Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!
You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!
this kind of thinking scares. makes me wonder when people will start knocking down doors for beastiality. not comparing the two. just sayin...Just because it's different it's critisized.
I think that if this will make them happy, let them do it. It's their decision.
This whole thing is completely and horribly disgusting and pretty wrong, but I just think that if they're in love, they're in love and there is nothing that you can do about it.this kind of thinking scares. makes me wonder when people will start knocking down doors for beastiality. not comparing the two. just sayin...
gotta have a limit somewhere
I'm honestly not sure what point you're even making with this post but, while a limit is certainly necessary, I don't think incest should cross the legal line. Beastiality is always exploitation, but incestual sex isn't necessarily. If both relatives are of age, and practice protected sex , it should not be up to the law to decide anything. The problem only comes with procreating.this kind of thinking scares. makes me wonder when people will start knocking down doors for beastiality. not comparing the two. just sayin...
gotta have a limit somewhere
Stop being a fencesitter. Is it wrong or is it not wrong?This whole thing is completely and horribly disgusting and pretty wrong, but I just think that if they're in love, they're in love and there is nothing that you can do about it.
What I'm saying that what they are doing it unordinary, but we shouldn't descriminate them for loving each other.Stop being a fencesitter. Is it wrong or is it not wrong?
My sentiments exactly.[vomit] What an awful background this child will have. [/vomit]
No, no it doesn't. It wiggles. That's different.wow.... and looking at the political spectrum (don't ask, my teacher made us study that), they aren't that far to the right to begin with
EDIT: So you're saying that you should kill the kid if he comes out stupid? Have you ever SEEN a video of a fetus while its being aborted? It actually fends for its life in there... that wouldn't be right bro.
Also, being bad at math isn't a problem. If you're bad at math, it just means you have no aptitude with numbers. Take me, I'm horrible at math, but it isn't a problem as if you had a deformity (I have no idea what hemophilia is) and that would mean that the person has an aptitude for something else, like I'm more of an artistic type.
Agreed times 100000000.No, no it doesn't. It wiggles. That's different.
The abortion debate is way too complex to resove in the smashboards pool room, so I'm basically figuring that it's okay for these people to get an abortion if the society they live in deems it okay, which I'm guessing it does.
Being bad at math is a problem. There's no positive side to not being able to think logically. It's not like being better at math makes you worse at art or something. Like, if you learned calculus, you wouldn't stop being able to think creatively.
I don't think it's consistent to have a problem with this couple procreating (assuming the risk of disorder is significant) but then turn around and claim it's okay for stupid or weak people to procreate. I'd say the latter is much, much worse.
It is the parents' fault.It's not the parent's fault that the kid will have it rough.
All of these "society will see it as bad so they're selfish" arguments can be used to prevent interracial couples from having children as well, or hell even people with big ears shouldn't have kids according to this line of reasoning.
It's a bad argument.
Exactly what I've been trying to explain.It is the parents' fault.
They are choosing to put the child into a bad situation, I don't see how it could be anyone else's fault.
It isn't bad because society will see it as bad, it's bad because they're putting their child into bad circumstances.
Well at least depending on your perspective, that could call for some unique family get togethers.Easiest thing: you don't.
edit: unless you want to get in your son/daughter's pants, then it could be a nice segue.
I'm guessing we don't have a law on murder mostly because it's immoral in the eyes of most of the population thus eliminating the need to waste time making an unnecessary law.I'm guessing we don't have an incest law mostly because it's immoral in the eyes of most of the population thus eliminating the need to waste time making an unnecessary law.
Are you being serious? This is one of the most baffingly stupid posts I've read on this forum...and I've read TONSI'm guessing we don't have an incest law mostly because it's immoral in the eyes of most of the population thus eliminating the need to waste time making an unnecessary law.
Is this sarcasm or something? Murder is against the law. it's not just some "unspoken rule" ._.Would you make a law on murder? No because it's an unspoken rule that YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO KILL ANYONE
I'd still make a lawI'm just saying, would you make a law that mostly everybody was against?
Would you make a law on murder? No because it's an unspoken rule that YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO KILL ANYONE
So you're saying laws on murder can be removed without any consequences? ._.I'm just saying, would you make a law that mostly everybody was against?
Would you make a law on murder? No because it's an unspoken rule that YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO KILL ANYONE
Are you, like, trolling or something?I'm just saying, would you make a law that mostly everybody was against?
Would you make a law on murder? No because it's an unspoken rule that YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO KILL ANYONE
I'm just saying, would you make a law that mostly everybody was against?
Would you make a law on murder? No because it's an unspoken rule that YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO KILL ANYONE
I'm just saying, would you make a law that mostly everybody was against?
Would you make a law on murder? No because it's an unspoken rule that YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO KILL ANYONE
I'm just saying, would you make a law that mostly everybody was against?
Would you make a law on murder? No because it's an unspoken rule that YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO KILL ANYONE
I'm just saying, would you make a law that mostly everybody was against?
Would you make a law on murder? No because it's an unspoken rule that YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO KILL ANYONE
hahahahahaha
I guess it's not so...uh, strange if you take that into account. They were strangers when they met, so it wasn't as if they had a grandparent-grandchild relationship to begin with.Her lover is the son of Pearl's daughter Lynette Bailey - who she put up for adoption when she was 18-years-old.
When his mother passed away, Phil tracked down his long lost grandmother and they quickly fell in love.
Yeah. I guess that's the best way to look at it. I don't care about the incest (really), but do they really need to have a kid together? They could just adopt. Genetic diseases have a high occurrence when the parents are so closely related.Omg... I can't imagine how this could turn
out well. But good luck to them, I suppose. >.>
Why is he looking at him like that?
Because it's funnyWhy is he looking at him like that?
They're going through a surrogate. It's not related to the grandmother as she's certainly too old to have viable eggs.Yeah. I guess that's the best way to look at it. I don't care about the incest (really), but do they really need to have a kid together? They could just adopt. Genetic diseases have a high occurrence when the parents are so closely related.
No clue at all but my theory is the guy that is about to sit down just revealed he is having a child with the grandmother of the guy behind him.Why is he looking at him like that?
Sig'd.YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO KILL ANYONE
So you mean to say there should be no laws because some people break them anyways?Sig'd.
Anyway, laws don't stop people from doing anything. Laws just put consequences to actions. People still don't listen. People are stupid.
Just watch the news. You hear about murder, ****, kidnapping, thieving, and more all of the time.
So, would a law stop anything? Would it even pass?
Probably not.
i see where your coming from but i dont think thats what he meansSo you mean to say there should be no laws because some people break them anyways?