Skip to comments.
Incest may not be best, but marriage bans should be rolled back, scientists say
Scientific American ^
| December 22, 2008
| Jordan Lite
Posted on 12/22/2008 6:18:42 PM PST by Free ThinkerNY
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101-120 next last
To: Free ThinkerNY
We are headed for no taboos.
2
posted on
12/22/2008 6:21:30 PM PST
by
DJ MacWoW
(Make yourselves sheep and the wolves will eat you. Ben Franklin)
To: DJ MacWoW
That is what they want. No rules and no judgements of anyone. All because some one’s feelings might get hurt. What the weaklings fail to understand is that not everyone is oversensitive like them.
To: DJ MacWoW
but but we are told not to worry about his stuff. We are told we are paranoid
To: DJ MacWoW
5
posted on
12/22/2008 6:26:54 PM PST
by
ventana
To: DJ MacWoW
Scientists — the priests of atheist culture.
6
posted on
12/22/2008 6:26:58 PM PST
by
unspun
(PRAY & WORK FOR FREEDOM - investigatingobama.blogspot.com)
To: Free ThinkerNY
Soooo, what do we have left? Multiple partner marriages, underage marriage, and bestiality? Have I missed anything?
7
posted on
12/22/2008 6:29:11 PM PST
by
stevio
(Crunchy Con - God, guns, guts, and organically grown crunchy nuts.)
To: Free ThinkerNY
Why do I get the feeling this will be good news for Bubba Clinton? Probably makes a few more women eligible to be hit on.
8
posted on
12/22/2008 6:29:14 PM PST
by
mnrep
(sarah 2012)
To: Free ThinkerNY
Two unrelated, dumb, sickly people are much more likely to have dumb, sickly offspring then are two related, intelligent, healthy people.
Maybe we should just make it illegal for dumb sickly people to reproduce. Oh, that wouldn't be politically correct. My bad.
To: Glacier Honey
I’m sure the local Smith family with extra fingers and toe webbing agree that it’s just paranoia.
10
posted on
12/22/2008 6:32:11 PM PST
by
DJ MacWoW
(Make yourselves sheep and the wolves will eat you. Ben Franklin)
To: Free ThinkerNY
All well and good, but what happens when you compound that risk over several generations. I think we all know the answer. Jimmy gets six fingers and a room temperature IQ.
11
posted on
12/22/2008 6:32:11 PM PST
by
Desron13
(If you constantly vote between the lesser of two evils then evil is your ultimate destination.)
To: ventana
Well Mrs V, they haven’t advocated animal love. Yet. *yuk*
12
posted on
12/22/2008 6:33:16 PM PST
by
DJ MacWoW
(Make yourselves sheep and the wolves will eat you. Ben Franklin)
To: Free ThinkerNY
Girl robots, now cousins. Scientists are trying to increase their odds of getting lucky. An incremental ε for getting a date is enough for those horny toads.
13
posted on
12/22/2008 6:33:40 PM PST
by
King Moonracer
(Bad lighting and cheap fabric, that's how you sell clothing.)
To: Free ThinkerNY
Marriage between cousins is commonplace in the Middle East.
14
posted on
12/22/2008 6:34:13 PM PST
by
ladyjane
To: unspun
Don’t you wonder about their childhood’s?
15
posted on
12/22/2008 6:34:31 PM PST
by
DJ MacWoW
(Make yourselves sheep and the wolves will eat you. Ben Franklin)
To: Free ThinkerNY
Queen Victoria was most likely a mutant.
I don't mean she had an adamantium skeleton or could shoot beams out of her eyes, but she most likely had a defect in a clotting factor on one of her X chromosomes that was new to her.
It was not “inbreeding” that made hemophilia a problem in Royalty, it was that because of Queen Victoria, the Czar of Russia, the Kaiser of Germany, and the King of England were all cousins. Everyone says “inbreeding”, but it was outbreeding to other royalty, and an unfortunate mutation in the X chromosome (of which men have only one and are thus more susceptible).
16
posted on
12/22/2008 6:35:00 PM PST
by
allmendream
(Wealth is EARNED not distributed, so how could it be redistributed?)
To: DJ MacWoW
West Virginia solved the incest problem by banning family reunions.
17
posted on
12/22/2008 6:35:17 PM PST
by
baltoga
To: Free ThinkerNY
Darwin was a ‘redneck’???
18
posted on
12/22/2008 6:35:46 PM PST
by
Just mythoughts
(Isa.3:4 And I will give children to be their princes, and babes shall rule over them.)
To: metmom
Check out what the intellectuals have in mind next.
19
posted on
12/22/2008 6:37:36 PM PST
by
Just mythoughts
(Isa.3:4 And I will give children to be their princes, and babes shall rule over them.)
To: Free ThinkerNY
What's next? Are liberals going to tell us they wanted to have sex with their "mommy" before they stated school - so "they were born that way"?
And should be able to marry their Mom?
Hmmmm, wonder if they wanted to kill Daddy and blind themselves out of guilt? Make it all legal. /Sarcasm off
20
posted on
12/22/2008 6:38:23 PM PST
by
GOPJ
(Gun Control-:- like trying to control stray dogs by neutering veterinarians.- G. Jonas)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101-120 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson