• Cryophilia@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    There’s nothing objectively wrong with either one. Both have been banned because they gross people out for purely social (bigoted) reasons.

    • jpreston2005@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Incorrect. One results in higher than normal birth defects that exacerbate over time, and one is perfectly healthy. We, as a society, should try to limit birth defects, no? Are you also in favor of bringing back thalidomide?

        • jpreston2005@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          that’s not true, and false equivalencies only serve to make you seem more ridiculous. You’re gross, and your kink is historically shamed because it destroys us a viable species. I feel sorry for the people in your life.

                • jpreston2005@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  no, I don’t. you seem pretty intent on trying to make me tho. banning first cousin marriages doesn’t lead to us banning all pregnancies began after the mother is 34. you’re using a logical fallacy of the slippery slope and it doesn’t apply.

                  • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    3 months ago

                    It’s not a slippery slope, it’s the exact same thing. The same excuse you use for banning incest equally applies to women over 34 giving birth. Banning that would not be a slippery slope, it would be an equivalence.