Monday, August 12, 2013

'I take thee, my son, to be my lawfully wedded wife..."

Commentor Ilion observes:
Concerning the sub-thread on incestuous "marriages" -- can you imagine how the "liberals" will freak out when some "evil" rich man figures out that he can "marry" his son, and so pass on the family fortune without the death-tax eating it alive. At the same time, when a Kennedy uses this method, it will be OK.


There's no rationale for prohibition of marriage between relatives if they are of the same sex-- no offspring to suffer genetic disorders.

So what's to stop a father and son from marrying? You believe in marriage equality, don't you?

A father marrying his son is a clever way to circumvent estate taxes. The nest egg passes to the spouse, untaxed. It's all in the name of love-- of money. A wonderful strategy. You believe in marriage equality, don't you?

The only drawback is that there'll be less money in the public coffers to provide free Obamacare-contraception for the breeders. Overpopulation looms!

Paganism has its amusements. 


  1. Michael,

    You're certainly tedious. This is at least the second time you've made the same argument as a thread about something, homosexual marriage, that only religious conservatives get upset about.

    At least you engage in recycling tired arguments. Although it would be nice if you'd come up with an original idea once in a while. I suspect my internal medicine tutor was right when he noted decades ago that surgeons are good with their hands, but aren't exactly the brightest light globes in the box, amongst medical practitioners.

    You keep on proving that he was right.

    1. bach:

      If we were husband and husband, we'd argue less.

    2. bach:

      Let's not go to bed angry.

    3. Looks like I missed Egnor's coming-out party. Is he that rare type of gay who is against gay marriage?


  2. In this "marriage, bachfiend is obviously the wife; I mean, just look at how he "reasons".

    1. Look at this! not-Horton's-Hoo is admitting that bachfiend isn't reasoning well.

  3. The Hoo Horton Never Heard: "Are you suggesting that women can't reason well, Ilion?

    (Conservatives tend to be sexist? Hoo knew??)

    Oh! Boo-hoo! A lying lestist -- but I repeat myself -- is tossing around "boo-words" ... and imagines I give a damn.

    1) I never passive-aggressively "suggest" anything; that's for academics ... and (a common type of) women. I'm a man: I say what I mean.

    2) All men know that a significant number of women *choose* to not reason well (which is to say, to not reason at all); all *honest* men will admit it. All *knowledable* men know that women do it because men act as their "enablers".

    2a) All rational and honest men know that "liberals" and other leftists, despite that they may physically look like men, "reason" in the same irrational and emotive that so many women choose to employ.

    1. Look again at what I wrote above that the lying leftist imagines he can use to "Gotcha" me .... (I'll wait while you re-read)

      Notice, I didn't say *anything* about whether wives/women reason well or not well. Rather, it was 'Hoo' -- who, even as a lying leftist is apparently put off by the lying leftist bachfiend's dishonesty -- who conjured up the "suggestion" that the only possible meaning is that "*all* wives/women do not reason well"

    2. Shorter Ilion:
      1. Confirms sexist attitude.
      2. Realizes that it puts him in bad light.
      3. Backpedals furiously.



    3. Let's review:

      1. In this "marriage, bachfiend is obviously the wife; I mean, just look at how he "reasons".

      2. Notice, I didn't say *anything* about whether wives/women reason well or not well.

      These two statements are in obvious contradiction.