In article <look-5E6812.11462207072003@no-spam>,
The Expatriate <look@no-spam> wrote:
> This isn't a high school debate class.
No, it's Usenet, which is debate class on steroids.
> I don't have to prove an axiom.
It's not axiomatic that incest between consenting adults should be
illegal.
> Few people these days deny the right of gay couples the right to sleep
> with whom they please
Until the Supreme Court ruled in Lawrence v. Texas, 13 states _did_
deny gays the right to sleep with whom they please. That was the whole
point of the case, remember?
> but I don't notice a big rush to defend
> incestuous couples. Society realizes it's taboo
taboo
1. A ban or an inhibition resulting from social custom or emotional
aversion.
So you're saying it's wrong because people say it's wrong. You're
arguing in circles.
> and no one, with the
> exception of you, is willing to waste time and energy trying to prove
> incest is just another "lifestyle choice."
I'm not trying to prove anything. I'm just trying to make you defend
your opinion, something you seem unable or unwilling to do.
--
D.F. Manno
dommanno@no-spam
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." (Benjamin Franklin)
Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2003 21:58:32 -0400
"D.F. Manno" wrote:
> I don't believe _anything_ the anti-abortion nuts have to say on the subject.
> They lie.
Well, there you go, an exemplary view of the open-minded, even-handed pro-choice
movement. As long as ideologues discount everything from the other side, they
never have to bother opening their minds and considering that they might be wrong.
--
Freddie Patek, asked how it feels to be the smallest player in major league
baseball: "A heck of a lot better than being the smallest player in the minors"