I definitely believe it is disgusting and wrong for a father and daughter to have a sexual relationship. I thought it was illegal in most states no matter if it is consensual or not. I can’t imagine doing that.
Let's consider this statement closely.
I definitely believe it is disgusting and wrong for a father and daughter to have a sexual relationship.
What would make it wrong for two (or more) individuals, who aren't cheating, who are capable of consenting, to consent to sex? Is sex itself wrong? Or do you believe that it is only right to have sex under certain conditions in addition to consent and being free to take on a new partner? What would those conditions be? Regardless, your claim that it is wrong shouldn't have power over the rights of anyone else.
I thought it was illegal in most states no matter if it is consensual or not.
Unconstitutional laws do still remain on the books that criminalize this in 48 states. That means in two states, there is no such law. What is your objection in those two states? Or the many countries with no ridiculous laws to that effect?
I can’t imagine doing that.
Then don't. Nobody is saying you have to.
I can't imagine running a marathon. Does that mean nobody else should be free to do so?
The fact is, human sexuality and relationships are diverse. Not everyone is going to want the same things. And that's OK! There is no good reason to try to deny people the relationships to which they've mutually agreed.
There are women who have been consanguinamorous with their genetic fathers. Some have been together until their father's death, in a loving relationship with no regrets (other than not starting sooner). Why should they be denied their rights just because someone else doesn't like their love? There's no good reason.
We need to support relationship rights for all, and full marriage equality.
![Non-Monogamy Diagram [I:FV]](http://www.obsidianfields.com/lj/nonmonogamy2.5.1.gif){kind=link}
Good post. Many people need to read this
ReplyDeleteI agree.
DeleteHave you noticed that this person says "I believe"?
ReplyDeleteHe is a believer.
Well, that's his right. But there is another right: not to believe, and there is a right to know, because knowledge is reality and logic.
You can believe in anything and in anyone. You can believe in the American dream or any other, you can believe in the love and faithfulness of your partner, you can believe that the palestinians are innocent angels, and that the iranians were seduced from the path of democracy by Ayatollah Khomeini.
You can believe in God, in Trump, in Putin and in Mao Zedong, in Satan or in aliens.
But, even the philosophers of the ancient world separated faith from truth. Tertullian, one of the founders of Christian doctrine, is credited with the popular phrase "I believe because it is absurd" (Credo, quia absurdum).
And in the example that Keith gave, we are faced with faith, not logic. Faith does not tolerate logic and boasts that it opposes facts and the reality we perceive. This man and his kind do not like consanguinamory, moreover, they hate such a relationships, and that's it.
It is almost impossible to convince adults of anything, and even more so of the acceptability of certain sexual relationships. It's a hopeless case. But we don't have to prove anything to anyone.
We are all endowed with natural rights at birth, and one of the main ones is the right to sexual self-identification and non-violent choice of sexual partner(s).
Whoever cannot or does not want to use these rights, let them live in their own way. But at the same time, we demand that we be allowed to live as we see fit, as long as we do not violate other people's rights or harm them (with the exception of bringing anger and concern to fanatics of traditional sexual virtues instilled by religion and state).
Sometimes it seems to me that such people are just jealous of those who have found love and happiness in their own family. Because it's not available to them by default.
Yes, I just feel sorry for them...