Posted on 12/22/2008 6:18:42 PM PST by Free ThinkerNY
Actually, now that you mention it, there were some news articles last year about birth defects in the Middle East. They have an extremely high rate of birth defects. It is assumed marriage between close relatives is common.
That will be their motto now. “You’ve tried the rest. Now try incest!”
You said — “The left is pushing the patience of people to an extremely dangerous level. There will come a point where the patience of a majority of the population will reach a limit where they cannot tolerate it anymore.”
Well, they may be pushing on same-sex marriages or homosexuality and/or “living together” without getting married — which are all prohibitions in the Bible. And they should always remain that way.
However, this particular one (”cousins”) has never been a prohibition in the Bible and it has *none of the basis* as those other moral laws (as coming from the Bible), and made into civil laws.
So, no one can be said to be “moving away from morals” on this particular issue, because it’s never been a moral issue with the Bible.
I wasn’t suggesting that it was part of the Bible. Muslims in the Middle East encourage marriage between cousins.
I’m pretty sure I read that on average each person carries 5 lethal genes. I think the biggest concern would have to be inbreeding over several generations. Interestingly, in nature, most animals do things that make it less likely that they will mate with closely related individuals. Not that it never happens, but it appears that nature attempts to keep it at a low level.
And moreover, with the help of engineers, they actually deliver when it comes to miracles.
Once same-sex marriage is established as an official national policy, we will see actual demands for incestuous marriage as a "civil right," with forum-shopped test cases in liberal courts.
I don’t want you to get brain freeze, but see if you can think real hard and list two differences between sex between two adult humans and sex between an adult human and a child human; and between humans and animals. Sit down and take deep breaths before you start.
And, if it has gone on for generations, they could well have concentrated some bad genes.
You said — That will be their motto now. “You’ve tried the rest. Now try incest!”
—
I wouldn’t take the “terminology” of the mainstream media to “make the case” — as if what they are talking about is “incest”. It’s not.
The *basis* of our moral civil laws has always been the Bible. That’s where they come from and there are incest prohibitions in the Bible, to be sure. No one should undo or over-throw the moral prohibitions for relationships that the Bible has.
We should *not* have same-sex marriages, we should not have adultery, we should not have “living together”, we should not have incest (as the Bible has defined)
However, the Bible has *never* made a prohibition of marrying cousins. That has never been a “moral prohibition” from the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.
So, this is *not* defined as “incest” by the Bible. This is one case that *cannot* be supported by the Bible’s morals — those *same morals* that we should all live by....
You seem excited about the idea of first cousins marrying each others.
You said — “The “No Incest” laws have very little to do with possible genetic defects. What they ARE concerned with is coercive sexual activity between family members, often in the same household.”
Yes, and this is an example of the MSM trying to *redine* incest, in such a way that the Bible has never defined as that — so that they can lump several things together under “incest”.
Cousins marrying has never been considered incest in the Bible and has never been prohibited. BUT, if the MSM gets people to “redefine” cousins marrying as incest (that’s a very easy hurdle to get over, with no problem at all) — what that does is “lower the threshhold” for “incest” for the items which *are* incest.
This is a way for the MSM to redefine the issue and slip in something that has a very low threshhold for getting “okayed” and thus trying to “carry along” a lot of other “incest prohibitions”.
That’s what is happening here...
ping
You said — “You seem excited about the idea of first cousins marrying each others.”
No, it’s something that I can see has never had a Biblical basis and so is one of those “cultural things” — that carry *no moral absolutes*.
Since I’m concerned about the Bible’s “moral absolutes” and not getting those overturned in our society — that means that trying to defend something that has never been a “Biblical absolute* is simply buying into the MSM’s way of trying to “lower the threshhold” to get people to think we can *get rid of moral absolutes*.
It’s a “ruse” by the MSM, trying to get you and other to “buy into it” (i.e., that it’s actually one of those moral absolutes that “make no sense”). It’s no more than a cultural tradition (one way or the other) with no “moral absolutes” attached to it, at all.
That’s the issue — and I don’t like to see the *real* moral absolutes *diluted* this way...
You said — “I wasn’t suggesting that it was part of the Bible. Muslims in the Middle East encourage marriage between cousins.”
Yes, I do know that. And, it’s also true that many in the Middle East have plenty of *moral* issues which are violations of the moral absolutes of the Bible — which our own moral laws in this country (in the past) have been based upon.
So, while I can criticize very many things with the cultures in the Middle East, especially those of that evil and despicable religion of Islam, *this one* — is *not* one of those issues that I can use against them, because it’s not a “moral absolute” that is prohibited by the Bible.
I’m not going to criticize Muslims because they are doing something that is culturally different from us here in this country — but because they violate moral absolutes and are part of an evil and oppressive religion. And getting married to a cousin isn’t in that category.
I don’t want to *dilute* the “moral high ground” that one has against the Muslims by throwing something in there that was never part of that moral high ground from the Bible.
I don’t know much about the Amish and their restrictions on marrying, but they’ve been a closed community for several generations and there are birth defects showing up there from too much inbreeding. The same thing showed up in the FLDS group with that enzyme deficiency (IIRC).
It doesn’t seem to take long for problems to show up.
I’m sure there are other groups out there as well. A larger gene pool appears to be a healthier gene pool.
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.