Should Dwarves(Dwarfs?) be allowed to have children?

[Uzumaki Macho]

How is incest unethical? Ethics is subjective. I think it's obvious that two male genitalia don't work together, and two female genitalia don't work together. It's obviously wrong.

Are far as ethics goes both are detestable, but by supporting one and not the other you're a hypocrite

Do you also think it's unethical for infertile people to have ***?

 

[Punk Hazard]

How is incest unethical? Ethics is subjective. I think it's obvious that two male genitalia don't work together, and two female genitalia don't work together. It's obviously wrong.

Are far as ethics goes both are detestable, but by supporting one and not the other you're a hypocrite

How do they not work together? They don't result in reproduction, but it does result in pleasure, which is just as big a part of *** as reproduction.

Hey, wait a second. When we were having those big rape debates about how getting consent from a drunk person isn't really consent, didn't you say that you go to parties and clubs and shit and get drunk and hit on drunk women and get hit on by drunk women and all that, so you can have a night of ***? Are you telling me that each of those times, you did it in order to get her pregnant, and not for the pleasure? Because, why do you get to be able to have straight *** just because it feels good, but gay people can't have *** with the same organs just because it feels good? Why do you get to dodge around the reproductive aspect of ***, but for gay people, the fact that they can't reproduce and can only **** for pleasure means their way is wrong?

 

[paratise]

How does slim know those genitalias do not work together though?

 

[slimreaper]

How do they not work together? They don't result in reproduction, but it does result in pleasure, which is just as big a part of *** as reproduction.

Hey, wait a second. When we were having those big rape debates about how getting consent from a drunk person isn't really consent, didn't you say that you go to parties and clubs and shit and get drunk and hit on drunk women and get hit on by drunk women and all that, so you can have a night of ***? Are you telling me that each of those times, you did it in order to get her pregnant, and not for the pleasure? Because, why do you get to be able to have straight *** just because it feels good, but gay people can't have *** with the same organs just because it feels good? Why do you get to dodge around the reproductive aspect of ***, but for gay people, the fact that they can't reproduce and can only **** for pleasure means their way is wrong?

How does slim know those genitalias do not work together though?

Do you also think it's unethical for infertile people to have ***?

I answer you all with the same thing.

It's clear they are two puzzle pieces that don't fit together and is therefore wrong. I never brought up that it was because their *** doesn't produce children it's wrong(although that's a side effect of the genitalia not being designed to work together), just because they clearly aren't designed to go together it's wrong. You'll never convince me differently and I personally believe you all know the same things but won't admit it. It's wrong.

 

[Punk Hazard]

I answer you all with the same thing.

It's clear they are two puzzle pieces that don't fit together and is therefore wrong. I never brought up that it was because their *** doesn't produce children it's wrong(although that's a side effect of the genitalia not being designed to work together), just because they clearly aren't designed to go together it's wrong. You'll never convince me differently and I personally believe you all know the same things but won't admit it. It's wrong.

Nah, nah, nah, genitals aren't puzzle pieces. Let's keep it plain and simple. If two penises or two vaginas can still generate pleasure, then what's the problem? If the problem is that no reproduction results, then you're a hypocrite because you have *** purely for pleasure as well. If the inability to cause reproduction isn't a problem, then there's no reason it isn't right.

So which is it? Don't dodge around the ****ing question either and try to appear smarter than you actualy are, answer plain and simple for a plain and simple question, you hypocrite.

 

[paratise]

I answer you all with the same thing.

It's clear they are two puzzle pieces that don't fit together and is therefore wrong. I never brought up that it was because their *** doesn't produce children it's wrong(although that's a side effect of the genitalia not being designed to work together), just because they clearly aren't designed to go together it's wrong. You'll never convince me differently and I personally believe you all know the same things but won't admit it. It's wrong.

Are people not meant to kiss because they are essentially using same organs(lips) thus "toy pieces" in this scenario?
Human relationships and organs are not toy pieces. You are building a false equivalency and expect everyone to go along with it by simply saying it is wrong.

 

[slimreaper]

Nah, nah, nah, genitals aren't puzzle pieces. Let's keep it plain and simple. If two penises or two vaginas can still generate pleasure, then what's the problem? If the problem is that no reproduction results, then you're a hypocrite because you have *** purely for pleasure as well. If the inability to cause reproduction isn't a problem, then there's no reason it isn't right.

So which is it? Don't dodge around the ****ing question either and try to appear smarter than you actualy are, answer plain and simple for a plain and simple question, you hypocrite.

go find a ***** and rub your dicks together and see how long it takes you to come.


even Sigmund Freud agrees with me

You must be registered for see links

"Soon after the libidinal shift to the penis, the child develops her first sexual impulses towards her mother.
The girl realizes that she is not physically equipped to have a heterosexual relationship with her mother, since she does not have a penis."


there is no denying the penis and vagina are made specifically for each other. Go ahead find a way around that. You people are in serious denial

 

[Norman Bates]

go find a ***** and rub your dicks together and see how long it takes you to come.


even Sigmund Freud agrees with me

You must be registered for see links

"Soon after the libidinal shift to the penis, the child develops her first sexual impulses towards her mother.
The girl realizes that she is not physically equipped to have a heterosexual relationship with her mother, since she does not have a penis."


there is no denying the penis and vagina are made specifically for each other. Go ahead find a way around that. You people are in serious denial

I am very happy to find someone who supports Mother and I being together because that is what you're doing, but I wish it wasn't someone so...troubled like you.

 

[slimreaper]

I am very happy to find someone who supports Mother and I being together because that is what you're doing, but I wish it wasn't someone so...troubled like you.

I don't support your weird shit either, just pointing out hypocrisy here, run along.

 

[Marin]

Nope. With such a high chance of baby and the mother not making it they're better off adopting.

Care centers are overcrowded anyway.

 

[paratise]

go find a ***** and rub your dicks together and see how long it takes you to come.


even Sigmund Freud agrees with me

You must be registered for see links

"Soon after the libidinal shift to the penis, the child develops her first sexual impulses towards her mother.
The girl realizes that she is not physically equipped to have a heterosexual relationship with her mother, since she does not have a penis."


there is no denying the penis and vagina are made specifically for each other. Go ahead find a way around that. You people are in serious denial

Did u srsly used arguements of a psychanalist from 100 years ago?

What is next, quantum physics by Newton and animal classification by Aristotles?

Also wasn't he the guy who said we all have incestuous urges? I am confused slimmy.

 

[Marin]

Nah, nah, nah, genitals aren't puzzle pieces. Let's keep it plain and simple. If two penises or two vaginas can still generate pleasure, then what's the problem? If the problem is that no reproduction results, then you're a hypocrite because you have *** purely for pleasure as well. If the inability to cause reproduction isn't a problem, then there's no reason it isn't right.

So which is it? Don't dodge around the ****ing question either and try to appear smarter than you actualy are, answer plain and simple for a plain and simple question, you hypocrite.

To a masochist a needle in the **** will provide pleasure so I guess that's just as compatible.

Look, he's obviously talking from a biological stand-point, not personal one. Biology deals with objective - compatibility for reproduction. Pleasure deals with subjective - compatibility to feel good. He's talking about puzzle pieces in that context.

Also, his hypocrisy doesn't really damage the arguments he's making so why focus on it so much?

 

[slimreaper]

Did u srsly used arguements of a psychanalist from 100 years ago?

What is next, quantum physics by Newton and animal classification by Aristotles?

Also wasn't he the guy who said we all have incestuous urges? I am confused slimmy.

As small children we might, Who am I to disagree with that, I don't remember.

point being male and female genitalia are made for each other clearly, denying it makes one look foolish.

 

[slimreaper]

To a masochist a needle in the **** will provide pleasure so I guess that's just as compatible.

Look, he's obviously talking from a biological stand-point, not personal one. Biology deals with objective - compatibility for reproduction. Pleasure deals with subjective - compatibility to feel good. He's talking about puzzle pieces in that context.

Also, his hypocrisy doesn't really damage the arguments he's making so why focus on it so much?

it's called a to quoque

You must be registered for see links

 

[Marin]

it's called a to quoque

You must be registered for see links

Tbh I didn't know what it's called. Tx for the info I guess.

 

[Claymantan]

it's called a to quoque

You must be registered for see links

Quotes an entry that says that his own style of argument (this thread) is a logical fallacy

Also showed me a video of Bill Burr making his argument about transgendered people in another thread, in which video Bill Burr calls himself a moron (although I enjoy Bill Burr's work)

Slim just does the work for himself in his own threads

 

[slimreaper]

Quotes an entry that says that his own style of argument (this thread) is a logical fallacy

Also showed me a video of Bill Burr making his argument about transgendered people in another thread, in which video Bill Burr calls himself a moron (although I enjoy Bill Burr's work)

Slim just does the work for himself in his own threads

First the bill burr video was just funny, I wasn't using it to make a point.


second, to quoque's are only fallacies if the hypocrisy has nothing to do with the argument such as the example they provide.

The hypocrisy has to directly contradict the argument, mine doesn't.

 

[CrimsonReaper]

I believe homosexuality to be unethical and not morally right.


you'll get over it

Homosexuality is an identity, incest is not you can't change your sexuality but you most certainly can get over your creepy sexual fantasy.

 

[Lightbringer]

you'll get over it

Oh it's not me that will have to get over it, it's your unfortunate children that will have to deal with you.

 

[Lightbringer]

As small children we might, Who am I to disagree with that, I don't remember.

point being male and female genitalia are made for each other clearly, denying it makes one look foolish.

So why does nature create gay people? Gay animals exist too. It's not a choice that someone can make on a whim.