₦airaland Forum

HappyPagan:
alright, are you on twitter?
Lordreed, anyone?

fieryy:
Offsprings with close relatives increases the risk of genetic and birth defects by significant amount in just one family. That's the reason why it's illegal in most countries.

The problem of kids being disabled might bkt be a moral problem, but you having a relationship with someone knowing the risks and implications that come with it, is a moral one.

But yes not every sexual relationship leads to pregnancy BUT every sexual relationship CAN lead to one.

Olorunnim:
How please explain is it not a moral problem?

tartar9:
Lol...but slaughtering them like animals and using them for peppersoup is consensual right

tartar9:
Lol...but slaughtering them like animals and using them for peppersoup is consensual right

fieryy:
Oh my gosh, seriously?

Do you want your kids to be disabled?!

LordReed:
Hey johnydon22, what's your take on the death penalty?

jesusjnr:
I think it has to do with numbers and a measure devised to curb or limit sexual immorality.

For instance a man sleeping with his own blood sister is a step closer to a father sleeping with his own daughter.

And there were instances recorded in the Bible where a sister married her brother and it was acceptable, but never a parent sleeping with his own child.

So probably incest being labelled immoral in Mosaic laws is just to reduce the chances of parent-child sex than that between a brother and sister.

For there's a way you'd observe it and see that we're all blood related, so all sex should be incest, but it's not so probably because incest is meant to provide that safe distance between those who are more closely related, so as to reduce the chances of parent-child sex.

Olorunnim:
Morality is a fluid subject it's a cultural thing what's seen as moral and okay in my culture may not be in yours And the world is becoming smaller cultures intermingle and ideas are exchanged, So I can't be the one to say what's moral or not

Like I said again to me it's a No No.

Olorunnim:
Scientifically speaking it's dangerous for the sake of the children such Union begets, But Again it has been in existence since time immemorial Asian middle Eastern And Even some European countries Engage in such acts But for me it's a No No I'm not the judgemental type So I won't condemn or praise Anyone Who engages in such Act,Live and let live.

JeromeBlack:
This is a waste of time. A lot of Nigerians cannot put forward a logical argument.

tartar9:
Well,if you think homosexuality isnt wrong and support gay rights then incest or bestiality shouldn't be wrong either.Live and let live,isnt it

budaatum:
If Jamiu can perform a miracle to "change everything about Jamiu to match what is typical of women right down to the genetic level", who would argue with her that she's not a woman?

We will perform all valid checks to truly ensure a miracle happened however. No one is pulling a TBJ on this lot!

Dudeweedlmao:
Johnydon22 why does the helicopter fan look like its slowing down ot even going anti-clockwise when the heli is about to take off?

sonmvayina:
ghost exist.....dont ask me how i know....lol

is the earth hanging on something or just floating in space?...

there are so many instances that 'wao' our physical reality..that we simply cannot push aside.there are things beyond the physical that seems to affect us, that no amount of medication can get rid of...

i think no one can claim any concrete knowledge of the immaterial realm as there are many possibilities as the population of the earth, i think it will be stupid for us to ignore it or fooolish for us to claim the opposite.

people are already finding it hard to grasp the singularity of the dual concept..not to talk of one billion possibilities..

tartar9:
Those higher dimensions follow from the equations.They seem to be necessary consequences for consistency in nature.

paraltero:
Okay, so who decides what is true?

paraltero:
It may be naïve to you but then you're neither an authority nor the person who makes the rules.

This kind of ties into my position. You say you're right. You believe you're right. If I gather 20 people and they all agree that you're wrong, are you wrong or still right?

paraltero:
That you don't agree with my assertions don't make them infantile or naïve.

You can't be judge, jury AND plaintiff.

I've been civil throughout this discussion but hey, guess I can't expect everyone else to be the same.

paraltero:
Here's a small analogy. If I wear an outfit and I say it looks good but 10 people say it doesn't, who is right?

paraltero:
Quick question: which identity is more valid; the identity people have of themselves or the identity other people give them?

paraltero:
Well you've introduced an element of agression and I'm not about that life.

paraltero:
It's supposed to be a discussion not an argument. If you choose to make an argument out of it, hey, you're right. We can end it now.

paraltero:
But when it comes to identity, there is no fact!

Identity's uniqueness is that it is whatever it is.

There is no default, no template, no standard. All identities differ, no matter how slight the differences might be. So if there is no standard for is, how can you tell something isn't? So if a human believes he is a dog, then by all intents and purposes, he is a dog mentally.

Your position is the exact same on people use to attack gay people, talking about "oh, most humans are straight so being straight is the standard and homosexuality isn't natural so you guys are wrong and abnormal".

This even after homosexuality has been shown to exist in nearly every species. That something isn't usual doesn't make it unnatural, but that's a digression.

If it's taken that identity is unque and there's no true state for identity, it means all your position falls back to biology.

Now I asked if your position is still tenable if human biology itself can be changed.

paraltero:
So what then makes the sex of a person? If you agree that sex is set at the chromosomal level, then it's no longer a delusion if someonce can change that, right?

However, I'm getting the impression that you feel sex is set at both the chromosomal level and the mental/conscious level too.

However, consciousness is sexless and genderless. It can be anything at any time. It's our consciousness that chooses how we percieve ourselves at any time and if our conscious self decides it's a horse, and the subconscious agrees with it, then for all intents and purposes, the person is mentally a horse, no matter what anatomy, physiology and morphology say.

So it still boils down to chromosomes and if that can be tweaked, I don't believe there's delusion.

It's like saying because someone has undergone a kidney transplant, the person is kidney-less because the kidney that's now there is not the one the person came with. Is it the person's original kidney? No. Does the person have a kidney? Of course!

LordReed:
Actually you've shown how you define gender which means you are already diverging and creating your own paradigm, similar to how you are accusing others of doing.



They do, a pupil is any human child in primary school, a cook is any adult human who prepares meals, none of these roles are defined by their sex.



Yes indeed but are you the arbiter of what social convention is or we all collectively deciding where we should go?



Indeed you shouldn't care what someone calls themselves and I doubt anybody is interested in forcing you into a position where you have to pass delusion as truth.

budaatum:
It seriously does They can assign themselves dog. Pig is already taken. Or futuristically speaking, Venusians, or Martians. They will be assignable specie one day.

budaatum:
They are categorically affirming that DNA XY or XX do not define who they are.

They are the Ubermensch who will chose the dick the lipstick thr gender or sex they want!

LordReed:
You said these are social constructs so we are the ones defining these things. If we change them to

Man: Adult human male or female
Woman: Adult human female or male
Boy: Child human male or female
Girl: child human female or male

just like

Cook: Adult human male or female
Driver: Adult human male or female
Pupil: Child human male or female

which are roles defined not by the sex but by the social function. What will be wrong with that?

budaatum:
We covered quite a lot on what we referred to at the time as objective and subjective morality. Some might not have seen the connection but its there humpty dumpty like. Heres actual human beings telling you they are changing gender and the bits that go with it, but to you they are delusional, even though they passed the 'are you delusional test' before their bits were cut off.

Personally speaking, I think dem chop belle full and it will come back to bite them, both the deluded persons accessing and the parents and the poor brain-dead child. Let them be in naija and claim they are not the gender their mama and papa gave them and let us see. Its nothing new though. The anthropologist sees the similarity in eunuchs.

Anyway, here's wiki on transgender et al.

LordReed:
So could it be that it is those social representations that have become interchangeable?