Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

My Modest Proposal (If homosexual marriage, then why not incest?)
The Toronto Sun ^ | March 13, 2003 | Michael Coren

Posted on 03/13/2004 9:58:11 AM PST by quidnunc

Gay couples all across North America are getting married. What a great symbol of tolerance.

In the name of that same tolerance, however, I believe we should go further and allow brothers and sisters to marry. In other words, incest should be not only allowed but recognized and affirmed by the state.

If you're not tolerant of this, quite clearly you should not be tolerated. Those of you who are shocked at first glance should take some time to consider what I'm saying.

Remember, there were at one time frightened and reactionary people who objected to marriage between homosexuals.

Sometimes progress can leave some wounded souls in its midst. That doesn't mean we can stand still.

When we come down to the core of this, it's about love. And when love is involved, nothing else really matters. Love is divine, love is all, love is everything. The love I have for my dog, for my favourite sports team, for my favourite food. If a brother and sister genuinely love one another, who are we to say they cannot be married?

Imagine the pain of Jane and John, in love since childhood. Then a thoughtless and cruel society tells them that because of some archaic tradition they should not be allowed to be happy. Jane's and John's feelings come first. If the majority is in some way offended, it is the majority that has to look within and adapt.

History is on my side on this one. Ancient cultures routinely encouraged incest and, indeed, used it to preserve aristocratic clans. It was only that hateful and outdated book known as the Bible that forbade such activities, and we all know that nobody takes Judeo-Christian values seriously any longer. Thank God. No, forget that. Thank my magic crystal.

-snip-

(Excerpt) Read more at canoe.ca ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Extended News
KEYWORDS: anarchy; civilrights; homosexualagenda; incest; lawrencevtexas; marriage; prisoners; slipperyslope
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-73 next last

1 posted on 03/13/2004 9:58:12 AM PST by quidnunc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: quidnunc
Sexualization of familial relations would be a disaster for children and the state should in no way permit or promote this.
2 posted on 03/13/2004 10:00:52 AM PST by Unam Sanctam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc
I wish that a freeper pair of same-sex siblings would get in line to get married, where ever licenses are being handed out to gays. It would provide a great bit of media, and put the stupidity of "gay marriage" into context. The judge would either allow the siblings to be married, or forbid it on the grounds of incest. Either way, traditional marriage would win the ensuing debate.
3 posted on 03/13/2004 10:01:35 AM PST by Travis McGee (----- www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com -----)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc
For once the State of Arkansas is in the forefront of societal evolution,
4 posted on 03/13/2004 10:02:07 AM PST by Jeff Chandler (Why the long face, John?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Unam Sanctam
I don't think he means it.
5 posted on 03/13/2004 10:03:28 AM PST by Jim Noble (Now you go feed those hogs before they worry themselves into anemia!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc
I assume you saw that The Netherlands (I believe) recently enacted legislation making beastiality illegal -- after some stranger was found in the middle of the night naked in a horse's pen. This is the natural progression of where the "gay marriage" movement is taking us.
6 posted on 03/13/2004 10:05:17 AM PST by ReleaseTheHounds
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc

San Francisco Marriage Stuffs
( 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!!"
7 posted on 03/13/2004 10:05:24 AM PST by WKB (3!~ Term Limits: Because politicians are like diapers., need to be changed for the same reason.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc
Does this mean I can now marry my favorite sheep? But wait - there's more - how about a polygamous marriage with sheep - would that qualify?


Naaaaaaaah.

8 posted on 03/13/2004 10:07:29 AM PST by M. Peach (eschew obfuscation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc
Well if gays can marry, why not anyone? My wife has been driving me crazy for most of the 32 years we have been married so I believe I shall divorce her and marry my daughter. My daughter is a good cook, very attractive and is much nicer to me than my wife. Besides she is adopted so no big deal ..... right?

............ may God forgive us this and all such foolishness ....

9 posted on 03/13/2004 10:07:43 AM PST by HoustonCurmudgeon (PEACE - Through Superior Firepower)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WKB
Got that by email last night, it must be moving fast! ;-)
10 posted on 03/13/2004 10:09:11 AM PST by HoustonCurmudgeon (PEACE - Through Superior Firepower)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc
There would be NO logical reason NOT to allow incest. If you didn't the perversion of incest would be discriminated against. Same would apply to polygamy and pedophilia if the age of consent is lowered.
11 posted on 03/13/2004 10:09:14 AM PST by nmh (Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HoustonCurmudgeon
I got it a few days ago but have been waiting for just
the right time to post it. This seemed to be it. :>)
12 posted on 03/13/2004 10:10:52 AM PST by WKB (3!~ Term Limits: Because politicians are like diapers., need to be changed for the same reason.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc
He left out an obvious argument in favor of incestuous marriage: we don't screen couples for latent genetic abnormalities that could patently affect their children. Why should brother-sister pairings be any different?

I fear the reductio ad absurdum argument simply doesn't work in a society where the absurd is triumphant. Then again, if absurdity is the norm, no argument whatsoever can prevail.

13 posted on 03/13/2004 10:11:28 AM PST by Dumb_Ox
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc
I asked that question of a gay guy who was doing a survey on gay marriage. His answer: I incest is against the law. I answered that gay marriage is against the law too.
14 posted on 03/13/2004 10:12:15 AM PST by BunnySlippers (Help Bring Colly-fornia Back ...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah
Ping


What We Can Do To Help Defeat the "Gay" Agenda


Homosexual Agenda: Categorical Index of Links (Version 1.1)


The Stamp of Normality

15 posted on 03/13/2004 10:12:59 AM PST by EdReform (Support Free Republic - All donations are greatly appreciated. Thank you for your support!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc
I was listening to The Savage Nation a couple of weeks ago. A lesbian called in to say homosexual "marriage" should be legal. When Savage started asking her, should you allow a brother and sister to marry? She said no. A father and a son, etc.. she said no to all except which one.. she thought 2 sisters should be allowed to marry!

It's a pity I don't remember it word for word, but wow.. it just shows the mental state they are in.
16 posted on 03/13/2004 10:13:01 AM PST by Trillian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc
In the name of that same tolerance, however, I believe we should go further and allow brothers and sisters to marry. In other words, incest should be not only allowed but recognized and affirmed by the state.

Wrong. There are no genetic issues to deal with when speaking of homosexuals marrying.

However, allowing brothers and sisters to marry would go a long way towards eliminating the usury Estate Tax.

17 posted on 03/13/2004 10:15:54 AM PST by Bloody Sam Roberts (If you can read this...you're too close.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Unam Sanctam
Sexualization of familial relations would be a disaster for children and the state should in no way permit or promote this.

That's the point. If marriage is about family, then homosexual marriages don't make sense. If it is NOT about family, then it is about anything and everything we want it to be. Everything is up for grabs -- Gender, quantity, familial relationship, species. Why only 2? Seems arbitrary to me. Me and my wife and my other wife, who is my sister, and our beloved dog, Skipper, have nothing but love -- it is that arbitrary and caprecious State that is not allowing us to have the legal relationship that matches our love.

18 posted on 03/13/2004 10:17:23 AM PST by freedumb2003 (Everyone is stupid! That is why they do all those stupid things! -- H. Simpson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc
Wants to marry chair
19 posted on 03/13/2004 10:21:10 AM PST by jwalburg (Gimli supports Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HoustonCurmudgeon
Haven't seen much discussion of how young a person can be and get married. I remember a girl in Michigan that got married at 14 with her parents permission. ("Had to.") Could two 14 year old boys marry each other with their parents permission? How about a 14 year old boy and a 55 year old man? That's where this is all headed, is it not?
20 posted on 03/13/2004 10:24:31 AM PST by Poincare
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc
Hey, what about Polygamy, bestiality with consenting donkeys or goats, mono-wedding (marriage between split personalities), marriage between a living and a dead person and, last but not least, marriages between infants?

21 posted on 03/13/2004 10:25:28 AM PST by Bismarck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc
I'm not sure what brought on this out-pouring of affection that we have been witness to, but with the attendant lemming-rush to the coast, couldn't someone have removed the guard rails on the coast highway?
22 posted on 03/13/2004 10:25:34 AM PST by WhiteyAppleseed (John Kerry was narrowly edged out by Leonard Zelig in Woody Allen's film "Zelig".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee
I wish that a freeper pair of same-sex siblings would get in line to get married...

(this is a repeat post, but indulge me for the sake of other lurkers/posters)

A few weeks ago, I heard attorney Gloria Allred SPEECHLESS and stumbling for about
30 seconds.

Mark Taylor (her former on-air partner at KABC 790AM in Los Angeles) was guest-hosting
at KKLA 99.5FM and interviewing Allred about gay marriage.
Taylor asked why the "equal treatment" scheme wouldn't open the door to "incest marriages".
Gloria triumphantly said that couldn't happen because of all sorts of public policy
prohibitions, especially against the unfortunate production of inbred offspring.

Then Taylor slammed Allred to the mat: "How can you deny two brothers a marriage license?
They obviously won't be birthing any inbred offspring!"

The momentary silence, then the stumbling speech of Allred (in managing to
NOT answer the question and quickly switch the subject) was...
PRICELESS.
23 posted on 03/13/2004 10:25:43 AM PST by VOA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Bloody Sam Roberts
Genetic screening and abortion take care of those pesky genetic issues. You are living in an earlier era.
24 posted on 03/13/2004 10:26:43 AM PST by jwalburg (Gimli supports Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Bismarck
Ask france about marrying a live woman with a dead man, they've done it.

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/02/11/1076388397691.html?from=top5
25 posted on 03/13/2004 10:30:53 AM PST by Trillian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc
I suppose that those of us who oppose this (tongue-in-cheek) proposal are sibophobes?

Or, as the case may be, equineophobes, bovineophobes, ovineophobes, and the piece de resistance, porcineophobes!

26 posted on 03/13/2004 10:32:07 AM PST by Ole Okie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jwalburg
You are living in an earlier era.

Then light the candles on my Christmas tree, hand me my buggy whip and call me old fashioned.

27 posted on 03/13/2004 10:32:14 AM PST by Bloody Sam Roberts (If you can read this...you're too close.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: WKB
LOL!
28 posted on 03/13/2004 10:34:17 AM PST by AmericaUnited
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: jwalburg
I want to marry my 98 Camaro
29 posted on 03/13/2004 10:35:40 AM PST by Crazieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Trillian
It's time for America to stop metaphysical discrimination! Equal rights for the dead!
30 posted on 03/13/2004 10:38:40 AM PST by Bismarck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc
Please excuse me for not being able to commit to a debate on this issue. I just want to respond in brief with a sincere reply. This is not meant as an endorsement of gay marriage, just food for thought. Two issues separating incestuous marriage from homosexual marriage are as follows:

- Sex among relatives yields a high probability of producing genetic flaws. That’s cruel to any resulting children, and is one thing that separates sibling marriage from gay marriage.

- There is no evidence of wide spread biological predispositions to only being able to love a sibling (or a dog or multiple people for that matter). Studies are inconclusive regarding biological components to homosexuality. A couple of the most thorough study reviews (one from Harvard and another from Cambridge) seem to go right down the middle claiming some predisposition, but recognizing a large environmental component. Then there of course both flawed and agenda driven studies on both sides claiming conclusive evidence one way or the other. The problem is that there has never been a really good sampling policy. Personally, I think homosexuality is a lot like a mental disorder, with a mixture of sources. Nevertheless, millions of homosexuals exist here who are unable to love heterosexually. There is nothing like that regarding people who can only love siblings, dogs or polygamy.

Again, I’m not endorsing this. I just want to point out what I see as imperfections in this analogy. Excuse me if I’m unable to respond to those who disagree.

31 posted on 03/13/2004 10:40:52 AM PST by elfman2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bismarck
Maybe she could just get a taxidermist and stuff her now husband. Prop him up on the bed and wow, lasts longer than viagra ;)
32 posted on 03/13/2004 10:42:20 AM PST by Trillian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Unam Sanctam
You got any objections to marrying a adopted sister?
33 posted on 03/13/2004 10:42:51 AM PST by philetus (Keep doing what you always do and you'll keep getting what you always get)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Dumb_Ox
You know, we don't even have to get to the sibling issue. In some states, first cousins are not allowed to marry; in other states, they are. The legislative history of these laws would make for interesting reading on this topic, I suppose.
34 posted on 03/13/2004 10:43:19 AM PST by GraceCoolidge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: WKB
LOL!

That's clever!

Did you write it?
35 posted on 03/13/2004 10:44:34 AM PST by tiamat ("Just a Bronze-Age Gal, Trapped in a Techno World!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc
Or polyandry. Why not polyandry? I mean if two guys is okay, why not two guys and a girl?
36 posted on 03/13/2004 10:45:37 AM PST by mewzilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Unam Sanctam
I take it you've never read Jonathan Swift's A Modest Proposal? I believe the tongue, in this case, is firmly planted in the proverbial cheek.
37 posted on 03/13/2004 10:46:12 AM PST by xjcsa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: philetus
Yes, because the issue is protecting the innocence of the nuclear family relationship. It doesn't depend on being a blood relation. And once any part of the nuclear family is sexualized, e.g. a relationship between adopted siblings, then it is easier for incest between natural siblings to be normatized.
38 posted on 03/13/2004 10:46:21 AM PST by Unam Sanctam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Trillian
Well, it seems that the groom already died two years ago. So a taxidermist is out of the question. Maybe she has to find a well-endowed medium that can satisfy her natural urges. Something like "Ghost" but with a male medium instead of that old hag, Whoopi.
39 posted on 03/13/2004 10:46:38 AM PST by Bismarck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: All
I'm going to marry my goldfish.
40 posted on 03/13/2004 10:50:24 AM PST by Bismarck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Crazieman
Hey, why not?
41 posted on 03/13/2004 10:52:58 AM PST by jwalburg (Gimli supports Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Unam Sanctam
Kids are being taught in schools that homosexualality is normal. They see it on TV constantly, in the movies, magazines. Kids know what their two daddies are doing in the bedroom.
All incest would do is make it just a litle more perverted.

You're living in a dream world.
42 posted on 03/13/2004 10:56:30 AM PST by philetus (Keep doing what you always do and you'll keep getting what you always get)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: tiamat
Did you write it?



I wish but no it came in email
43 posted on 03/13/2004 10:57:31 AM PST by WKB (3!~ Term Limits: Because politicians are like diapers., need to be changed for the same reason.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: WKB
Thanks for sharing it anyway!
44 posted on 03/13/2004 10:58:55 AM PST by tiamat ("Just a Bronze-Age Gal, Trapped in a Techno World!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee
Have some patience, it will happen eventually.
45 posted on 03/13/2004 10:59:47 AM PST by philetus (Keep doing what you always do and you'll keep getting what you always get)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Bloody Sam Roberts
Wrong. There are no genetic issues to deal with when speaking of homosexuals marrying. However, allowing brothers and sisters to marry would go a long way towards eliminating the usury Estate Tax.

Society disagrees with your logic. HIV adults have kids not too mention those unfortunate individuals who carry the genes for cystic fibrosis, hemophilia, sickle cell disease, etc.

I think gay marriage, polygamy, and incest will further erode the atomic structure of our civilization to the detriment of all of us and especially children. However, there will be no legal or rigorous medical basis to prevent consenting adult sibling or parent-adult children marriages.

46 posted on 03/13/2004 11:03:17 AM PST by Maynerd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Bismarck
Or maybe she can find a realdoll in his image and continue the charade.
47 posted on 03/13/2004 11:06:20 AM PST by Trillian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Bismarck
I'm going to marry my goldfish.

There is already precedent:


48 posted on 03/13/2004 11:07:55 AM PST by freedumb2003 (Everyone is stupid! That is why they do all those stupid things! -- H. Simpson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: philetus
I don't think the state should promote either homosexuality or incest through civil gay or incestuous "marriage".
49 posted on 03/13/2004 11:08:59 AM PST by Unam Sanctam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Unam Sanctam
1. The Aims and Objectives of ILGA are

(i) To work for the equality of lesbians, gay men, bisexuals and transgendered people and liberation from all forms of discrimination

Homosexual Group Possibly Connected To Pedophilia Applies To UN

NEW YORK, May 11, 01 (CWNews.com/C-fam.org) - The International Lesbian and Gay Association (ILGA)-- a gay-rights group barred from the UN because some of its members promoted pedophilia-- is seeking reinstatement as a non- governmental organization (NGO) by the UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), according to the Catholic Family & Human Rights Institute, a group monitoring the UN.

If ILGA regains NGO status it can lobby and consult the UN Member States on a number of crucial and contentious issues, including how the UN defines and interprets human rights. In 1993, ILGA became the first gay-rights group granted official UN recognition. ILGA is an umbrella organization representing hundreds of homosexual groups worldwide. Some of those groups, which have included the North American Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA), have either condoned pedophilia or promoted it.

In 1994, the UN revoked ILGA's NGO status because of this association with pedophilia. ILGA claims to have severed ties with some of the most visible pedophilia groups, such as NAMBLA, but according to a September, 1994 report in the New York Times, ILGA still could not "vouch" for the elimination of all such groups from its organization.

50 posted on 03/13/2004 11:12:38 AM PST by philetus (Keep doing what you always do and you'll keep getting what you always get)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-73 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson