This is a topic I am fully chud-brained on. Some things should be illegal because I just find them that gross and off-putting. You can give me some convoluted argument explaining how consent between adults in incestuous situations is invalid, but we all know that incest between consenting adults is illegal purely on the grounds of being repugnant to the majority of people, and that that’s the way it ought to stay.
I know, that’s why it’s chud-brained. And I think that’s why liberal or leftist rationales around laws forbidding bestiality and incest are so strained, no one wants to lend credence to a “it should be illegal based on my personal feelings about it” mindset. But ultimately nothing is objective, all laws ultimately have a root in morality and all morality ultimately has a subjective basis and this is one area I’m just gonna have to skip the line and say it’s bad because I feel that it’s bad very strongly.
I know, that’s why it’s chud-brained. And I think that’s why liberal or leftist rationales around laws forbidding bestiality and incest are so strained, no one wants to lend credence to a “it should be illegal based on my personal feelings about it” mindset. But ultimately nothing is objective, all law have a root in morality and all morality ultimately has a subjective basis. And this is one area I’m just gonna have to skip the line and say it’s bad because I feel that it’s bad very strongly.
leftist rationales around laws forbidding bestiality […] are so strained
The left rationale around outlawing bestiality isn’t strained at all. Animals can’t give informed consent. If that’s not self-evidently enough for you, then I don’t know what to say.
The vegan leftist rationale outlawing bestiality isnt strained. The non-vegan leftist rationale that the animal’s consent matters when it comes to sex with a human but not when it is forcibly impregnated or killed by a human is strained.
“consenting adults” is doing some lifting there because of grooming and power dynamics.
very very rarely unwitting siblings who were adopted into separate households grow up without knowing each other, meet without knowing they’re related and start a relationship and sometimes courts decide that isn’t illegal as long as they don’t reproduce. biologists can chime in on whether one generation is enough to Hapsburg.
i think it’s motivated by disgust but it’s also a pretty good heuristic for abuse, unlike sodomy laws.
Yes, that’s what I’m talking about. In the incredibly unlikely scenarios where two siblings of the same age who are now grown adults and independently decide, free of any insidious influence past or present, that they are in love and want to be together without ever having children, I still want them to be lowered into a hole and for that hole to be covered forever (humanely).
This is a topic I am fully chud-brained on. Some things should be illegal because I just find them that gross and off-putting. You can give me some convoluted argument explaining how consent between adults in incestuous situations is invalid, but we all know that incest between consenting adults is illegal purely on the grounds of being repugnant to the majority of people, and that that’s the way it ought to stay.
I can’t get on board with this because this exact reasoning also works for sodomy laws.
I know, that’s why it’s chud-brained. And I think that’s why liberal or leftist rationales around laws forbidding bestiality and incest are so strained, no one wants to lend credence to a “it should be illegal based on my personal feelings about it” mindset. But ultimately nothing is objective, all laws ultimately have a root in morality and all morality ultimately has a subjective basis and this is one area I’m just gonna have to skip the line and say it’s bad because I feel that it’s bad very strongly.
The Banned Comment
The left rationale around outlawing bestiality isn’t strained at all. Animals can’t give informed consent. If that’s not self-evidently enough for you, then I don’t know what to say.
The vegan leftist rationale outlawing bestiality isnt strained. The non-vegan leftist rationale that the animal’s consent matters when it comes to sex with a human but not when it is forcibly impregnated or killed by a human is strained.
“consenting adults” is doing some lifting there because of grooming and power dynamics.
very very rarely unwitting siblings who were adopted into separate households grow up without knowing each other, meet without knowing they’re related and start a relationship and sometimes courts decide that isn’t illegal as long as they don’t reproduce. biologists can chime in on whether one generation is enough to Hapsburg.
i think it’s motivated by disgust but it’s also a pretty good heuristic for abuse, unlike sodomy laws.
Yes, that’s what I’m talking about. In the incredibly unlikely scenarios where two siblings of the same age who are now grown adults and independently decide, free of any insidious influence past or present, that they are in love and want to be together without ever having children, I still want them to be lowered into a hole and for that hole to be covered forever (humanely).
what if they’re half siblings from one of those sperm bank fraud weirdos? that’s probably happened a few times without anyone knowing.