March 11, 2008
Is incest between two hot lesbian twin sisters wrong?
Around here we acknowledge two kinds of gay: good and bad. Good gay is when two hot chicks get it on; bad gay is all the rest. Hence, good gay is pretty much a phenomenon only found on Cinemax After Dark and an occasional episode of The L Word (which Showtime just cancelled, life sucks).
If you're going to argue that gay is beautiful based only on the aesthetic of love, why can't I argue that gay is mostly icky based on the aesthetic of vomit hurling grossness?
Or, if morality is a purely subjective individual evaluation made on feelings, then why are your feelings of love valid but my feeling that I want to gouge my eyes out when watching you kiss invalid? Both are feelings.
If love is all that matters why can't brother and sister get it on? They love each other. And, contrary to popular belief, the effects of incestuous relationships on the gene pool are highly overstated. Sure, you get the occasional third ear, but it's rare. Very rare.
Incest is wrong because it's gross. It's called the Westermarck effect, look it up. Unsettling, no?
Which makes you kind of wonder: If the incestuous relationship lobby was headed by two hot lesbian twins (better yet, triplets), would the Massachusetts Supreme Court declare incest a Constitutional right?
SPON:
Germany's highest court is about to rule whether incest will continue to result in a jail term. It is referring to the case of a brother and sister who have already had four children together....Thanks to the salacious readers of Hot Air!But social research shows that incest is more likely to be the result of family problems than the cause. Eugenic aspects, which the German statue book cites regarding sibling incest, are a poor justification for punishment. The risk of hereditary disease for offspring also exists with other people with genetic defects. Yet the German constitution would scarcely forbid such people from having children.
UPDATE: New pic below. Better?
