1. Advertising
    y u no do it?

    Advertising (learn more)

    Advertise virtually anything here, with CPM banner ads, CPM email ads and CPC contextual links. You can target relevant areas of the site and show ads based on geographical location of the user if you wish.

    Starts at just $1 per CPM or $0.10 per CPC.

U.K: Children every year born from cousin marriages have defects

Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by Darpie, Aug 31, 2010.

  1. #1
    Article: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/h...ties-due-to-cousin-marriages-every-year.html#SEMrush
     
    Last edited: Aug 31, 2010
    Darpie, Aug 31, 2010 IP
    SEMrush
  2. stOx

    stOx Notable Member

    Messages:
    6,426
    Likes Received:
    130
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    230
    #2
    This is illegal in the UK and it's about time we start prosecuting people for it.
     
    stOx, Aug 31, 2010 IP
  3. mcfox

    mcfox Wind Maker

    Messages:
    7,527
    Likes Received:
    716
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    360
    #3
    No it's not. It's legal. It maybe should be illegal but it's legal as it stands.

    I watched this documentary last week or the week before. They must be rerunning it. Kind of sad when you see what happens.
     
    mcfox, Aug 31, 2010 IP
  4. Will.Spencer

    Will.Spencer NetBuilder

    Messages:
    14,789
    Likes Received:
    1,040
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    375
    #4
    The thought of government stepping in and telling people whom they can and can't marry is more than a bit uncomfortable. Yes, I realize that it's already illegal in most places to marry a sibling or a parent/child. It's just one more intrusion into people's private lives and each of those must be considered very carefully. Once you put the rights of the state above the rights of individuals, it's difficult to know when to stop.

    So the Muslims want to make retarded kids. OK. Unless the government is forced to give welfare on these people, that should be the choice of the couple involved. Some people smoke, some people drink soft drinks, and some people marry their cousins. This doesn't automatically create any form of moral authority for the government to step in and control the decisions of individuals.

    Muslims have been marrying their cousins for over a thousand years. This is how the current Paki's and Bangladeshi's got into this world. Government can't morally force Muslims not to marry their cousins, but they can morally refuse to give taxpayer-funded welfare to these families. Perhaps that's a useful "middle ground" that could be a basis for compromise between the moralists and the pragmatists.
     
    Will.Spencer, Aug 31, 2010 IP
  5. mcfox

    mcfox Wind Maker

    Messages:
    7,527
    Likes Received:
    716
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    360
    #5
    The UK Govt is forced to give welfare... and all of the healthcare costs as well... for as long as it is required - as in, years and years, decades, even.
     
    mcfox, Aug 31, 2010 IP
  6. alexispetrov

    alexispetrov Peon

    Messages:
    2,531
    Likes Received:
    50
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #6
    It is awkward about the idea of the government demanding they cannot marry, but think about it; you will go to jail if you are HIV positive and have unprotected sex with someone without informing them, thus risking giving them HIV as well.

    This is the same thing, except rather than the victim being an adult it is a child.

    If these people breed they are knowingly putting their child at severe risk of a horrible, painful and ultimately tragic life.

    It's abuse, the way I see it.
     
    alexispetrov, Aug 31, 2010 IP
  7. Will.Spencer

    Will.Spencer NetBuilder

    Messages:
    14,789
    Likes Received:
    1,040
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    375
    #7
    The government chooses to, it is not forced to.

    It's really no different than marrying a stupid person or a fat person -- or even an ugly person. If you marry a stupid person, there is a significant statistical chance your child will be stupid. The same is true if you marry a fat person or an ugly person.

    Should the government outlaw marrying people with genetic markets for cancer, heart disease, or any of the thousands of known diseases with a genetic component? Those also knowingly put children at severe risk of a horrible, painful and ultimately tragic life. Or what about marrying a person with a history of depression or bi-polar disorder?

    All of these put the children at risk and all of these increase the costs of a government that chooses to operate a welfare state.

    How are these any different?
     
    Will.Spencer, Aug 31, 2010 IP
  8. mcfox

    mcfox Wind Maker

    Messages:
    7,527
    Likes Received:
    716
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    360
    #8
    It's required by law but yes, they could do something about it.
     
    mcfox, Sep 1, 2010 IP
  9. Helvetii

    Helvetii Notable Member

    Messages:
    4,412
    Likes Received:
    90
    Best Answers:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    205
    #9
    Marrying siblings and first cousins should be illegal if the claims are true. They put entire humanity at risk by corrupting our gene pool.
     
    Helvetii, Sep 1, 2010 IP
  10. alexispetrov

    alexispetrov Peon

    Messages:
    2,531
    Likes Received:
    50
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #10
    It's not really. Stupid people can still be productive, happy and live normal lives. A lot of the conditions that result from inbreeding are, in fact, very painful and not only shorten the life of the victim but also effect the quality far more intensely than simply being overweight or dumb. Blindness for one thing, when paired with mental retardation, (this combination is surprisingly common when it comes to inbreeding,) means that the kid wont only not struggle to comprehend things, it will also be unable to see, limiting what can be done to help it develop what limited mental capacity it has.

    The main point here I think I wanted to make was that no, it isn't the same thing. Having your life cut short by decades upon decades AND it being filled with pain, as it often is, being treated like an outsider because you are different, etc. is not the same as being fat or stupid.

    If you glass a guy in the face and blind him, or beat him until he suffers brain damage - that's illegal. Why should this be any different when we know the risks?
     
    alexispetrov, Sep 1, 2010 IP
  11. Will.Spencer

    Will.Spencer NetBuilder

    Messages:
    14,789
    Likes Received:
    1,040
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    375
    #11
    That sounds a lot like being fat or stupid to me. Or, like many of the genetic disorders for which we do not currently sterilize people.

    If the issue really is birth defects, it seems to me that forced sterilization of carriers is a significantly more effective approach than prohibiting first-cousin marriages.
     
    Will.Spencer, Sep 2, 2010 IP
  12. mcfox

    mcfox Wind Maker

    Messages:
    7,527
    Likes Received:
    716
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    360
    #12
    They should also forcibly sterilise ugly and stupid people as well... and anyone with ginger hair.
     
    mcfox, Sep 2, 2010 IP
  13. Will.Spencer

    Will.Spencer NetBuilder

    Messages:
    14,789
    Likes Received:
    1,040
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    375
    #13
    Powerful political forces protect the mutated MC1R gene.

    [​IMG]
     
    Will.Spencer, Sep 2, 2010 IP
    mcfox likes this.
  14. DPian

    DPian Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,352
    Likes Received:
    53
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    195
    #14
    Marrying siblings and first cousins is a common practice around the world ,
    it should be declare illegal but unfortunately it is impossible to declare it illegal around the world,
    however it can be done in a particular country or a particular community.
     
    DPian, Sep 2, 2010 IP
  15. Damocles

    Damocles Peon

    Messages:
    154
    Likes Received:
    1
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #15
    There's something slightly icky about it... But then there's something slightly icky about other things that aren't illegal. Simply make the law that they sign a "no procreation" agreement if they wish to be officially recognized as "married"...

    The reality is just saying "You can't get married!" wouldn't stop this any more than saying "You can't get married!" to gays has stopped homosexual sex or stopped them from holding ceremonies in churches getting "married", it just made it so they have a harder time getting the law to recognize their relationship. People will continue it, because it is what they wish.

    Even with the taboo associated among our cultures with cousin/sibling marriage(US and Britain) there will be others who will cross that barrier.
     
    Damocles, Sep 2, 2010 IP
  16. Will.Spencer

    Will.Spencer NetBuilder

    Messages:
    14,789
    Likes Received:
    1,040
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    375
    #16
    Or 'ya could snip the male quick and easy like...
     
    Will.Spencer, Sep 2, 2010 IP
  17. alexispetrov

    alexispetrov Peon

    Messages:
    2,531
    Likes Received:
    50
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #17
    That actually makes the most sense.
     
    alexispetrov, Sep 3, 2010 IP
  18. Hecky

    Hecky Like a Dungeon Dragon!

    Messages:
    5,656
    Likes Received:
    284
    Best Answers:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #18
    I don't see how this differs to laws surrounding age. You can't marry anyone below the age of 16 in England, and the government will tell you that you can't.
     
    Hecky, Sep 8, 2010 IP
  19. Will.Spencer

    Will.Spencer NetBuilder

    Messages:
    14,789
    Likes Received:
    1,040
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    375
    #19
    A reasonable argument can be made for restricting the rights of children. That same justification is less reasonable when used to restrict the rights of minorities.
     
    Will.Spencer, Sep 8, 2010 IP