Incest is not good for procreation, but homosexual incest nullifies any concerns in that regard, making the premise of incest's taboo void in such a case.
So, if you have a problem with both, "two wrongs make a right".
Incest is not good for procreation, but homosexual incest nullifies any concerns in that regard, making the premise of incest's taboo void in such a case.
So, if you have a problem with both, "two wrongs make a right".
Well, that's more from a biological standpoint, but yeah.
From a social/cultural one... and as much as it's roots were originally a result of the biological you can't easily deny that at this point it is it's own entity... there's likely a fair amount of room for debate, but I'm certainly not going to be touching that, let alone here.
Incest is not good for procreation, but homosexual incest nullifies any concerns in that regard, making the premise of incest's taboo void in such a case.
So, if you have a problem with both, "two wrongs make a right".
Sir, I'm amazed by that statement. I haven't ever been laughing that hard while clapping my hands. Hey, 10/10.
Incest is not good for procreation, but homosexual incest nullifies any concerns in that regard, making the premise of incest's taboo void in such a case.
So, if you have a problem with both, "two wrongs make a right".
Technically, if you had a problem with homosexuality, then making it incestual wouldn't get you past your opposition to the topic... and if you don't have a problem with homosexuality, then there isn't "two wrongs".
Dakkan said:
Well, that's more from a biological standpoint, but yeah.
From a social/cultural one... and as much as it's roots were originally a result of the biological you can't easily deny that at this point it is it's own entity... there's likely a fair amount of room for debate, but I'm certainly not going to be touching that, let alone here.
In my college psychology class, they made us participate in experiments. One of them was a videotaped debate where the TA would try to make absurd arguments as a way of testing how people could argue back against them. One of the arguments I faced involved them trying to suggest there was nothing wrong with incest if they wore protection and promised not to let it affect their relationship from there on out. As was likely the intended effect, it was difficult to find a proper way to argue back just because it was the sort of argument I'd never put any thought into before, and therefore just had a strong sense of "that's wrong", but couldn't quickly get it into a coherent argument on the spot. (Eventually settling on attacking the "just because you say there's no change in relationship doesn't mean there won't be")
Incest is not good for procreation, but homosexual incest nullifies any concerns in that regard, making the premise of incest's taboo void in such a case.
So, if you have a problem with both, "two wrongs make a right".
But only if you have a problem with both. If is just one then everything go wrong.
I could ask you the same.It is!!Can you bear it if we don't?Definitely not...So we're really doing this?I'm your little sis, you know?Me neither!This is so embarrassing!Geez!!
