Quote:
Originally posted by pirepresent
I see what you're saying, about how some could think this would lead the way for incest, etc. Where should the line be drawn? The line between homosexuality and incest is VERY clear however - homosexuality harms NOTHING (aside from the people who are opposed to it). Incest has serious, often severe genetic consequences. If two closely related people have children, such extremely similar DNA from both parents causes serious defects.
So there's the line. But homosexuals can't even have children, unless they adopt. So why, why can't we just let them have each other and share the happiness of being married?
|
The line on incest is not as clear as you might think. As long as one partner is sterile, and the sex is CONSENSUAL as well....
Let me break it down for you people that only define incest as sex that can produce offspring or sex between parents and little children:
Father/son = no babies
Mother/daughter = no babies
Sister/sister = no babies
Brother/brother = no babies
Mother/son + one of them sterile = no babies
Father/daughter + one of them sterile = no babies
These folks will be wanting to add their relationships to the civil union services too.
Threaded Mode