Mr. Ratburn Comes Out In Arthur Season Premiere

[Turo602]

Originally Posted by Xav

I don't have kids so that's irrelevant.
I'm not the one who brought up incest or inbreeding. I'm just offering a solution.

Whether you have kids or not is irrelevant. Would you be okay with it? Not a hard question to answer.

[Refractive Reflections]

Originally Posted by Candy Kappa

It's your snidely post that warranted the gif, I have no issues with polygami and now that you specified what you mean with incest; first cousins are not usually considered incest.

As a legal term Incest means having sexual relation with a person too close to in family bond be it biological or adopted.So, it depends on the law. In Norway, first cousins marrying is not incest and I find it really weird that only 19(?) states in the US allows first cousins to marry. But sure, first cousins relationships being prohibited by law is hella weird and it's interesting to read what other courses ban it too.

...But what is considered too close though? It's all cultural relativity, just like the moral relativity of relationships/marriage. Besides the same language can be applied here: "People hate what they don't understand or fear!", "How can people hate love that is so pure!", "Love is love!" The contradictory reasoning is hilarious in the responses: "We need to support all adult consentual relationships, but.... that is disgusting! Law enforcement needs to called! They are mentally ill!" Gee, no difference than 50 years ago with homosexuality, right?

Because if we are going just on the potential of "risk of birth defects" for the children of the potential incest couple. Then what would be wrong with homosexual incest between siblings or parent-adult child relationship? Or heterosexual incest couples that are unable to procreate?

There's a movement for first-degree relative incest:
https://www.thecut.com/2015/01/what-...-your-dad.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.421a5590ddf3
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/si...nal-justice-et

...And polygamy acceptance:
https://www.wnd.com/2014/01/gays-mov...e-polygamists/

Originally Posted by Candy Kappa

And by the by, I've never met a single queer person that's against polygamy.

"Never met a single queer person against polygamy"... well, here's a Politico rant against polygamy, but supporting gay marriage. Or an article not carrying about the issue, saying it's the polygamists fight, and not the LGBT community's concern.

------------
...And besides with everyone so concerned about polygamy and incest relationships, they need to relax their hatred, because it will melt away soon enough and be accepted. I mean if mainstream society was able to accept homosexual relationships with Will & Grace, and how society was against that form of a relationship being depicted beforehand, it shouldn't be too difficult for the entertainment industry to fight against such hate for these other forms of loving adult consentual relationships!

[Zulithe]

If you bring up incest, bestiality, inter-species marriage in an argument opposing homosexuality in any way, you have already lost. Well-known fallacies that aren't taken seriously and have been proven false time and time again, and I won't waste time arguing with these people. Neither should you.

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage

[Voltron]

I'm pretty sure the goal isn't to make a solid argument about screwing animals, it's about trolling people.

[Candy Kappa]

Originally Posted by Refractive Reflections

...But what is considered too close though? It's all cultural relativity, just like the moral relativity of relationships/marriage. Besides the same language can be applied here: "People hate what they don't understand or fear!", "How can people hate love that is so pure!", "Love is love!" The contradictory reasoning is hilarious in the responses: "We need to support all adult consentual relationships, but.... that is disgusting! Law enforcement needs to called! They are mentally ill!" Gee, no difference than 50 years ago with homosexuality, right?

What is too close... sure that is a valid question. I'd say anything closer then first cousins is too close. Sibling, parent, grandparent and uncle/aunt sexual relationships will have a huge power imbalance and can compromise consent, heck it might be grooming.

[Zulithe]

Originally Posted by Voltron

I'm pretty sure the goal isn't to make a solid argument about screwing animals, it's about trolling people.

Then they should be banned, as it is against the rules.

Far too much of it is allowed on this board. A thread about positive gay representation where it is seldom witnessed allowed to derail into a back and forth about incest. It's shameful. And this kind of behavior occurs in far, far too many threads here.

[Voltron]

I agree. I have a lot of friends in the LGBTQ community who have suffered greatly due to societal prejudices, misconceptions, and outright malice towards them. It would be a lot easier if we could just enjoy the news of acceptance without having it muddied by people hell bent on maintaining the status quo and using one person's struggle for their own political ends. Sad.

[snake]

We’re all gay on the Technodrome Forums.

[Candy Kappa]

Originally Posted by snake

We’re all gay on the Technodrome Forums.

[FredWolfLeonardo]

Originally Posted by Zulithe

A thread about positive gay representation where it is seldom witnessed allowed to derail into a back and forth about incest.

The technodrome forums has a strange fascination with incest

[snake]

Is Ratburn pitching or catching here?

[ProactiveMan]

Originally Posted by Zulithe

If you bring up incest, bestiality, inter-species marriage in an argument opposing homosexuality in any way, you have already lost. Well-known fallacies that aren't taken seriously and have been proven false time and time again, and I won't waste time arguing with these people. Neither should you.

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage

I think I brought up inter-species marriage; not really for the sake of arguendo. I was merely amused at the absurdity of fighting over a gay rat.

I'm not opposed to same-sex marriage for the record, or trying to argue against depictions of such in a cartoon. But... Mr Ratburn is a rat, and the yuppie looking dude he married is clearly not a rat; ipso facto inter-species marriage.

[Utrommaniac]

They're all animal people though, so to them it would be an interracial marriage.

[ProactiveMan]

I think you're probably right.

Are there any other mixed-species couples on the show? (I don't remember any.) If so, are there any interesting combinations of children? Crocodile-Goats or something like that?

Arthur was never meant to weather this level of scrutiny.

[Allio]

I do know that DW's friend Emily's father is a monkey and mother is a bunny. She clearly takes after her mother, but seems to have a bigger face like her father

[Refractive Reflections]

Originally Posted by Zulithe

If you bring up incest, bestiality, inter-species marriage in an argument opposing homosexuality in any way, you have already lost. Well-known fallacies that aren't taken seriously and have been proven false time and time again, and I won't waste time arguing with these people. Neither should you.

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage

Actually no. That link only discusses adult-child incest, I'm discussing adult-adult incest which falls under the same umbrella of adult consent as the justification for the foundation of homosexual marriage. And as for "genetic defects", are we now going to prohibit those with Huntington's disease from having children, since they have a far greater likelihood of having genetic defects than children from incest?

Your post reeks of self-righteous elitism. Funny how so many want to demonize something that uses the same reasoning that they use to legitimize their own romance. Why would your opinion matter on what's considered revolting when all parties are adult and consenting?

Originally Posted by Voltron

I agree. I have a lot of friends in the LGBTQ community who have suffered greatly due to societal prejudices, misconceptions, and outright malice towards them. It would be a lot easier if we could just enjoy the news of acceptance without having it muddied by people hell bent on maintaining the status quo and using one person's struggle for their own political ends. Sad.

...And your victim narrative virtue signaling is right on time.

I'm giving a valid cultural-reflective argument here, and pointing out the hypocritical nature of society wanting to legitimize their own form of romance while demonizing the unpopular when both use the same foundational relationship reasoning ("If all parties are adult and consenting, what's the problem then?"). The cognitive dissonance and elitism in this thread, and in society, are hilarious.

[Candy Kappa]

Do you have a raging boner for your sister or brother, and want it justified? Or is it your mom?

[Voltron]

...And your victim narrative virtue signaling is right on time.

I'm giving a valid cultural-reflective argument here, and pointing out the hypocritical nature of society wanting to legitimize their own form of romance while demonizing the unpopular when both use the same foundational relationship reasoning ("If all parties are adult and consenting, what's the problem then?"). The cognitive dissonance and elitism in this thread, and in society, are hilarious.

No, you aren't. Nothing you say is valid. You're a boob who has no place in this discussion.

[FredWolfLeonardo]

Originally Posted by Voltron

No, you aren't. Nothing you say is valid. You're a boob who has no place in this discussion.

No, you da boob.

[Xav]

Originally Posted by Zulithe

If you bring up incest, bestiality, inter-species marriage in an argument opposing homosexuality in any way, you have already lost. Well-known fallacies that aren't taken seriously and have been proven false time and time again, and I won't waste time arguing with these people. Neither should you.

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage

If you bring up wikis that anyone can edit & change at their leisure as your reference you have already lost.

Originally Posted by Voltron

It would be a lot easier if we could just enjoy the news of acceptance without having it muddied by people hell bent on maintaining the status quo and using one person's struggle for their own political ends.

Ironic coming from someone who doesn't think marriage should be expanded upon.

Originally Posted by Voltron

You're a boob who has no place in this discussion.

Using boob as an insult is misogynist.