Category: Let's talk
There's a class-action suit, AS I WRITE, by a mother and son of ONE family, a father and daughter of ANOTHER, joining with a MOTHER AND DAUGHTER, and FINALLY, a FATHER AND SON of TWO OTHERS, and ALL TOGETHER, their suit, which there's a copy of below, reads like this:
"WE, the (EX) and the (EX) families of (EX-LOCATION) hereby sue on the grounds of OUT-AND-OUT DISCRIMINATION, brought on by the BLATANT REFUSAL to accept us in a public facility, after learning that we're incestuous heterosexual, homosexual, and Lesbeian couples, who are LEGALLY-CONSENTUAL ADULTS, minding our OWN business, staying out of OTHERS' way, thus, doing unto OTHERS that what has NOT been done to US in RETURN, which is EXACTLY the VERY REASON FOR THIS SUIT, as we're in FULL CONTROL of demanding OUR RIGHTS--AFTER ALL, if the NON-BIOLOGICALLY-RELATED GAYS AND LESBEIANS have gone as far as to be able to obtain a LEGAL MARRIAGE LICENSE in various areas of this country, WE'RE just as PERSISTANTLY DETERMINED to have that VERY SAME RIGHT, despite ANY/ALL the concerns of if within the HETEROSEXUAL-INCESTUOUS COUPLE, that the woman, pregnant, might stand the risk of giving birth to a poorly developed child, when in FACT, chances of such of the same thing happening in HETEROSEXUAL NON-INCESTUOUS FAMILIES would be GREATER."
Now, you may CERTAINLY BREATHE AN EXTREMELY HUGE SIGH OF RELIEF, as this is ONLY a FICTITIOUS REPORT, but this DOES bring out the VERY ABSOLUTE VALID POINT of JUST HOW OUR SYSTEM ACTUALLY IS, as it's ALWAYS PROOVEN TO BE, TIME AND TIME AGAIN, and for as LONG as this system lasts, don't EVER BE SURPRISED if such ever DOES happen, and the VERY SAME ARTICULATED PROTEST LINES that brought out the gays and Lesbeians, AS BOLD AS ANY BOLD-WRITTEN LETTER COULD BE, enough to DEMAND FULL RECOGNITION AS LITTERALLY MARRIED COUPLES, the ABSOLUTE RIGHT to even LEGALLY ADOPT, ETC., would NO DOUBT, work for THESE cases--I mean, the COMPLETE MADNESS just NEVER ENDS!
NATURALLY, any BROTHER/SISTER INCESTUOUS COUPLE may as well join the "NICK-NACK-PADDY-WAGON," along with the REST.
"Well, why do YOU care?" you JUST MIGHT ask. "If THEY'RE not bothering YOU, and infringing on YOUR right to be the person that YOU wanna be, leave THEM alone, so that they can live lives that make THEM the people that THEY'RE happy with being--AFTER ALL, doesn't ""YOUR BIBLE" say: ""JUDGE NOT, lest YE are judged?""
LET'S CALL THIS A CLASSIC EXAMPLE, AMONG OTHERS, of making ACCEPTABLE what's WRONG, and REJECTABLE what's RIGHT.
again, for the third timeI have told you this, wrong, fucking, board!!
No, it's the 300TH time; if it ISN'T, it WILL be--PLUS MORE THAN THAT; TRUST me.
So, I'm confused...Are you supporting this or taking a stand against it? I hope you're against it, because, if nothing else, it's a shame to bring a child into the world who didn't ask to be born with birth defects, not to mention what they would go through in school if the other kids knew about their home situation, and anyway it's disturbing, there's a reason that family relationships and sexual relationships are separate. They should never be combined. I don't even know what else to say. I normally don't advocate against love, but really, how can you even see a relative as someone attractive after growing up with them, and probably fighting with them for half your life? I don't get it, but to each their own I guess. I actually knew a brother/sister couple, and they were weird in general, so I wonder if you woul have preexisting emotional problems to want to do something like that. But I'm not condemning it, after all, because when you do that, you condemn yourself, because only God has the right to judge people, I'm just looking at it from a moral point of view, and hopefully I'm not offending anyone.
Well, the scenario was a bit confusing to me. If I'm understanding it correctly, it involves incestuous family members? First of all, incest has been proven to lead to sexual, emotional and physical problems later in life. As far as the birth defects go, I believe a child's right to life, even if it is a short one, is far better than not letting the child even be born. I was three months premature, and now I am a healthy well-adjusted woman. I know that my blindness is far less severe than other types of birth defects. However, I do not believe of bringing a child into the world in a situation that could lead to future consequences for society including possible sexual crimes. I think it would be in the child's best interest to be placed with a foster family. I once heard that love means doing what is best for the beloved. Bringing up a child in an incestuous household hardly qualifies as as being in the best interest of the child.
The poster is against incestuous relationships. From what I interpreted from the original post, the writer was stating that if society allows homosexuals to marry, then it's only one more step to allow people in ancestuous relationships to marry.
One of the major unfortunate results of ancestuous relationships can be, as already stated, the birth of children with severe physical or mental defects. To answer the poster's question, I hope our society doesn't go so far as to legalize incestuous relationships. It's not good for the offspring of the relationship, and, as another poster said, people in incestuous relationships often end up with severe emotional problems.
Our mores are crumbling, let's hope we don't fall to that standard. I'm not a prude, I just don't like to see people injured and children born with disabilities and/or defects because they are innocent and the byproduct of what the parents have done.
I'll second that oppinion. Our mores are definitely changing, and not for the better in my oppinion. Family is such an important component for society. The absence of a stable family can lead to many sociological problems such as poverty, a lower education level, poor self-esteme, and drug/alcohol abuse. I'm not saying that everyone who comes from a less-than-perfect family will have any of these issues, but the risk is certainly greater. I am a huge proponent of what most people would call a traditional family. The disolution of this type of family, in my opinion has led to a meltdown for our society. If something doesn't change, I'm afraid things will be even more chaotic. I am an optimist though and I believe things will steadily improve.
I'll third it. HOwever, there is a big difference between consenting unrelated homosexual adults being together and between incest. The idea of comparing them is so ridiculous that we might as well bring bestiality into the picture. Seriously, just because certain people may not agree with a particular life style, turning it into a mockery or bringing up invalid points will not prove your argument. Furthermore, neither will religion. everyone has their own faith, so trying to use any religion to declare what is universally right is invalid in itself.
In the Bible Many people married their cousins and so on. I wouldn't say brother or sister relationships are right, but if it's a little farther down the line I don't see a problem with it. Psychological problems for the child growing up of an incestual family? How so? If the child is loved and taken care of then all is well. You are only saying that because other people would see it as wrong and make fun of them? What about homosexuality? You have the same types of people that are totally against this and will make fun of a child for having gay parents. It's not natural, and 2 gays can't ahve a child. They either have to ahve another mans sperm, or a woman egg. I mean then it really isn't truely your own child flesh and blood. If gay was right then you wouldn't have to have another person get your pregnant or carry your child. JMO.
There are reasons why there are laws against gay marriage. Where do you draw the line?
City Hall in San Francisco ( A scene at City Hall in San Francisco )
"Next."
"Good morning. We want to apply for a marriage license."
"Names?"
"Tim and Jim Jones."
"Jones? Are you related? I see a resemblance."
"Yes, we're brothers."
"Brothers? You can't get married."
"Why not? Aren't you giving marriage licenses to same gender couples?"
"Yes, thousands. But we haven't had any siblings. That's incest!"
"Incest?" No, we are not gay."
"Not gay? Then why do you want to get married?"
"For the financial benefits, of course. And we do love each other.
Besides, we don't have any other prospects."
"But we're issuing marriage licenses to gay and lesbian couples who've been denied equal protection under the law. If you are not gay, you can get married to a woman."
"Wait a minute. A gay man has the same right to marry a woman as I have.
But just because I'm straight doesn't mean I want to marry a woman. I want to marry Jim."
"And I want to marry Tim, Are you going to discriminate against us just because we are not gay?"
"All right, all right. I'll give you your license. Next."
"Hi. We are here to get married."
"Names?"
"John Smith, Jane James, Robert Green, and June Johnson."
"Who wants to marry whom?"
"We all want to marry each other."
"But there are four of you!"
"That's right. You see, we're all bisexual. I love Jane and Robert, Jane loves me and June, June loves Robert and Jane, and Robert loves June and me. All of us getting married together is the only way that we can express our sexual preferences in a marital relationship."
"But we've only been granting licenses to gay and lesbian couples."
"So you're discriminating against bisexuals!"
"No, it's just that, well, the traditional idea of marriage is that it's just for couples."
"Since when are you standing on tradition?"
"Well, I mean, you have to draw the line somewhere."
"Who says? There's no logical reason to limit marriage to couples. The more the better. Besides, we demand our rights! The mayor says the constitution guarantees equal protection under the law. Give us a marriage license!"
"All right, all right. Next."
"Hello, I'd like a marriage license."
"In what names?"
"David Deets."
"And the other man?"
"That's all. I want to marry myself."
"Marry yourself? What do you mean?"
"Well, my psychiatrist says I have a dual personality, so I want to marry the two together. Maybe I can file a joint income-tax return."
"That does it! I quit!! You people are making a mockery of marriage!!"
Nightbird's DEFINITELY ON THE MONEY: OF COURSE, I'm ABSOLUTELY, DOGMATICALLY OPPOSED to HOMOSEXUALITY, as I would be to "INCESTUALITY," if you will, BESTIALITY, and SO ON, BUT who am I to judge ANYONE that might be living THOSE VERY LIFE-STYLES? It CAN, HAS, IS, and STILL WOULD BE POSSIBLE, to NOT condemn those, LIVING the life-styles, WITHOUT EVER CONDONING the life-styles. Anyone that claims that such is impossible to DO, CLEARLY MISSES THE MARK, because being that it WOULD be no PERSONAL CONDEMNATION, WITHOUT NO "BEHAVIOR-CONDONATION," would be the ONLY ABSOLUTE MEANING of "TOLLERANCE" of one another.
The poster of POST 10, HOWEVER, had me TOTALLY OUT OF MY SEAT, DEFINITELY (LMAOL)! You just GOTTA do MORE of that ... BESIDES, on SUNDAY, while we're at it, JUNE 29, which is OBVIOUSLY THIS Sunday that's coming UP, here in New York City will be the "GAY PRIDE" parade; now, JUST IMAGINE that ALL THESE OTHER "ABOVE-MENTIONED-ALTERNATIVE-LIFESTYLES" GROUPS, having their OWN parades, should ANY/ALL SUCH should ever decide to suddenly be out of THEIR closets? How is it that HETEROSEXUALS don't have any "STRAIGHT PRIDE" parades? Don't you think we should?
First of all, this topic belongs in New and Views. Not, Let's Talk. It belongs in the board wher you would discuss such topics as this, not general chat and funny surveys, okay? Second of all, don't ask me for my oppinion until you put the topic in the right board. It's disturbing, nonetheless.
"SunshineAndRain," or WHATEVER WEATHER-CONDITION that YOUR CONDITION is in, I want you to read the FOLLOWING "ZONE"-ADMIN. quotation, which TOTALLY DEFINES MY "PROACTIVE REACTION" to YOU:
"Please note that we prefer not to censor our members thoughts, and believe in freedom of speech. There are options to ignore most forms of communication if you choose not to participate, and we encourage you to make your own decisions as to what you view as acceptable content. We are not your parents."
THIS means, QUITE OBVIOUSLY, that since this IS a "G-E-N-E-R-A-L, GEN-ER-AL" BOARD, where ANY/ALL TOPIC/TOPICS of ANY/ALL NATURE is ABSOLUTELY FREE to NOT ONLY be POSTED, but to ALSO REMAIN, PERMINENTLY, my ONLY QUESTION to YOU is: if you've read OTHERS' posted comments that were posted here, and ABSOLUTELY none of THEM were SUDDENLY FATALLY STRUCK by a bolt of lightning, whether SIMULTANEOUSLY or SEPARATELY for having DONE so, who/what makes YOU any better for NOT doing so, YOURSELF, as YOU, YOURSELF, are NO MORE OUR PARENT, than the "ZONE" admins. are OUR PARENTS, to stop us?
post 13 was not diminishing your right to free speach, so there was no point in posting the sensorship and free speach claws of the homepage. but sunshine and rain is right this belongs in news and views, but this was already moved once before from the writers block board. so I have to wonder, why you post in there and not look for the right board. or are you just putting in a random place, are you too lazy to look at the board discription, and just post at the first place that strikes your fancy?
insest, and homosexuality, I make no comment on the first, and the second I am for it, seeing as how I am a homosexual, and if you don't like it, then tough. I really don't care what anyone says about me anyway.
how does this belong in news and views? it's not an article for newsbreaking. It was just a sinario that the op made. This board is fine for this kind of post...otherwise a moderator would have already stepped in and moved it. Sunshine and rain, are you a mod? Obviously not or you would have moved it. So I don't think you should be telling people where they can and can not post something.
it might not be news, but it is someone's view on something. but oh well.
WELL, DRAGONFLY, OBVIOUSLY, YOU don't seem to pay attention too well. I SAID: "I'm ABSOLUTELY, DOGMATICALLY OPPOSED to HOMOSEXUALITY, as I would be to ""INCESTUALITY," if you will, BESTIALITY, and SO ON, BUT who am I to judge ANYONE that might be living THOSE VERY LIFE-STYLES? It CAN, HAS, IS, and STILL WOULD BE POSSIBLE, to NOT condemn those, LIVING the life-styles, WITHOUT EVER CONDONING the life-styles. Anyone that claims that such is impossible to DO, CLEARLY MISSES THE MARK, because being that it WOULD be no PERSONAL CONDEMNATION, WITHOUT NO ""BEHAVIOR-CONDONATION," would be the ONLY ABSOLUTE MEANING of ""TOLLERANCE" of one another." If you WERE paying FULL, UNDISTRACTED ATTENTION, and I JUST SO HAPPENED to have misjudged you for NOT doing so, how is it that you took PERSONALLY the above-repeated statement? THAT'S PRETTY DAMN AMAZING, if you really ask ME!
well then, my god life for fuck, you are a complete and total hypocrit.
And you DO have ABSOLUTE, SUBSTANCIAL EVIDENCE, as given in ALL of MY ABOVE-SUBMITTED POSTS as SOLID BACK-UP; do you NOT, DRAGON-PISS?
This is the general category, for discussions (or drag out fights as they might become.) I think this is as good a place as any. If the board's placement into this category really bothered everyone so much, they should use the report post form. There hasn't been a one report.
Just as I've ALWAYS SAID: they love the abuse, so QUITE OBVIOUSLY, they'd wanna come back for MORE--OF COURSE, they don't want THIS, as well as ANY/ALL OTHER "PISS-OFF" MESSAGES, PAST, PRESENT, AND/OR FUTURE, to be taken down, because THEY'RE afraid of LITTERALLY DYING, due to "LACK OF ANNOYANCE." HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!
mygodchosenbride&i4lifefinally
, do you like abuse?
You must...you post in this foolish way...I personally feel that you are an antisocial piss-ant.
P.S. I agree with tiffanitsa.
actually, this topic was origionally reported along with the my telaspace one because they were already in the wrong board once before.
and appearently he does like abuse, and, yes, his writing does make me cringe. but what ever.
I'm done.
I like the amusingness of this all, and don't bitch about that not being a word, I, don't, care!
I like (LOVE) being THE ABUSER, CONTINUOUSLY, OVER AND OVER, RELENTLESS, REPENTLESS AND DEFINITELY UNSCATHED, you WORTHLESS IMPS!
By the way, POST 22'S POINT, EXACTLY! YOU PEOPLE, or PEOPLE-LIKE-EXCUSES-OF-EXISTENCE (or ANCE--WHATEVER the FUCKIN' FUCK), would TOTALLY CEASE TO EXIST, the VERY MOMENT that they could NO LONGER BE DRIVEN TO REACT, RESPONSIVELY, or is it "RESPOND, REACTIVELY?", to any/all of the "BAIT" that I keep MERCILESSLY "BAITING" them with, and I'VE discovered that "NEW FISH" are biting! MMMMMMMMM! LOVE the sound of THAT!
You fool, you actually are trying to prove that you are smarter than us?
Well, let's do it this way:
I'm calling you out...you've met your match. You want to go toe to toe with someone...well...here I am you silley little toadstool.
This outa get interesting.
yall people havent been taught social skills the orginator of this topic is one of them. and will never listen cause he is a spoiled bratt.
odviously, and yes this should get very interesting soon, smerks knowingly.
No, I happen to have social skills unlike this post's author.
I meant to say some people but was kinda preoccupied sorry if i seemed to indecate anyone.
SEE? TOLD YA! These "FISH" will ALWAYS "BITE THE BAIT," especially YOU, "MUDCROCK, or WHATEVER the fuck your SHIT IS--I NEVER, EVER, EVER, in LIFE, have to PROOVE ANYTHING about ME, so if ANYONE'S prooving ME "SMARTER" than you "CURSED CREATURES of ALL CREATION," YOU'RE the one that's "prooving me FOR me." I don't have that ability--AFTER ALL, you CERTAINLY taught me how to take "COMMON SPELLING" to an ENTIRELY OTHER LEVEL! GONE, FOREVERMORE, are the days of spelling "SILLEY" as "SILLY," thanks to "MUSHMOUSE!" I could've NEVER done THAT! IN FACT, if THE BOTH OF US were given a test to see if our ability to spell would be like, if I spelled the word "DOG" and YOU spelled "DOGG," the conductor of this test, who'd be JUST AS SMART as YOU are, would DEFINITELY give YOU the HIGHEST SCORE for having spelled "CORRECTLY," according to BOTH of you "WHIZ WASTES!"
You are the most retarded creature I have ever had the misfortune to meet.
LIKEWISE, "DRAG-HAG!"