if you allow gay marriage, what is the justification for not letting two sisters marry?
50 comments
You're right!
And if you let a man and a woman marry, why not just let a brother and a sister marry?
Astounding logic, maestro!
"if you allow gay marriage, what is the justification for not letting two sisters marry?"
Each other or someone else? If it's the former I don't see why it should need to be explained and if it's the latter they already can.
Why do I need to justify a ban I don't actually care to implement? Consenting adults should be allowed to form whatever personal relationships and living arrangement they want with other consenting adults. It's unfortunate the government wanted to get involved by giving tax benefits to certain of those living arrangements and not others with no clear explanation why other than completely arbitrary lip-service to religion and "tradition." This is government's mess to clean up, but aside from that, I really don't care if two sisters of adult age wish to live with each other and get intimate once in a while. It may be "weird" or "unusual" or any of a number of other vague, ambiguous adjectives, but what it is not is any of the rest of our businesses.
... Well, when you think about it, lesbians couldn't reproduce with each other anyway, so it wouldn't be inbreeding.
You raise a good point, mr p.
BTW it is clever question. He was able to get around both usuall answers ("consenting adults" and "inbreeding"). And I haven't seen any real answers to him yet.
And I, personally, really cann't see any significant difference here.
This isn't fundie, you guys. He brings up a great point.
It's just like when women got the vote, and now we have DOGS voting! And now that interracial marriage is illegal, people are marrying hamsters and fire hydrants!
OH WAIT
And if you ban gay marriage, then what is the justification for letting people with different colored eyes marry?
You make about as much sense, asshole.
there is no justification for not letting two sisters marry.
as long as they both do it with informed consent, and no children come out of it, there is nothing wrong with any incestuous relationship.
Incest laws?
Inbreeding avoidance occurs naturally when people are raised together in a sibling-like relationship. If people raised as siblings are then sexually attracted to each other, I would conclude that something is wrong psychologically. I would get them some help, not encourage them to marry "since they can't breed anyway". By your argument, since heterosexual marriage is legal: if a brother and sister wanted to marry, but were infertile what is the justification for not letting them?
I really don't care anymore. Want to marry your sister, fine. Want to marry your goat, well it seems bestiality is legal in 20 states. Want to marry your washing machine, go for it. I'm just tired of the fucking argument.
Interesting point, actually.
Brother-sister marriage is illegal because of the high probability of producing children with defects, but with sister-sister marriages there isn't that problem....
I would guess, though I don't have figures, that the number of brother-brother or sister-sister homosexual couples is probably very small.
Incest is wrong because of the emotional and psychological damage it can cause, in addition to the genetic issues involved. Societies all over the world condemn incest, and that should be a clue that something's wrong with it.
We could defend cannibalism in the same manner -- "I don't see anything wrong with it (as long as there isn't murder involved) and it's just protein anyhow, right?" And yet most societies (admittedly not all) severely condemn and punish it because the majority of people in the world find cannibalism revolting. Same with incest. Not all cultural taboos are wrong; sometimes they're right.
to #664722
"Homosexuality is wrong because of the emotional and psychological damage it can cause, in addition to the childrenlessness issues involved. Societies all over the world condemn homosexuality, and that should be a clue that something's wrong with it."
And how it is different from your words?
Huh? Two sisters? Ya mean Nuns ?
But they're already married to christ, aren't they? Wouldn't that be big of me?
Incest is fine as far as I'm concerned, Consenting adults only though.
Reproduction I have still not been convinced would lead to mutations. Only a higher chance of mutation. And as I was informed that normally only happens over repeated in breeding over generations. Though even a higher chance from the single example wouldn't be that bad, since next generation their kid will find someone else probably, but whatever.
Most of my siblings are only half related heh, of course I hate them all.
While that marriage would still be illegal that coupling is a possible outcome of the slippery slope.
Giving Gay couples all the legal benifits of straight couples has come about mainly because of financial benefits being denied to gay couples who are devoted and emotionally tied to their partner. Being legally married is the only path to those benefits.
Many siblings never marry and live together their whole lives, depend on each other and care deeply for each other. Technically unmarried unions will have to be addressed as entitled to benefits denied to them.
Legally there's actually one foot on that slope right now.
Because marriage isn't about sex legally, it's about a legally-binding union. Sisters are not legally bound to each other but fit the criteria of a couple if they've commited their lives, their home and their day to day life to each other
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.