Nothing, according to a judge in Australia, provided the partners are “mature adults” who take care not to produce offspring by relying either on contraception or, should that fail, abortion.
Judge Nelson of New South Wales then drew a parallel I find most appropriate, though not in the sense in which he meant it: “If this was the 1950s and you had a jury of 12 men… they would say it’s unnatural for a man to be interested in another man or a man being interested in a boy. Those things have gone.”
They have indeed, evoking the mixed metaphor of the thin end of the wedge being driven into a slippery slope. The judge’s logic is unassailable: legalising first homosexuality and then homomarriage destroys any objections, present or future, to any kind of sexual activity.
Implicitly, His Honour welcomes this development, and the only possible concerns he sees are purely practical, those involving pregnancy. However, as he correctly pointed out, such problems don’t have to arise in our progressive time.
Schoolchildren these days may not learn traditional academic subjects, such as history and philosophy, and they may not even learn how to read properly, but they all take condom classes.
French letters have replaced belles lettres, and then there’s always the fall-back position of an abortion, which, when all is said and done, is but a form of contraception, a surgical equivalent of popping a morning-after pill.
Fair enough, 25 to 50 per cent of children produced by this version of brotherly love develop problems, ranging from idiocy to infertility. However, as a man of the humanities, I’m less interested in statistics than in the moral aspects of such unions.
These, as far as Judge Nelson is concerned, don’t exist. We no longer live in the antediluvian 1950s, when troglodyte laws frowned on sexual perversion, and those who advocated homomarriage were likely to be committed to a loony bin.
We live in the twenty-first century, when morality has been taken out of sex. If two consenting adults want to have some innocent fun, what’s the problem? Who’s getting hurt?
Society, would be the answer to that question, but anyone daring to proffer such a reply would be considered an objectionable fossil – and, if he speaks forcefully enough, possibly even a law-breaker.
When in 2014 our (Conservative!) PM pushed through the homomarriage law, I was writing pieces about both the thin end of a wedge and the slippery slope. Some readers took exception to such unfashionable extremism. Just because two homosexuals in love are now allowed to tie the knot, it doesn’t follow that, say, incest and bestiality will become legal as well.
I put forth all sorts of counterarguments then and could do so now. But there’s no need: Judge Nelson has done it for me.
Remove morality from it, replace it with soulless rationality, and no sane person could argue logically against any form of consensual sex. Siblings (same-sex or otherwise), parents and children – what does it matter, provided the children are grown up and a good time is had by all?
And treating consent as the absence of resistance, even poking farm animals should raise no objections. Did that ewe say no? Of course she didn’t, Your Honour. In fact, she quite enjoyed having her hind legs stuck into a pair of wellies.
This isn’t reductio ad absurdum; in modernity no such thing is possible. Nothing is any longer absurd, and even satire is left for dead. What was absurdly unthinkable or risible even 10 years ago, never mind in the 1950s mentioned by the good judge, is now legal, unobjectionable and even commendable. I’m eagerly awaiting the time when it becomes compulsory.
“Oedipus, schmedipus, as long as he loves his Mum,” we chuckle. And in my French backwater, where incest is rife, it’s referred to as le cinéma des pauvres (the cinema of the poor), much to the mirth of my Parisian friends who, like me, have their country houses here.
Laughter all around, just as Hilaire Belloc observed some 100 years ago: “We are tickled by [the Barbarian’s] irreverence, his comic inversion of our old certitudes and our fixed creeds refreshes us; we laugh. But as we laugh we are watched by large and awful faces from beyond; and on these faces there is no smile.”
On the other hand, it is only a year or so back that someone was convicted of hurting someone’s feelings by calling him a sheep-shagger.
That’s different. Calling someone a sheep-shagger is judgemental and implicitly pejorative. The sheep-shagger’s feelings may be hurt, and we can’t have that, can we? Actually doing it with a sheep is unobjectionable to today’s lot. It’s not just this particular perversion either. Homosexuality is normal, healthy and moral. Yet calling somebody a homo (or any synonym thereof, of which English has a large vocabulary) qualifies as a hate crime.
Sex robots if hacked can kill you too! So it is said. Nelson of Copenhagen. Nelson of the Nile. Nelson of Trafalgar. NO!
Incest is a way of life in some cultures and religions – like the Hindoo Dindoo Faith
https://dindooohindoo.page.tl/Rig-Veda-Incest.htm
RigVeda III .31.1-2]. Hiranyakashpu married his daughter Rohini. Vashista married Shatrupa, Janhu married Janhavi, and Surya married Usha.
Rig Veda 10.61.5-7 “(Rudra), the benefactor of man, whose eager virile energy was developed, drew it back when disseminated (for the generation of offspring)again the irresistible (Rudra) concentrates (the energy) which was communicated to his maiden daughter.
Rig Veda 6.55.5 ”I glorify Pushan, the husband of his mother, may the gallant of his sister hear us ; may the brother of Indra be our friend.”
Rig Veda 6.55.4 Pushan, who driveth goats for steeds, the strong and Mighty, who is called His Sister’s lover, will we laud.
Rig Veda 10.3.3 ”Attendant on the Blessed Dame the Blessed hath come: the Lover followeth his Sister. Agni, far-spreading with conspicuous lustre…”
Ashvins were the sons of Savitar and Usha who were brother and sister.
Krishna was married with his uncle’s Satrajit’s daughter and Krishna’s son Priduman was married with his matenal uncle Rukmaya’s daughter.
Brahma had three sons Marichi, Daksha and Dharma and one daughter. Daksha is stated to have married the daughter of Brahma who was his sister
Other instances are Purukutsa and Narmada, Viprachiti and Simhika, Nahusa and Viraja, Sukra and Usanas, Amavasu and Go, Amsumat and Yasoda, Suka and Pivari.
The Evolution of Incest !
It starts with Sexual Deviance – like the Kinky sex practices of the Hindoo Vedas and Puranas – and the innovation steps in !
https://dindooohindoo.page.tl/Puranas-_-Kinky-Sex.htm
Garuda Purana 2.22.61-62 [Ghosts said] We “lick up the urine mixed with semen” from the “vaginal passage of the widow” having illicit intercourse with her paramour. O pious brahmana, “we lick up the menstrual blood from the generative organ of a woman.”
· Skanda Purana V.iii.20.47-48 Sri Devi said:- If a righteous son well-known all over the world is to be born to me, I will “first breast-feed a Brahmana” and then alone my son. O great sage, such a son has been born to me. O eminent Brahmana, if you “wish to be alive suck the breasts.”
· Narada Purana III.84.32-35 In the north-eastern corner he shall duly worship Vighnaraja accompanied by his beloved.
· His fingers are “engaged in touching the beloved’s private parts”.
· He is n”aked and holds a skull filled with wine.”
· With the “tusk he is holding a bowl” that shines and from which jewels roll down.
· He shall worship Pusti who is also naked.
· With one hand, she “holds a red lotus” and with the “other she touches penis”. She is pink in colour.…”
· Narada Purana III.84.22-24 In the cremation ground the devotee shall “sit naked on the chest of a corpse”. Repeating the mantra he shall offer “a thousand flowers” of the arka plant smearing them with his own semen. With these flowers he shall devotedly worship the goddess.
o He who meditates on the “vaginal passage of a woman” splashed with the “menstrual blood” and repeats the mantra ten thousand times, shall certainly fascinate and captivate the people by means of sweet poesy.”
· Narada Purana III.84.20 ”He who repeats mantra ten thousand times seeing the sexual organ of a woman with beautiful eyes shall attain equality with the lord of speech ere long.”
· Narada Purana III.84.25-26 ”The devotee shall meditate on Kali as follows: She is stationed on the chest of Siva who is on the Yantra with fifteen corners. She is engaged in amorous battle with lord Mahakala and is smiling sweetly.
· The devotee himself shall perform sexual intercourse. Even as he does so he shall repeat the mantra a thousand times.”
· Narada Purana III.87.32-36 ”On the fourteenth day of the dark fortnight, during the pitch dark midnight, the devotee shall take bath and wear red garments, garlands and unguents. He must bring a woman of youthful charms to represent the deity Chinnamasta and worship her.
· She must be beautiful and “capable of having intercourse with five men”, be of smiling look and have her hair dishevelled.
· She must be “made naked and worshipped” and then he must repeat the mantra ten thousand times.
From Sexual Deviations emanates the evil of Incest – as in Hindooism – which then dooms the race and the nation
Sample Sexual deviance in Hindoo scriptures – as in Fellatio !
https://dindooohindoo.page.tl/Puranas-_-Oral-Sex-and-Fellatio.htm
“Origins of Oral Sex”, in Dindoo Hindooism
It starts with Lord Shiva who asks “women to eat his testicles”
Devi refused this disgusting food, and finally Siva said, ‘I will give “you something never tasted”, by anyone else: the “wo balls resembling fruits below my navel”. Eat the testicles that hang there and be satisfied.’ Delighted by this gift, the goddesses praised Siva.” — Padma Purana 5:26:91-125; cf. Linga Purana
Then we have Sage Dirghatama who asked the wife of King Bali to “lick every part of his body” !
”After that, King Bali appeased that sage and was furious with his wife; and sent her again well-dressed, after her toilet, to the sage, when the seer said. ”O. Devi!Cast off your bashfulness and then “lick the whole of my body with your tongue”, after rubbing it with salt, curds and honey; you will then attain your wish and get sons.” Matsya Purana 48.67-76
As per the Puranas ,When a Hindoo Rani is not sure ,”if she is being fucked”, by her limpdick husband – then “oral sex is the best practice”
“O sage, in the course of the sexual activity she suspected him to be another man.
Hence she received the semen through the mouth into the nostril.
Thence were born the twin gods Asvins, the foremost among physicians”.
Shiva Purana, UmaSamhita 5.35.32-34 (Bala Kandam, Chapter 14. For more details on yaham,refer to the book “Gnana Surian”,published by Kudi Arasu Press)
Then we have the “birth of Ayappa/Karthik Niggpa” when the “sperm of Shiva”, entered into Agni’s mouth ! How did that happen ? I wonder !
Abraham and Sarah were brothers and sisters from a different mother – and the net result was Isaac – and then …. the line from Jesse,David , Solomon and the Doom of Israel and the Jews !
Abraham and Sarah = Incest of lower degree – but incest , still !
https://dindooohindoo.page.tl/Abraham.htm
The Net impact !
David was a rapist and a murderer and his son raped his sister and all the mistresses of David !
https://dindooohindoo.page.tl/David-Rapes-and-His-wives-are-raped-in-public.htm
https://dindooohindoo.page.tl/David-Son-rapes-his-sister.htm
Solomon became an idolator and the Jew race was cursed by Allah and the Lord
https://dindooohindoo.page.tl/Solomon-_-Idolator-and-Lothario.htm
India was raped and pillaged by the Huns,Turks,Miughals,Momgols,Taimur,Greeks,Chinese ……..
They could not protect their women or their nation or their culture !
It was OFFICIALLY ENSLAVED to the Mughals and Brits for 1000 years ! Is there any other parallel in history !
Their Chief God Rama was an Impotent,Pansy,Coward,Murderer,Pimp,Drunkard and a Gambler
Cogito ! Reason ?
Hindoos are the seed of incest !
It all started with a man called Ishvaku !
https://dindooohindoo.page.tl/Dindoos-%3D-Born-of-Incest.htm
The Impotent King “had 4 sons” whom he “sent to exile”, and who “fucked and married their own sisters”, to produce the “Divine Sakya Dynasty” !
The reason Y the gandoo king “kicked out his 4 sons” – is just like the “story of Gandoo Rama” !
As per “Ambattha-sutta of the Theravada Digha-Nikaya” (Long Discourses)
“Out of fear of the mixing of castes “they cohabited (sa—vasa) together with their own sisters”
The sons of Ikshvaku,according to this Pali version, had “sexual relations” with their “true,full sisters” (not a “half or distant” sister)