₦airaland Forum

Come to think of it, how come two consenting adults had sex and produced a child, then the authorities accuse them of inceest but yet only the man was sent to jail?

Sexist West?

cococandy: They are being sensible in applying the laws of human rights.
And being sensible requires some measure of selectivity.

Good!

Next time, we should all collectively tell them and Obama & Cameron and their impressionable, moronic mouthpiece proxies to fck off when they start their homosexuality crusade and criticising countries for banning homosexuality by referring to Human rights.

Every country on Earth selectively applies it.

carefreewannabe: I don't want to elongate arguments. I don't want to have another debate.

I just want to know your opinion on in.cest (between siblings, not homo.se*xuality) being a punishable act.

I am not going to contradict, neither am I going to agree.
I just want to know.

It is disgusting and unnecessary, so should be banned.

That said, I think, as violently disgusting as it is, it is less disgusting than homosexual sex.

Societies need to make laws that is dependent on good morals and ban such (i.e. both) from mainstream.

If people (adults) then want to bone themselves behind closed doors, as long as we would not know about it and no one is coming to tell me "this is the 21st century! Accept it, it is funky", then it is not my business or concern.

If I suspect someone (an adult) is banging their sibling, I would not give a fck. Just like I don't give a fck if I know someone is an homosexual but the person is not putting it in front of me, calling me a bigot or telling me to accept it.

cococandy: But if they are ra'ped,
then having an abortion is no longer a crime?
Or if the child has the chance of being born abnormal having an abortion is no longer a crime?

Or if the pregnancy is a risk to the mother and foetus having an abortion is no longer a crime?

Or if one's wife got abducted and was molested during the time she was held against her will,got pregnant and was maybe released after a month in captivity. The husband and wife decide to get rid of the ensuing pregnancy they didn't commit a crime?

Maybe like crackhuas you think you can try shake me up with the abortion question but there's a reason why I'm not interested in going all over this abortion ish AGAIN just now.

And that's because
There can only be SELECTIVE abortion laws.
So abortion in some cases is a crime while in other cases it is not.
Do you now see why it is not in the same league with incest?

If your argument is that laws are selective and the Germans are being selective in applying their concept of "human rights" here, then I can see why. If not, I can't.

carefreewannabe: I am very disappointed now.

Why are you disappointed?

Is there a point to unnecessary elongation of arguments when it has been resolved?

carefreewannabe: It's very difficult to conduct research on this issue as these people are not many and hide but I have never heard of the possibility being as "low" as 10% but you are one of the few people I trust who doesn't call assumptions "FAAAACT".



This is a very good question.

I thought of it and it gave me a lot of headache.

To be honest, I don't want to have to make such a decision. I can't even answer this question.
What do you think?

And if we say, no, should we also allow in.cest for this reason?

I have a younger brother and I consider our relationship "pure and innocent" and to me it feels right and natural.



It definitely is but it doesn't change my view on in.cest.
I think it would be wrong to justify in.cest like this.

I consider sibling relations "innocent" and I want it to remain like that. This is my personal point of view.




S.ex between cousins is not a punishable offense.
We are talking about siblings here and in developed countries women over 40 have many possibilities to reduce the risk.
Due to the nature of my work, I know many mothers at this age.



I thought we removed cost from the argument.
I thought I agreed with you on this.


Now to you Mr, should the law that makes s*ex between siblings a punishable offense be changed?
Should two consenting, adult siblings have the right to have s*ex?
Should they be allowed to procreate?



Well done Mr Sagamite. Very good move. I am VERY impressed. If you remove the ugly I will submit to you.




Please answer my questions.

No need to go on, babes.

You have already agreed to the core of my sarcasm.

carefreewannabe: Yes, they are selectively applying it when it serves a higher purpose. They are very smart, the Germans. They don't follow laws blindly.

Since you have said this, then bitte schön!

Gut, gut!

Admitting that has proved my point.

They are hypocrites and they discriminate.

Thanks. Mwuah.

cococandy: Answering you would beg the question why?
Which in turn will take us elsewhere.
I've a looooooong reason as explanation for whatever side of the fence I decide to answer from.(And I've got good points for each side)


So you creating a new thread would be quite helpful. If you don't mind

Abortion is harm to the child.

When una fuku-faka, fuku-faka without condemn and then kill a poor, innocent, defenseless baby.

All women, who are not raaped should be force to have the child.

crackhaus: What's your opinion on abortion, should it be banned and made illegal as well?

OOOOOOOOOOH!

Well asked!

cococandy: Key word 'possibility'
Makes it legit to ban them.

I've the right to use drugs afterall it's my body and what I do with it doesn't matter.
But after taking the drugs,the result MAY affect others negatively.(Possible but uncertain)
So do I still have the right to use drugs?



Stop trolling

So you will ban women over 40 from having kids?

carefreewannabe: The risk is by more than 40%, almost 50%.

And MY answer is YES in this context.

Let me take it one by one so it does not get too voluminous.

First of all, your over 40% figure might be wrong. I have read of 10% - 30%.

Difference researchers come up with different theories. The higher rates are when both parents both carry a dysfunctional gene. Which is not the case for everyone.


Lets play around and assume your figures even make sense, and so?

There are people with hereditary genetic disorders which have higher than 40% possibility of passing it to their kids. Are we to say we would also remove their rights to love and procreate?

If not, is that not another double standard and inconsistency in law application (hence discrimination)?

Furthermore, it is even reported that the chance of a defect in a child by first cousins is the same as that of women over 40 having a child. Should we ban women over 40 from having kids because they may harm the kids, Ms Feminist?

Are we going to allow women over 40 cost us society more money to raise their kids because they are so irresponsible not to marry and give birth early?

cococandy: It doesn't affect me.
It may affect their unborn kids.(And pls don't try to debate that)
Since the kids can speak for themselves and the damage may already have been done and can't be undone when they are born, it's left for thz already living people to speak fro them since they are not yet here to speak for themselves.

If they can show medical proof that they are not capable of bearing kids from such acts, they can go ahead. Until then,it won't be right to give them 'rights' that affect someone else negatively.

Any 'right' that affects someone else isn't a right.
I might as well demand the right to possess whatever I lay eyes on even if they already belong to someone else and not minding the previous owner will be hurt if I do take it at will.

Should my right be granted?

#iknowyouarebeingsarcastic

That's for the benefit of those who can't see the sarcasm in your post.

You cannot ban people's human rights or circumvent their human right based on the "possibility" (your "may affect" of it affecting others.

You cannot deny them their rights to bear kids, privacy or have a family life based on something that is not a certainty.

Asukwo is a genius!

www.nairaland.com/attachments/1749242_business20day20cartoon20jan2016202013_jpegbff19e40e5233c9414ef49d7fff8070a

EroticAngelina: FVCK YOU!! useless orphan. don't quote me again, coz I can see that your brain is fvcked up. and u are mentally unstable!!! black goat

You are a cretinous person!

Next time use your brain toe think before talking. It is actually a tool that can be used for such a function.

carefreewannabe: Me too.

carefreewannabe: Kids from incestuous unions have a MUCH HIGHER risk of being born handicapped, both mentally and physically.

Just for your information, the siblings who have taken their case to court and triggered off this discussion in Germany have four kids, 2 of them are sick.

And so what?

Much higher risk is grounds to prevent people from having their human rights?

carefreewannabe: I will explain it AGAIN.

It is a argued that a family should be a se.x-free zone FOR CHILDREN.
If in.cest is made legal, it will be easier for family members to get away with child abuse.
Moreover, children have to have the security that the law protects them from se.xual abuse within families.

Amsorry?

How would it make it easier. Is the law not going to have age of consent? How is the law not protecting them if it states the age of s*xual contact should be strictly after the national age of consent?

carefreewannabe: This is a very good argument in favor of the ethics council's suggestion and one that people who argue against the law that makes in.cest a punishable act point out.

I still believe that the law must ensure that a family should be a "sex-free zone" (except for parents) because ...

- ... incestuous couples have a very high risk of having sick children.
- ... allowing in.cest (if only for adults) will leave to the abuse of this law and the weaker ones (children) less protection.
- ... such laws will destroy the innocence of sibling relationships.

That is your belief. We are talking logic and equal application of logic in formulating laws here. Not individual and arbitrary belief.

I am sure there are many people in Germany that believe homosexuality is unnatural and perverse, logic of human rights was still used to impose it on society. Many of them even feel homosexual marriage would destroy the institution but again, the logic of "human rights" is not subject to one's belief.

carefreewannabe: Unlike, homo.sexuals that many people are "obsessed" with, siblings can "re-direct" their attraction to the next potential partner.
A homo.sexual can never (maybe very rarely) force himself to feel attracted to anyone of the opposite s.ex.
Siblings have plenty of different options, homo.sexuals don't.

Who are you to dictate who or what an adult should direct their attraction at?

Are you part of the Nazi party?

As long as it is 2 consenting adults, TWO CONSENTING CONSCIENTIOUS ADULTS, it is not your business.

carefreewannabe: I haven't said, they should. Someone else did.

I have and you know it.

So, tell us, what part of the UN Declaration of Human Rights gives Germany the power to ban sex between two siblings.

Or are they just ignoring it and selectively applying "human rights".

Warning: This is where you will potentially lose the argument, baby.

carefreewannabe: What is a form of s*xual orientation?

Inceest is a form of heterosexual orientation.

carefreewannabe: The case of the couple, I mentioned at the beginning, has been taken to different courts. The couple has argued on grounds of human rights, which is understandable. Human rights come with restrictions. The European Court of Human Rights argued that Germany has the right to ban in.cest as it serves a higher purpose, namely the protection of families and their members. There are cases, in which a good argument weighs more than another good argument.

In a nutshell, one side claims that se.xual freedom is more important than the protection of families; the other side argues that it would significantly weaken family values that must be protected.

It's for you to decide which side you take, not for me.

Oh, the European Court of Human Shyt, that is notorious for coming out with their rubbish sanctioned this discrimination?

Here is my opinion of them right from time:

https://www.nairaland.com/248474/only-america-behave-like-mental-man/1#3748967



But Europe would think it is a crime and backwards when African countries ban sexual perversion for the protection of families and morals to ensure the higher purpose of procreation?

Amsorry, but your attempt to use the European Court of Bollocks Rights as a legitimator of an argument point has failed. You still have to explain to me how a government can use cost as grounds for denying people their human rights.

I am sure no courts would agree for Nigeria to kill some of its citizens because it would be cheaper to provide better services to a smaller population. Again, Cost is not grounds for removing people's human rights.

carefreewannabe: Let be so.

You are going to violate UN principles?

ICCJ is calling!

carefreewannabe: This is against the constitution and the constitution is not going to be changed for a few people who have a pool of other options.

Really?

Can I save this please?

So you think the constitution should not be changed to grant people their "human rights" because those people are few?

But Nigeria and co should change their laws for the sake of some few perverts?

carefreewannabe: The answer is simple. I don't feel like arguing in favor or against homo.sexuality. It is not only boring, in the meantime, it is also that I don't care so please spare me. If you need a stage to argue against homo.sexuality, let me please leave the show.



No, I don't in this context.

Good.

EroticAngelina: are u insane? all I'm saying is that they could have used a better picture! every country has something..u knw ... local. they wouldn't like it if that's what Google uses! they are better ways. listen Mr whatever Ur name is, if you don't understand what someone is saying, I'd suggest u tame that Lil finger of urz that's itching to press 'quote' to quote the person o.k.a.y??

You are a cretinous person!

What could they have used better?

Something that misrepresents the actual reality in Nigeria, so you can moronically go about the world beating your chest about greatness while you have not had 12 hours of straight light in the last 8 months?

person, the picture is adequately representative of Nigeria. Those are iconic images of the main city in the country. Shut the fck up and don't be hoping someone helps praise the cesspit you have as a country.

decode55: [color=olive] you need to get your head checked ASAP

I don't think you have grey matter in that box you call a cranium [/color]

You are a cretinous person!

A microcell from my head is more intelligent than your whole lineage.

person!

bushdoc9919: That's Obasanjo's legacy (Jonathan is busy reviving the railways).

Reviving the railways by buying 2 second-hand, 1960s trains for millions of pounds to be used by the 20 million in Lagos?

You were dumbly blinded by the repainting of the archiac trains?

Tundeiab: saddist...

I lie?

EroticAngelina: mm, they tried. at least we got recognized but frankly, I don't want that to be the picture they used there to be in Google.com !!!!! Hellooooo! that's embarrassing! they could have used an art drawing of women/men dressed in the three major tribes of Nigeria attires! that's more presentable! in every celebration these white ppl do for us, they must be a negative part! I CNT shout abeg

You don't know your country is embarrassing?

You want the world to hide the embarrassment for you?

decode55: mmm.

Judging from that pic, we have only molues, okadas & keke napeps in Nigeria


Nice

Another product of a failed education system.

freecharles: This is good...it feels good to know that Nigeria is recognized. How many countries get this on their independence day.

GREAT PEOPLE

Nigeria has failed your life.

somsom: Does that include when a man is forced to marry a girl he impregnated?

Of course that is success.

.................to fcktards.

jaybee3: YES for unrepentant, idiotic, brainwashed religious morons

TV01: Thank you. You do know I'm the "Marriage Man" !
Have you found anyone worthy yet. It would be nice to be able to pencil in a date for next summer !


TV

Waa pe nbe. (You go wait long)



Pencil it down for August 2027.

carefreewannabe: First of all, if kids have to suffer for a life time because their parents acted in an irresponsible way, then it's reason enough to make it illegal.

How do kids suffer a lifetime?

What makes them suffer?

carefreewannabe: Secondly, if in.cest was legalized then it would open doors to child abuse in families. The German government said that families have to be seen as a place of protection for children and the law and societal norms have to do ensure that it is. Leagalizing in.cest would open doors to child abuse in families. It would make it more acceptable as a side effect.

How does legalising in.cest lead to child abuse?

Would there not be age of consent infused in the law?

carefreewannabe: Thirdly, if two consenting adults decide to have s.ex with each other behind closed doors, then nobody will know and they can "pursue their happiness".

Oops!

Carefreewannabeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee, you don't say this when it comes to homosexual "rights". I am the only one that says that.

carefreewannabe: Fourthly, the siblings who triggered off this discussion had four children together because they wanted to "pursue happiness." The government can't make sure that such couples won't take it a step further and they cannot be sterilized by force.

Why should they be sterilized?

Have you ever read the UN Declaration of Human Rights?

carefreewannabe: Fifthly, se.x between siblings is not a se.xual orientation but rather a coincidence of two people who feel attracted to one another and see nothing wrong with it. People fall in and people fall out of love. It is not that they can't find happiness elsewhere if they are forbidden to sleep with one another. Many people have to find a new partner if the partner they desire is not available for one reason or another.

It is a form of the natural s*xual orientation. Not the s*xual deviancy now tagged "S*xual orientation".

carefreewannabe: Last but not least, the cost of possible kids coming from such unions will have to be carried by the society as a whole. Germany is a welfare state. The kids have to get special health treatment and possibly special education.

Cost to the government is not grounds for eliminating peoples human rights.

That is against the UNITED NATIONS PRINCIPLES!

If the government thinks their cost is to high, then theycan eliminate some services. That is what is flexible, not human riiiiiiiiiiiiiiights!

carefreewannabe: That's a different topic.


I knew people would want to discuss homo.sexuality in this context. They are free to do so. I am not taking part in these debates.

If you want to discuss in.cest with me, you know how to find me but without engaging me in debates on homo.sexuality, please.

Why?

When people want to debate homosexuality's s*xual perversion, they make comparisons (strangely with heterosexual, normal, healthy se*x) to justify it but you don't think inceest should be compared with homosexuality? You want to rule out that line of argument?

Why?

Because you can see the blatant hypocrisy of the Western world and know you cannot defend it?

Babygal4eva: Yes it is way more disgusting.

They are of the same blood come on even if they don't get kids from it it is still wrong , its like saying if a mother loves her son she can get it on with him after all he is a consenting adult, I mean come on there is a line, for homosexuality I don't really care cause its their orientation people have diff kinks but like I said there is a line

Who are you to decide what is more wrong?

How can you say blood sex is more wrong than deviation from natural function (i.e. Perversion)?

If you believe any of the Holy Books, how can blood sex be wrong when GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOD used it to start the human race?

carefreewannabe: No, I don't agree. If someone's sexual orientation causes harm to someone else (e.g. pedophilia, in.cest), then it should NOT be accepted in the name od sexval freedom.



Says who and on what grounds?

And it's not me who says such about the German government but the article itself and plenty of others on the Internet. Go and check it for yourself.

Politicians from the two biggest leading parties have harshly condemned the council's suggestion.

I love it the way the Western society and press have successfully infused "S*xual Orientation" into the lexicon to replace the real word: "S*xual Deviancy".

cococandy: As they rightly should.

As much as everyone's right should be protected,if in the process of exercising such right,another person is affected negatively,then such rights should be forfeited or measures put in place to ensure that they don't affect the next person.

That's the only way order can be maintained.

How does two consenting adults in love who are engaging in inceest affect you?

How does what they do in the privacy of their bedroom affect you?



Two consenting adults! Human rights! What can be wrong with love? Privacy of the bedroom!

carefreewannabe: For the reasons you have mentioned and some others, the German government has harshly criticized the ethics council for even thinking of such nonsense.

The German government must be mad.

Under what grounds are they condemning the Ethics Council when they are acceptors and even promoters of other deviancies like homosexuality?

Why should homosexuality be a "human right" but siblings shaaging each other is an abomination?

They are hypocrites!

Great Man
www.nairaland.com/attachments/1747539_20140927090745_jpegd205d661a1e369c56e21127169136887



Decent Man
www.nairaland.com/attachments/1747551_20140927091245_jpeg07e897f50eca106fff014d0512bccb03



Ediot
www.nairaland.com/attachments/1747555_20140927091539_jpeg37627ee6216fb735f1ce24cc53d7f02b



Decent Man
www.nairaland.com/attachments/1747560_20140927092057_jpeg5669f1373646af12313418343867b9b2



Good Man
www.nairaland.com/attachments/1747574_20140927113439_jpeg364f3175babaad9431f5ce47d24d8765



Mad Decent Man
www.nairaland.com/attachments/1747580_20140927104922_jpeg591651e7dd125ea9381993a6ac0d0848



Dumb Decent Man
[img]http://nigerianembassy.nu/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Shagari.jpg[/img]



Decent Man
https://dailypost.ng/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/buhari.jpg



Arsehole Arsewipe
www.nairaland.com/attachments/1747594_20140927105916_jpege3e8a403dac80486b867f4f84cdaef2d



Insignificant Dumb Educated Man
www.nairaland.com/attachments/1747600_20140927110809_jpeg5efe696370656bb6ea5af75cc6b92916



Murderous Baastard Animal
www.nairaland.com/attachments/1747610_20140927111128_jpeg4a5c2df4ce6c919a1c9f9dbf0972dca6




Insignificant Decent Man
www.nairaland.com/attachments/1747614_20140927111434_jpegbbd7720e6d1c6c5604fa1a231395f745




Dumb Ediot
www.nairaland.com/attachments/1747622_20140927112410_jpeg7e28645f0f925ca37d6b4e854661a2aa




Major League Fuuuucktard
https://blog.foreignpolicy.com/files/jonathan1.jpg