Remember meForgot password?
    Log in with Twitter

Who Didn't See This Coming?

By Sheba     Mar 23, 2007 in Lifestyle
Massachusetts Senate Bill 938 - Further down the slippery slope...The problem with same-sex "marriage" is not just that it is inherently wrong. Another problem with it is that it could lead to things that are even worse.
Take for example the case of the German couple living together with four children. The BBC did a report on this couple, Patrick and Susan, who had been living together for six years and have four children. What is wrong with this seemingly normal, average family?
Well, as a child Patrick was given up for adoption by his mother and when he became an adult finally met momma and all his other biological family, including you guessed it, sister Susan. After momma passed away the two became what the BBC termed "lovers."
So what did the German authorities do when they found out? Why, what any "moral" government would do (I'm being sarcastic here).
...they placed three of their children—two of whom have disabilities—in foster care and charged Patrick with incest. Patrick has already served two years and faces more jail time.
Ok, before you get on your moral holy ground and start spouting scorn, take a cold beer or a joint and get high for a minute, if that's what makes you mellow. But remember when making a "moral" decision that what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander and all that.
And that when you start f-ing around with "morality" and making it anything less than the "absolute" that it is, that you are going to have situations like these and YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO IMPOSE YOUR MORALITY ON ANYONE ELSE!! Isn't that what you all say and believe?
Anyway, back to the story.
... the couple is challenging German laws against incest in Germany’s Federal Constitutional Court. Heck I would do the same if I was in love and the powers that be were dictating to me that I can't. Isn't that what the homosexuals are fighting for too? And the polygamists? (well they'll be next if they're not fighting yet, just wait until after gay marriage is legal thru out the land.)
As the couple’s lawyer, Endrik Wilhelm, told the BBC, “this law is out of date, and it breaches the couple’s civil rights.” According to the lawyer, the “couple [is] not harming anyone,” and the ban “is discrimination.”
To those like Juergen Kunze, a geneticist at Berlin’s Charite Hospital, who cite the genetic risks to the offspring of incest, Wilhelm replies: “Why are disabled parents” or “people with hereditary diseases [and] women over 40” allowed to have children?
Anyone who claims to be surprised by this case has not been paying attention to American law. In Lawrence v. Texas, the Supreme Court found that “consenting” adults had a right to privacy when it comes to sexual relations—any kind of sexual relations. As Justice Scalia pointed out in his stinging dissent, the logic employed by the majority of the court could be applied to laws against “bigamy, same-sex marriage [and] adult incest.”
Aye, but who the heck is listening to reason these day? Everybody wants their opinion to be heard and well, logic and reason is not taught in schools anymore. Lord forbid, our children should be taught a curriculum that includes logic and reason instead of the "social" curriculum being ram roded up their little butts. Those kids will learn to think critically and we all know a thinking mind is a threat to any one who is out to hoodwink you.
If you deny that there’s a “substantial government interest in protecting order and morality,” as courts increasingly are doing, where do you draw the line? Certainly not at same-sex “marriage,” as we have seen. The fact is that, as Dr. Kunze puts it, laws like these “based on long traditions in Western societies” have not been stopping courts lately.
The ugly truth is that, absent a “substantial government interest in protecting order and morality,” the incestuous couple has the better argument. In a culture where personal autonomy trumps long-established moral traditions, our revulsion does look like the kind of prejudice that Lawrence rejected as the basis for laws.
Like I said, none of this should come as a surprise. Instead, it ought to serve as a warning of where the law is headed.
Yeah, and I'm sure this is going to catch us all napping too. Who knows we might even get on our moral holy ground and protect the "human rights" of this brother and sister after all they are two consenting adults who love each other and nobody has the right to impose their morality of right and wrong upon them - just like they don't the gays...well you get the picture. Besides, we do not "choose" who we fall in love with. Remember?
And isn't it lesbian Melisa Etridge who sang in one of her songs, "love is never wrong?!"
Click here for a commentary on the Massachusetts Senate Bill 938.
Here's an excerpt: The problem, you see, with bestiality -- repulsive as it may be -- is that if gay "marriage" and sexual autonomy are constitutionally protected, bestiality is eminently logical, just as the Massachusetts legislators show us.
Ah yes, it don't just end at incest. No, no, no. It's open season - give it a few more years. Pedophilia, bestiality, oh my the possibilities are endless.
More about Incest, Morality, Adult, Government
Latest News
Top News