Letter to the editor

mosaik · Post by **mosaik** » 6/26/2003, 12:32 pm

nambla makes me want to hurl

happening fish · Post by **happening fish** » 6/26/2003, 12:36 pm

i don't know what that is

mosaik · Post by **mosaik** » 6/26/2003, 12:38 pm

North American Man/Boy Love Association

www.nambla.org

it's not a joke, either.

Corey · Post by **Corey** » 6/26/2003, 1:07 pm

mosaik wrote:nambla makes me want to hurl

no kidding. Just plain sick.

happening fish · Post by **happening fish** » 6/26/2003, 1:15 pm

oh yeah

I AM ME · Post by **I AM ME** » 6/26/2003, 3:59 pm

so basically they're trying to legalize pedophilism?

emily · Post by **emily** » 6/26/2003, 6:43 pm

it is wrong because it's not sex between consenting adults. gay/bi/lesb sex is between consenting adults. it's their own business. jesus.

One-Eye · Post by **One-Eye** » 6/26/2003, 7:54 pm

Indeed.

Corey · Post by **Corey** » 6/26/2003, 8:41 pm

What about necros?[shadow=darkred][/shadow][shadow=red][/shadow][shadow=orange][/shadow]

happening fish · Post by **happening fish** » 6/26/2003, 8:43 pm

that's not consensual. i don't think the dead person consents to it.

Corey · Post by **Corey** » 6/26/2003, 8:44 pm

so what? they're dead

Narbus · Post by **Narbus** » 6/26/2003, 9:07 pm

If you're not next of kin, then it's straight out, since the next of kin are the ones who determine what happens to the body (unless the deceased made prior arrangements, or course). So if the next of kin don't give the ok, then it's like humping someone else's car, for lack of a better metaphor. The body is the property of the next of kin, so hands off.

And if you are next of kin, then it's incest, which is also out.

Corey · Post by **Corey** » 6/26/2003, 9:13 pm

and why is incest out?

happening fish · Post by **happening fish** » 6/26/2003, 9:41 pm

retarded children

One-Eye · Post by **One-Eye** » 6/26/2003, 10:27 pm

Ingrained evolutionary taboos. :nod:

To prevent retarded children. :nod:

<- just took a bio anthropology class.

Narbus · Post by **Narbus** » 6/26/2003, 10:53 pm

Aerin wrote:Ingrained evolutionary taboos. To prevent retarded children.

<- just took a bio anthropology class.

1. Hey! I took an anthro class that mentioned that. It's called the "incest taboo," and I'm pretty sure they haven't found a culture that ignores it (Some cultures are weird about it, cross cousins, and parallel cousins, it's odd, but all cultures have some form of it).

2. Yes, to prevent the retarded children.

3. Also, incest is of questionable morality because it can be seen as abusing an existing family relationship and using it to force another person to be intimate with you. But mostly the retarded children.

One-Eye · Post by **One-Eye** » 6/26/2003, 10:59 pm

Yep. It's very interesting how incest taboos work. See, humans are programmed to not be sexually attracted to peers they grew up with, which is normally their siblings and cousins. It cancels the other evolutionary pressure towards mating with genetically similar individuals. You want SOME homogeneity (to increase good traits like intelligence, physical strength, whatever you have that you want passed on), but too much can result in, among other things, retarded children.

The theory also explains why siblings raised apart who meet later in life (not knowing they're siblings) often get married. Without the incest taboo, all your genes see is someone VERY similar you, and say "hot damn! let's hook up with that spicy specimen!"

Anthropology = fascinating.

happening fish · Post by **happening fish** » 6/26/2003, 11:10 pm

hahahahaha

that would suck

I AM ME · Post by **I AM ME** » 6/27/2003, 12:13 am

hmm guess the Hick culture missed out on that gene

Corey · Post by **Corey** » 6/27/2003, 6:07 am

Yes, yes, I know all about the retarded children thing, but so what? They are still consenting adults. What if they take the necessary precautions to make sure they don't have kids? How is that different from gay sex if both situations there is no possibility of kids?