Debate Mansion

   

Incest | A Sin Or Not | (Page 7)

Post Reply New Post

Page 7 of 16

Freethinker112

IF-Sizzlerz

Freethinker112

Joined: 16 May 2012

Posts: 13809

Posted: 16 August 2012 at 9:27am | IP Logged
Originally posted by krystal_watz

Right. Spoken like a true defeated one.

And the trait continues. You already have reached the verdict, haven't you, that I am defeated?


Originally posted by krystal_watz

 Btw, I clarified all my "ad hominems" in my past posts. You might want to go back and read them.

Nope, you haven't, can't find them. You may wanna post again.
And really sneaky, editing a post AFTER I have replied to it.


Originally posted by krystal_watz

. And, I'm sorry, but its impossible to come up with a serious reply to whatever you wrote in this thread.

Same can be said about you.


Originally posted by krystal_watz

 And oh, you also went to great absurdities to defend yourself with statements likening ethical codes governing a mother-child relationship with a malpractise like Sati

Come on, I gotta spoon feed to you? Okay, let's take it in simple terms that you may understand.
Society thought women didn't deserve to live without their husband. Society thinks people should not have sexual relationship with their relation. The women wanted to live, opposing society views. Some people want to have sexual relation with family, opposing society views. But women were forced to act opposite of what they wanted. Incestuous couple are forced to act opposite of what they want.
See the correlation? If you can't understand in such simple terms, I can't make it any simpler.


Originally posted by krystal_watz

 You talk about "rule of the majority" in one post, and then contradict it by mentioning "consciental considerations".

I have, in this thread, argued against "rule of majority". I am actually for people free to do the things they want and society not interfering. Have you even read my posts?


Originally posted by krystal_watz

I'm sorry, but throughout the length of the debate between the two of us, you were unable to come up with anything except vapid theory and inconsistent rambling.

I actually argued for the freedom of people, while you made posts of self pompousness, considering yourself higher than every other person and considering every word coming out of your mouth as the absolute truth while opposing viewpoints are "inconsistent rambling". I actually made an argument, while your posts basically were confirmations by you that you were right.


Originally posted by krystal_watz

And yes, I have defended my arguments in every post where I also pointed out the discrepancies of your various points.

Nope, instead of defending you are just dying to prove i am a "young-theorist-rambler", and so you are automatically right. You are too stuck to even consider the opposite viewpoints without personal attacks.



The following 2 member(s) liked the above post:

DexterkilailaSamraat_92

Dear Guest, Being an unregistered member you are missing out on participating in the lively discussions happening on the topic "Incest | A Sin Or Not | (Page 7)" in Debate Mansion forum. In addition you lose out on the fun interactions with fellow members and other member exclusive features that India-Forums has to offer. Join India's most popular discussion portal on Indian Entertainment. It's FREE and registration is effortless so JOIN NOW!

krystal_watz

IF-Rockerz

krystal_watz

Joined: 10 August 2009

Posts: 9855

Posted: 16 August 2012 at 11:38am | IP Logged
Originally posted by Freethinker112

Originally posted by krystal_watz

Right. Spoken like a true defeated one.


And the trait continues. You already have reached the verdict, haven't you, that I am defeated?


Originally posted by krystal_watz

Btw, I clarified all my "ad hominems" in my past posts. You might want to go back and read them.


Nope, you haven't, can't find them. You may wanna post again.
And really sneaky, editing a post AFTER I have replied to it.


Originally posted by krystal_watz

. And, I'm sorry, but its impossible to come up with a serious reply to whatever you wrote in this thread.


Same can be said about you.


Originally posted by krystal_watz

And oh, you also went to great absurdities to defend yourself with statements likening ethical codes governing a mother-child relationship with a malpractise like Sati


Come on, I gottaspoonfeed to you? Okay, let's take it in simple terms that you mayunderstand.
Society thought women didn't deserve to live without their husband. Society thinks people should not have sexual relationship with their relation. The women wanted to live, opposing society views. Some people want to have sexual relation with family, opposing society views. But women were forced to actoppositeof what they wanted. Incestuous couple are forced to act opposite of what they want.
See the correlation? If you can't understand in such simple terms, I can't make it any simpler.
Sorry, that's an out-and-out absurd co-relation. Incest is against the basic social conditioning of humans, and hence considered "perverted" by Society at large. It is also wrong from a conscience POV, while a widow wanting to have a relationship is not conscientally wrong. And btw, Sati got nothing to do with anything here. You've also to learn how to make a point with clarity. And the relationship between blood-relatives is on an entirely different level than any Social custom. Parents and siblings, ARE parents and siblings in any culture, under any circumstances. Its the way we have been conditioned since we have shed the ape skin. That relationship is not "subjective" to anything. Oh, must I say more? :'(


Originally posted by krystal_watz

You talk about "rule of the majority" in one post, and then contradict it by mentioning "consciental considerations".


I have, in this thread, argued against "rule of majority". I am actually for people free to do the things they want and society not interfering. Have you even read my posts?
Turn the logic on to yourself. Human beings are social animals, and have a right to judge. Telling "society" not to interfere is impractical. Also, (in your language) who appointed you the Society Police? You got no right to tell people what they should think about others. Mind yo own biz.


Originally posted by krystal_watz

I'm sorry, but throughout the length of the debate between the two of us, you were unable to come up with anything except vapid theory and inconsistent rambling.


I actually arguedforthe freedom of people, while you made posts of selfpompousness, considering yourself higher than every other person andconsideringevery word coming out of your mouth as the absolute truth while opposing viewpoints are "inconsistent rambling". I actually made an argument, while your posts basically were confirmations by you that you were right.
You wish you knew what an argument is. You've a long way to go to grow up. And no, I'm not being snide. Freedom is never absolute, and people can never accept outlandish behaviour that is obnoxiously taboo. It's wrong to expect it. But that's something you won't understand at your age. Its all right.   


Originally posted by krystal_watz

And yes, I have defended my arguments in every post where I also pointed out the discrepancies of your various points.


Nope, instead of defending you are just dying to prove i am a "young-theorist-rambler", and so you are automatically right. You are too stuck to even consider the opposite viewpoints without personal attacks.




Read my last posts. Again and again. Patiently.

Freethinker112

IF-Sizzlerz

Freethinker112

Joined: 16 May 2012

Posts: 13809

Posted: 16 August 2012 at 10:10pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by krystal_watz

Sorry, that's an out-and-out absurd co-relation. Incest is against the basic social conditioning of humans, and hence considered "perverted" by Society at large. It is also wrong from a conscience POV, while a widow wanting to have a relationship is not conscientally wrong. And btw, Sati got nothing to do with anything here. You've also to learn how to make a point with clarity. And the relationship between blood-relatives is on an entirely different level than any Social custom. Parents and siblings, ARE parents and siblings in any culture, under any circumstances. Its the way we have been conditioned since we have shed the ape skin. That relationship is not "subjective" to anything. Oh, must I say more? :'(

And again, once upon a time Sati was also considered normal by the whole society. And that is just an example. It is wrong for your conscience, but apparently not for some otherwise they wouldn't have indulged in it. Again, one size doesn't fit all. Just because most doesn't want to have sexual relationship with family, doesn't mean that there can't be a small minority who does. And you yourself say that it is a "conditioning", meaning it is subjective and not objective.


Originally posted by krystal_watz

Turn the logic on to yourself. Human beings are social animals, and have a right to judge. Telling "society" not to interfere is impractical. Also, (in your language) who appointed you the Society Police? You got no right to tell people what they should think about others. Mind yo own biz.

Wow, you are ready to tell people what to do and now have a problem with people telling you what to think? You consider yourself above your rules?
And no, I never said that you didn't have a right to judge. I have repeated again and again that you have all the right to be grossed by it, you can have no connection with those people. But that doesn't give you the right to stop them. Judge all you want, but don't force down your thoughts down other throats.
And I am exactly minding my own business, that's why I am making the argument that if people are consenting they should be  allowed to do what they want. We should mind our own business. It's you who is adamant to pry into affairs of others, their personal sex lives. And again, take your own advice.


Originally posted by krystal_watz

You wish you knew what an argument is. You've a long way to go to grow up. And no, I'm not being snide. Freedom is never absolute, and people can never accept outlandish behaviour that is obnoxiously taboo. It's wrong to expect it. But that's something you won't understand at your age. Its all right.   

Personal attacks, yet again.
And you will never grow up. You will become 60 one day and still be stuck in your mentality.
Yes, if all people are consenting, they should be free to do what they want.
And society is changing. Once inter-religious and inter-caste marriages were taboo, and that taboo is diminishing nowadays.
And seems like personal choice is a concept you won't understand at any age, even when you get 60.


Edited by Freethinker112 - 16 August 2012 at 10:09pm

The following 1 member(s) liked the above post:

Samraat_92

krystal_watz

IF-Rockerz

krystal_watz

Joined: 10 August 2009

Posts: 9855

Posted: 17 August 2012 at 12:01am | IP Logged
Originally posted by Freethinker112

Originally posted by krystal_watz

Sorry, that's an out-and-out absurd co-relation. Incest is against the basic social conditioning of humans, and hence considered "perverted" by Society at large. It is also wrong from a conscience POV, while a widow wanting to have a relationship is not conscientally wrong. And btw, Sati got nothing to do with anything here. You've also to learn how to make a point with clarity. And the relationship between blood-relatives is on an entirely different level than any Social custom. Parents and siblings, ARE parents and siblings in any culture, under any circumstances. Its the way we have been conditioned since we have shed the ape skin. That relationship is not "subjective" to anything. Oh, must I say more? :'(

And again, once upon a time Sati was also considered normal by the whole society. And that is just an example. It is wrong for your conscience, but apparently not for some otherwise they wouldn't have indulged in it. Again, one size doesn't fit all. Just because most doesn't want to have sexual relationship with family, doesn't mean that there can't be a small minority who does. And you yourself say that it is a "conditioning", meaning it is subjective and not objective.

Again, blood relations are NOT on the same level as social customs. Blood relations are universal, independant of any individual society. And, using the "subjective" logic, every social construct is subjective, including general ethics and morality. This could be used as an argument to justify Sati as well.
Originally posted by Freethinker112

[QUOTE=krystal_watz][B]Turn the logic on to yourself. Human beings are social animals, and have a right to judge. Telling "society" not to interfere is impractical. Also, (in your language) who appointed you the Society Police? You got no right to tell people what they should think about others. Mind yo own biz.Wow, you are ready to tell people what to do and now have a problem with people telling you what to think? You consider yourself above your rules?
And no, I never said that you didn't have a right to judge. I have repeated again and again that you have all the right to be grossed by it, you can have no connection with those people. But that doesn't give you the right to stop them. Judge all you want, but don't force down your thoughts down other throats.
And I am exactly minding my own business, that's why I am making the argument that if people are consenting they should be allowed to do what they want. We should mind our own business. It's you who is adamant to pry into affairs of others, their personal sex lives. And again, take your own advice.



HAHAHA, getting agitated, are you? See, your tender mind speaks at this point Tongue What do you mean by "forcing views down one's throat"? How does one do it, pray? Avoiding people who violate integral social norms, boycotting em, is the way people go. And, by the way, incest is illegal in many countries. Go screech at the law. Hoo hoo.   *yawn*
Originally posted by Freethinker112

[QUOTE=krystal_watz][B]You wish you knew what an argument is. You've a long way to go to grow up. And no, I'm not being snide. Freedom is never absolute, and people can never accept outlandish behaviour that is obnoxiously taboo. It's wrong to expect it. But that's something you won't understand at your age. Its all right.
Personal attacks, yet again.And you will never grow up. You will become 60 one day and still be stuck in your mentality.
Yes, if all people are consenting, they should be free to do what they want.
And society is changing. Once inter-religious and inter-caste marriages were taboo, and that taboo is diminishing nowadays.
[DIV]And seems like personal choice is a concept you won't understand at any age, even when you get 60.

Suicide is a personal choice too, my darlin. Should it be encouraged? Some people decide to stay on in an abusive relationship by choice. Are they making a healthy choice? Naw. And, SOCIETAL CONSENT is the whole point of the debate. If people weren't concerned about social norms, we wouldn't have a society. Humans are intelligent. They reason. They judge others and actions. Animals don't judge or reason. They don't debate either for that reason. Quite complex, huh? :(

Edited by krystal_watz - 17 August 2012 at 12:22am

Freethinker112

IF-Sizzlerz

Freethinker112

Joined: 16 May 2012

Posts: 13809

Posted: 17 August 2012 at 9:24am | IP Logged
Originally posted by krystal_watz

Again, blood relations are NOT on the same level as social customs. Blood relations are universal, independant of any individual society. And, using the "subjective" logic, every social construct is subjective, including general ethics and morality. This could be used as an argument to justify Sati as well.

Yes, but if society dictates what you are supposed to do in a blood relation, then it makes it a custom. And I used the "subjective logic" to say that it is wrong to make incest a sin because some people believe it to be, the same way that I said Sati was not right just because some people believed it to be. I don't know where did you get the idea  you can justify Sati by that logic.


Originally posted by krystal_watz

HAHAHA, getting agitated, are you? See, your tender mind speaks at this point Tongue What do you mean by "forcing views down one's throat"? How does one do it, pray? Avoiding people who violate integral social norms, boycotting em, is the way people go.

Again, personal comment. No doubt you use so many of them, seems like you don't have any confidence in your arguments.
I said you could stay away from them. Not everybody is like you, they will find some people who treat them normally. And they know that most people won't be supportive, the most you can do is to leave them alone. 


Originally posted by krystal_watz

 And, by the way, incest is illegal in many countries. Go screech at the law. Hoo hoo.   *yawn*

And legal in many. For example, it is legal in India if both parties are adults. So, you can stop your happy dance.


Originally posted by krystal_watz


Suicide is a personal choice too, my darlin. Should it be encouraged?

Again, you seem to be having problems comprehending my posts. Look up the meaning of "Tolerate", "Encourage" and "Approve" in a dictionary. Then you will understand what I mean by saying that I can tolerate it but not encourage or approve it.


Originally posted by krystal_watz

Some people decide to stay on in an abusive relationship by choice. Are they making a healthy choice?

Nope, but incest does not mean abuse. 


Originally posted by krystal_watz

 Naw. And, SOCIETAL CONSENT is the whole point of the debate. If people weren't concerned about social norms, we wouldn't have a society. Humans are intelligent. They reason. They judge others and actions. Animals don't judge or reason. They don't debate either for that reason. Quite complex, huh? :

Maybe complex for you, not so much for me. As I have said many times, thinking of society changes over time. Once our society considered many things taboo which we do nowadays. It has changed in the past, and it will keep changing in the future. And no, not everybody is dying for the approval of society, like you. This thread is about the personal thoughts of the members regarding incest. And as usual, you seem to assume that you speak for everyone.

The following 1 member(s) liked the above post:

Samraat_92

krystal_watz

IF-Rockerz

krystal_watz

Joined: 10 August 2009

Posts: 9855

Posted: 17 August 2012 at 9:57am | IP Logged
Originally posted by Freethinker112

Originally posted by krystal_watz

Again, blood relations are NOT on the same level as social customs. Blood relations are universal, independant of any individual society. And, using the "subjective" logic, every social construct is subjective, including general ethics and morality. This could be used as an argument to justify Sati as well.

Yes, but if society dictates what you are supposed to do in a blood relation, then it makes it a custom. And I used the "subjective logic" to say that it is wrong to make incest a sin because some peoplebelieveit to be, the same way that I said Sati was not right just because some people believed it to be. I don't know where did you get the idea you can justify Sati by that logic.
By using the term "society dictates", you undermine the centrality and universality of the concept of Blood Relations. And yes, everything related to ethics or legality is "dictated by society", whether you realize it or not. For the umpteenth time: Don't like social norms, you're free to leave and reside in isolation.


Originally posted by krystal_watz

HAHAHA, getting agitated, are you? See, your tender mind speaks at this pointTongueWhat do you mean by "forcing views down one's throat"? How does one do it, pray? Avoiding people who violate integral social norms, boycotting em, is the way people go.


Again, personal comment. No doubt you use so many of them, seems like you don't have any confidence in your arguments.
I said you could stay away from them. Not everybody is like you, they will find some people who treat them normally. And they know that most people won't be supportive, the most you can do is to leave them alone.

You make no sense. Conflicting statements. You repeated the exact same thing you said before. Look up the dictionary meaning of boycott. It means leaving alone. What the hell are you trying to convey?
Originally posted by krystal_watz

And, by the way, incest is illegal in many countries. Go screech at the law. Hoo hoo.   *yawn*


And legal in many. For example, it is legal inIndiaif both parties are adults. So, you can stop your happy dance.


Originally posted by krystal_watz


Suicide is a personal choice too, my darlin. Should it be encouraged?


Again, you seem to be having problems comprehending my posts. Look up the meaning of "Tolerate", "Encourage" and "Approve" in a dictionary. Then you will understand what I mean by saying that I can tolerate it but not encourage or approve it.

And what EXACTLY do you mean by that? "Tolerating" is a passive action, and so is "disapproving". So what difference does it make if anybody is psychologically tolerant OR intolerant towards it?



Originally posted by krystal_watz

Some people decide to stay on in an abusive relationship by choice. Are they making a healthy choice?


Nope, but incest does notmeanabuse.


Originally posted by krystal_watz

Naw. And, SOCIETAL CONSENT is the whole point of the debate. If people weren't concerned about social norms, we wouldn't have a society. Humans are intelligent. They reason. They judge others and actions. Animals don't judge or reason. They don't debate either for that reason. Quite complex, huh? :


Maybe complex for you, not so much for me. As I have said many times, thinking of society changes over time. Once our society considered many things taboo which we do nowadays. It has changed in the past, and it will keep changing in the future. And no, not everybody is dying for the approval of society, like you. This thread is about the personal thoughts of the members regarding incest. And as usual, you seem to assume that you speak for everyone.

And how did you make this assumption? Oh, right. I quoted you and questioned your stance in an aggressive tone. LOL
Keep trying. Anybody who is not desperate for social approval, negates the need for tolerance you cry out for.
Keep trying and typing. :)

.DarkParadise..

IF-Stunnerz

.DarkParadise..

BollyCurry Buzzer

Joined: 17 February 2010

Posts: 25433

Posted: 17 August 2012 at 10:52am | IP Logged
Well, I don't know if I'd call it a 'sin' or not because I think everyone has a right to lead their own personal lives and make choices. But definitely, it is not something which is acceptable to me. As far as possible, I do not let people who have committed mistakes feel awkward around me but if i encounter an incest, I think I might just fail at that. Whether he should be ashamed or not, well, it will be easy for me to sit behind the computer and say 'it is his life and he shouldn't lead it like the society wants him to' and all 'coz I myself give a damn about the society in many aspects but as unfair, narrow-minded and hypocritical as it will be, I might not be able to hide my contemptConfused

The following 1 member(s) liked the above post:

krystal_watz

krystal_watz

IF-Rockerz

krystal_watz

Joined: 10 August 2009

Posts: 9855

Posted: 17 August 2012 at 11:31am | IP Logged
Originally posted by PurpleFairy

Well, I don't know if I'd call it a 'sin' or not because I think everyone has a right to lead their own personal lives and make choices. But definitely, it is not something which is acceptable to me. As far as possible, I do not let people who have committed mistakes feel awkward around me but if i encounter an incest, I think I might just fail at that. Whether he should be ashamed or not, well, it will be easy for me to sit behind the computer and say 'it is his life and he shouldn't lead it like the society wants him to' and all 'coz I myself give a damn about the society in many aspects but as unfair, narrow-minded and hypocritical as it will be, I might not be able to hide my contemptConfused

The point. Theroretical talks of "tolerance" and "letting one live his life" can go only so far. In a society, humans are conditioned to live by norms. Gross transgressions are bound to invoke contempt. People can't help it in real life. But its still a concept too complex to comprehend for certain folks. Them, who are at a stage of life where tempting bookish notions of "unconventionality" and "tolerance" overtake practical, everday common sense. Big smile

Post Reply New Post

Go to top

Related Topics

  Topics Topic Starter Replies Views Last Post
Your opinion on Incest

2 3 4 5 6

..RamKiJanaki.. 45 5715 07 September 2009 at 9:41am
By rogna

Forum Quick Jump

Forum Category

Active Forums

Debate Mansion Topic Index

Limit search to this Forum only.

 

Disclaimer: All Logos and Pictures of various Channels, Shows, Artistes, Media Houses, Companies, Brands etc. belong to their respective owners, and are used to merely visually identify the Channels, Shows, Companies, Brands, etc. to the viewer. Incase of any issue please contact the webmaster.