This is going to be a fun one.
So here are the facts:
I commented on a news article about a mother and adult son charged with incest (and adultery as well for her.) This is what I said:
Someone responded to me and I replied before I realized my original comment was removed for being inappropriate. Then I added the edit when I saw.
The next day I discovered I’d been banned from that community for “pro-incest comments” and several others I don’t think I’ve ever been in for rule 4 violations. The orignal post was removed.
You can see those here:
Site rule 4 is: Usernames or posts/comments containing transphobia, homophobia, sexism, racism, ableism, zionism, anti-veganism, or trivializing COVID. No self-described or obvious fascists, conservatives, or reactionaries.
My comments had none of those things. I’d even go so far as to say my banning was reactionary.
Now, I’m not defending incest, especially not for myself. My problem is with puritanical laws interfering with the private sex lives of people. In my original comment I stated that grooming was a separate issue and should be dealt with, but that there is nothing inherently wrong with incest. That is, enthusiastic consensual sex between capable adults.
I know someone will bring up the Hapsburgs, so yes, children of incest should be avoided.
It doesn’t. You’re misreading the incest statute as the age of consent statute. Nothing in the incest statute allows an 18-year-old to have sex with a 14-year-old. That is statutory rape, with or without incest laws or incest being a factor. The minor lacked the capacity to consent to sex with the adult.
Minors do not lack the capacity to consent to sex with other minors. There is no issue of capacity between two 14-year-olds. There is no criminality in such a relationship. Unless the 14-year-olds are related; then they are to be imprisoned. As are the 24-year-old couple. As are the 57-year-old couple.
Nope. In California 14 and 17 is legal and 18 15 is legal hence the law.
Have a nice day.
Like I said you keep saying that when you have a question you can’t answer and maintain your bullshit.
Should I point out in California there is no minimum age to marry and after marriage there is no statutory rape?
It’s gross to defend removing them bud.
Bad faith argument. None of that is being challenged. Have a good day.
Yeah, except the person you’re defending. You’re adorable, tell me to have a nice day and then continue the conversation one more time, it’ll be our thing.
That’s simply untrue, and your own citations demonstrate it. OP is clearly not discussing pedophilia, child marriage, age of consent, or any of the other issues you are trying to use as a distraction from the trouble you’re having with consensual adult incest. Bad faith argument; have a good day.
Executive they are and nuh uh is a shitty argument bud.