Apparently, that must have a major importance for you :D
I never understood the outlawing of marriages to cousins/brother/sisters/same-sexes, etc., though where I live, law is rather strict this way.
"They also point to recent testing that placed the increased risk of spina bifida and cystic fibrosis at only 1.7% -2.8% higher than for children of unrelated parents."
Having CF myself, I don't like the idea of any extra risk there. But then my parents aren't at all related, so I guess that goes to show that it's all a crapshoot to begin with.
OMG. This is depressing: Billy Redden, the banjo boy from Deliverance, cannot in all actuality play banjo.
I hate Hollywood.
|
"They also point to recent testing that placed the increased risk of spina bifida and cystic fibrosis at only 1.7% -2.8% higher than for children of unrelated parents."
Having CF myself, I don't like the idea of any extra risk there. But then my parents aren't at all related, so I guess that goes to show that it's all a crapshoot to begin with.
Would it be a carry on from previous generations of inbreeding? Not pointing fingers but these things happen.
Apparently, that must have a major importance for you :D
I never understood the outlawing of marriages to cousins/brother/sisters/same-sexes, etc., though where I live, law is rather strict this way.
But parent-child is out of the question?
|
|
But parent-child is out of the question?Apparently, that must have a major importance for you :D
I never understood the outlawing of marriages to cousins/brother/sisters/same-sexes, etc., though where I live, law is rather strict this way.
It wasnt during the slavery period when slave owners bred sons to mothers in pursuit of better, faster, stronger slaves.
Would it be a carry on from previous generations of inbreeding? Not pointing fingers but these things happen."They also point to recent testing that placed the increased risk of spina bifida and cystic fibrosis at only 1.7% -2.8% higher than for children of unrelated parents."
Having CF myself, I don't like the idea of any extra risk there. But then my parents aren't at all related, so I guess that goes to show that it's all a crapshoot to begin with.
Quite possibly, though I think I'd have to go back quite a few generations to find familial marriages.
After thinking about this a bit more, I'd say: Love is hard to find, so if you happen to love a family member, so be it. But if you can describe your familial relationship without consulting a written family tree...strongly consider adoption and a vasectomy!
After thinking about this a bit more, I'd say: Love is hard to find, so if you happen to love a family member, so be it. But if you can describe your familial relationship without consulting a written family tree...strongly consider adoption and a vasectomy!
And from there, we can go directly to the question why people with known genetic disorders are allowed to breed at all.
This at 3.15. Just sayin'.
|
But parent-child is out of the question?Apparently, that must have a major importance for you :D
I never understood the outlawing of marriages to cousins/brother/sisters/same-sexes, etc., though where I live, law is rather strict this way.
It is according to the Bible. Sex with your parents, aunts and uncles and your siblings is not okay.
2 siblings should share about 50% of their DNA. 2 cousins would then share 25% of their DNA. If those cousins have children, About 12.5% of their DNA would match, and only a portion of that DNA could potentially hold a lifethreatening genetic disease.
The article talks about a 3% increase from 3% to 6%. That's about 1 in 17 kids, instead of 1 in 34 kids. If 2 cousins would have 3 kids together, there would be a 1 in 6 chance of one of them having a lifethreatening genetic disease.
The article doesn't include what is or isn't a lifethreatening genetic disease. Some forms of cancer can be hereditary even though they won't develop until you're 40 or 50 years old. Did the study take that into account?
And what about genetic disorders that aren't lifethreatening? Baldness, ADHD, autism and more.
While the article does mention an increased risk if marrying your cousin happens a lot in your culture, it doesn't go on to state what that risk is.
After thinking about this a bit more, I'd say: Love is hard to find, so if you happen to love a family member, so be it. But if you can describe your familial relationship without consulting a written family tree...strongly consider adoption and a vasectomy!And from there, we can go directly to the question why people with known genetic disorders are allowed to breed at all.
Personally, I plan to adopt if I ever want a kid, but I believe the usual argument against "Let's not let dysfunctional people breed" is that it's a slippery slope toward "Let's not let minorities breed." Or something.
I do believe that unless humanity masters warp-speed mass space travel rather soon, we're either going to end up in a near-constant cycle of war, or we're all going to realize that we need some kind of enforced birth-rate control. 'Cause the necessity of 'Go forth and multiply' has looong since past, if it was ever a necessity at all.
Marrying cousins used to be extremely common. It still is in some countries. I personally don't see why people are surprised by this.
Also, apparently, it used to be okay to marry adopted siblings; just take a look at Mary Shelley's Frankenstein and how the mad scientist marrying his adopted sister wasn't treated as unusual.
Edgar Allan Poe married his first cousin......seems like a legit thing to do, and should totally work out.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Iffin sumbuz is yer cousan AND yer sister, them's bad tuh raise up seed upon.
Alser, iffin sumbuz is yer graymaw, AND is yer maw, thet ther's a bad idee.
Corse, I gots no SINE tifickal everdense. Mainway's just anecdotal.
Thet's why I mainly tends to go poodaddlin' round with cosmic beins from the outer darkness of spase.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Heck, until May 2011, bestiality was still legal here in Florida.
As far as I'm concerned, you Primes can have relationships with whatever you want... you'll all still make fine hosts for slaadi larvae.
Heck, until May 2011, bestiality was still legal here in Florida.
But your marriage was grandfathered in right?
Edgar Allan Poe married his first cousin......seems like a legit thing to do, and should totally work out.
His adopted cousin.
It wasnt during the slavery period when slave owners bred sons to mothers in pursuit of better, faster, stronger slaves.But parent-child is out of the question?Apparently, that must have a major importance for you :D
I never understood the outlawing of marriages to cousins/brother/sisters/same-sexes, etc., though where I live, law is rather strict this way.
I don't see how this applies to his statement.
Edgar Allan Poe married his first cousin......seems like a legit thing to do, and should totally work out.His adopted cousin.
Oh. well thet thar's arrite. She ain't thredded up is his broodmate then.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Quick fact-check on the David...
2 siblings should share about 50% of their DNA. 2 cousins would then share 25% of their DNA.
But actually, cousins only share 12.5% of their DNA. Double first cousins would share 25%.
I agree it's potentially problematic, but so is everything. Should we not allow women over a certain age to get married because there's a higher chance of birth defects? Like many situations, any line drawn would be relatively arbitrary and leave a fair number of people unhappy.
What is more interesting is that some people imagine this is something you can draw up laws about and have people obey them. I mean... It isn't really the marriage that is the potential problem, is it?
Second, if we're that scared of defects in people's genes, we really ought to gene-check everyone for defects before they are licensed to procreate. Because that certainly won't end badly...
I don't think marrying cousins has been illegal anywhere in Europe. If it had been, considering how many grandchildren Queen Victoria had, married into lots of European royal families, the last century's history might have been very different.
Off, the DBT's 2003 release Decoration Day, the liner notes claim the song is about (at the time, anyway) the only couple in the American prison system for consensual incest.
Edgar Allan Poe married his first cousin......seems like a legit thing to do, and should totally work out.His adopted cousin.
I've never heard that she was adopted. I have heard that she was 13 at the time of the wedding and Edgar and Virginia never consummated their marriage. But I've never heard that she wasn't really his cousin.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I've never heard that she was adopted. I have heard that she was 13 at the time of the wedding and Edgar and Virginia never consummated their marriage. But I've never heard that she wasn't really his cousin.Edgar Allan Poe married his first cousin......seems like a legit thing to do, and should totally work out.His adopted cousin.
As I understand it he was the adopted one and even if they were blood related should he really count? They consummated and as far as I know they never had a romantic/sexual inclination for each other.
From what I'm reading, he was taken in, but never officially adopted by his aunt, who was the mother of his wife. It looks like they were really cousins.
Btw, "consummating a marriage" usually means having sex.
What is more interesting is that some people imagine this is something you can draw up laws about and have people obey them. I mean... It isn't really the marriage that is the potential problem, is it?
Second, if we're that scared of defects in people's genes, we really ought to gene-check everyone for defects before they are licensed to procreate. Because that certainly won't end badly...
But all laws are simply a line drawn somewhere. What is punished, what isn't. How strongly it is punished. Consanguinity is no different. Just pointing to the fact the line is arbitrary doesn't, by itself, disprove its value. Mr. Betts is fond of pointing out nuclear weapons are illegal, therefore drawing the line at handguns, assault rifles etc is just a different spot of demarcation. I think, to some extent these laws exist, as well, to prevent exploitation of family power dynamics.
All that said, personally I really wouldn't care if cousins married.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Off, the DBT's 2003 release Decoration Day, the liner notes claim the song is about (at the time, anyway) the only couple in the American prison system for consensual incest.
I know of at least one more.
Friend of mine works for the public defenders office. He had a client who left his paramour and young daughter when the child was a baby. At 19 the little girl tracked down her father to renew the relationship. They started spending time together. He started helping her with small college related expenses, then one thing led to another.... (And que 70s porn music).
The affair lasted a couple of years until the mother stumbled on it and reported it to the police. He's now in prison.
I've never heard that she was adopted. I have heard that she was 13 at the time of the wedding and Edgar and Virginia never consummated their marriage. But I've never heard that she wasn't really his cousin.Edgar Allan Poe married his first cousin......seems like a legit thing to do, and should totally work out.His adopted cousin.
When she was 13....
And he was 27....
Ahh...these days wouldn't that sort of count as a pedo?
I suppose that's an entirely different line, but similar, in what's allowed with marriages and what all and how things have changed...but looking at the 13 year olds I know...I don't think any of them would be old enough or responsible enough to be married.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As I understand it he was the adopted one and even if they were blood related should he really count? They consummated and as far as I know they never had a romantic/sexual inclination for each other.I've never heard that she was adopted. I have heard that she was 13 at the time of the wedding and Edgar and Virginia never consummated their marriage. But I've never heard that she wasn't really his cousin.Edgar Allan Poe married his first cousin......seems like a legit thing to do, and should totally work out.His adopted cousin.
they was too full blooded cousins.
I don't know iffin they poodaddled or not. Wasn't there.
As to whether he should count? The thread says "married yer cousin."
I don't know why the hell he wouldn't count. It doesn't say "married yer cousin, with irrefutable proof you consummated the marriage."
|
|
Quick fact-check on the David...
2 siblings should share about 50% of their DNA. 2 cousins would then share 25% of their DNA.But actually, cousins only share 12.5% of their DNA. Double first cousins would share 25%.
You're right. You would share about 25% with your aunt or uncle, and about 12.5% with your cousins.
Well... apparently Virginia Poe was rather a special-looking lady. According to that wikipedia page, she was completely pale, with black hair, giving her a very striking, different look. Many described her as not looking human, though admittedly beautiful. She died at 24, after five years of illness in tuberculosis, which would put the first symptoms at 19... but is that the whole truth? Tuberculosis can lie dormant, it can take a good, long while to grow visible. It's not beyond the pale that there could have been a connection between how she looked and her disease. It's also quite likely that looking otherworldly at mid-nineteenth century completely killed your prospects of marriage, meaning her cousin might have been the only match possible. The marriage could well have been one meant to provide for her.
There could be thousands of reasons... but the main thing is, we don't know. Apparently their marriage was a happy one, and it is strange to judge them by the standards of our time. YMMV.
The problem with cousin marriage is not really the risk for genetic mutation. That's not a big risk, certainly not bigger than in many other situations nobody's discussing. The problem is that if it's common enough, and the populations realtively immobile, you risk breeding up certain genetic defects in an entire population. Note that small, isolated communities end up there no matter who they marry. As I understand it, and I am happy to admit I am at fault if I am, the Ashkenazy jews have been a somewhat isolated group for long enough, and have so frequent genes for Tay-Sachs disease that many choose to test for it before having children together. Thing is, once you reach that level of saturation in the population, it's not enough not to marry your cousin. You need to find a partner from a different region, because most the possible partners nearby are rather closely related to you in several different ways. At least a few different people I have talked to from Balkan have told me that this is a practice in some areas there.
As to whether he should count? The thread says "married yer cousin."
I don't know why the hell he wouldn't count. It doesn't say "married yer cousin, with irrefutable proof you consummated the marriage."
Yes he did marry his cousin, but most of the conversation here has been about breeding which is why it might not be relevant to the conversation.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
|
|
After thinking about this a bit more, I'd say: Love is hard to find, so if you happen to love a family member, so be it. But if you can describe your familial relationship without consulting a written family tree...strongly consider adoption and a vasectomy!And from there, we can go directly to the question why people with known genetic disorders are allowed to breed at all.
"allowed" is a tricky thing in a country with rights. people as a whole need to do a lot more thinking before breeding in general. I myself will never have children do to the joint and spine deformities in my family. glad my wife understands and supports me on that
Yes he did marry his cousin, but most of the conversation here has been about breeding which is why it might not be relevant to the conversation.As to whether he should count? The thread says "married yer cousin."
I don't know why the hell he wouldn't count. It doesn't say "married yer cousin, with irrefutable proof you consummated the marriage."
Seeing as the whole conversation is irrelevant, I don't see why that even matters.
Off, the DBT's 2003 release Decoration Day, the liner notes claim the song is about (at the time, anyway) the only couple in the American prison system for consensual incest.
I know of at least one more.
Friend of mine works for the public defenders office. He had a client who left his paramour and young daughter when the child was a baby. At 19 the little girl tracked down her father to renew the relationship. They started spending time together. He started helping her with small college related expenses, then one thing led to another.... (And que 70s porn music).
The affair lasted a couple of years until the mother stumbled on it and reported it to the police. He's now in prison.
I'm not exactly sure what I'm favoriting in this post, but, uh....[presses "+"]
Seeing as the whole conversation is irrelevant, I don't see why that even matters.Yes he did marry his cousin, but most of the conversation here has been about breeding which is why it might not be relevant to the conversation.As to whether he should count? The thread says "married yer cousin."
I don't know why the hell he wouldn't count. It doesn't say "married yer cousin, with irrefutable proof you consummated the marriage."
That... Is a fair point.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I love my momma!