Should first cousins be allowed to marry?

[CultureKing]

Marry?  Yes.  Reproduce?  No.

Why not?  Did you read the thread?

Again, the risk is the same with women over the age of 30 (as Lewis pointed out).  And my mom had me when she was almost 43...so...

They may come out healthy, but they also come out looking like this:

(big picture)

And since I don't want our next generation to be too scared to reproduce by sleeping with ^^^, then it's in our best interest to keep them from breeding. 

But as Alcon said, the chance of birth defects is exactly the same between first cousins as it is with women over the age of 30.  If you want to restrict first cousins from procreating, do you also want to restrict women over the age of 30 from procreating?

You can post pictures of your stereotypical "inbred redneck" stereotype if you want, but it doesn't change the facts.

Ecept if you are in a society that says that marrying and having kids with your cousin is acceptable that means that sure the first time it happens then the risk is pretty low, but when society says its ok then their child may marry their cousin (and so on), thus compounding the risk of genetic disease.
Also somehow I just dont think it is quite right, I dont know how to explain it.

[SPC]

Yes, although the resulting children may be born with problems, and I have no clue why anyone would like to marry such a close relative.

Are you insulting me?

[Alcon]

Ecept if you are in a society that says that marrying and having kids with your cousin is acceptable that means that sure the first time it happens then the risk is pretty low, but when society says its ok then their child may marry their cousin (and so on), thus compounding the risk of genetic disease.

How likely is that, though?  Really, in a non-isolated community?  Besides, having kids with your cousin isn't illegal.  Just marrying him/her.

Also somehow I just dont think it is quite right, I dont know how to explain it.

With every ounce of respect, if that's the best explanation in my mind, I might be considering the possibility that it was out of emotive reactionism more than logic.

[J. J.]

Actually, I question the source.  Wiki, not necessarily a better one, notes a much higher degree of problems, 13 times above average.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cousin_marriage

[Alcon]

Actually, I question the source.  Wiki, not necessarily a better one, notes a much higher degree of problems, 13 times above average.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cousin_marriage

That's different.

That assumes that cousin marriage is predominately common.

In an American society, the legalization of cousin marriage is unlikely to put the rate of cousin marriages to 55%, so the 13 times number isn't really transposable.

[J. J.]

Actually, I question the source.  Wiki, not necessarily a better one, notes a much higher degree of problems, 13 times above average.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cousin_marriage

That's different.

That assumes that cousin marriage is predominately common.

In an American society, the legalization of cousin marriage is unlikely to put the rate of cousin marriages to 55%, so the 13 times number isn't really transposable.

What a we suppose to do, make it legal for a few years then reversed it?

[MODU]

You can post pictures of your stereotypical "inbred redneck" stereotype if you want, but it doesn't change the facts.

Whaaaaaaaaaat?  I thought that picture was great! 

[Alcon]

What a we suppose to do, make it legal for a few years then reversed it?

I think you misunderstand.  Making it permanently legal still wouldn't result in a rate anywhere near 55% in American society.  Do you think it would?

[CultureKing]

What a we suppose to do, make it legal for a few years then reversed it?

I think you misunderstand.  Making it permanently legal still wouldn't result in a rate anywhere near 55% in American society.  Do you think it would?

While I dont think it could get anywhere near 55% you have to think about who would be marrying their cousins and the legacy it would promote. Those who marry their cousins would likely have children who would see it as culturally acceptable, thus I could see in some families a development of marrying close relatives to "keep the family and genes pure" (and yes there are families out there that would resort to this), amoung these families or groups the rate in that group could raise to numbers that would be simular to Pakistan (think of small groups like the ammish who have small numbers in terms of choices of who to marry that is in their respective group, and would thus fully accept the marraige of cousins)

[Alcon]

I suppose so, but if we're limiting marriage between first cousins, why not just limiting marriage among multi-generation cousin marriages?  That solves the problem without impacting sporadic couples.

And, marriage doesn't have to have anything to do with children.  Cousins having children out of wedlock isn't illegal, to my knowledge.

I love arguing about things I don't really care about.

[DuEbrithil]

Marry?  Yes.  Reproduce?  No.

yes, lets just say, "here is your marriage license, now let me have your genitals."

[YRABNNRM]

So clearly women over 30 shouldn't be allowed to breed - just look at you Alcon! We can't have any more of you, damnit!

I have three arms

No need to get sexual, Alcon.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

NO

1. Birth defects
2. It's disgusting!

[Gabu]

2. It's disgusting!

I find you disgusting; can I get the government to stop you from reproducing?

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

2. It's disgusting!

I find you disgusting; can I get the government to stop you from reproducing?

You can TRY!

[John Dibble]

1. Birth defects

Dude, read the thread. The risk under normal conditions isn't that big.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Ten bucks says you're descended from at least one cousin marriage, probably more. Ya inbred hick!

[CultureKing]

I suppose so, but if we're limiting marriage between first cousins, why not just limiting marriage among multi-generation cousin marriages?  That solves the problem without impacting sporadic couples.

And, marriage doesn't have to have anything to do with children.  Cousins having children out of wedlock isn't illegal, to my knowledge.

I love arguing about things I don't really care about.

I could go for a limit for multi-generation cousin marriages, that would make it better...
And yes it is fun to argue about things that dont really matter

[Bono]

Map of the legality of first cousin marriage in the US (it's legal pretty much everywhere else in the world):

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

No.  Marriage is an outmoded bourgeois concept that should be banned altogether.

[angus]

You can post pictures of your stereotypical "inbred redneck" stereotype if you want, but it doesn't change the facts.

Whaaaaaaaaaat?  I thought that picture was great! 

I liked it.  Very nice mullet. 

it's not really that much of an increase.

Non-related couples have a 2-3% risk of birth defects, and first cousins have a 4-6% risk.

Are you smoking?  2 times 2 is four.  3 times 2 is six.  So the very stats you present suggest, at least anecdotally, that first cousins have double the chance of having weird offspring as non-relatives.    I wouldn't call that "not really that much of an increase"

Still, I don't care, honestly, if two first-cousins marry.  Don't care if two men marry.  Don't care if one man marries five or six women.  Or if one woman marries five or six men.  I still don't buy the arguments that non-traditional marriages erode the institution.  Money problems erode marriages.  Bad sex too.  Or no sex.  And abuse.  And neglect.  And extramarital affairs.  But I have a hard time imagining how homosexual, polygamist, or incestual marriages among people you have never met really affect your marriage.

[John Dibble]

Are you smoking?

That depends - are you a nark?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

.002 is double .001, but that doesn't make it much of an increase. 4-6% isn't that much more than 2-3%. Double it again and I might consider it a big increase.

[angus]

It's doubling.  That's a two-fold increase!

oh, well, as a practical matter I think we're in agreement on the question, as in "don't really care," so I won't quibble over the minutiae.

[John Dibble]

It's doubling.  That's a two-fold increase!

oh, well, as a practical matter I think we're in agreement on the question, as in "don't really care," so I won't quibble over the minutiae.

I demand you quibble over minutiae - what else am I to do with my time? Spend it productively, perhaps working on homework? I THINK NOT!

[Tetro Kornbluth]

Better question:

Should Brothers and Sisters be allowed to marry?

Or even Fathers and Daughters?

Or Mothers and sons?

I mean if they'll both over 16 and consent to it, of course.

[Gabu]

It's doubling.  That's a two-fold increase!

Statistically speaking, a healthy person has double the risk of a heart attack when having sex.  So you should never have sex.

Of course, never mind that the probability increases from one in a million to two in a million.