FinalChaos

This guy did what was absolutely necessary, and I love him for it.

Maji de Watashi ni Koishinasai

Maji de Watashi ni Koishinasai

Also something for people who read Tokyo Babel,
 

Hmm... How about the villainous protagonist in Hanachirasu? Does he qualify as such? 

That dark part of Youtube where you end up while you're supposed to be working.
 

wanko, the green haired sword warrior with a talking cellphone strap and kokoro
WHY I CANT PICK MULTIPLE GIRLS 

While I haven't read Subahibi, I'd suggest Dies Irae over MLA. Mainly due to the the 2 parts needed to be read before MLA and the annoying protagonist.

Dunno about the manga but I have read the light novel, where Veldora (the dragon) does show up again though after a looong time. His interaction then is damn good too. The point where he comes out is 
Gonna watch Fairy Tail and Index 3 from the sequels, and plan to try out Zombieland saga and Kyuuketsu-san for now.

Lmao. Yeah, 'cause the thread dying is so unusual. xD
But fair enough, I'll add to the conversation. Caveat, though! I'm quite tired, so I might ramble a bit.
 
I'm not against gay marriage myself, but I can try and play the Devil's advocate (ironically). One reason for being against gay marriage can be the religious aspect, though that would also involve prohibiting atheists or people of other religions getting married. Then again, in that scenario, there could just be established a non-religious marriage, with a non-religious authority figure to legalize the union. So meh. Another reason could be the fear of a slippery slope, which is not without credibility, where people are afraid it's gonna go towards disaster one tiny step at a time. The reason I say it's not without credibility is because I remember seeing advocates for gay marriage on old TV debates going "Oh come on, it's just marriage! It's not like we're gonna start teaching it to kids in school!" Not only is it being taught to kids in school, but so is transgenderism, which I think is an appalling thing to do. That does not mean gay people shouldn't be allowed to marry, obviously, but that kind of fear might be what fuels the position. Also, the homosexuality "movement" is needlessly perverse, which is not helping their cause. If you want to convince regular people that you're a normal human being just like them, maybe you shouldn't dress up in spandex and BDSM gear at your pride parades. Not to mention making prepubescent boys twerk half naked on the street.
 
I've read your question and I will answer it, but let me give my 5 cents about incest in general first, as it's actually a subject I find quite interesting. I have a great interest in morality and general philosophy, so it's a topic I've thought about on and off for a long time.
 
Okay, so I actually wrote an entire paragraph, but found myself rambling way too much, and I've decided I need to try and condense it. I think one of the most important things to understand before going into this discussion is this: Human societies are in a constant battle between two separate ideals: Collectivism (i.e. order) and Individualism (i.e. freedom). Both have their pros and cons, and society cannot function with only one of them. Collectivism says that people must make sacrifices to their freedom and independency for the good of the group. Like paying taxes or not breaking the law. Taken to its extreme, we get totalitarian states, like the Soviet Union, where your rights are non-existent and you are expendable. You only exist in order to be a benefit for the nation, as it sees fit. It represents the absolute of order. But order without happiness doesn't work, and we can't have happiness without individuality. So on to individualism. Individualism says that the individual is supreme over the collective. That everyone is unique and does not belong to any group. Taken to its extreme, it means no one is bound by any rules other than those they set for themselves. It means reality is subjective, your gender is whatever you want it to be, the law does not apply to you, ectera. A society can not be purely individualistic, as it will instantly turn into an anarchy if it ever tries to be.  It represents the absolute of chaos.
For society to function, we need a balance of both collectivism and individualism, so as to have both the order of the former and the happiness of the latter. However, society always tend to lean more to one or the other. But unlike traditionally where it has leaned more towards collectivism than individualism, we now lean towards individualism, and I'd argue that we're on a steady course towards complete individualism. Because once you start putting individualism over norms and traditions, there's no logical place to stop. This is why the LGBTQASKLNTRKESAMwhatever is spinning out of control and why we suddenly have 127 genders. If we put what the individual thinks above what society thinks, everything becomes subjective, and if everything is subjective, then nothing is real and everything is meaningless and the only thing that matters is one's own subjective perception and feelings. That's the basis of the arguments of feminists and all the other "civil rights" advocates.
I probably did a really shitty job of explaining all that, but like I said, I'm tired, so forgive me. ^^
So why was any of that relevant? Because, like I said, we're leaning towards individualism, so these issues get increasingly tackled from an individualistic approach. The only ways you can advocate against something like incest are with either morality or societal pragmatism, both of which use a collectivist foundation rather than an individualistic foundation, which is where the problem arises. Because individualism doesn't care about morality because morality is imposed by the collective on the individual, and societal pragmatism puts the needs of the group above the individual, so that's out of the question too. (If you wonder what I mean, by "societal pragmatism," I mean, for example, how legalizing incest is extremely bad for the stability of families and opens up the floodgate for a whole host of problems. But since the individual reigns supreme in individualism, that doesn't matter.)
So to answer your question, it depends entirely on your value system. If you value collectivism above individualism, then you'll adhere either to the morality of the society you find yourself in, or to the pragmatism of context. If you value individualism over collectivism, then you don't have any argument against it. Or really any sexual activity, including bestiality and pedophilia. Not without having an inconsistent argument, anyway.
 
Feel free to offer counterarguments if you want. I'm sitting here yawning every 30 seconds, so I probably made an error of logic here and there. Or everywhere.

Good god, I just discovered this. Truly beautiful, a work of mankind's true ingenuity.
 

Adding VN reasons:
Too much meaningless choices No skip function so you have to bear the boring parts Too much repetition Drags a lot in some sections The few walkthroughs around sucks, looks like it was google translated Some questionable OST Food discussions at least once a day High amount of surprise bad endings Can't be patched The hottest character isn't romanceable

No. Hell no. 
There are two main reasons:
1. The less controversial reason is simply that visual novels are not popular enough. They barely have an international audience as it stands, not to mention the borderline nonexistent non-Japanese VN development industry. Besides being dominated by a single language/country/culture/market, they aren't in text form like plays or poetry can be. They're software. Visual novels are an exceedingly young genre (particularly outside Japan), and as such don't have an established tradition (though they do have tropes) and they thus don't really reflect different cultures or have distinct schools of thought. The fact that you need -at the very least- a capable:
1. composer
2. programmer
3. writer
4. artist
for a given visual novel hurts these chances too. For a novel, you need an author and an editor. Give them two years. Done. Not so simple for a visual novel.
2. The genre simply isn't mature or serious enough. The vast majority of VNs out there, like many anime, go for a non-ambitious slice of life or romantic comedy story. If not that, they tend to stick to many anime/manga tropes on top of the genre's tropes on its own. I'm talking about how the choices-influence-storyline idea is almost always used as skill/luck/walkthrough usage checks for getting into a girl's p-p-panties~. I'm talking about the overwhelming usage of anime/manga styling and characters (all your -dere). And when a VN does get popular for something except cute anime girls, it's more often than not for action or suspense or murder mystery (F/SN, Steins; Gate, Umineko). This doesn't mean they automatically lack merit (Umineko is one of the most emotional and profound visual novels out there and it has sideboob demons, bunny girls shooting missiles, and goat vore). However, even such serious VNs often end up bashing you in the head with their messaging, or lack enough depth to go for a second read. They don't lend themselves very well to analysis. Few VNs out there deal with real-life matters or issues, such as a particular war or a particular culture, and this matters. Few VNs out there dabble with legitimate philosophy or truly have something original to say. Furthermore, very few VNs try to expand what the medium can do. Playing with perspective, how the text is displayed, how choices are made and how their consequences are conveyed- too few VNs play with these ideas, and the genre is considerably worse off for it. Particularly notably, how almost every high-profile protagonist here is a good old straight white high school age regular guy and how so many stories take place in a high school setting (at least partly, and with a predominantly high school cast). It hurts this genre.

Mine too.
But apparently Monsters are fine ....... in water.