Affairs

Nellisir said:

Kids cannot give consent. Neither can animals, for that matter. That's why we have the term "consenting adults".

Click to expand...

Zombie_Babies said:

What does that have to do with what you quoted? I said nothing about kids and consent. I've seen people say things like 'if we allow ____ sex then what's next? kids? animals?' and that's all crap. 100%, total crap. It's been hinted at in this thread that if out of wedlock marriage is seen as ok then that opens up an avenue for kids to be touched. That's what I was talking about cuz it's absolutely ridiculous.

Click to expand...

What does that have to do with what you quoted?

Click to expand...

goldomark said:

I find it interesting that we need the consent of an animal to marry it, but not to slaughter it and eat it.

Click to expand...

Umbran said:

Heh. When we kill an animal for food these days, we generally make it as quick and human as possible. When you marry someone, it lasts a long time, and if it goes badly, it isn't humane at all...

Click to expand...

Nellisir said:

Yes, I agree. It's ridiculous and it's a stupid argument, because kids and animals cannot give consent. Gay marriage? Two adults. Straight marriage? Two adults. Group marriage? Well, still all adults. Adult & Animal? Uh, no. No consent. Adult & child? No consent. Arguing that a relationship between two consenting adults is the same as between an adult and child, or an adult and an animal, is fundamentally ignorant.

I'm agreeing with you, dude.

EDIT FOR EXTRA CLARITY

My statement is the commonly understood legal and morally basis of your position; it is _why_ "its absolutely ridiculous". It might not be _your_ basis (maybe you have a deep seated belief that tall people and short people are ridiculous together), but it's the common reasoning for such a position.

View attachment 60608Sheer insanity.

Again, yes, you are right.

Click to expand...