Cyberdevil 2021-03-14 20:19:53

Hell yeah! :D So many honors and potential bucket list drops running in parallel with this one! Likewise!

Cyberdevil 2021-03-15 23:36:01

Though this one really took a minute. :)

Cyberdevil 2021-03-19 05:22:19

Does work like this too. :)

1. The NG Logs one? If so: https://www.wkrconcepts.com/nglogs/index.php?id=lists

2. As far as I know they should be these: https://www.newgrounds.com/wiki/help-information/site-moderation

Aaand I guess I'll do that too. XD Here too for posterity though. One route...

Anytime!

Cyberdevil 2021-03-20 09:17:07

Woof, bark, growl

Cyberdevil 2021-03-20 17:56:52

Woof? Woof woof!

OK maybe the bark was growling a bit too far.

Cyberdevil 2021-04-08 03:12:43

Posting on one post about a post on another post? XD Well alright...

Cyberdevil 2021-04-18 13:20:02

Hmm, I'm not religious, so some would probably say I blaspheme simply by speaking on matters thereof, but I do try to be respectful regardless. I don't like blasphemy, but I don't like being called out for blasphemy either just because I don't agree with certain religious views. To disrespect and to disagree are different things IMO. I'd rather we could all just have an open discussion and showcase a mutual respect to whatever each of us believe.

TLDR: I don't like how that word is often used more so as an excuse to hinder open discussion than to actually call on people to be civil and respectful about other people's beliefs, as IMHO it should be It feels akin to the 'God works in mysterious ways' argument. Like a wall that's there just to keep you from looking out and questioning more so than to actually shelter you and do good.

Cyberdevil 2021-04-22 10:31:07

We don't really know if HE claims it or no though, only that PEOPLE claim he claims it. :) People wrote the books, people tell history, and people are flawed so... who knows how much history has skewed his words and intentions if there really were any he gave us! And if he is a 'he'. ;)

Cyberdevil 2021-04-22 17:24:14

Preferably not. XD That'd really be the worst way to go. Choking/drowning/anything like that... actually maybe running out of air slowly isn't as bad though...

Cyberdevil 2021-04-23 23:34:13

Hmm, maybe so, though if you go as far as to inbreed you might end up with children with disabilities. There'd also be the difference in relationship regarding how any LBTQ+ one would start a new, whereas with incest you'd change an existing family unit. What kind of psychological effect would that have on the concept of 'family'? May be common arguments but I think they're pretty different scenarios too.

Cyberdevil 2021-04-24 10:49:16

Hmm hmm, agree with pretty much all your points, just to play devil's advocate/elaborate on my own thoughts here:

1. I don't think one dabbling in either one or the other would think whichever one they're dabbling in as a gross one. Is it gross to a homosexual to be homosexual? Is the preconditioning itself gross, even though they'd look just like any other human no matter their sexual orientation/identification? Seems like 'gross' is both subjective, and more so not really true here? Possibly: gross is the unknown, or the different. We loath the unknown. We're disgusted by that which we don't understand and have no positive connotation to.

2. What is? What divine law to you believe in? This seems as subjective an argument as the above, and even if it is against divine law, then why? Are there benefits to that law? Did a divine entity really script that law, or was it more so a human claiming they were steered by a divine hand? Who's then to say that law is absolutely true? If there is a functional detriment to something, then IMO it'd be more reasonable to prescribe that as a sin. Like inbreeding. I don't see as much functional detriment to sequel orientation, though if you raise kids as an unconventional couple there might be room to question. Like: do we need both a maternal and a paternal role model to properly develop? Would having a same-gender set of parents have certain psychological downsides, or benefits? If both, would benefits outweigh downsides compared to traditional split gender parenting? Would downsides be marginal and not really matter? And what about prejudice; how those kids might be treated or perceived by others. Even if there shouldn't be prejudice it most definitely still exists and might need to be a factor to consider.

3. Indeed, this doesn't seem like a valid argument at all. Potential psychological downsides in raising a kid that way would be a different issue, as above, but functionally this argument's moot. It's also possible (and helpful) to adopt.

4. They're totally different issues/areas too, just like LGBT+ and incest are. I think few would want to legalize consensual pedophilia or bestiality, but any relationship could be victimizing, hence the importance of it being consensual, no matter age or gender or even breed. Forced marriages are another big problem in some parts of the world.

5. I don't think you even need to argue this point. Is there evidence thereof? In contrast, I think it might be healthier than ever. It's known that times of hardship strengthen relations, and those willing to go into a relationship that'd be shunned and looked down upon by so many would be going through more hardship than the rest of us. Thus you might argue they'd be more resiliant than we (we as in the population majority) would, and appreciate each other more than we do.

Sexual relations... may be a point there. Beware AIDs and HIV and all that stuff. ;)

6. Fair point. Personally I wouldn't argue against the freedom to have any relationship you want to have, as long as both parties really want to, but I do feel like there's some kind of line with family. As inbreeding actually damages DNA it seems like we (not just humans, most species) have a built-in failsafe for doing so. So regardless of the moral arguments it just doesn't seem like it's meant to be. And maybe I have been brainwashed by common norms but: I don't feel like it'd be a good moral choice either. Or that it'd break some fundamental code in the do's and dont's of life. Wonder why I feel that way though...

7. Good point there too. Supporting religious freedom doesn't mean you can't be religious yourself, or vice versa. Giving others the opportunity to do what they want doesn't mean you have to do the same as they do. This could apply to anything. As long as these choices don't harm anyone I see no downside. Mutual respect and allowance = a better world IMO.

Cyberdevil 2021-04-24 15:00:11

Interesting find btw. And real bummer Yahoo Answers are shutting down. :/ Had some fun times on that site before...

Cyberdevil 2021-04-24 15:01:25

Well I was already for anyone getting together with anyone before, but personally I don't think it's right, think it'll be difficult to change my mind about that. :) The site you linked to has some good arguments though. My sister has a good friend from a family with a history of inbreeding though, and she always had trouble in school, she was married (forcefully, so of course different if it was consensual) and they have a severely handicapped child... according to Wikipedia: Inbreeding results in homozygosity, which can increase the chances of offspring being affected by deleterious or recessive traits. This usually leads to at least temporarily decreased biological fitness of a population (called inbreeding depression), which is its ability to survive and reproduce.

...though the site you linked to seems to dispute that risk to. I don't know. Need to read up more sometime, but going by that one example I know of IRL it seems like there most definitely are risks, even if statistically MOST people turn out alright.

Just incest seems alright though. :) To each their own freedom at least with that!

Cyberdevil 2021-04-24 23:09:38

All good reasons... I can't/don't have a reason to argue against them, though still personally adverse to such relations. I'm not saying people shouldn't be free to have them either way, it's just not my 'religion'. :)

Cyberdevil 2021-04-25 13:51:11

Interesting. Feels like they're really trying to sell this particular relation type there, but I did learn some things. :) Most notably maybe that immediate family members are really the only link where potential birth defects go up notably, and that it's maybe possible to check DNA compatibility beforehand... if so there'd be no uncertainty. Risks clear. Good read.

Cyberdevil 2021-04-27 23:59:33

Interesting how on the debate page every few arguments there's actually one in the 'yes' column that seems to have been posted to the wrong one too. :) So the numbers should weigh even more in the favor of 'no, no problems'... good links.

Cyberdevil 2021-04-28 22:34:39

Mmm, if you're religious that's definitely a strong point! It is pretty strange that those who are the most against this all seem to be devoted Christians in particular. It all started with Adam and Eve too didn't it? And bloodlines chockful of similar sibling parent/child relations after that.

If you believe in this lineage one could possibly argue from that same standpoint that's why we lost our immortality, though. Overtime DNA deterioration due to family bloodlines... though maybe the scriptures have other explanations for that?

Cyberdevil 2021-04-29 00:43:35

When you can start formulating powerful and possibly irrefutable arguments based on all this information you've gathered you'll really be a force to reckon with. :)