I had a long, incredibly witty and unrefutable post typed up in response, but the server ate it. My moment of glory has passed, you’ll just have to settle for this.
Blood ties are no more your business than medical records. The fact that you have chosen to make them your business does not make your actions any more correct. This is like saying that gender is a matter of public record, so it is OK to restrict marriage based on gender, as it doesn’t violate anyones privacy. Not to mention that this argument defines marriage as a vehicle for reproduction and nothing more.
**
What family? The family that is mom, dad and 2.5 kids? Or the divorced mother of three? Your presumption appears to be that society will come tumbling down if the family unit is tampered with. Clearly, given the fact that there is no hard and fast definition of family, and people seem to do just fine from all kinds of upbringings, this presumption is wrong. The situtation is no different from inter-racial marriages, or gay marriages: It is simply none of your damn business.
[sub]
And, BTW, is there some irony in a guy named Beelzebubba arguing for the rights of brothers and sisters to wed? Hmmm… [/sub]
All of them. I think incest on a parent/child or brother/sister level would be bad in any family, whether it be a classic nuclear family, a single-parent family, a gay-parent family, or any other modern permutation.
I think it’s sad that anyone who defends the institution of the family is often assumed to be trying to define what family is, or is some right-wing “family values” ideologue. Moderates and liberals believe in the family, too, but just with a much more broad definition of what that is. And it doesn’t include incest.
Back on topic, I guess I’m OK with 1st cousin marriages being legal, but you won’t see me supporting one within my own family (we’re all pretty tight, so it would just be uber-creepy. We don’t really have any “see them once a year” cousins.)
Point the first: I think first cousins having children is “not recommended”. In the version of the article in my paper, it mentions a “doubling” (well, not quite) of a particular birth defect occuring. The article then dismisses this as negligible when it is anything but. You should generally assume a near doubling of most low incidence birth defects.
The article is irresponsible in okaying first cousin marriages.
Point the second: What if it continues a few more generations? Then you are talking about real problems. If you allow it once, then you allow it a lot and if the grandchildren of two first cousin marriages marry, it’s going to get bad. (In farming, crossingbreeding between the most diverse types is usually best. Something racists oddly ignore.)
I had to face this in my genealogical research when I found out the relationships among by Dutch NY ancestors from 1600-1800. Immense number of cousin, second-cousins marriages over many generations. I am amazed these people could walk upright.
Whether the state legislature should be involved gets into that old grey area: how much should the goverment do to stop people from being stupid.
No, not referring to hemophilia-which I know more about than I should-seeing as how science is NOT my cup of tea. (apparently you haven’t heard of my Romanov obsession)
I’m speaking more along the lines with regards to even minor things-for example, King Victor Emanuel III of Italy was the child of a first cousin marriage-who were also very inbred themselves-and as a result was very small-only 5 ft. If you look at some of the pictures of the families, they at the very least tended to be pale, washed out, pop eyed, etc. Then, of course, there were mental illness going around, etc.
But you’re right-hemophilia had nothing to do with it.
I’m not saying ONE first cousin marriage is a bad idea-it’s when you start doing it more and more often, a lack of new genes tends to make certain problems reoccur.
I think we had a thread in IMHO about the most horrifying cases of inbreeding we’ve seen.
I don’t see anything wrong with 1st cousins getting married. My only question is, does everybody have to sit on one side of the church during the wedding?
Beelzebubba, we were discussing the people that can or cannot make-up of a family, not the sexual behavior within a family. It’s apples and oranges. I concede I could have made my point a little better, but they’re two different subjects. In my opinion, incest should not be part of a family in the same way child and spousal abuse shouldn’t. I mean, sometimes fathers and sons get into fights voluntarily. Should that be OK simply because they both consented to it?
Guinastasia, do you have a link to that thread, if it still exists? I’ve never had an example of inbreeding pointed out to me, so I have some sort of twisted interest in reading that.
Funny aside: I can often get a rise out of people when I say that my parents were related before they got married. But then I explain that it was all by marriage (dad’s brother to mom’s aunt), so everything’s kosher. Coupling that with the fact that I was nearly a bastard (in the literal sense; I may already be one figuratively) is a great conversation starter!
Oh, and ftg, was that an Associated Press story or the New York Times article? The Times took a pretty even-handed approach to things. (The Times doing a better job than the AP; big surprise :rolleyes: )
Oooh, good one superbee… it’s like one of those Zen riddles.
SNenc: *I’m no good at this kind of math… do cousins who are the children of identical twins have any more genes in common than “normal” cousins? *
I think so; if my notion of this is right, they are as genetically related as half-siblings (children of one mother but different fathers, or vice versa) are. Someone with actual biology knowledge please help out here.
They are as closely related as half-siblings (although “share more genes” may or may not be accurate) For genetic purposes, identical twins are pretty much the same person, Barring any new mutations, any combination of genes that appears in one mother’s egg could have as easily appeared in the other’s.
Doreen
I think first-cousin marriages should be legal. I don’t think they need to be encouraged, exactly. And the children of first or second cousins are well-advised to pursue exogamy.
