Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Marriage of cousins a long-held taboo
The Washington Times, Culture section ^ | April 16, 2002 | Richard Ostling

Posted on 04/16/2002 3:40:30 PM PDT by FormerLib

Edited on 07/12/2004 3:38:28 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

Must first cousins be forbidden to marry? In the Bible, and in many parts of the world, the answer is no. But the answer is yes in much of church law and in half of the 50 United States.

This issue became news when the April issue of the Journal of Genetic Counseling said risks had been exaggerated for serious birth defects, retardation or genetic diseases among children of first-cousin marriages.


(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-28 next last
This story had come up before but this article gave a very interesting history of the question, including the differing Biblical aspects.
1 posted on 04/16/2002 3:40:30 PM PDT by FormerLib
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: FormerLib
well, i'm glad we settled that nagging question.

i had been trying to figure that out all day.

2 posted on 04/16/2002 3:53:31 PM PDT by scott91
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FormerLib
They're missing the point here. One uncommon marriage between cousins might not be a statistically genetic problem, but what if two cousins marry whose grandparents were cousins? You can begin to water down the gene pool very quickly if you have several generations of cousins marrying cousins. I'd like to see a statistical analysis of that.
3 posted on 04/16/2002 4:03:52 PM PDT by ElkGroveDan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ElkGroveDan
No need for a statistical analysis. Just look at the British royal family.

I'd say it was a bad idea.

4 posted on 04/16/2002 4:06:43 PM PDT by Dinsdale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ElkGroveDan
Sort of like what happened in the Clinton Klan?
5 posted on 04/16/2002 4:07:19 PM PDT by tet68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: FormerLib
Now, let's go to the Bourbons and their kin. They maintained the required 4 degrees of consanguinity prohibition, but NOT BEYOND 4!

The result was that in any one generation there were but a few hundred of them, all closely related. They kept this up for more than half a millenium. Even today one is King of Spain. Still within the family, but not named Bourbon, we find the Princess Bouval-Craon who runs Sotheby's Paris. I have no idea who she married, but any of the identifiable members of this narrow group probably continue to chose spouses from among the others.

6 posted on 04/16/2002 4:07:53 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ElkGroveDan
I'd like to see a statistical analysis of that.

Not a problem! Head for the Appalachians and start counting! ;-)

7 posted on 04/16/2002 4:16:53 PM PDT by FormerLib
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: FormerLib
Marriage of cousins...

How disgusting!

Unless she's really,really cute.

8 posted on 04/16/2002 4:43:00 PM PDT by mdittmar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
When the upper classes mate with each other's cousins--be they Bourbons, Hapsburgs, Cabots or Lees, nobody thinks ill of it.

When the poor white trash in the Appalachians do it, it's suddenly a crime against nature.

9 posted on 04/16/2002 4:50:51 PM PDT by Loyalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

Comment #10 Removed by Moderator

To: Loyalist
When the poor white trash in the Appalachians do it, it's suddenly a crime against nature.

No it's not, it's called, "Alabama".

11 posted on 04/16/2002 4:56:35 PM PDT by tet68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: FormerLib

Howdy cousin!
12 posted on 04/16/2002 4:56:50 PM PDT by aomagrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AlexanderTheGreat
You're also missing an important point. You shouldn't prohibit people from marrying just because there's some percentage (however big or small) of congenital birth defects. We don't prohibit people with congenital diseases from marrying and having kids.

True, but to denigrate ages old rules of civilized society as "taboo" because some statistician did a superficial analysis of first generation risks is also wrong.

One of the reasons we as humans have survived to crawl out of the caves and rule the world is because until recently we have stuck to the rules of society (religious or otherwise) that result in the most successful civilizations. Time and time again, conservative and biblical rules that govern people who lived together as a society have proven to be the most effective path to stability, peace, harmony, and growth.

13 posted on 04/16/2002 5:01:13 PM PDT by ElkGroveDan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

Comment #14 Removed by Moderator

To: tet68
Sort of like what happened in the Clinton Klan?

That alone makes a great argument against it!

15 posted on 04/16/2002 5:21:22 PM PDT by FormerLib
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: tet68
Hey Bubba......what in the hell did he just say about Bama'?


16 posted on 04/16/2002 5:23:20 PM PDT by Icthus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: FormerLib
Ironically, Darwin married his first cousin, as did his sister.
17 posted on 04/16/2002 5:27:09 PM PDT by stands2reason
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AlexanderTheGreat
That's interesting...of course back in the day, we were more likely to live within a mile of most of our relatives--cousins, etc.
18 posted on 04/16/2002 5:32:12 PM PDT by stands2reason
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

Comment #19 Removed by Moderator

To: FormerLib
This is absolutely forbidden by the bible, and so is teen sex, and so are Priests that marry women, and so is naked anything, and so is NOT supporting Alan Keys, and all of you who doubt it will surely go straight to He!!, and us righteous will gloat at your demise.

Dogs and cats sleeping together, the end of the world as we know it!!!!

/sarcasm

20 posted on 04/16/2002 5:40:10 PM PDT by MonroeDNA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-28 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson