LGBT: How do you reply to this argument against gay marriage?

When gay marriage opponents say that if gay marriage is allowed, then marriage between daughter and father, mother and son, brother and brother, should be allowed. How do you respond to that?LGBT: How do you reply to this argument against gay marriage?
Of course, because after women got the right to vote, so did children in 1953.LGBT: How do you reply to this argument against gay marriage?
Incest is obviously not okay, and those that put that as an ';argument'; are grasping at straws to try to find reasons not to allow gay marriage. It's like the whole, ';if gay marriage is allowed we'll have to allow people to marry their pets.'; That's absolute crap!





Homosexuality is very different from incest and those other things they try to bring up. Again, those against gay marriage are grasping at straws and are trying to make others afraid of allowing gay marriage.
Partnering with a family member increases the risk of a child being born with a physical or mental impairment, which isn't fair on a child. In addition to that, there's also the tricky issue of whether the relationship is consensual or not. It's not unknown for a parent to abuse their child because they are in a position of power in the family. LGBT relationships are, for the very vast majority, consensual in nature.





Having said that though, I saw a documentary not long ago where there were a couple of cases or half siblings or siblings that had never met each other until they were much older, meet one day, fall in love and begin relationships with each other. It was heartbreaking to see one couple struggle to be together even though their children were born normal. It was a consensual relationship and the guy kept being thrown in jail and their children were taken away from them each time. They couldn't help who they loved but if you allow one couple to stay together and have children then it blurs the boundaries for everyone else and you risk potentially more heartbreaking situations. The other couple of half siblings, the guy had his tubes tied, so the law could never prove that they were having sex because they didn't produce children, so neither went to jail.





Personally I find it odd, but that's because I've never been in that situation. I think for the sake of not blurring whether a relationship is consensual or not and to prevent an increase in children being born with deformities, incest should remain illegal. And these issues aren't parallel to gay marriage.
There has never been a point in time where immediate family members were allowed to wed and they won't start just because of gay marriage. Even in societies where consanguineous (close-kin) marriages are not just ideal, but preferred, immediate family members marrying each other were never allowed.





I believe these people are just looking for any and every possible tragedy to compare gay marriage to (i.e. people marrying their dogs, fathers, brothers), I mean really...





I don't know much about debating on behalf of gay marriage, but I do know a thing or two about consanguineous marriages in western and eastern society. And believe it or not, close-kin marriages are legal in a few select states in the U.S., but with provisions mind you. However, it's strictly forbidden between immediate family members in eastern societies, as well as this one.





Your opponents are dragging up issues of a different caliber.
That's a ';slippery slope'; argument. Slippery slope arguments are logical fallacies, meaning they are not valid in a debate. No one needs to legalize incestual marriage in order to legalize gay marriage, the same way no one had to legalize incestual marriage to legalize interracial marriage.
Incestuous relationships are often non-consentual, and sexual abuse by a family member can deeply hurt and affect a child. Why would anything that hurts someone be made legal?





Incest leads to a risk of producing a child who has a much higher risk of severe birth defects. Homosexual relationships don't have this risk.





Basically, incest has the potential to cause hurt to people and affect them negatively. Gay marriage doesn't hurt anyone, therefore why should it not be allowed?
Polygamy and adult-child marriage (and reports of inbreeding) have all historically been either legal or common in the Middle East, Bible Belt, and other traditional conservative religious cultures where homosexuality, by contrast, is strictly forbidden.





Gay marriage on the other hand is taking us in the opposite modern, secular direction.
It's a stupid fear based response. They'll say anything to freak people out so they will oppose it too. I fail to see how gay marriage affects anyone but the 2 people involved. Why should they not have the same basic rights as everyone else just because they happen to love someone of the same sex? The issue is about human rights! The religious people keep trying to make it a moral/spiritual/religion issue but it's not. The law treats gays differently and I don't see why that should be okay. In a democracy there aren't various ';levels'; of rights. EVERYONE is supposed to have human rights. PERIOD! Having the right to visit your loved one in the hospital to inherit their property to adopt a child should not be different for gays. It creates ';castes'; and withholds certain rights from some of the population. That's not justice for all!
my favorite arguement against gay marriage is:


if we allow gay marriage, we'll eventually allow the joining together of an animal and a human.


where the heck do they get THAT from?


i don't know..


if you have to stretch your imagination that far to find a possible argument, you have no real argument.
You could say they that homosexuality and incest is not the same because we aren't related to our lovers and because our being together wont cause terrible birth defects. I hate when people compare us to incest and to freaks that wanna **** their dogs.
this arguement of doors opening is so annoying.


Legally speaking, there is a distinct difference in the idea of two non related people marrying and incest (polygamy or even beastiality which are often brought up in the same arguement.)
Umm....yeah, incest and gay marriage are completely different things.


Gay Marriage is joining two lovers in marriage.


Incest is just....creepy. (no offense meant).
I have answered this question before and I said, '; I'm not asking you to legalize incest. I'm just asking for my human rights as a homosexual to marry my non-relative lover.';
easy argument. That is incest. Gay marriage is a constitutional right which has yet to be enforced.
im vey offended seeing as how im a bisexual i think that gays should have the same rights as straights when it comes to marriage i mean i dont see whats wrong we are all people we just have different tastes for different genders
There is a big difference between homosexuality and incest.
I don't think those two could even be compared to each other. Hey edg why don't you go back to your dorm room and take another rip off your bong and leave us alone.
Homosexuality is not the same with incest!!!!
god wouldnt like any of that foolishness
I laugh it off, just like I do all the other stupid arguments people have come up with.
My response would be:





How do manage to fit THAT much stupid into such a small mind?
One thing leads to another. This move opens the door to a host of immoral things. Incrementalism is a bad thing.