Quote:
|
Originally Posted by wilbjammin
The logical flow of your ideas is really hard to follow.
|
Not really.
The argument goes like this:
"Marriage should not be exclusive to straight couples. It should be available to all consenting adults of whatever sexuality."
That's ok, fine by me. Next...
"However, related couples should be excluded."
This is often qualified with:
"Related couples are more likely to produce defective offspring."
All making sense so far? This implies that a couple should not be allowed to marry/procreate etc, if there is an increased chance of deformity.
"By this reasoning, it should be illegal for non-related couples who are more likely to produce defective offspring to marry."
So if deformed children can be used against incestuous couples, it should be used against everyone to assure equality. That's what this debate is all about right, the same rights for everyone?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by wilbjammin
The reality is, however, that many believe that incest causes genetic problems so to decompact "discrimination" against incest requires significant proof that there is no increased chance of offspring having deformities.
|
By this logic, anything that anyone believes is automatically considered the truth until someone can prove otherwise. Excuse me if I thought the burden of proof should lie with the person making the claim.