-27-2017, 03:50 PM
Are cases of rape and incest the will of God?

http://nytlive.nytimes.com/womenintheworld/2017/03/23/oklahoma-lawmaker-defends-anti-abortion-bill-says-rape-and-incest-are-will-of-god/

Oklahoma State Representative George Faught, the author of a controversial bill (http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2017-18%20SUPPORT%20DOCUMENTS/BILLSUM/House/HB1549%20CS%20BILLSUM.PDF) that would make it illegal in the state to pursue an abortion in the case of a genetic abnormality, made a powerful and potentially disturbing declaration of faith during questioning about the bill on the floor of the Oklahoma House on Tuesday. Asked by fellow state Representative Cory Williams about whether he considered rape to be the “will of God,” Faught boldly, if not necessarily unabashedly, answered in the affirmative.
“Well, you know, if you read the Bible, there’s actually a couple circumstances where that happened,” said Faught. “The Lord uses all circumstances. I mean, you can go down that path, but it’s a reality unfortunately.”

It appears as if your poll is more telling than any abortion debate tPF has seen...

del
03-27-2017, 03:53 PM
Are you speaking from experience?

To whom, is your comment addressed?
no

someone else

Bethere
03-27-2017, 03:55 PM
Because not all times are people intelligent enough to know incest is a bad thing. So, it may not be "rape" but still a bad decision to carry the fetus to term.


... a public health decision.

DGUtley
03-27-2017, 04:09 PM
I feel no guilt or shame, in saying, I would want no reminder of the violent act perpetrated upon me, by a monster, that's exactly what that child would represent. There's no way I could bring myself to nurture it, allow it to grow in my body..... period. If your body is ever violated like that, then, you can do what you wish.
Abby08, I cannot say that I totally understand your position, but as an individual I think I do and I cannot fault you for your position. I would hope that if I was in your position, that I would take my course; but I am honest and weak enough to know that I cannot say with certainty that I would. Thank you for being so open. Dave.

Subdermal
03-27-2017, 05:55 PM
I've stated my position on the topic of abortion multiple times on this forum. I am not a 'life begins at conception' guy. I believe in a soul, and I believe that 'life' - in the manner of definition necessary for this topic (read: when one becomes a unique individual/when they acquire a soul) has to be described as the moment the soul enters the body, just as I believe death should be defined as the moment the soul leaves the body.

I do not believe that moment is at conception, as special and miraculous such a conjunction is. Instead, I believe it is when a fetus' blood begins to circulate separate from the mother. Terms like 'lifeblood', and phrases like "when the blood moves" are used to support the importance of blood when defining one's own life, and I think it is appropriate here as well.

The reason I think it's important - and IMO the correct position to hold - is that wide cultural acceptance of my beliefs on this would eliminate the difficulty many moral people have with things like rape or incest, as well as ease the difficult moral conflicts regarding taking 'morning after' pills.

The point at which a fetus' blood begins to circulate separately from the mother is around 17-21 days. Plenty of time for anyone in the position of having engaged in - willingly or not - activity which could or did result in pregnancy to reverse it, without moral crisis.

Bethere
03-27-2017, 09:37 PM
It appears as if your poll is more telling than any abortion debate tPF has seen...

The results are awfully one-sided..

Adelaide
03-28-2017, 06:30 AM
It isn't the will or act of a higher being, and women should be allowed to abort if that is what they wish to do. My religion says life doesn't begin until a child takes a first breath outside the birth canal, although I do oppose late-term abortions unless the woman's life is at risk or severe fetal abnormalities have been discovered (where the child would suffer to the extreme or die immediately, if not be stillborn).

patrickt
03-28-2017, 08:23 AM
Bethere, as a liberal, really is proud of being a liar. Nothing in his post supports his statement that a state representative said "rape and incest are the will of God." That's called, Bethere, a lie.

I disagree with the representatives bill but I disagree more with the liberal joy of lying.

Bo-4
03-28-2017, 08:49 AM
He needs to be, a committed in- patient.

Permanent - he can weave baskets and listen to chirping birds :cool2:

Bo-4
03-28-2017, 08:55 AM
While I don't believe rape or incest is the will of God, I also don't believe an innocent child conceived during such should be condemned to death either.

A rapist is a violent criminal - one who commits incest is very sick.

Both on occasion may act out in a manner that they have little control over - what do you suppose the chances are that child might inherit some of those bad genes?

Sorry @hanger4 (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=403), but there is simply no way to rationalize forcing a women to live with a horrible nightmare for the rest of her life.

Chris
03-28-2017, 08:59 AM
Bethere, as a liberal, really is proud of being a liar. Nothing in his post supports his statement that a state representative said "rape and incest are the will of God." That's called, Bethere, a lie.

I disagree with the representatives bill but I disagree more with the liberal joy of lying.

Don't call people names.

donttread
03-28-2017, 09:01 AM
The mother should have an abortion option as should all pregnant women . But only up to 20 weeks, which is plenty of time. The means of conception , while sad, is irrelevent to the time frame.

hanger4
03-28-2017, 09:24 AM
A rapist is a violent criminal - one who commits incest is very sick.

Both on occasion may act out in a manner that they have little control over - what do you suppose the chances are that child might inherit some of those bad genes?

Sorry @hanger4 (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=403), but there is simply no way to rationalize forcing a women to live with a horrible nightmare for the rest of her life.

There is nothing conclusive concerning a so called 'criminal gene'.

If you had read all my posts you would know I never advocated forcing a women to carry to term. The poll question asked "should" and I believe she should, the child conceived is innocent.

patrickt
03-28-2017, 01:05 PM
Don't call people names.
If pointing out that the OP is a lie and the person posting is a liar is name-calling, I reject the warning.

Hal Jordan
03-28-2017, 01:48 PM
If pointing out that the OP is a lie and the person posting is a liar is name-calling, I reject the warning.
Threadbanned for violation of rule 9

Bethere
03-28-2017, 05:21 PM
Of course not, and I support abortion in the first trimester.

But, why do people keep adding "incest" as if it's a viable reason to abort? I mean, I support choice for any woman who is impregnated by anyone and she wants to abort - but why keep saying "incest?"

If incest was against the woman's will -- it's just "rape." It it was with her consent -- well -- you see what I'm saying?

Sure. You are saying that incest is a redundant classification. Maybe it is, but if it is then it doesn't really matter either way does it?

That's the true nature of redundancy.

Bethere
03-28-2017, 05:25 PM
It isn't the will or act of a higher being, and women should be allowed to abort if that is what they wish to do. My religion says life doesn't begin until a child takes a first breath outside the birth canal, although I do oppose late-term abortions unless the woman's life is at risk or severe fetal abnormalities have been discovered (where the child would suffer to the extreme or die immediately, if not be stillborn).

I lean against abortion. But here's the thing. My life isn't on the line in the delivery room. So there's no way it can be my call.

I support your right to make those decisions for yourselves.

Subdermal
03-28-2017, 05:27 PM
It isn't the will or act of a higher being, and women should be allowed to abort if that is what they wish to do. My religion says life doesn't begin until a child takes a first breath outside the birth canal, although I do oppose late-term abortions unless the woman's life is at risk or severe fetal abnormalities have been discovered (where the child would suffer to the extreme or die immediately, if not be stillborn).

Wait.

How, based upon your determinations, could you possibly be opposed to late-term abortion? Your statement is utterly inconsistent.

It sounds to me a clash of conscious and subconscious morality.

Subdermal
03-28-2017, 05:30 PM
I lean against abortion. But here's the thing. My life isn't on the line in the delivery room. So there's no way it can be my call.

I support your right to make those decisions for yourselves.

But not the right to keep my tax money to decide for myself what is an appropriate use of my charitable giving.

Got it.

Bethere
03-28-2017, 07:14 PM
The mother should have an abortion option as should all pregnant women . But only up to 20 weeks, which is plenty of time. The means of conception , while sad, is irrelevent to the time frame.

Roe set that number at 28 weeks. It hasn't changed in nearly 50 years of aggressive litigation.

Even so, if Republicans were more flexible, people like me and my fellow ohio posters on both sides of the aisle here at tPF could actually negotiate a compromise on that number. There are five of us and we are spread out evenly across the political spectrum.

We've talked about that numerous times over the years. It's shocking on how much we do agree. We don't talk about those things on internet forums. That's why no one noticed.

There are other points where we might agree. I guarantee it.

Crepitus
03-28-2017, 07:54 PM
Oklahoma.

Where the men are manly and the sheep are nervous.

rcfieldz
03-28-2017, 08:06 PM
I have never raped a woman. It was always consensual sex. I have no children. So I'm thinking that at some time a woman may have decided to or needed to have an abortion after having sex with me. I have never been informed if this may indeed be true. I also believe it's the woman's body and her right to do with it however she chooses. If in the event a woman is raped or is a victim of incest then it is still a matter between the woman/or youngster and a physician. Not the business of any government official.
Is it the will of God for some people to write about rape and incest in blogs? I guess for some it may be.

Crepitus
03-28-2017, 08:15 PM
I have never raped a woman. It was always consensual sex. I have no children. So I'm thinking that at some time a woman may have decided to or needed to have an abortion after having sex with me. I have never been informed if this may indeed be true. I also believe it's the woman's body and her right to do with it however she chooses. If in the event a woman is raped or is a victim of incest then it is still a matter between the woman/or youngster and a physician. Not the business of any government official.
Is it the will of God for some people to write about rape and incest in blogs? I guess for some it may be.

http://s2.quickmeme.com/img/d8/d818dfeb5bdd413efe23032c3416a4542917195a5cd0b3f528 b799b81356018e.jpg

OGIS
03-28-2017, 10:15 PM
Are cases of rape and incest the will of God?

http://nytlive.nytimes.com/womenintheworld/2017/03/23/oklahoma-lawmaker-defends-anti-abortion-bill-says-rape-and-incest-are-will-of-god/

Oklahoma State Representative George Faught, the author of a controversial bill (http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2017-18 SUPPORT DOCUMENTS/BILLSUM/House/HB1549 CS BILLSUM.PDF) that would make it illegal in the state to pursue an abortion in the case of a genetic abnormality, made a powerful and potentially disturbing declaration of faith during questioning about the bill on the floor of the Oklahoma House on Tuesday. Asked by fellow state Representative Cory Williams about whether he considered rape to be the “will of God,” Faught boldly, if not necessarily unabashedly, answered in the affirmative.
“Well, you know, if you read the Bible, there’s actually a couple circumstances where that happened,” said Faught. “The Lord uses all circumstances. I mean, you can go down that path, but it’s a reality unfortunately.”


Wow.

I wonder if he takes that next step in his mind... and rationalizes his perverted thoughts regarding his own (or others') children as "the Will of GOD"?

That's, of course, just in case he's a pedo. Which, I am told, is almost never ever the case with fundie nutbar parents. So, no, I'm not accusing the gentleman of being a raging closet pedophile, no sir, not at all.

I think he probably has a thing about male horses.

OGIS
03-28-2017, 10:17 PM
While I don't believe rape or incest is the will of God, I also don't believe an innocent child conceived during such should be condemned to death either.

Absolutely.

OGIS
03-28-2017, 10:30 PM
I feel no guilt or shame, in saying, I would want no reminder of the violent act perpetrated upon me, by a monster, that's exactly what that child would represent.

There's no way I could bring myself to nurture it, allow it to grow in my body..... period.

If your body is ever violated like that, then, you can do what you wish.

The answer to the entire issue is technology. We are very close, possibly 10 years away, to being able to raise a human embryo stage or fetus stage to term outside of a human womb. And we already have a thriving surrogate mother industry. I see no reason why unwanted potential children, regardless of their gestation development state, could not one day soon be removed and brought to term in a surrogate womb or in a lab.


Then both sides of the abortion controversy will be happy, right?

OGIS
03-28-2017, 10:35 PM
It's still an innocent child. I won't condemn you for your decision, I just don't believe I could condemn an innocent for the acts of another.

At least right after the rape it is a small mass of cells. No brain, no thought, just cells. It is not a child.

FindersKeepers
03-29-2017, 03:52 AM
Sure. You are saying that incest is a redundant classification. Maybe it is, but if it is then it doesn't really matter either way does it?

That's the true nature of redundancy.

It can be redundant but it doesn't have to be. The science behind procreation of kissing cousins doesn't necessarily point to a damaged/deformed/damned body/soul. By saying rape and "incest" we're throwing some religious/superstitious flavor into the mix. Children are regrettably born to incestuous couplings and not all are mentally/physically damaged. It's obviously not optimal, but the offspring of brother/sister incidents have been hidden and raised as their grandparents' "later-in-life baby." We've all heard those stories. By including "incest" in the reasons to abort, we're following old religious tenets down the rabbit hole.

Just sayin'.

AeonPax
03-29-2017, 04:09 AM
`
`
I support a woman's right to choice. It's not even arguable anymore. However, I keep counsel only with myself when it comes to abortion, not some book or male clergy's opinion.

Bethere
03-29-2017, 04:15 PM
It can be redundant but it doesn't have to be. The science behind procreation of kissing cousins doesn't necessarily point to a damaged/deformed/damned body/soul. By saying rape and "incest" we're throwing some religious/superstitious flavor into the mix. Children are regrettably born to incestuous couplings and not all are mentally/physically damaged. It's obviously not optimal, but the offspring of brother/sister incidents have been hidden and raised as their grandparents' "later-in-life baby." We've all heard those stories. By including "incest" in the reasons to abort, we're following old religious tenets down the rabbit hole.

Just sayin'.

Actually, just because the mutations don't show in your generation doesn't mean the mutations aren't there.

My college roommate's family came to family day. I was surprised. My white roomie had a black sister, and yet his mother and father were white.

Did you guys study dominant and recessive genes in biology class?

NapRover
03-29-2017, 04:22 PM
Manson killed. That was not the will of God.

NapRover
03-29-2017, 04:32 PM
At least right after the rape it is a small mass of cells. No brain, no thought, just cells. It is not a child.
It's a zygote, with all the DNA and genetic recipe to become a man or woman. It's much more than just cells.

Bethere
03-29-2017, 04:44 PM
It's a zygote, with all the DNA and genetic recipe to become a man or woman. It's much more than just cells.

Thanks for your opinion and thanks for voting.

Are you surprised that absolutely no one has checked either god's will option on the poll?

NapRover
03-29-2017, 04:59 PM
Thanks for your opinion and thanks for voting.

Are you surprised that absolutely no one has checked either god's will option on the poll?
I'm impressed that they know it is not His will.
Catholics and a lot of others require that a zygote receive all the respect due any human being.
(Btw, I have played different versions of Carpet Crawler probably 25 times since your recent post).

https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=2808

Bethere
03-29-2017, 05:03 PM
I'm impressed that they know it is not His will.
Catholics and a lot of others require that a zygote receive all the respect due any human being.
(Btw, I have played different versions of Carpet Crawler probably 25 times since your recent post).

https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=2808

You are a lucky man to have seen that tour. When I saw it, at vets memorial in Columbus, there was maybe 500 people there. I like riding the skree through the end, with it. Devastating stuff.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IlHUI35CyT8

Bethere
03-29-2017, 05:18 PM
I'm impressed that they know it is not His will.
Catholics and a lot of others require that a zygote receive all the respect due any human being.
(Btw, I have played different versions of Carpet Crawler probably 25 times since your recent post).

https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=2808

As for your point? I don't necessarily disagree. Except that it Isn't my life on the line in the delivery room. It simply cannot be my call. And I refuse to force the woman I love to risk death without her having the final say.

NapRover
03-29-2017, 05:22 PM
As for your point? I don't necessarily disagree. Except that it Isn't my life on the line in the delivery room. It simply cannot be my call. And I refuse to force the woman I love to risk death without her having the final say.
And that is what my Catholic sisters tell me: it's not my call.

Bethere
03-29-2017, 05:33 PM
And that is what my Catholic sisters tell me: it's not my call.

Do they really? Could you elucidate?

MisterVeritis
03-29-2017, 05:37 PM
Because not all times are people intelligent enough to know incest is a bad thing. So, it may not be "rape" but still a bad decision to carry the fetus to term.
Why is incest a bad thing?

Bethere
03-29-2017, 05:40 PM
Why is incest a bad thing?

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/04/outbreeding-wont-save-the-british-royal-family/&ved=0ahUKEwiU18zJ5fzSAhUk0YMKHb6vAqoQFgiFATAP&usg=AFQjCNFPiXCxJk8ovrcSFLgA9wj2KBURuw

17697

MisterVeritis
03-29-2017, 05:45 PM
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/04/outbreeding-wont-save-the-british-royal-family/&ved=0ahUKEwiU18zJ5fzSAhUk0YMKHb6vAqoQFgiFATAP&usg=AFQjCNFPiXCxJk8ovrcSFLgA9wj2KBURuw

You failed to answer my question. Anyone else? Why is incest a bad thing?

Abby08
03-29-2017, 05:47 PM
You failed to answer my question. Anyone else? Why is incest a bad thing?

Seriously??

Bethere
03-29-2017, 05:56 PM
Seriously??
He's defending incest. I didn't make it up. He would assume a diametrically opposed position from me at the drop of a hat.

He's about to ask me who Cain's wife was.

NapRover
03-29-2017, 06:13 PM
You failed to answer my question. Anyone else? Why is incest a bad thing?
Incest, and all kinds of other sexual laws were recorded and passed on in Leviticus
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Leviticus+18&version=NIV

Crepitus
03-29-2017, 06:23 PM
Seriously??

Seriously. Mr. V's brain is a wholly owned subsidiary of the hard "RWNJ" right.

MisterVeritis
03-29-2017, 06:38 PM
Seriously??
Do you have an answer?

MisterVeritis
03-29-2017, 06:39 PM
He's defending incest. I didn't make it up. He would assume a diametrically opposed position from me at the drop of a hat.

He's about to ask me who Cain's wife was.
I have not defended incest. I asked why you and others believe it is a bad thing.

MisterVeritis
03-29-2017, 06:39 PM
Incest, and all kinds of other sexual laws were recorded and passed on in Leviticus
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Leviticus+18&version=NIV
That is not an answer. Why is incest a bad thing?

MisterVeritis
03-29-2017, 06:40 PM
Seriously. Mr. V's brain is a wholly owned subsidiary of the hard "RWNJ" right.
While that is an interesting observation it, too, fails to answer the question. Why is incest a bad thing?

Safety
03-29-2017, 06:57 PM
Why is incest a bad thing?

Seriously?

Crepitus
03-29-2017, 07:00 PM
Seriously?

Apparently.

Tahuyaman
03-29-2017, 07:03 PM
Seriously. Mr. V's brain is a wholly owned subsidiary of the hard "RWNJ" right.
His question on incest has nothing to do with right or left wing political views.

Now watch some idiot mischaracterize that comment.

Abby08
03-29-2017, 07:34 PM
I have not defended incest. I asked why you and others believe it is a bad thing.

More importantly, why do you think it's not?

Abby08
03-29-2017, 07:37 PM
Do you have an answer?

Yes.

MisterVeritis
03-29-2017, 07:40 PM
More importantly, why do you think it's not?
I have no opinion. Many of you do. Why do you believe incest is a bad thing?

MisterVeritis
03-29-2017, 07:41 PM
Yes.
Your answer is nonresponsive. Anyone else? Why is incest a bad thing?

NapRover
03-29-2017, 07:47 PM
That is not an answer. Why is incest a bad thing?

When God forbids it, it's a good enough answer for most of the world. Why isn't it good enough for you?

Tahuyaman
03-29-2017, 08:04 PM
Parents are supposed to raise and protect their children. Not violate their trust.

Some things are are so vile they shouldn't require an explanation.

Crepitus
03-29-2017, 08:05 PM
His question on incest has nothing to do with right or left wing political views.

Now watch some idiot mischaracterize that comment.

See, that's where you are wrong. The whole reason he's asking thEze questions is to prove some point that will let him defend your fellow rwnjobber.

del
03-29-2017, 08:07 PM
While that is an interesting observation it, too, fails to answer the question. Why is incest a bad thing?

it produces people like, well, you.

Tahuyaman
03-29-2017, 08:08 PM
See, that's where you are wrong. The whole reason he's asking thEze questions is to prove some point that will let him defend your fellow rwnjobber.Only a total hack could make this a left vs right issue. Trying to make this an issue of political ideaoligy is stupid.

Crepitus
03-29-2017, 08:15 PM
Only a total hack could make this a left vs right issue. Trying to make this an issue of political ideaoligy is stupid.

Except.that it isn't me who is doing it.

Tahuyaman
03-29-2017, 08:19 PM
Except.that it isn't me who is doing it.. You just tried to do that. MV never did anything g but ask a question. You tried to make it a right wing thing. That is stupid.

Crepitus
03-29-2017, 08:22 PM
. You just tried to do that. MV never did anything g but ask a question. You tried to make it a right wing thing. That is stupid.

Dude, he's as transparent as window glass. We all know what he was gonna do. Denying it is what's stupid here.

Subdermal
03-29-2017, 08:26 PM
Dude, he's as transparent as window glass. We all know what he was gonna do. Denying it is what's stupid here.

If you are confident in your belief system, questions wouldn't threaten you. The question is a good one; one which tackles moral absolutism vs moral relativism.

Why are you afraid to answer it? Do you not base your ideology in principle?

MisterVeritis
03-29-2017, 08:27 PM
When God forbids it, it's a good enough answer for most of the world. Why isn't it good enough for you?
According to the old testament, God forbids many things. Do you comply with all of God's commands? Do you eat pork? Do you ever wear something made from two kinds of cloth?
Don't dodge. Why do you believe incest is a bad thing?

MisterVeritis
03-29-2017, 08:28 PM
Dude, he's as transparent as window glass. We all know what he was gonna do. Denying it is what's stupid here.
What do you think I am going to do?

Why do you believe incest is a bad thing?

Crepitus
03-29-2017, 08:30 PM
If you are confident in your belief system, questions wouldn't threaten you. The question is a good one; one which tackles moral absolutism vs moral relativism.

Why are you afraid to answer it? Do you not base your ideology in principle?

Lol! Circle the wagons boys!

Subdermal
03-29-2017, 08:34 PM
Lol! Circle the wagons boys!

Dunno what you're talking about, fella. Seems as though you're frightened of a question.

Crepitus
03-29-2017, 08:40 PM
Dunno what you're talking about, fella. Seems as though you're frightened of a question.

Not even a little bit.

MisterVeritis
03-29-2017, 08:41 PM
Will no one step up? Why is incest a bad thing?

Tahuyaman
03-29-2017, 08:54 PM
Dude, he's as transparent as window glass. We all know what he was gonna do. Denying it is what's stupid here.
You try to make it an issue of political ideology and it's his fault. Got it.

Chris
03-29-2017, 08:55 PM
it produces people like, well, you.

Snide remark, not snark.

Tahuyaman
03-29-2017, 08:55 PM
Will no one step up? Why is incest a bad thing?
Evidently it's a political issue to some.

MisterVeritis
03-29-2017, 08:55 PM
You try to make it an issue of political ideology and it's his fault. Got it.
I am looking for an answer. I believe everyone here believes incest is a bad thing. I want to know why.

Is eating pork as bad as incest?

NapRover
03-29-2017, 08:55 PM
According to the old testament, God forbids many things. Do you comply with all of God's commands? Do you eat pork? Do you ever wear something made from two kinds of cloth?
Don't dodge. Why do you believe incest is a bad thing?
Believe me, for most of my life I haven't followed any of His commands at all, and placed my will above His. Huge mistake. Foolish.
Jesus in effect, "retired" some of the Old Testament's strict laws. For example, He passed on stoning an adulterous, but admonished her to "sin no more". Regarding diet, He declared that what comes out of a mouth is more important than what goes into it. And he had his disciples call off the dogs on some folks they didn't think were following the law to the letter telling them "if they're not against us they are for us".
i don't believe he abolished all old laws though, the Ten Commandments and the golden rule still stand.

So I just don't think it's right. Was that a dodge?

Tahuyaman
03-29-2017, 08:56 PM
According to the old testament, God forbids many things. Do you comply with all of God's commands? Do you eat pork? Do you ever wear something made from two kinds of cloth?
Don't dodge. Why do you believe incest is a bad thing?. The birth of Christ and creation of the New Testament changed the laws of the Old Testament. I don't believe the New Testament excused incest.

MisterVeritis
03-29-2017, 08:57 PM
Believe me, for most of my life I haven't followed any of His commands at all, and placed my will above His. Huge mistake. Foolish.
Jesus in effect, "retired" some of the Old Testament's strict laws. For example, He passed on stoning an adulterous, but admonished her to "sin no more". Regarding diet, He declared that what comes out of a mouth is more important than what goes into it. And he had his disciples call off the dogs on some folks they didn't think were following the law to the letter telling them "if they're not against us they are for us".
i don't believe he abolished all old laws though, the Ten Commandments and the golden rule still stand.

So I just don't think it's right. Was that a dodge?
Yes. An artful dodge. :grin:

For you incest is bad because your religion says so. Is incest as bad as eating pork?

MisterVeritis
03-29-2017, 08:58 PM
. The birth of Christ and creation of the New Testament changed the laws of the Old Testament. I don't believe the New Testament excused incest.
Okay. So far two of you say incest is bad due to religious beliefs.

Tahuyaman
03-29-2017, 08:59 PM
I am looking for an answer. I believe everyone here believes incest is a bad thing. I want to know why.

Is eating pork as bad as incest?. I'm not arguing with you in this one. I already explained my position on the subject.

Tahuyaman
03-29-2017, 09:01 PM
What do you think I am going to do?

Why do you believe incest is a bad thing?


Lol! Circle the wagons boys!. Maybe Crepitus doesn't believe incest is a bad thing, ever consider that? Maybe that's why he won't answer?

MisterVeritis
03-29-2017, 09:02 PM
Snide remark, not snark.
LOL. del.

I have a very high IQ. I have incredible curiosity. I have received high awards for technical innovation and my research and development work. If incest produced me you guys should be all for it.

del is deficient.

Thanks.

Crepitus
03-29-2017, 09:05 PM
You try to make it an issue of political ideology and it's his fault. Got it.

LOf'nL

NapRover
03-29-2017, 09:06 PM
Do they really? Could you elucidate?

Sure, now that I looked up that word!
They both are practicing Catholics, one a lawyer, one an RN. Both, as well as everyone else is my large family, think it's a woman's call and she is the one who decides what to do with her body.
When I bring up the innocent life issue, they just shrug and point to rule #1. It's not my call.

Tahuyaman
03-29-2017, 09:08 PM
What do you think I am going to do?

Why do you believe incest is a bad thing?


Okay. So far two of you say incest is bad due to religious beliefs.
Scroll back. I think it's bad for other reasons.

Tahuyaman
03-29-2017, 09:09 PM
LOf'nL

Sure.

MisterVeritis
03-29-2017, 09:10 PM
Scroll back. I think it's bad for other reasons.
If it is important you will tell me.

Everyone dodged.

Incest is bad because.

Tahuyaman
03-29-2017, 09:11 PM
If it is important you will tell me.

Everyone dodged.

Incest is bad because.
I did answer. If you missed it, oh well....

Crepitus
03-29-2017, 09:15 PM
. Maybe Crepitus doesn't believe incest is a bad thing, ever consider that? Maybe that's why he won't answer?

Not playing your silly game.

MisterVeritis
03-29-2017, 09:16 PM
Not playing your silly game.
Why won't you answer crep? I know it requires thought.

Bethere
03-29-2017, 09:17 PM
I have not defended incest. I asked why you and others believe it is a bad thing.

I told you. It's obviously a public health issue.

Bethere
03-29-2017, 09:23 PM
I did answer. If you missed it, oh well....

Me, too.

Ravens Fan
03-29-2017, 09:28 PM
LOL. del.

I have a very high IQ. I have incredible curiosity. I have received high awards for technical innovation and my research and development work. If incest produced me you guys should be all for it.

del is deficient.

Thanks.
@MisterVeritis TB'ed for insults after warning and violation of rule 9.

Tahuyaman
03-29-2017, 09:40 PM
Not playing your silly game.
Well, MV is gone. I don't care why you refuse to answer the question. That's your business.

Bethere
03-29-2017, 09:51 PM
Well, MV is gone. I don't care why you refuse to answer the question. That's your business.

It is always his call.

Tahuyaman
03-29-2017, 10:28 PM
If a man has a thing for his mother, daughter or sister, that's his problem.

Bethere
03-29-2017, 10:33 PM
If a man has a thing for his mother, daughter or sister, that's his problem.

But if they conceive then that is a public health issue.

OGIS
03-29-2017, 11:26 PM
If a man has a thing for his mother, daughter or sister, that's his problem.

If there is force or intimidation (as with an adult and minor) involved then that man is a criminal, and it is a problem for the State.

That's one of the core purposes of government: protecting the population against criminals.

OGIS
03-29-2017, 11:33 PM
If it is important you will tell me.

Everyone dodged.

Incest is bad because.

Are you, by chance, channeling Robert Heinlein?

FindersKeepers
03-30-2017, 03:42 AM
Actually, just because the mutations don't show in your generation doesn't mean the mutations aren't there.

My college roommate's family came to family day. I was surprised. My white roomie had a black sister, and yet his mother and father were white.

Did you guys study dominant and recessive genes in biology class?

We did, but back then it didn't interest me too much.

Recessive genes can, and do, appear after generations, and can affect anyone. But, "fresh blood" makes them less likely.

What's happening with the incest thing, when it's lumped in with rape as a reason to abort, in my opinion, is not being given a lot of thought. Yes, inbreeding CAN result in physical/mental problems, but from what I understand, it doesn't always, and it's more rare in first cousins than previously thought.

So -- why make an exception for incest? I understand the rape exception, but I would just simply expand that exception to all women in the first trimester -- just a choice for all. I don't need to know their reasoning.

It's the taboo thing. The product of incest is not a child to some but a demon of sorts.

I just find that odd.

FindersKeepers
03-30-2017, 03:45 AM
But if they conceive then that is a public health issue.

If we go down that road -- then the fetus of a mother who drinks is a public health issue.

The fetus of a mother who took drugs is a public health issue.

The fetus of a mentally handicapped mother (or father) is a public health issue.

Welcome to eugenics, my friend. We tried that once before -- in the 30s -- to minimize those "accidents." It did not end well.

Bethere
03-30-2017, 08:28 AM
If we go down that road -- then the fetus of a mother who drinks is a public health issue.

The fetus of a mother who took drugs is a public health issue.

The fetus of a mentally handicapped mother (or father) is a public health issue.

Welcome to eugenics, my friend. We tried that once before -- in the 30s -- to minimize those "accidents." It did not end well.

I'm sorry but that is nonsense. Incest causes genetic disease. It's a fact. Ask the hapsburg family. Incest was a serious public health issue before it was banned.

Tahuyaman
03-30-2017, 10:02 AM
But if they conceive then that is a public health issue.

It might be and it might not be.

Bethere
03-30-2017, 10:05 AM
It might be and it might not be.

It always is. You are either expressing traits or you are a carrier. The gene is there in both cases.

Tahuyaman
03-30-2017, 10:13 AM
It always is. You are either expressing traits or you are a carrier. The gene is there in both cases.

Dont try to spin this off onto me. I've already made my views known on the subject.

Bethere
03-30-2017, 10:14 AM
Dont try to spin this off onto me. I've already made my views known on the subject.
The antecedent of 'you' wasn't Tahuyaman.

Tahuyaman
03-30-2017, 10:15 AM
If we go down that road -- then the fetus of a mother who drinks is a public health issue.

The fetus of a mother who took drugs is a public health issue.

The fetus of a mentally handicapped mother (or father) is a public health issue.

Welcome to eugenics, my friend. We tried that once before -- in the 30s -- to minimize those "accidents." It did not end well.

Laws banning incest shouldn't be linked to eugenics. Abortion could be though.

Tahuyaman
03-30-2017, 10:17 AM
The antecedent of 'you' wasn't Tahuyaman.

Dont try to deflect your issues on to me because you are your own grandpa.

Bethere
03-30-2017, 10:19 AM
Dont try to deflect your issues on to me because you are your own grandpa.

You are way out of line.

Tahuyaman
03-30-2017, 10:23 AM
You are way out of line.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=W7x1ETPkZsk

OGIS
03-30-2017, 10:25 AM
If we go down that road -- then the fetus of a mother who drinks is a public health issue.

The fetus of a mother who took drugs is a public health issue.

The fetus of a mentally handicapped mother (or father) is a public health issue.

Welcome to eugenics, my friend. We tried that once before -- in the 30s -- to minimize those "accidents." It did not end well.


As with most things in real life, there must be balance. I agree, public "standards" for what pregnant mothers can consume are problematical. It is a two-edged sword.

On the one hand, you are absolutely correct that totalitarian "do-gooders" of any stripe (Left or Right) will, if given the opportunity, carry any such standards to extremes, including the horrors of forced eugenics programs.

(On a related note, have you seen Gattaca? The movie has been called the "thinking man's SF movie," and is an interesting example of what sounds like a "free market" eugenics program.)

But on the other hand, what of the rights (if any) of the [I]unborn future-child (or for Conceptualists, religious or otherwise) the future unborn-child to start "the race" with as healthy a mind and body as is possible?

(This issue of State-enforced public health standards for pregnancy is, I think, also somewhat related to State-enforced public health standards for, say, food workers. Perhaps an anarchist would have no issue with a fast food worker with Hep-C making his salad, or a Typhoid Mary cooking his meals in a restaurant, but most people expect the State to set (and enforce) standards in these areas, rather than rely on the "magic middle finger" of private enterprise to resolve the dangers.)

But getting back to pregnancy, here's my question: IF the State (1) is to be restricted to a libertarian "hands off" position as regards individual freedoms and market activity, (2) being allowed to establish only the common (and individual-liberty-oriented) "rules of the game" that the players live under... then (3) to what extent is it the State's responsibility to make sure that new players (i.e.: children) have the best physical and mental tools available to play the game?

It is, I think, fair to say that the answer to this question is necessary before asking questions about incest (which may indeed result in physical and mental impairment for that (or future) generations.

***

Also on a related note, have you ever read an old SF book titled "Earth Abides"? I think I've read that book a dozen times, and I still find new meanings to certain passages. One passage that haunts me is the one where the informal "tribal council" of the older men and women has to decide what to do about a drifter who has come into their lives.

Setting: a plague has wiped out 99.9% of humanity. AS such, virtually all serious human pathogens have also been wiped out, and, a couple of decades later, the human survivors are all preternaturally healthy. An exception is that the tribe is caring for a mentally-retarded female child (then a mid-teen) born to one of them. Everyone agrees that the girl should never have children, and as she grows her friendships are carefully monitored to prevent any type of sexual activity. The tribe is essentially Stateless, and this agreement is simply an informal compact among friends and neighbors.

Enter the drifter, who seems sickly in some ways and who (when drunk) brags about his sexual prowess and conquests. The mentally retarded girl is fascinated by him, and he with her.

The problem: Allow the drifter to stay? Or tell him to leave? Even to the point of driving him away? Because - the consensus among the oldsters is - he will simply sneak back and have relations with the girl. And then all those sexually-related diseases that plagued mankind will once again be loosed on the tribe.

The consensus decision is made, and the drifter is taken out and hanged. The tribe must be protected. And the protagonist mourns that the State has been reborn... but sees no way around it.

It is one of the best books I have ever read. Read the reviews.

https://www.amazon.com/Earth-Abides-George-R-Stewart/dp/0345487133/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1490886571&sr=8-1&keywords=earth+abides

Bethere
03-30-2017, 10:39 AM
As with most things in real life, there must be balance. I agree, public "standards" for what pregnant mothers can consume are problematical. It is a two-edged sword.

On the one hand, you are absolutely correct that totalitarian "do-gooders" of any stripe (Left or Right) will, if given the opportunity, carry any such standards to extremes, including the horrors of forced eugenics programs.

(On a related note, have you seen Gattaca? The movie has been called the "thinking man's SF movie," and is an interesting example of what sounds like a "free market" eugenics program.)

But on the other hand, what of the rights (if any) of the [I]unborn future-child (or for Conceptualists, religious or otherwise) the future unborn-child to start "the race" with as healthy a mind and body as is possible?

(This issue of State-enforced public health standards for pregnancy is, I think, also somewhat related to State-enforced public health standards for, say, food workers. Perhaps an anarchist would have no issue with a fast food worker with Hep-C making his salad, or a Typhoid Mary cooking his meals in a restaurant, but most people expect the State to set (and enforce) standards in these areas, rather than rely on the "magic middle finger" of private enterprise to resolve the dangers.)

But getting back to pregnancy, here's my question: IF the State (1) is to be restricted to a libertarian "hands off" position as regards individual freedoms and market activity, (2) being allowed to establish only the common (and individual-liberty-oriented) "rules of the game" that the players live under... then (3) to what extent is it the State's responsibility to make sure that new players (i.e.: children) have the best physical and mental tools available to play the game?

It is, I think, fair to say that the answer to this question is necessary before asking questions about incest (which may indeed result in physical and mental impairment for that (or future) generations.

***

Also on a related note, have you ever read an old SF book titled "Earth Abides"? I think I've read that book a dozen times, and I still find new meanings to certain passages. One passage that haunts me is the one where the informal "tribal council" of the older men and women has to decide what to do about a drifter who has come into their lives.

Setting: a plague has wiped out 99.9% of humanity. AS such, virtually all serious human pathogens have also been wiped out, and, a couple of decades later, the human survivors are all preternaturally healthy. An exception is that the tribe is caring for a mentally-retarded female child (then a mid-teen) born to one of them. Everyone agrees that the girl should never have children, and as she grows her friendships are carefully monitored to prevent any type of sexual activity. The tribe is essentially Stateless, and this agreement is simply an informal compact among friends and neighbors.

Enter the drifter, who seems sickly in some ways and who (when drunk) brags about his sexual prowess and conquests. The mentally retarded girl is fascinated by him, and he with her.

The problem: Allow the drifter to stay? Or tell him to leave? Even to the point of driving him away? Because - the consensus among the oldsters is - he will simply sneak back and have relations with the girl. And then all those sexually-related diseases that plagued mankind will once again be loosed on the tribe.

The consensus decision is made, and the drifter is taken out and hanged. The tribe must be protected. And the protagonist mourns that the State has been reborn... but sees no way around it.

It is one of the best books I have ever read. Read the reviews.

https://www.amazon.com/Earth-Abides-George-R-Stewart/dp/0345487133/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1490886571&sr=8-1&keywords=earth+abides

I thought your excellent heinlein question deserved an answer last night.

FindersKeepers
03-30-2017, 10:51 AM
I'm sorry but that is nonsense. Incest causes genetic disease. It's a fact. Ask the hapsburg family. Incest was a serious public health issue before it was banned.

It "increases the risk" of genetic disease. From my limited research, it does not always "cause" genetic disease as you claim.

There are chances that a child of incest will be born just fine. More chance than not, actually. They may carry a recessive gene, which may or may not ever express itself.



In general, inbred children exhibit lower intelligence and physical strength and get sick more often in comparison to their non-inbred counterparts, io9 (http://io9.com/5863666/why-inbreeding-really-isnt-as-bad-as-you-think-it-is) reported. However, the risk for life-threatening deformities and diseases among inbred children is not as high as you may believe.
Our genes are responsible for essentially every part of who we are. Most of our genes are either beneficial or largely neutral, but a small number of genes actually carry serious health consequences, known as autosomal recessive diseases (http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/002052.htm). Some of these include cystic fibrosis, sickle cell anemia, Tay-Sachs disease, and albinism. In small gene pools, the chances of offspring inheriting the two recessive genes needed to express these conditions increases. For example, first cousins would have a 12.5 percent chance of having a child with one of these disorders, io9 reported. This is why you’ll see population trends such as Tay-Sachs (https://www.jewishgenetics.org/tay-sachs-disease) being most prevalent in those of Jewish origin and Puerto Rico (http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/in-sight/wp/2015/02/09/clear-as-black-seeing-beyond-shades-of-albinism-within-puerto-ricos-population/) having the highest density of albinism in the world.
When you have an even smaller gene pool, such as two first relatives, the chances of inheriting these recessive conditions may skyrocket to 50/50. Interestingly though, this is not the case for all inherited disease, as many need generations of inbreeding before they can ever be expressed. A 2008 study (http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/kissing-cousins-ok/story-e6frg12c-1111116504749) on 48 cases of incest found that the risk for birth defects is around two percent in the general population but rises to only four percent between first cousins. However, due to the sensitivity of the subject, there was no information available for the children of incest between closer relations.



http://www.medicaldaily.com/kissing-cousins-everything-you-didnt-want-know-about-incest-and-why-inbreeding-isnt-321650

OGIS
03-30-2017, 10:52 AM
I thought your excellent heinlein question deserved an answer last night.

LOL, the jury is still out whether Heinlein was a pedo. My own thoughts are there are far too many of his works that imply in that direction for it to be coincidence. Similarly works-based questions surround his position on incest.

I note, though, that pedophilia is simply the sexual attraction to children, and most authorities agree that it is a brain wiring issue that is beyond the control of the person. But whether that attraction is acted upon is another issue, entirely. "Virtuous pedophiles" (yes, they exist, and are probably 90% of the [hidden] pedophile population) may feel attraction to children, but they do not act on it. Do I think Heinlein was an active pedo? No. His stature as a major author is well-enough established that something would have been explicitly said, were that the fact.

Bethere
03-30-2017, 10:58 AM
It "increases the risk" of genetic disease. From my limited research, it does not always "cause" genetic disease as you claim.

There are chances that a child of incest will be born just fine. More chance than not, actually. They may carry a recessive gene, which may or may not ever express itself.




http://www.medicaldaily.com/kissing-cousins-everything-you-didnt-want-know-about-incest-and-why-inbreeding-isnt-321650

Seriously, it causes..

In biology, did you guys do the fruit fly or pea plant experiments? You can actually accurately predict how many mutations will manifest themselves with expressed traits in each generation. If everyone in the room does the experiment right everyone will report the exact same data.


We've known this for 200 years.

OGIS
03-30-2017, 10:59 AM
It "increases the risk" of genetic disease. From my limited research, it does not always "cause" genetic disease as you claim.

There are chances that a child of incest will be born just fine. More chance than not, actually. They may carry a recessive gene, which may or may not ever express itself.

http://www.medicaldaily.com/kissing-cousins-everything-you-didnt-want-know-about-incest-and-why-inbreeding-isnt-321650

Good catch on that article.

Ancient tribes had no clue about genetics, but I am fairly sure that they noticed that incestuous sex led to more unfortunate results than non-incestuous sex. My take on the blanket taboo against incest is that it was the best way (barring a knowledge of genetics) to prevent those results.

Whether, say, father-daughter incest has elements of rape to it (as in intimidation by an authority figure) is another issue.

Bethere
03-30-2017, 11:05 AM
LOL, the jury is still out whether Heinlein was a pedo. My own thoughts are there are far too many of his works that imply in that direction for it to be coincidence. Similarly works-based questions surround his position on incest.

I note, though, that pedophilia is simply the sexual attraction to children, and most authorities agree that it is a brain wiring issue that is beyond the control of the person. But whether that attraction is acted upon is another issue, entirely. "Virtuous pedophiles" (yes, they exist, and are probably 90% of the [hidden] pedophile population) may feel attraction to children, but they do not act on it. Do I think Heinlein was an active pedo? No. His stature as a major author is well-enough established that something would have been explicitly said, were that the fact.

I didn't notice his deviancy until I reread stranger in a strange land.

OGIS
03-30-2017, 11:10 AM
I didn't notice his deviancy until I reread stranger in a strange land.


Door Into Summer was another. The protagonist's relationship with the little girl, Ricky (?) is extremely suggestive. Pedophilia averted by the happy existence of time travel and suspended animation.

And "All You Zombies" has it all: rape, incest, transgenderism, (and, yes, time travel). The protagonist is his own mother AND father, as I recall. Mind bent.

AZ Jim
03-30-2017, 11:33 AM
I don't see it as death. I see it as denial of conscience life. What is your earliest memory? You sure didn't know what was happening as a seed.

FindersKeepers
03-30-2017, 01:06 PM
Seriously, it causes..

In biology, did you guys do the fruit fly or pea plant experiments? You can actually accurately predict how many mutations will manifest themselves with expressed traits in each generation. If everyone in the room does the experiment right everyone will report the exact same data.


We've known this for 200 years.
Didn't do either one of those experiments, but, unless you can point to something more recent that the medical article I posted, I think I'll pick that over the science of 200 years ago.

At any rate, that's getting off topic because we know not all products of incest are damaged mentally or physically.

Which brings us back to the question of abortion. I'm an advocate of letting women choose, but, when you say the children of incest are a national health concern, are you advocating choice? Or, mandatory abortion?

Bethere
03-30-2017, 04:15 PM
I don't see it as death. I see it as denial of conscience life. What is your earliest memory? You sure didn't know what was happening as a seed.

I remember my third birthday party. I got a beach ball, a lawn mower, and a fisher Price shaving kit. Afterwards we used these really cool balls that you filled with vanilla ice cream. They had a spout that fit into the mouths of 7up bottles. You'd turn the whole thing upside down and voila! Ice cream floats.

it was a great day!

Bethere
03-30-2017, 04:17 PM
Didn't do either one of those experiments, but, unless you can point to something more recent that the medical article I posted, I think I'll pick that over the science of 200 years ago.

At any rate, that's getting off topic because we know not all products of incest are damaged mentally or physically.

Which brings us back to the question of abortion. I'm an advocate of letting women choose, but, when you say the children of incest are a national health concern, are you advocating choice? Or, mandatory abortion?

If the mother is under 18 then mandatory abortion and prison time for the father. Children are unable to enter into contracts or give consent.

Thanks for asking.

FindersKeepers
03-30-2017, 04:57 PM
If the mother is under 18 then mandatory abortion and prison time for the father. Children are unable to enter into contracts or give consent.

Thanks for asking.

I can't go there. If a mother, even a young one, wants to keep her child -- I'm not for mandating abortion. I don't think abortion should ever be mandated. That's where choice comes in. Yes, we may end up footing the bill for a defective baby, but that's a big "if." And, once we mandate abortion for babies of incest, where do we stop? Babies of crack ho's? Babies of prison mamas? Babies of undocumented immigrants? All of those cost the taxpayer.

But, in the case of incestuous rape, I agree the male should be in prison -- if -- he's older and the female is a child. 14 year-old cousins don't need that kind of punishment.

I go back to choice being the right thing to do. The female's choice.

Of course, I also support a DNA database that every male has to contribute to, and when a minor female aborts, I think we should track down the male, because oftentimes, a young girl is pressured to abort by an older male who wants to get rid of the evidence.

Bethere
03-30-2017, 05:47 PM
I can't go there. If a mother, even a young one, wants to keep her child -- I'm not for mandating abortion. I don't think abortion should ever be mandated. That's where choice comes in. Yes, we may end up footing the bill for a defective baby, but that's a big "if." And, once we mandate abortion for babies of incest, where do we stop? Babies of crack ho's? Babies of prison mamas? Babies of undocumented immigrants? All of those cost the taxpayer.

But, in the case of incestuous rape, I agree the male should be in prison -- if -- he's older and the female is a child. 14 year-old cousins don't need that kind of punishment.

I go back to choice being the right thing to do. The female's choice.

Of course, I also support a DNA database that every male has to contribute to, and when a minor female aborts, I think we should track down the male, because oftentimes, a young girl is pressured to abort by an older male who wants to get rid of the evidence.

Don't know about the database, lol. You just drove the libertarians insane. She knows who did it. Just make sure the state actually processes the rape kit if appropriate, or checks the accused's dna.

del
03-30-2017, 06:45 PM
I can't go there. If a mother, even a young one, wants to keep her child -- I'm not for mandating abortion. I don't think abortion should ever be mandated. That's where choice comes in. Yes, we may end up footing the bill for a defective baby, but that's a big "if." And, once we mandate abortion for babies of incest, where do we stop? Babies of crack ho's? Babies of prison mamas? Babies of undocumented immigrants? All of those cost the taxpayer.

But, in the case of incestuous rape, I agree the male should be in prison -- if -- he's older and the female is a child. 14 year-old cousins don't need that kind of punishment.

I go back to choice being the right thing to do. The female's choice.

Of course, I also support a DNA database that every male has to contribute to, and when a minor female aborts, I think we should track down the male, because oftentimes, a young girl is pressured to abort by an older male who wants to get rid of the evidence.

i love small govt cons

:rofl:

FindersKeepers
03-31-2017, 03:26 AM
Don't know about the database, lol. You just drove the libertarians insane. She knows who did it. Just make sure the state actually processes the rape kit if appropriate, or checks the accused's dna.

Of course she knows who did it. Out of fear, she's unlikely to tell, however, so, are we to just turn a blind eye to the crime?

FindersKeepers
03-31-2017, 03:27 AM
i love small govt cons

:rofl:

So, how'd you like your buddy's call for mandatory abortions?

del
03-31-2017, 10:18 AM
So, how'd you like your buddy's call for mandatory abortions?

no more than i liked your hypocritical call for compulsory dna harvesting for males.

thanks for asking and try harder next time, ms small government 2017.