Skip to comments.
Incest: The next frontier in 'reproductive freedom'
WND ^
| Matt Barber
Posted on 01/17/2015 11:25:31 AM PST by jimluke01
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-39 next last
1
posted on
01/17/2015 11:25:31 AM PST
by
jimluke01
To: jimluke01
“Like a plastic Piggly Wiggly bag fluttering about in the alley”
Submitted for the worst opening line of an op-ed piece.
2
posted on
01/17/2015 11:33:20 AM PST
by
Usagi_yo
(It's not possible to give success. Only opportunity. Success is earned on it's own right.)
To: jimluke01
Kutner is guilty.....WAAAAAAAAAAY guilty.
3
posted on
01/17/2015 11:37:10 AM PST
by
GilesB
To: jimluke01
INCEST: The path to Sodom Destruction of the Nation.
4
posted on
01/17/2015 11:38:00 AM PST
by
SandRat
(Duty - Honor - Country! What else need s said?)
To: jimluke01
Personally, I think the pedophiles have a better argument to be next; although there is a ring to the incest argument about it being genetic, so to speak.
5
posted on
01/17/2015 11:41:09 AM PST
by
Steamburg
(Other people's money is the only language a politician respects)
To: Usagi_yo
It was a dark and stormy night. Like a plastic Piggly Wiggly bag fluttering about in the alley, my girlfriend’s final words echoed in my ears: “Let’s see if the lion is asleep”.
6
posted on
01/17/2015 11:42:18 AM PST
by
ClearCase_guy
(Malort, turning taste-buds into taste-foes for generations.)
To: jimluke01
America needs more people with two left hands and feet.
7
posted on
01/17/2015 11:48:34 AM PST
by
Stepan12
(Our present appeasement of Islam is the Stockholm Syndrome on steroids.)
To: Usagi_yo
I’m all for the legalization of incestuous marraige. I can marry my son and beat the death tax.
8
posted on
01/17/2015 11:54:53 AM PST
by
Oldhunk
To: ClearCase_guy
9
posted on
01/17/2015 12:06:03 PM PST
by
MNDude
To: Oldhunk
Don’t go all Piggly Wiggly plasticy baggity on us.
10
posted on
01/17/2015 12:09:56 PM PST
by
Usagi_yo
(It's not possible to give success. Only opportunity. Success is earned on it's own right.)
To: jimluke01
11
posted on
01/17/2015 12:11:47 PM PST
by
publius911
(Formerly Publius6961)
To: Usagi_yo
seems like the perfect opening sentence for this piece, describing how people think who have no moral foundation
12
posted on
01/17/2015 12:17:33 PM PST
by
bigbob
(The best way to get a bad law repealed is to enforce it strictly. Abraham Lincoln)
To: MNDude
13
posted on
01/17/2015 12:19:16 PM PST
by
ClearCase_guy
(Malort, turning taste-buds into taste-foes for generations.)
To: jimluke01
Well, we’d only being catching up with Europe.
Napoleon himself abolished laws against incest.
Unfortunately, since the idea of marriage being all about families and children is rejected, there’s no reason to ban anything that was taboo anymore.
God help us all.
14
posted on
01/17/2015 12:19:53 PM PST
by
Shadow44
To: jimluke01; SandRat; ClearCase_guy
"... the greasy slope made slippery by the advent of counterfeit same-sex marriage. If you artificially remove one requirement for marriage in this case, the binary male-female prerequisite then there is no justification, logically or legally, for not removing all requirements." True. But the slope got pretty dang slippery before same-sex "marriage."
What are the requirements for real marriage?
- That marriage be recognized as the only decent and honorable setting for sexual relations,
- that marriage be lifelong until the death of one of the spouses;
- that enshrines the actual "marriage act" of conjugal sex: intercourse in the procreative form.
If "marriage" is a three-legged stool, then it was already smashed flat to the ground when "straight" people
- mainstreamed non marital sex;
- instituted easy divorce, and
- overwhelmingly succumbed to unnatural sex --- contrcepted sex --- which intentionally negates the procreative form and meaning of sex, and thus mainstreams a perversion.
So it was straight people who denatured and perverted sex, and re-defined marriage. No wonder the gays want in now: it suits them.
Oh, and I would agree that marriage, properly defined, involves more than just this "three-legged stool." But these are basics; and if you take these three defining characteristics away, you don't actually have marriage. You have a deconstructed pile of parts and splinters.
15
posted on
01/17/2015 12:23:36 PM PST
by
Mrs. Don-o
(Stone cold sober, as a matter of fact.)
To those who insisted that homosexual marriage wouldn't lead to this: "WE TOLD YOU SO."
16
posted on
01/17/2015 12:24:43 PM PST
by
Darksheare
(Those who support liberal "Republicans" summarily support every action by same.)
To: jimluke01
Well, I don’t care what they do with the law, I don’t believe I could know that my neighbor was screwing his minor daughter and not do something forceful to stop it.
I guess by the time the pervs get all this sort of sick behavior legalized close minded old farts like me will be dead and no one will object.
People like this woman at salon are disgusting beyond belief.
17
posted on
01/17/2015 12:35:12 PM PST
by
ChildOfThe60s
(If you can remember the 60s.....you weren't really there)
To: jimluke01
If you artificially remove one requirement for marriage in this case, the binary male-female prerequisite then there is no justification, logically or legally, for not removing all requirements.Sorry, but this implies the collapse of the moral foundation started with the gay marriage bit.
Which is of course nonsense. It started with the general acceptance of premarital sex. The second brick to go was easy divorce.
Once you abandon the ideal of sex limited to marriage, there is no logical stopping point short of the "anything goes" for consenting adults point we're at now.
I think we'll stick with the consensual part, but I expect the "adults" part to start eroding soon.
The problem is that most people were more than happy to accept the removal of the first brick, since it provided justification for something most of us are inclined to do anyway, and now we're on the slippery slope and accelerating towards the bottom. To scramble metaphors.
To: Darksheare
They knew. It’s part of the long-term plan; which they will continue to deny.
19
posted on
01/17/2015 1:02:45 PM PST
by
ChicagahAl
(Don't blame me. I voted for Sarah.)
To: ChicagahAl
Yeah they knew.
We even had a few in forum trolling over it at the time.
The smirking butt sniffers.
20
posted on
01/17/2015 1:24:46 PM PST
by
Darksheare
(Those who support liberal "Republicans" summarily support every action by same.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-39 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson