Last year Penny Lawrence (28) tracked down her long-lost father Garry Ryan (46). Lawrence is now pregnant with his child and claims to be in love with her father.
I would like to discuss a sample of the comments from the news item***:
johnnymac12 | Feb 20, 2012, 12:22 PM EST
What a filthy b*****d this 'father' is. Should be put before the courts and jailed for life.
It's a sad state of affairs. Very sad. Very wrong. Intensely wrong. Horrifically wrong.
SICK, FU*KING SICK SICK
SICK, FU*KING SICK SICK
I am confused and require help processing the seemingly obvious hypocrisy here (could be none, hence *seeming*).
1. People (en masse) are making declarative statements concerning right and wrong (i.e., this {incest behaviour} is wrong).
2. People were/are told point blank with homosexual couples that no declarative statements of right and wrong are allowed. i.e.: you have no right to judge others. They are consenting adults who love each other, why would you deny them any rights? Why would you H8 and judge others? Who are you to declare moral superiority, moral righteousness over them by imposing your theistic "moral absolutes"?
3. Where are the homosexual supporters now? Where are all the 'heroes' of equality, justice and love? Suddenly, can't find too many on this thread...or any other thread.
What is the distinguishing factor between a homosexual couple and the couple noted above? They both love each other and they are both age of majority. Why is incest "sad", "sick" and "wrong" and the homosexual relations are simply "on the right path"? Can anyone explain why making a morally declarative statement is okay with the incest couple above, but not homosexual couples? (this is wrong, is sad etc. is cool and allowed with incest, but not a homosexual couple)
Where are all the 'judge not-ers' now? What happened to the moralists crusade to prevent H8ers from H8'n?
If one argues both (incest, homosexuality) are amoral (or morally good, right and pure), then what makes them either amoral, or morally right pure and good?
If one argues homosexual activity is either amoral, or moral, but the incest couple is immoral, then what is the distinguishing factor, and what makes that distinguishing factor 'true'?
I call on Laddy GaGa to apply the same vernacular/logic to the incest couple as she does with the homosexual community (or make a distinction):
No matter gay, straight, or bi,
Lesbian, transgendered lifeI’m on the right track baby
I was born to survive
Can we be 'inclusive' and 'loving' and add incest please? If not, please explain why.
Unless educated otherwise, it seems we either accept the reality that morals exist and strive to be consistent within them, or admit we are agenda based and there is no real consistency of logic in our ad hoc approach to life and rules.
*** I am not saying either acts are wrong, sad or sick in this entry...I am simply asking questions...
This is what happens in a world that has shunned God
ReplyDelete“You have your way. I have my way. As for the right way, the correct way, and the only way, it does not exist.”
― Friedrich Nietzsche
There is a way that seems right to a man but its end is the way of death. Proverbs 14:12
I think they're insane, but is there some kind of blind spot in the conservative ideology that doesn't allow you to acknowledge basic biological facts? It's like discussing abortion. Conservatives claim that there is no difference between a born baby and an unborn one except its location. Right. A woman is just a container; there's no biological relationship between her and the "unborn baby" AT ALL. She's not effectively its life support machine or anything.
ReplyDeleteSimilarly here. You conservatives love to go on and on about how homosexuality is stupid because it doesn't produce offspring (among other criticisms). Never mind that homosexuality isn't sterility and that gay people often produce children before coming out of the closet. We won't even look at that. But then let's compare the non-reproducing homosexual couple with the reproducing incestuous couple. Yep, there you go. I did your thinking for you.
You know, if by some miracle a gay or lesbian couple *could* produce a kid between them? Assuming you didn't get a YY sex-chromosome arrangement in the kid of a gay male couple... they're still *not related.* It'd still be the sexual reproduction of two unrelated people.
But they don't reproduce with one another. They produce no children. No third party has to pay the price for them twisting up a family tree. If they would have in the first place. Which we already established they wouldn't.
Seriously. Could you *try* to think about this for a minute? Maybe possibly?