- Joined
- Mar 29, 2016
- Messages
- 40,989
- Reaction score
- 55,252
- Location
- Houston Area, TX
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Meh. We're getting into splitting hairs here. I agree that consenting adults should be able to have sex without consequence --- unless the reasons I stated. That still makes the act criminal because they've chosen to do it in a certain place.
Well, then what exactly is the debate here?
Everyone in this thread is basically saying the exact same thing, just in different words. The both of us are saying basically the same thing.
If its hair splitting, then what is the pinpoint you are trying to get across in your OP? I agree that I'm being semantical, but that's because I'm specifically talking about the legal reasoning and how its applied/interpreted, which involves a heap of semantics, especially in regards to situations that aren't uniform and need to be flexible, as no one situation fits all.
Are you specifically pinpointing incestual adult consensual sex, or something else?