• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Next sexual taboo to be lifted?

What will be next sexual taboo to be lifted?

  • Incest

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Zoophillia

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Ephebophilia

    Votes: 1 4.5%

  • Necrophilia

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Polygamy

    Votes: 12 54.5%

  • Other (explain)

    Votes: 9 40.9%
  • Total voters
    22
Polygamy seems most likely.


Gay marriage will probably be widely legalized over the next two or three decades, and this will make arguments against legal polygamy more difficult to support.
 
the OP is just more of the same slippery slope fallacy that is popular among those who disapprove of homosexuals.
 
LOL people like this crack me up. The lack of logic is slightly scary, but its funny nonetheless.
 
tessaesque said:
I can't even... I just... This has got to be the most extreme slippery slope argument on this issue I've yet seen.

Somebody already summed up the reason why most "taboos" won't be legalized.

But lets think about the whole "immoral" and "unacceptable" argument for gay sex and adultery "in the past".

Historical records indicate that promiscuity, adultery, swinging, and homosexual sex were acceptable and common practices in several cultures at different points in time over the last few thousand years. Historically speaking, it is not as though the modern mentality of acceptance is new, unique, or all that outrageous. But by all means, let's not let historical record and fact distract us.
Click to expand...

The slippery-slope argument has always been ridiculous. It's the same argument that was used against racial equality: "But... If we let the blacks vote, we'll have to let the asians and horses vote as well! When will it stop!?"
 
I voted other, as in: Legalizing the OP to reproduce would be the scariest of the slippery slopes, IMO.
 
Cyrillic said:
Fornication, miscegenation, adultery and homosexuality were all in past unmoral things today normal 100%.
What is going to be next big thing?

Necrophilia - who really cares they are dead they won't mind
Ephebophilia - there is party in Holland that is fighting for this Partij voor Naastenliefde, Vrijheid & Diversiteit
Zoophillia - animals are getting rights really fast today; also support from PNDV
Incest - use condom and everything is going to be alright

Don't say nothing! If someone asked 50 years ago about gays they would tell to you not to support sick people.
Don't say this isn't provocative I am serious.
Click to expand...

You can't be serious? I swear the level of ignorance in your comments is epic. The sick influence of the fear mongering rhetoric of the religious whack job right is oozing from your poll.
 
Last edited:
Top Cat said:
Gee, and you're a conservative? Imagine that?
Click to expand...

Technically, he's not wrong.

ab·nor·mal   [ab-nawr-muhl] Show IPA
adjective
1.
not normal, average, typical, or usual; deviating from a standard: abnormal powers of concentration; an abnormal amount of snow; abnormal behavior.
Click to expand...

The issue is whether or not abnormal = bad.

Genius IQ is abnormal.
Left-handedness is abnormal.
HIV immunity is abnormal.
 
tessaesque said:
Technically, he's not wrong.



The issue is whether or not abnormal = bad.

Genius IQ is abnormal.
Left-handedness is abnormal.
HIV immunity is abnormal.
Click to expand...

Celibacy is abnormal, but some people would prefer not to recognize that.
 
Two points:

1) Many are not getting the point of the question, either willfully, or naively. The point behind the question is NOT that some things that are accepted now are morally corrupt, but that they were deemed so at one time... and society eventually got past it.

2) Slippery slope theories are indeed valid, but just like anything can be taken to an absurd extreme by some. Just because some take a concept too far does not mean that the concept itself is invalid.
 
Last edited:
Lord Tammerlain said:
a animal can not give consent, a dead person certainly can not ( try and ask one if they agree to do anything, if they answer, they probably are not dead, if they try to eat while engaged in sex, run as they probably are part of the zombie horde

Childern, due to their immaturity can not give legal consent, the age in which they can varies
Click to expand...

If they agree before they die

RadicalModerate said:
Fine, if the person gives consent while they are dead, you can bang 'em. :roll:



Yes, exactly.



And let me remind you that slaves used to be killed in public for entertainment.



So a dog humping a leg means it wants a human sized penis in it???
Click to expand...
I was speaking about profession choose that is made around age of 14.
Peter singer isn't only one. Zoophilia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Last edited:
Polygamy. If gays can marry because "what two people who love each other do is no one's business", then not also believing that "what two or more people who love each other do is no one's business" is the obvious and non-hypocritical position.

Provided that ALL parties are adults and not coerced, of course.
 
Risky Thicket said:
Celibacy is abnormal, but some people would prefer not to recognize that.
Click to expand...

Normal is thing of agreement. And I think it is normal. People in celibacy are much more spiritual then others.
radcen said:
Two points:

1) Many are not getting the point of the question, either willfully, or naively. The point behind the question is NOT that some things that are accepted now are or are morally corrupt, but that they were deemed so at one time... and society eventually got past it.

2) Slipper slope theories are indeed valid, but just like anything can be taken to an absurd extreme by some. Just because some take a concept too far does not mean that the concept itself is invalid.
Click to expand...

:applaud
 
I'm a fan of polygamy and have always been baffled by its illegality. While I don't think you'll see polygamy formally legalized, I do think that open relationships and other informal equivalents will become more accepted.

(Just an opinion folks...))
 
radcen said:
Polygamy. If gays can marry because "what two people who love each other do is no one's business", then not also believing that "what two or more people who love each other do is no one's business" is the obvious and non-hypocritical position.

Provided that ALL parties are adults and not coerced, of course.
Click to expand...

To be honest, I don't care at all about polygamy, with the conditions you list. The issue, however, is it opens a potential massive legal mess that we really need to figure out before we let people engage in polygamy wholesale. Once we know how to handle it all? Go for it. Until then, we need to tread carefully. The courts are clogged up badly enough as it is.
 
Goshin said:
Polygamy seems most likely.


Gay marriage will probably be widely legalized over the next two or three decades, and this will make arguments against legal polygamy more difficult to support.
Click to expand...

Arabs won't legalize same-sex marriage in next 1000 years

Helix said:
the OP is just more of the same slippery slope fallacy that is popular among those who disapprove of homosexuals.
Click to expand...

I do but this has nothing to do with then it is about next taboo to be lifted. Don't misuse my other political views. I shouldn't mention them at all.

whysoserious said:
I voted other, as in: Legalizing the OP to reproduce would be the scariest of the slippery slopes, IMO.
Click to expand...
Thank you for your wishes. God bless!
 
Cephus said:
To be honest, I don't care at all about polygamy, with the conditions you list. The issue, however, is it opens a potential massive legal mess that we really need to figure out before we let people engage in polygamy wholesale. Once we know how to handle it all? Go for it. Until then, we need to tread carefully. The courts are clogged up badly enough as it is.
Click to expand...
Yep. There are areas where our laws would need to be adjusted, and unfortunately some of it will happen in the courts, which is not ideal.
 
radcen said:
Yep. There are areas where our laws would need to be adjusted, and unfortunately some of it will happen in the courts, which is not ideal.
Click to expand...

It's not just areas where it will need to be adjusted, but huge swaths that will have to be entirely re-written. Custody, child and spousal support, divorce, etc. are all going to be gutted and we'll have to start over. It's no small step.
 
Cephus said:
It's not just areas where it will need to be adjusted, but huge swaths that will have to be entirely re-written. Custody, child and spousal support, divorce, etc. are all going to be gutted and we'll have to start over. It's no small step.
Click to expand...
That's what I meant, just didn't word it strong enough.
 
radcen said:
That's what I meant, just didn't word it strong enough.
Click to expand...

That's fine, I didn't mean to say that you didn't understand the severity, I just think that most people who support polygamy just don't understand the implications. They think it'll be something simple and it just isn't. Marriage is currently handled almost as a business transaction. It's either an ongoing concern or it's not. While married, it is, when divorced, it isn't. Assets are sold off and property is distributed in a hopefully fair and amicable fashion. But when you have three or more people in a relationship, what happens? It's no longer a binary situation. How do you split up assets? If you take the simplest scenario, people A, B and C, if person A and B get divorced, does B get 1/3 of the total assets? What if person B has only been in the relationship for 1 year and A and C have been there for 10 years? Worse, what if A and B get divorced, but B and C remain married? Who gets what then?

I'm not even going to get into child custody when the children may be legally adopted by large multiples of people who may end up hating each other.

Polygamy is one of those things that, in theory, sounds great, but when you get down to the details, is a massive monster.
 
jamesrage said:
Of course not.There are other factors like harm or cost to others, harm to society and other issues in whether or not something should be legal or illegal.
Click to expand...

In your opinion
 
Cyrillic said:
Normal is thing of agreement. And I think it is normal. People in celibacy are much more spiritual then others.


:applaud
Click to expand...

You think celibacy is normal because..."people in celibacy are much more spiritual then (sic) others". Your criteria for normal human behavior then is being more spiritual than others?

I'm going to step out on a limb here and say that based upon your logic regarding normal, you don't know the difference between your hole and an ass in the ground.
 
My vote is the next taboo broken will be polydactalism, those sick f*cks will be everywhere fingering everything is sight! Who needs that sort thing infront of our children. :shock:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom