Post: #1

After the pedofilia piece, some of you had some suggestions as to what these degenerates would be pushing afterwards.

Well, I give you Incest and Necrophilia.

Liberals youth: Allow incest and necrophilia

Quote:NEWS Liberal Youth Stockholm has a new proposal. In true liberal spirit, they want to remove the law that prohibits incest between siblings.

Over the weekend, the Liberal Youth had their annual meeting in Stockholm. One of the decisions taken at the meeting is that the union endorses a change of legislation regarding incest.

- The proposal implies in principle that adult siblings, those over 15 years, and does who want to can have it. The law should not moralize, says Cecilia Johnson, Liberal Youth League president of Greater Stockholm, to Nyheter24.

The Association would therefore abolish all the law that prohibits sexual intercourse between siblings.

- We see it as a moral law, and we are generally against it. I do not think this law protects anyone right now, says Johnsson.

Necrophilia

If you think that having sex with your siblings is not enough while you're alive, then LUF Stockholm have another proposal for you.

The union has adopted a decision where it wants to make necrophilia legal, i.e. sex with dead bodies. Johnson believes that it does not primarily concern necrophilia, but that everybody should be able to decide what happens to their body after death.

- It is that we are in for being able to decide what a person wants to do with their body when one is dead. In practice, this means that might donate it to science or a museum, or if you want to allow someone else to have sex with it. It's about owning your body even after you have died, she said.

The Liberals Party does not endorse the proposals.

- No, this is not a view us Liberals have, in general, we believe that sex between siblings and necrophilia should remain illegal, says Adam Alfredsson, spokesperson for the Liberals, to Nyheter24.

I've bolded a two statements from the party members. The young ones are spoilt brats with clear authority issues, and zero sense for what is right or wrong. The mother party states that in general it is something they do not support, i.e. in certain cases, they will support it.

You really cannot make this shit up. Luckily on twitter you can see where general population stands...

Post: #2

Pedophilia is different in that it pertains to individuals under the age of
consent. There is a clear and strong moral and practical argument for its criminalization.

That is not the case with incest or necrophilia.

I don't believe in criminalizing things because they are disgusting/unnatural. Even if it is damaging to the acting parties, as long as it does not affect me and they are consenting adults, it's none of my business.

Post: #3

I actually read some fascinating shit about incest the other day. Apparently, if a brother and sister are separated at birth, and reunite in adulthood, they could possibly form natural physical attraction. But during childhood, siblings can detect each other through scent, just as a mother can detect her children. This exposure, in healthy humans, biologically eliminates the ability to form a sexual relationship. Its also why dogs tend to become obsessively protective of children born to their owners.

Post: #4

Welcome to "What About Me?"-ism, where yesterday's "slippery slope" is tomorrow's "progress"

Post: #5

B-but the slippery slope argument is a fallacy!

Post: #6

I rarely get riled up over news but this is utterly disgusting and revolting.

Do these young politicians believe this will net them votes and a clap on the back? They are so far removed from reality it's mindboggling.

My grandfather's generation survived WW2 and lay the bricks of a new world. My generation will be remembered for things like this...

Post: #7

Rigor mortis is not consent.

Post: #8

(02-21-2016 12:58 PM)HenryHill Wrote:  I don't believe in criminalizing things because they are disgusting/unnatural. Even if it is damaging to the acting parties, as long as it does not affect me and they are consenting adults, it's none of my business.

We should definitely all be okay with a man fucking his father or a woman fucking her son as long as they're all consenting adults using protection to prevent pregnancy.

Certainly this won't contribute to the collapse of society.

Post: #9

The fun part is that the Swedes can find the time to fight over shit like this while the migrants continue to invade their country and destroy their culture.

If they are smart, they will check to see if incest/necrophilia is permitted in Sharia law, because that's what will matter in the future.

Post: #10

(02-21-2016 12:58 PM)HenryHill Wrote:  Pedophilia is different in that it pertains to individuals under the age of
consent. There is a clear and strong moral and practical argument for its criminalization.

That is not the case with incest or necrophilia.

I don't believe in criminalizing things because they are disgusting/unnatural. Even if it is damaging to the acting parties, as long as it does not affect me and they are consenting adults, it's none of my business.

The view of cowards and the accomplices of civilization destroyers everywhere.

A great example that shame and judgment need to come back. Without it, every goddamn fetish and deviant act that humans can pull from satan's Ahole is acceptable.

Also, this whole if it doesn't affect me line is complete BS. Since when have any of these liberal/leftwing policies haven't affected us? Have you walked around a western country (especially Sweden) lately? On the public aesthetics alone, it affects me. By triggering my gag reflex on a daily basis.

Post: #11

What.........the......fuck.........

Post: #12

(02-21-2016 10:35 PM)LeeEnfield303 Wrote:  The fun part is that the Swedes can find the time to fight over shit like this while the migrants continue to invade their country and destroy their culture.

That could be the point of the exercise.

Post: #13

(02-21-2016 12:58 PM)HenryHill Wrote:  Pedophilia is different in that it pertains to individuals under the age of
consent. There is a clear and strong moral and practical argument for its criminalization.

That is not the case with incest or necrophilia.

I don't believe in criminalizing things because they are disgusting/unnatural. Even if it is damaging to the acting parties, as long as it does not affect me and they are consenting adults, it's none of my business.

The bolded part is, to me, the more important bit. Leave aside any questions of cowardice or Enjoying The Decline: how do you define "affecting me"?

Homosexuality is disgusting and unnatural. It's generally conducted between consenting adults. But its admission into mainstream society has caused arguably as much misery and damage to our culture, our military, and even our religions as feminism did. Indeed lesbianism -- homosexuality between women -- is a major driving force, if not the driving force behind most of the feminism that men are facing every single day. It is one of the major forces pushing the West into its present shitpile. As homosexual "families" become more common, more and more kids will be silenced into their "progressive" viewpoints, and the drift of society away from heterosexual norms will continue, in favour of something deeply degenerate. Even now some kids raised in homosexual families have publicly protested about their treatment.

Does it affect you? Probably not directly. But not everything in the world has to affect you directly to cause you some serious inconvenience or harm. Consider the Christian bakers, sued by a homosexual couple for refusing to serve that couple. Does it affect you directly? No. But precedent is all important in law, and precedent will come back to affect you later simply because judges love analogies and precedents, and they love warping what was a decision made for particular circumstances into general rules to cover the rest of us.

This is not a slippery slope argument. It's pure and simple bait and switch being offered by the Left. Every time some degenerate sexuality or degenerate practiced is put forward for acceptance in the name of "humanity" or "fairness" or "equality", the principal argument in favour is always "It's a private matter between consenting adults" or "It's none of your business." The second step is always to twist the Christian value of tolerance and demand that everyone "live and let live."

This is a bait-and-switch because nobody can see the unintended consequences of decriminalising degenerate behaviour, and those who are practicing that behaviour don't care what the consequences are.

Say necrophilia is decriminalised. You can leave it as a provision in your will that your body can be used to fuck Daniel Radcliffe complete with a fart bladder inserted into your anus. But when it is decriminalised, there will then be "debates" in society about "the intrinsic nature of life." On the Internet, there'll first be hilarious memes referencing Dr Manhattan's observation that "there is no difference between a living body and a dead body", but then taken more seriously "given necrophilia is decriminalised in Upper Bumfuck, Vermont." All those horrible diseases you can get from fucking a piece of rotting meat? Soon they'll be paid for on the public dime, because you can't dictate who or what I love.

And that's just with necrophilia which at least can be blocked on the basis of it being a public health problem to allow it rather than intrinsic moral grounds. It's worse in the case of incest.

Make no mistake: if incest becomes widely accepted, paedophilia will follow as night follows day. These last two taboos are not just moral issues, they, too, are public health initiatives simply because when you fuck children, you destroy them emotionally and mentally. You make them a public health problem. Again and again we see the backgrounds of paedophiles include a prior history of sexual abuse. Take a fucking look at most feminists' life histories, for Christ's sake: from Andrew Dworkin to Marilyn French most of them claim to have been molested as children, and it's so damaged them they take it out on the male sex for the rest of their fucking lives!

God save us from people who mean well. -storm

Post: #14

Post: #15

Source? I get nothing googling parts of the quoted text. The top result on Google is actually this thread

Post: #16

(02-21-2016 12:58 PM)HenryHill Wrote:  Pedophilia is different in that it pertains to individuals under the age of
consent. There is a clear and strong moral and practical argument for its criminalization.

That is not the case with incest or necrophilia.

Henry, put the bottle down.

Post: #17

(02-22-2016 07:02 AM)Vicious Wrote:  Source? I get nothing googling parts of the quoted text. The top result on Google is actually this thread

Completely forgot to post the source, school boy error. It's from Nyheter24 and you can find it here

Regarding the article, I'm all in favor of a society where the government has as little interference as possible in our lives. However, in light of current societal developments, it is clear that the idea of 'do whatever you feel like as long as it's between consenting adults' is a recipe for disaster. It's what allows SJWs and progressives to get away with less than traditionally moral values.

The young politician points to countries where it is not illegal, or that where there are no laws regulating it. These include Portugal, France, the Netherlands and some others. While it may not be regulated, there is most likely an obvious social stigma that prevents it from happening. Also it is pretty common sense that you should not pork your siblings, adult or not.

Post: #18

It's gotten so bad now that whenever I hear news about Sweden part of me thinks "Good, fuck em they'll get what they deserve, hopefully the rest of the world sees it and wakes up." Then a bigger part of me thinks "Those beautiful blonde women though.. we have to save them." You also seem cool and worthy of saving Swedish RVF posters.

Post: #19

Relevant