First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next  Last
Incest Legalized?
604 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
77
Offline
Posted 3/15/08

Hugegnome wrote:

Smoking is practiced far beyond homosexuality and incest and unlike those two smoking actually affects other people through second hand smoke and the medical bill for people developing cancer from smoking is a lot higher than deformed children created by people practicing in unprotected incest.


The difference is that they put tax on cigarettes and some of the money was supposed to go to health care.
8432 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / Canada
Offline
Posted 3/15/08

nta2005 wrote:


Hugegnome wrote:

Smoking is practiced far beyond homosexuality and incest and unlike those two smoking actually affects other people through second hand smoke and the medical bill for people developing cancer from smoking is a lot higher than deformed children created by people practicing in unprotected incest.


The difference is that they put tax on cigarettes and some of the money was supposed to go to health care.


You can edit your last post and not double post.

Just because we get tax from it doesn't mean we don't waste money on medical expenses that could've been prevented. People who are breathing second-hand smoke also do not pay cigarette taxes and second-hand smoke is far more harmful than first-hand smoke. People with cancer also don't tend to pay much taxes when they are being hospitalized or when they're dead. Not to mention the amount of money the government spends on ads to tell deter people from smoking and to educate teenagers on the negative effects of smoking.

BTW allowing smoking and taxing it without legalizing drugs and taxing that is quite hypocritical on the government's part. I don't really want them to ban cigarettes necessarily but I believe the tax should be much higher and legalize drugs while they are at it and tax the living hell out of it.


On a different note back on topic. There aren't that many actual incestuous people so the effects of decriminalizing incest would have an insignificant effect on society. Especially considering more than a few countries have already decriminalized incest between adults and I have yet to heard of a surge of deformed children in those countries.

604 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
77
Offline
Posted 3/15/08

Hugegnome wrote:

Just because we get tax from it doesn't mean we don't waste money on medical expenses that could've been prevented. People who are breathing second-hand smoke also do not pay cigarette taxes and second-hand smoke is far more harmful than first-hand smoke. People with cancer also don't tend to pay much taxes when they are being hospitalized or when they're dead. Not to mention the amount of money the government spends on ads to tell deter people from smoking and to educate teenagers on the negative effects of smoking.

It would not make sense to tax the victim i.e. the second hand smokers. And yes, you tax them when they smoke, not when they are in the hospital. I think that the tax money on cigarettes would be enough to cover for health care, government advertising or what not. Come to think of it, smoking generate a lot of revenue for the government. There was a recent Dutch research article says that smoking would cut health care cost because people would die younger and lung cancer does not drag out with very low survival rate.



BTW allowing smoking and taxing it without legalizing drugs and taxing that is quite hypocritical on the government's part. I don't really want them to ban cigarettes necessarily but I believe the tax should be much higher and legalize drugs while they are at it and tax the living hell out of it.

I agree but in the end, it's the will of the people. I don't think most people want drugs to be legalized. And if you tax it too much, people will smuggle anyway. I remember a time when people were smuggling cigarettes into Canada because of the heavy tax on cigarettes in Canada compare to the US.



On a different note back on topic. There aren't that many actual incestuous people so the effects of decriminalizing incest would have an insignificant effect on society. Especially considering more than a few countries have already decriminalized incest between adults and I have yet to heard of a surge of deformed children in those countries.


Like you said, there aren't many cases so you won't see a surge nor hear much about them. Besides, I think these cases would be kept confidential anyway. No matter how insignificant the cost, I don't want to pay for it with my tax dollars. They can buy their own insurance.
8432 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / Canada
Offline
Posted 3/15/08

nta2005 wrote:


Hugegnome wrote:

Just because we get tax from it doesn't mean we don't waste money on medical expenses that could've been prevented. People who are breathing second-hand smoke also do not pay cigarette taxes and second-hand smoke is far more harmful than first-hand smoke. People with cancer also don't tend to pay much taxes when they are being hospitalized or when they're dead. Not to mention the amount of money the government spends on ads to tell deter people from smoking and to educate teenagers on the negative effects of smoking.

It would not make sense to tax the victim i.e. the second hand smokers. And yes, you tax them when they smoke, not when they are in the hospital. I think that the tax money on cigarettes would be enough to cover for health care, government advertising or what not. Come to think of it, smoking generate a lot of revenue for the government. There was a recent Dutch research article says that smoking would cut health care cost because people would die younger and lung cancer does not drag out with very low survival rate.



BTW allowing smoking and taxing it without legalizing drugs and taxing that is quite hypocritical on the government's part. I don't really want them to ban cigarettes necessarily but I believe the tax should be much higher and legalize drugs while they are at it and tax the living hell out of it.

I agree but in the end, it's the will of the people. I don't think most people want drugs to be legalized. And if you tax it too much, people will smuggle anyway. I remember a time when people were smuggling cigarettes into Canada because of the heavy tax on cigarettes in Canada compare to the US.



On a different note back on topic. There aren't that many actual incestuous people so the effects of decriminalizing incest would have an insignificant effect on society. Especially considering more than a few countries have already decriminalized incest between adults and I have yet to heard of a surge of deformed children in those countries.


Like you said, there aren't many cases so you won't see a surge nor hear much about them. Besides, I think these cases would be kept confidential anyway. No matter how insignificant the cost, I don't want to pay for it with my tax dollars. They can buy their own insurance.


The percentage of people with incestuous desires probably rank in the low single-digit percentages and then again not every incestuous couple would probably desire a child, thus would use protection and not even child born from incest would have genetic defects. That's like saying old women having children should be outlawed because there is also a chance for defects and people with genetic defects should also be prevented from having children, and everyone should see a geneticist to see if their defective recessive genes match their partner since that'll also cause a great chance for defects.

Besides why would rate of defect in children be considered confidential if the statistical comparison between the countries are significant enough to be outside the error margin.

How are street drugs and tobacco anything different? They both cause serious health deficits and they're both addictive? Cigarettes being smuggled? Just like Marijuana being smuggled from Canada to the States almost everyday?

The Dutch study shows revenue for Netherlands I would believe. Tax revenue is quite a bit in Netherlands because the tax is also proportionately big and the average tax rates for Cigarettes in the United States is much lower.

604 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
77
Offline
Posted 3/15/08

Hugegnome wrote:

The percentage of people with incestuous desires probably rank in the low single-digit percentages and then again not every incestuous couple would probably desire a child, thus would use protection and not even child born from incest would have genetic defects. That's like saying old women having children should be outlawed because there is also a chance for defects and people with genetic defects should also be prevented from having children, and everyone should see a geneticist to see if their defective recessive genes match their partner since that'll also cause a great chance for defects.

Besides why would rate of defect in children be considered confidential if the statistical comparison between the countries are significant enough to be outside the error margin.

How are street drugs and tobacco anything different? They both cause serious health deficits and they're both addictive? Cigarettes being smuggled? Just like Marijuana being smuggled from Canada to the States almost everyday?

The Dutch study shows revenue for Netherlands I would believe. Tax revenue is quite a bit in Netherlands because the tax is also proportionately big and the average tax rates for Cigarettes in the United States is much lower.



Basically it comes down to this:
1. We both agree that we should tax smokers/drug users to the extent that it should cover the medical expenses and what not.

2. You are OK with legalizing incest.
I don't care either way.

3. You are OK with paying for the medical costs for children defects or prevention as the result of these incestuous relationships because the cost is insignificant.
I say they should pay their own way.

Regarding facts and figures, I can't find the info (*too lazy*) to back up my argument nor to debunk yours. So in the end, it's just a difference in opinion and no more than that.

8432 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / Canada
Offline
Posted 3/15/08

nta2005 wrote:


Hugegnome wrote:

The percentage of people with incestuous desires probably rank in the low single-digit percentages and then again not every incestuous couple would probably desire a child, thus would use protection and not even child born from incest would have genetic defects. That's like saying old women having children should be outlawed because there is also a chance for defects and people with genetic defects should also be prevented from having children, and everyone should see a geneticist to see if their defective recessive genes match their partner since that'll also cause a great chance for defects.

Besides why would rate of defect in children be considered confidential if the statistical comparison between the countries are significant enough to be outside the error margin.

How are street drugs and tobacco anything different? They both cause serious health deficits and they're both addictive? Cigarettes being smuggled? Just like Marijuana being smuggled from Canada to the States almost everyday?

The Dutch study shows revenue for Netherlands I would believe. Tax revenue is quite a bit in Netherlands because the tax is also proportionately big and the average tax rates for Cigarettes in the United States is much lower.



Basically it comes down to this:
1. We both agree that we should tax smokers/drug users to the extent that it should cover the medical expenses and what not.

2. You are OK with legalizing incest.
I don't care either way.

3. You are OK with paying for the medical costs for children defects or prevention as the result of these incestuous relationships because the cost is insignificant.
I say they should pay their own way.

Regarding facts and figures, I can't find the info (*too lazy*) to back up my argument nor to debunk yours. So in the end, it's just a difference in opinion and no more than that.



Agree to disagree...


2165 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / F / in ur head
Offline
Posted 3/15/08
they shouldnt DO IT... products of incest would greatly suffer... a lifetime of suffering for a moment of pleasure... nupz.. duznt sound fair to me.. itd be okay if the ones who had that moment of pleasure were the only ones who'd suffer.. at least they know what they're in for but those little kids never had a choice!!! T_T
Posted 3/15/08
I can`t say I`m for it or against it . It doesn`t involve me so , why should I care ?
People are selfish . They only care about they want and need . It`d be weird
for siblings to love each other in that way but if that`s what they want , I`ll leave
them to do what they want .
Posted 3/15/08

sypris wrote:

If a bro and a sis want to tap eachother it doesnt effect me at all so who cares? I always wanted to see a baby with 3 arms a tale and no ears.


It can't do that, the only reason close family members usually have children with birth defects is because of the gene pool and the types of genes that are too close. Its like saying you can't have too much of a good thing. You also will have more and more of the same genes pairing up, it might take probably 2 generations for incest to really start causing problems if it is done in each.
263 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / F
Offline
Posted 3/15/08
I believe that it would take more than two generations unless there was some bad recessive gene in the family... And it would be highly unlikely that a brother and a sister have a kid who has sex with his sister, has a kid and that kid has sex with his sister and they have a kid again. Besides who knows, maybe there could be some good gene that makes the baby extremely healthy? If I remember correctly then the biggest problem with small gene pools would be that it makes adjust to the enviroment.

With animals people use incest to bring out the good genes and it is done a lot. Expecially when dealing with rarer species or breeds. It does happen in nature too. Male lions have to leave their prides so that incest doesn't happen, but if a strong male leads one pride long enough it will eventually have sex with its own daughters... And if it is strong enough to lead the pride that long it has good genes to pass on to the cubs.

But here is a though that came to me when people said that having sex with our relatives is irresponsible because the babies will be deformed (lol): Does that mean that retarded or deformed people can't have babies either? Or people with hereditary illnesses? Would a parent with diabetes or cancer be irresponsible?

Don't take this post too seriously, I'm tired and I am having problems expressing myself in english.
37756 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / アメリカ
Offline
Posted 3/16/08

WarriorsCreed wrote:


sypris wrote:

If a bro and a sis want to tap eachother it doesnt effect me at all so who cares? I always wanted to see a baby with 3 arms a tale and no ears.


It can't do that, the only reason close family members usually have children with birth defects is because of the gene pool and the types of genes that are too close. Its like saying you can't have too much of a good thing. You also will have more and more of the same genes pairing up, it might take probably 2 generations for incest to really start causing problems if it is done in each.


I cant believe you took that comment seriously. I bet your the type that thinks gullible isnt in the dictionary.
610 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / F / Hong Kong
Offline
Posted 3/19/08
even if incest is legalized, bros and sis wouldnt wanna do it because they wouldnt have that type of feeling towards each other...i guess? well most of them at least. it's really up to them n their lives.
238 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Some City In New...
Offline
Posted 3/19/08
WOOHOO, CHROMOSONALLY CHALLENGED CHILDREN!
I love kids being born with clubbed feet.

(sarcasm)
238 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Some City In New...
Offline
Posted 3/19/08
And seriously, the south is fucked up enough already, we don't need another major fuck up like this one.
4590 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Colorado
Offline
Posted 3/19/08
Well...err...yea thats just awkward.
Sure, if fucked up siblings want to screw in their house, more power to em. Just dont make me have to hear it, see it, or know about it...please...
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.