First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next  Last
Post Reply Sweden party wants to make incest and necrophilia legal
73302 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34 / M / Atlanta, GA
Offline
Posted 4/5/17
I'm of the opinion that these are very bizarre practices but if it's between consenting adults or people who registered to have their cadaver used this way then we probably shouldn't seek to jail people for it, especially if there's no real victims other than the people who willingly consented to it in the first place.

When I say real victim I mean someone that suffered harm because this harmed them and not someone who felt really embarrassed or something that's more like they didn't react to the news well and that caused them harm.
7259 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 4/5/17 , edited 4/5/17
HELL NO. THAT DISGUSTING. [MAKE NE WANT TO PUKE]
8369 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 4/5/17
This is what the world needs, more sexual libertinism
11396 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
29 / M / Clinton, NY
Offline
Posted 4/5/17 , edited 4/5/17

DaveyDafydd wrote:

These two support it!



28198 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / Kaguya's Panties
Offline
Posted 4/5/17 , edited 4/5/17
#IncestIsWincest

P.s. I'm joking, for those with the mentality of a potato.
17710 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
(´◔౪◔)✂❤
Offline
Posted 4/5/17 , edited 4/5/17

ProfessionalCamelThief wrote:

as a tibetan, i support necrophilia and incest. 100% way.
Why?
people who are into necrophilia are not into it by choice. They are born like that. The current system is punishing people for it.
This is not a mental disorder. Why? because what these people do behind their bedroom is all of their business. Also the consent from a dead person is really out of the question. You can ask consent from people who are alive. so as long as the person says no one can make love to me after i die, it should be like that, however if they say fuck me all you like, then necrophilia people could go all they want. Just cause you are sexually attracted to dead people doesnt mean you will go around raping all dead bodies. Just as you being attracted to opposite sex doesnt mean you will go raping everyone. This is why i support legalizing necrophilia. And that necrophilia people are not punished for being born like that.
I hope I do not live in an age where I have to explicitly state that I don't allow any person to pleasure themselves with my corpse.
210388 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / Antique bookshop
Offline
Posted 4/5/17
i think their country is too peaceful, so the government wish to create some dramas
1792 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / Spokane, Washingt...
Offline
Posted 4/5/17
OK, necrophilia, major eww!
Incest, slightly disturbing, but if both parties are consenting, I honestly could not give a fuck about people fucking in the privacy of their own lives.

It's all in the consent. Dead can't give consent, animals can't give consent, and children can't give consent. All of those need to be illegal.

Everything else, as fucked up as it may be, is still the choice of 2 (or more) consenting adults. Their choices aren't affecting anyone outside in any 'real' way. Note that your disgust or moral objection is just a feeling, thus not 'real' and not a physical problem.
45992 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / Jackson, MS
Offline
Posted 4/6/17
I'm fine with them wanting to make incest legal, and encourage them to do so, honestly. If it's between two consenting adults, then the government really shouldn't tell them they can't.

Necrophilia, on the other hand, no. Dead bodies can't consent to it.
182 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / My Desk
Offline
Posted 4/6/17
Me thinks they had too much marijuana. While they are at it they should implement LQBT+ Zones. I'd like to see some cuddling without said people getting interfered by a homophobic prick.
23819 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Oppai Hell
Offline
Posted 4/6/17
Consent is something that you can give beforehand, but more importantly, is something you have the ability to take away at any point.

Just saying.
23819 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Oppai Hell
Offline
Posted 4/6/17 , edited 4/6/17
I am not sure of the problem with incest, even with birth defects. If they want to have children despite that, that is their own responsibility. In any case, there has been many cases where people do procreate with serious inherited disabilities. Where we draw the line seems arbitrary in that regard.

I just do not care if someone wants to have babies with their sister. I think begetting children is a cross between a privilege and a right to have that privilege. The rates are not even that high.

Minsc 
82473 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
36 / M / PEI, Canada
Offline
Posted 4/6/17 , edited 4/6/17

PeripheralVisionary wrote:

I am not sure of the problem with incest, even with birth defects. If they want to have children despite that, that is their own responsibility. In any case, there has been many cases where people do procreate with serious inherited disabilities. Where we draw the line seems arbitrary in that regard.

I just do not care if someone wants to have babies with their sister. I think begetting children is a cross between a privilege and a right to have that privilege. The rates are not even that high.



What about when parents request taxpayer dollars to raise a child with disabilities brought upon by said incest? Where do we draw the line on which people with disabilities to help and which to leave behind? Siblings not having sex will reduce the chances of children with disabilities being produced. At least that is the common belief, and I see no need to question it. At the end of the day the idea of incest is either right or wrong, non of us ultimately have any authority in deciding which direction it is.

As for necrophilia, I'd put that in the same camp as having sex with sex toys, pinatas or toasters. Basically, nope.
11614 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Winnipeg, MB.
Offline
Posted 4/6/17

Minsc wrote:


PeripheralVisionary wrote:

I am not sure of the problem with incest, even with birth defects. If they want to have children despite that, that is their own responsibility. In any case, there has been many cases where people do procreate with serious inherited disabilities. Where we draw the line seems arbitrary in that regard.

I just do not care if someone wants to have babies with their sister. I think begetting children is a cross between a privilege and a right to have that privilege. The rates are not even that high.



What about when parents request taxpayer dollars to raise a child with disabilities brought upon by said incest? Where do we draw the line on which people with disabilities to help and which to leave behind? Siblings not having sex will reduce the chances of children with disabilities being produced. At least that is the common belief, and I see no need to question it. At the end of the day the idea of incest is either right or wrong, non of us ultimately have any authority in deciding which direction it is.


What about when parents request taxpayer dollars to raise a child with disabilities brought on by their inferior geneticpool that makes them more likely to have disabled children? Are we going to force sterilization so that we can keep our country's gene pool pure? Of course we're not because punishing people for their genetics is dozens of times more sick and wrong than incest is.

23819 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Oppai Hell
Offline
Posted 4/6/17 , edited 4/6/17

Minsc wrote:


PeripheralVisionary wrote:

I am not sure of the problem with incest, even with birth defects. If they want to have children despite that, that is their own responsibility. In any case, there has been many cases where people do procreate with serious inherited disabilities. Where we draw the line seems arbitrary in that regard.

I just do not care if someone wants to have babies with their sister. I think begetting children is a cross between a privilege and a right to have that privilege. The rates are not even that high.



What about when parents request taxpayer dollars to raise a child with disabilities brought upon by said incest? Where do we draw the line on which people with disabilities to help and which to leave behind? Siblings not having sex will reduce the chances of children with disabilities being produced. At least that is the common belief, and I see no need to question it. At the end of the day the idea of incest is either right or wrong, non of us ultimately have any authority in deciding which direction it is.

As for necrophilia, I'd put that in the same camp as having sex with sex toys, pinatas or toasters. Basically, nope.


So having sex with sex toys is wrong?

In any case, there are plenty of such examples of non incestuous disabilities and such being passed on. This is dangerously close to some twisted form of eugenics. In any case, the chances of incest defects are not at all very likely compared to such other disabilities and vulnerabilities. I really do not see why we should allow monetary concerns like this to forbid freedoms that will likely be less than 1% of the 35% dedicated to welfare budget anyway.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.