Incest significantly increases the chances for genetic defects, along with other issues.

You cannot keep comparing apples to burritos. For fuck's sake, you are creating the dangerous assumption that we'll magically support everything else.

Homosexuality in of itself is not morally wrong. Unlike incest or rape, it provides no harm and is a part of nature. You go on about how you have gay friends, but do you think that makes a difference? You're voting to support homosexuality, not for incest pornos to become a reality. 

With your logic, we'd have gone down a plethora of slippery slopes in life, but we haven't. Why is homosexuality constantly the only subject focused on?

Can you list ANY country that has had incest become legal after applying gay marriage? Because right now your post seems to be nothing more than rubbish

Exactly. The "slippery slope" is bullshit because the same ridiculous "logic" can be applied to anything; speeding fines are a slippery slope to banning cars, Nintendo investing in new IPs like Splatoon is a slippery slope to abandoning Mario/Zelda/Pokemon, eating meat is a slippery slope to embracing cannibalism...

Are you serious or just joking around now. My point has gone over your head. 

The fact we allowed gays is a stepping stone for many other things.

In my book incest is worse however logic says it isn't. Because we let gays love each other so why cant family members?

You would be thick if you think its apples to burritos.

Tell me what's the difference between two gay men and two gay brothers? 

There isnt, that opens an argument for incest marrage debates.

Remember equality? Love is love? 

You give into one you will eventually give in to the rest in a matter of time. 

That's my point. Dont give me this slippery slope garbage either. We said the same thing about digital media, 4k, loot boxes not being taken seriously and look what happens. Time changes everything.

I never did say they HAD to reproduce. Just that they CAN. Naturally.
And that is ultimately the difference.

Except we don't.

Which is why it is a logical fallacy.

Considering that Australia had DECADES worth of debate on same-sex marriage, dozens of polls dating back decades... Put the idea to a nation-wide vote... And then had the Government vote on it and pass two levels of parliament after the media circus for months and months just to get it passed?

And then a few select individuals ignorantly think that Pedophilia and Bestiality will somehow quietly come next without any scrutiny or protest? Time for them to start living in the real world I think.

Bullshit. Australia obviously disagrees with you as well as per the vote results.

One is two consenting same-sex adults that aren't related to each other and is legally, socially acceptable.

But I must ask you... Who gives a shit if someone you have never met and will never meet are banging each other? What they do in the privacy of their own home is not only none of your damn business, but it's also not your concern as long as they adhere to the law of the land.

It is a slippery slope argument. It is a logical fallacy. It is stupid. It is wrong. You need to come to terms with that or get educated on logical fallacies and on  slopes that are slippery.

A slippery slope logical fallacy is an argument where you assert that one thing leads to the other... And before we know it, it will result in something we don't want... And therefore we shouldn't do the first thing.
So by your slippery slope logical fallacy, we should not have a heterosexual marriage... As it will eventually result in people marrying an exotic piece of fungis on a moon orbiting a planet in the Alpha Centauri star system sometime in the future.

The issue with your slippery slope logical fallacy is that it is possible to do the first thing that is mentioned (I.E marriage) and then conflate it with an infinite number of possible what-if variables to reinforce your argument.

Another example of your slippery slope logical fallacy is:
Do not buy the new Pink Album, otherwise you will start buying My Chemical Romance Albums... Which means you will want to become an punk with green hair... Thus the solution is not to buy the Pink Album in the first place... When the real likely outcome is that you will just buy the new Pink album and stop there.

And like I said before... I am more than happy to educate you on logical fallacies as it seems you are severely lacking in understanding of that area and will thus cling to whatever argumentum from ignorantiam that you can to reinforce your own confirmation bias.

Your not understanding the point either. I know its morally wrong however you cant argu the difference between 2 gay men and 2 gay brothers. There the same thing so why cant they love each other? They cant reproduce so whats the problem. Men are men and woman are woman who all want to be treated fairly. 

Your right i couldn't care less what happens behind closed doors. Its NONE of our damn buiness. Hence why i voted yes.

Australia gives into alot. Gun laws, voilent video games, curtains around swimming pools for muslim woman etc so dont say we don't because we do and there facts.

No need to educate because i already know. My point is we allow 1 side and not the other and that is basically the issue with accepting new things. Also explain to me whats wrong with incest if they love each other? Its been happening as long as gays. Thats the problem with the term love, alot dont know what it means and use it to have what they want.

They aren't the same thing. That's the point. And thus should not be seen and treated the same.

Gun laws was one of the best things a conservative (Liberal/John Howard) Government ever did.
The amount of lives it has saved has been massive.

Then you know why your slippery slope logical fallacy is wrong and you should probably stop using it.

I am neither pro or against incest.
Incest is actually legal in Australia up to a point, even incest-based marriages is legal up to a point.

So your argument that same-sex marriage will result in incest marriage is actually wrong, because it was already legal up to a point.

There not different. Gays are two men or woman who like the same sex. Incest can also be two men and woman who like the same sex just the same. 

Like I said before, what's the difference between two male gays compared to 2 gay brothers? Nothing, they both breath and bleed. They both cannot reproduce etc. Its sort of legal now image it becoming worse in the coming years. You let one thing through than expect more. Sure we have set rules in place. We at this moment in time say incest is wrong etc, just like how we said gays were wrong as well. Rules change regardless if you have your belief that these rules will never change. They will eventually. Especially when we start throwing around terms "Love is love"

Also your opinion on gun laws is your obviously your opinion. To me its the stupidest thing we have ever done, we are the first to blame issues on objects and not people. Russia seems to get along well with guns in place, crazy that. Crime will happen regardless. Just like we cant play some games in Australia because there too violent eg Hatred. However that's an debate for another thread.

I can't tell of you're serious or not.

Actually, I can never tell if you're serious or not.

Dude, you still don't understand that from your terrible arguments we could say that straight people shouldn't love each other because it could eventually lead to brothers fucking their own brothers. 

Sexuality and Incest are COMPLETELY separate constructs.

And like you just alluded to... You can be either gay/straight/bisexual and in an incest relationship.
Ergo. Incest has nothing to do with Homosexuality or any sexuality for that matter... SO you can stop trying to force a connection between them.

I can use the same argument about you and your partner. You both breathe and bleed and ergo are the same as 2 gay men in an incestual relationship.

Do you see how this is a logical fallacy?

We have already established that your slippery slope logical fallacy is rubbish with the sound logic and reasoning already presented prior in this thread that you have acknowledged.
Thus merely rewording it to somehow make it seem different isn't suddenly going to turn your Argumentum ad Ignorantiam into something sound. - So why continue with it?

Don't take me for a fool... I am pretty sure I have been sufficiently eloquent enough in this thread to show that I am not one.

Stupidest thing we have ever done? Are you serious?
We have not had a gun massacre in decades. It's saved lives... And you think that is stupid? Since when has saving lives equated to being stupid?

Gun control works in Australia, it wouldn't work in say... The USA. - For one, the USA is not girt by sea... A natural barrier to smuggling of weapons, drugs and people.

It's not just my opinion either, it's statistics. It's evidence.
And even if we have a gun massacre tomorrow, the fact we didn't have one for several decades prior still means it was worth it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Moscow_shooting

Sure it does. Keep thinking that.

So your argument is... That unless we can stop 100% of all crime, be it kids stealing lollies from a shop, someone holding a shop up with a knife, someone hit and running an old lady in a car... That we shouldn't ban guns?

That would be like saying unless vaccines can cure 100% of all diseases known to man... There is no point in getting any vaccine.

Different problems require different solutions, if it's a different crime not related to guns, then it requires a different solution, it's that simple.

I don't have any drama getting the games I wish to play, there are ways around it... Like importing from another PAL territory, pirating, VPN... List goes on.