• @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      -13 months ago

      that’s not true, and false equivalencies only serve to make you seem more ridiculous. You’re gross, and your kink is historically shamed because it destroys us a viable species. I feel sorry for the people in your life.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            03 months ago

            I just misremembered. But my point still stands. You want to ban women over 34 having children?

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              13 months ago

              no, I don’t. you seem pretty intent on trying to make me tho. banning first cousin marriages doesn’t lead to us banning all pregnancies began after the mother is 34. you’re using a logical fallacy of the slippery slope and it doesn’t apply.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                03 months ago

                It’s not a slippery slope, it’s the exact same thing. The same excuse you use for banning incest equally applies to women over 34 giving birth. Banning that would not be a slippery slope, it would be an equivalence.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  12 months ago

                  no it wouldn’t and that’s your logical fallacy. banning consanguineous marriage does not mean banning all women over the age of 34 from giving birth. You’re wrong.