Jump to content

Incest Debate And Liberal Double Standards


Donald Trump
 Share

Recommended Posts

So I was thinking, with the advent of gay rights around the world, do you think we'll see the legalization of incest in the near future? 

 

It's hardly something that harms anybody, so what if a guy wants to sleep with his daughters. If they're adults and consenting, what's the big issue with liberals? I like how liberals blab on about gay rights and are against incest, hypocrisy isn't it? 

 

Genetic issues are a problem, but liberals are fine with being against eugenics and allowing people with inheritable disabilities to breed. So going down that logic, how can they use that as an argument? Dishonesty? Hypocrisy? Just look at Ivanka and Donald, pretty damn cute don't you think? ;)

 

Look at this : http://www.livescience.com/2226-incest-taboo-nature.html

 

Going on and on about science and global warming, which there is no actual evidence for, Liberals are fine with being against incest which there IS evidence for existing in nature. Liberal double standards are hilarious, but why should we trust anybody, when 40% of liberals voted for Pervy Bernie, a pedophile apologist? 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No to incest; no to sexual deviancy; no to pedophiles.  

 

"Tolerance is the virtue of a man without virtues."

"Your cattle will die, your friends will die, you will die. But your reputation, if it is good, will never die."  -excerpt from the Havamal

 

"We are born into this time and must bravely follow the path to the destined end. There is no other way. Our duty is to hold on to the lost position, without hope, without rescue, like that Roman soldier whose bones were found in front of a door in Pompeii, who, during the eruption of Vesuvius, died at his post because they forgot to relieve him. That is greatness. That is what it means to be a thoroughbred. The honorable end is the one thing that can not be taken from a man."  -Oswald Spengler

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dennis prager did a talk on this, he mentioned that liberal professors never manage to answer the question. "Apples and oranges", or whatever. Joe Biden is for gay marriage because it's a matter of "who do you love?" And that implies that that's all that matters. In saying that, Prager enacts the slippery slope and says where does it stop? Pedophiles are being humanised more and more in the left as the days go on, examples from salon. I understand salon is an extreme left organisation, but continued desensitisation will lead to serious debates about pedo rights, incest rights, beastiality rights etc.

 

This thread isn't serious but the point still stands.

 

Slippery slope arguments tend to be utter BS.  That is why slippery slopes are fallacies, by definition.

 

In my travels of the internet (I may be a bit out of date) the highest concentration of incest/pedophiles I ever ran into was on 4chan to include /pol/ which is far right wing.  In all actuality, I doubt left or right wing political alignment correlates in any way to whatever brain disease pedophiles experience.

 

BL: This is a troll thread.  Your opinion on this matter while interesting is pretty much hogwash.

-signature removed for rules violation-

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even if it is a troll thread and OP is just roleplaying or whatever it's still a good basis for an argument. The highest concentration of pedos I've found are on YouTube, and quite honestly I'd think that if there was a thread about incest/pedophilla on /pol/, storm!@#$s would immediately denounce all participants of the thread as degenerate and requires castration. While the illness does not have a particular political alignment, the more 'tolerant' political alignment would be more likely to accept such people as normal in their culture. At least, the extreme left who believe everyone is mentally ill in some way.

 

You must be visiting some seriously deranged youtube channels.  iirc you-tube deletes ANY sex.

 

NS No.  They wouldn't (Storm front white knighting) - they are probably chaners themselves.  And no, "the left" is not more tolerant nor accepting of that behavior.

 

All boards of 4chan (the alt-right) are known for their pedophilia.  I assume? mods clean it up now but its in their culture.

Your point remains invalid.

-signature removed for rules violation-

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Slippery slope arguments tend to be utter BS.  That is why slippery slopes are fallacies, by definition.

 

 

Slippery slope arguments are not by definition fallacious. The term may be used to describe a causal link that relies on cogent inductive arguments as well as uncogent ones. 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope#Non-fallacious_usage

Edited by Princess Bubblegum
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No.  I don't know what you mean.  I do believe you that pedos look for teenage girls swimming on youtube or whatever.  They are also on 4 chan in relatively massive numbers in my, admittedly outdated, experience.

 

No. /pol/ is generally representative of 4chan and vice versa.  Its is almost definitionally the "alt-right".  If you dislike this maybe you should change something.

 

You have a lot to learn young padawan.

-signature removed for rules violation-

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Slippery slope arguments are not by definition fallacious. The term may be used to describe a causal link that relies on cogent inductive arguments as well as uncogent ones. 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope#Non-fallacious_usage

 

k.

 

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/slippery-slope.html

-signature removed for rules violation-

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

That site does not assert that all descriptions of slippery slope are by definition something fallacious. If you want, I'll scan a few of my college-level logic books that will assert a similar position to the wikipedia portion I linked previously. Labeling something a "slippery slope" has no bearing upon the cogency or strength of the argument, and colloquial usage of the term (as previously shown) "slippery slope" encompasses cogent arguments as well.

Edited by Princess Bubblegum
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cool.  Whatever yet not in this case.  You may open a new thread to debate the intricacies of logical foolishness if you desire.

 

No, it's relevant to the thread. You asserted that slippery slopes are by definition fallacious, and I attempted to show otherwise. If it's not the case that slippery slopes are by definition fallacious, then an assertion on your part that in this case a slippery slope fallacy is being committed could warrant an argument all its own from you, else it's just an assertion. To borrow the position for the moment, the "slippery slope" argument relies upon ambiguity from the sexual liberation camp as to where the line for sexual transgression should be drawn. If the argument relies on the position of "do as thou wilt so long as no harm comes to others" then so long as that argument pertains to homosexuality, then it should pertain elsewhere as well so long as those conditions are met. If incest can meet those qualifications, then it's a strong 'slippery slope" argument that the reasons for one has led to the validation of another; and we are seeing some instances where that is happening (not to draw a position on it myself).

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, it's relevant to the thread. You asserted that slippery slopes are by definition fallacious, and I attempted to show otherwise. If it's not the case that slippery slopes are by definition fallacious, then an assertion on your part that in this case a slippery slope fallacy is being committed could warrant an argument all its own from you, else it's just an assertion. To borrow the position for the moment, the "slippery slope" argument relies upon ambiguity from the sexual liberation camp as to where the line for sexual transgression should be drawn. If the argument relies on the position of "do as thou wilt so long as no harm comes to others" then so long as that argument pertains to homosexuality, then it should pertain elsewhere as well so long as those conditions are met. If incest can meet those qualifications, then it's a strong 'slippery slope" argument that the reasons for one has led to the validation of another; and we are seeing some instances where that is happening (not to draw a position on it myself).

No it is not logical that if something that I find violates my personal norms happens than this other thing that is related because it violates my personal norms will happen. The argument is therefore a fallacious slippery slope.

 

You may go back and read your textbooks to confirm that if one thing does not necessarily flow from the other than it is a fallacy.

-signature removed for rules violation-

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am a Trump supporter, but I believe anybody has the right to marry anything. If a guy wants to marry his pet rock, all the power to him.

 

 

Peace will never be accomplished without war, but war cannot happen without peace.... or something like that idk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't care for incest, I would much rather put mah dick in my doggo. lol

 

 

You should move to Texas. Their legislature voted to decriminalize bestiality while at the very same time voting to make same-sex marriage MORE illegal. Clearly this means Republicans like having sex with animals and want to encourage others to do so.

eStUYHv.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No it is not logical that if something that I find violates my personal norms happens than this other thing that is related because it violates my personal norms will happen. The argument is therefore a fallacious slippery slope.

 

You may go back and read your textbooks to confirm that if one thing does not necessarily flow from the other than it is a fallacy.

 

Except that's not true. We might make an inductive argument, not a deductive one, so something doesn't have to necessarily follow here, nor is that what is actually being argued. A deductive argument isn't being asserted.Nor is the assertation that homosexuality became more accepted because it violates a personal norm (if that's the case, then please quote the location of that specific argument).

 

The argument is:

 

A sexual practice was normalized using ethical reasons.

That sexual practice became more accepted as a result.

If something else can be normalized using the same ethical reasons, then--in the absence of the introduction of other ethical reasoning--that thing is likely to also become more accepted as a result.

 

The question raised, to my understanding, is: what other ethical reasoning might mitigate the acceptance of incest and can it be easily surmounted? But this does not constitute a fallacious slippery slope. The causal chain is short. It could be extended and made slightly weaker if the argument includes the idea that incest would be made legal as a result and weaker still if it were to say that incest would become normal. The stronger argument is the simpler one, which I have shown above, so that should be the starting point. If you think the argument as I have outlined it is a still fallacious one (keep in mind its meant to be inductive), then let me know.                                             

Edited by Princess Bubblegum
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope. That does not necessarily follow which is a requirment and yes it has to to avoid fallacy.

 

Jaywalking and murder are both crimes. If I pass a law to decriminalize jaywalking because it fills up jails it does not follow that I will also decriminalize murder.

 

So no it does not follow.

-signature removed for rules violation-

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You should move to Texas. Their legislature voted to decriminalize bestiality while at the very same time voting to make same-sex marriage MORE illegal. Clearly this means Republicans like having sex with animals and want to encourage others to do so.

Texas=/=Republicans

 

however,

 

Texas=Bizarre/Crazy

 

I know a lot of great people who live there who are not Republicans. They are crazy though.

 

4GVsiHi.jpg

Edited by Lo Pan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope. That does not necessarily follow which is a requirment and yes it has to to avoid fallacy.

 

Jaywalking and murder are both crimes. If I pass a law to decriminalize jaywalking because it fills up jails it does not follow that I will also decriminalize murder.

 

So no it does not follow.

 

If you are under the impression that in an inductive argument a conclusion must necessarily follow from the premises, then I'm informing you that you are mistaken. You are describing a deductive argument. Inductive arguments rely on inferences of probability. Otherwise, you are telling me that all inductive arguments are fallacies.

 

As to your analogy, you're right, it would not follow that murder would be decriminalized because the shared properties between the two analogates (walking & murder) have notable, extreme dissimilarities. For that analogy to be accurate of our incest argument, it would mean discussing what those extreme dissimilarities are. If it turns out they are not so extreme and can be surmounted ethically (the issue at hand), then your analogy becomes weaker.

Edited by Princess Bubblegum
Link to comment
Share on other sites

From a libertarian standpoint, if an adult wants to do something with an adult, and both parties consent, I am sure government should get the heck out of it.  Be they man and man or brother and sister or whatever.  

One exception might be certain positions of trust and power, such as High School Teacher and (adult) High School Student, psychiatrist and patient, etc.  I'm not sure where or how to draw those lines.

 

Conservatard always calling for government intervention in bedrooms need to reconsider their commitment to small government.

 

I mean, go ahead Donald Trump, bonk Ivanka.  I might even pay to see that sex tape.

 

Nah, I'd just catch it for free on some site.

Edited by Aisha Greyjoy
  • Upvote 1

Duke of House Greyjoy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.