PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: greenspirit who wrote (132726)	3/21/2001 8:28:35 PM
From: thames_sider	Read Replies (1) of 769667

No, no and no - for the genetic damage likely to be caused to any offspring (maybe if there was no chance of progeny?). There's also doubt as to the understanding of a sexual relationship where there's already such proximity. Well, if they want to... er... I'd question both consent and responsible adulthood, whatever the example of Tsarina Katherine. So long as both parties can reply through the ceremony and sign the requisite legal documents, maybe it's fair. And yes, if consensual. Overall, if marriage grants special status in law, and restrictions are put on marriage, then they should be ultimately limited to volition, capability and understanding of both (all) parties. I'm not personally in favour of the extreme cases, but I don't claim to be perfect or all-knowing... nice questions :)

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next