----- Original Message ----- From: "Erik Reuter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2003 7:50 PM Subject: Re: Incest
> On Sun, Mar 23, 2003 at 07:49:39PM -0600, Robert Seeberger wrote: > > > If you mean immediate harm, I would agree, but since the "direct" > > relationship between the individuals will suffer in the long term, I > > would still disagree with your statement. > > I don't think it is worthwhile to speculate on all the indirect, delayed > possibilities that could conceivably occur. If you did, you would never > have sex at all since that is always a possibility, family member or > totally un-related person. Safer just to be friends if you think about > it too much... Sex with cousins is likely OK and beyond cousins is always acceptable. Are you saying you have no idea who your parents, brothers and sisters, nieces and nephews are? Unfortunately there is a large body of work over many years that belies your argument. Gonna argue for creationism next? <G> > > > A statement such as that cannot help but be misleading since it > > involves such a loaded subject. > > No, that is incorrect. If you replace "misleading" with "misinterpreted I can agree with misinterpreted. Its close enough for my uses. > by some people [due to emotional lack of rationality]" then I would > agree. Dan is obviously not very objective on this subject. > On the contrary, I know from my personal experiance dealing with my ex-wife and all the problems she had, that Dan is well versed, although not expert, in these matters. Having an emotional reaction does not in any way imply ignorance. Having no emotional reaction does imply something though. xponent Once More Maru rob Aint nothin' gonna change If you can go away Im just gonna stay here and always be the same _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
