Inter family marriage

[کیش]

Mayana

I was just joking

Somethings I noticed that was different from others are:

My right ear appears closed. Like for example i can't put those small headphones on it.
I cannot breath through both nostrils. One is always open, while then other doesn't let air go through.

[Fahd]

^ u r abnormal loooooooool jk jk

[graveyardofempires]

lol @ u ppl

[ScimitarXEdge]

I'm like all sorts of ethnicities if ai break it down. Cousin marriage happens on both side of the family ...no wonder I'm cross eyed.

[ghundal]

This is the most idiotic remark on this forum. Give me sources where your cousin is the same as your brother or sister, and give souces where mental retardation is high in such marriages. Albert Einstein was the offspring of first cousins, and he himself married his first cousin.

Cousin marriages are common in all tribal societies. It originally became custom to keep wealth inside the family. Even Darwin who married his first cousin and pioneered the study of genes said that there is no evidence of a biological disadvantage. Genetic defects are caused when the offspring aquires a defective gene from one of the parents whether the parents are cousins or total strangers.

But on a different note there is a story I am trying to find where in Britain, there was instances that women who went to a sperm bank to have a child, those children who grew up having different mothers but were fathered by the same sperm donor then married without knowing they were marrying their half brother/sister. When they found out, they were completely shocked.

So idiot, there are much more weirder people than you. Now you can tell people you have something in common with Einstein.

well, yes I added some comical effect, but marriage between cousins is still medically not advised. Besides your parents and siblings, you share a lot of your DNA with your cousins.

Rise in marriages between cousins ‘is putting children’s health at risk’ - Times Online

[sahil112]

i agree it is bad and we should marry more into other tribes but keep it strictly pashtun!!!
my opinion by the way about the strictly pashtun thing so yh your opinion can differ

[ghundal]

i agree it is bad and we should marry more into other tribes but keep it strictly pashtun!!!
my opinion by the way about the strictly pashtun thing so yh your opinion can differ

This is a practical concern that takes into account many things. Racism is wrong, but cultural integrity must be preserved, especially today.

We can't have pashtun men marrying outside otherwise who will marry the women.


There is already a marriage problem around the world, and this needs to be addressed in some manner.

[sahil112]

This is a practical concern that takes into account many things. Racism is wrong, but cultural integrity must be preserved, especially today.

We can't have pashtun men marrying outside otherwise who will marry the women.


There is already a marriage problem around the world, and this needs to be addressed in some manner.

im not racist but i dont want my race to die out either. the pashtun race needs to be preserved and breeded.

[khushal]

well, yes I added some comical effect, but marriage between cousins is still medically not advised. Besides your parents and siblings, you share a lot of your DNA with your cousins.

Rise in marriages between cousins ‘is putting children’s health at risk’ - Times Online

Your actually brainwashed by the eugenics movement.
If you look at actual scientific studies for first cousin marriages. The probability of genetic defect is slightly higher. Geneitic defects in the general population is 2% and in first cousin marriages it is 4%, and in people that have kids that are over the age of 35 it is also 4%, so what your saying is that people over 35 shouldn't have kids either because the probability is the same as first cousin marriages.


Thoughts on cousin marriage | Cousin Marriage Resources Looking at the number of states that ban cousin marriages in the USA, one can easily conclude that most states prohibit cousin marriages. If we consider the population of each state, however, we find that most people in the U.S. can marry their cousin.

How close is too close to marry? This elementary question has a tremendous range of opinions along with strong emotional attachments. At one time, the Roman Catholic Church prohibited cousins to marry even if they were only sixth-cousins. Moreover, Pope Zacharia (A.D. 471) insisted that marriages were prohibited whenever any relationship could be traced.

Today, the opinion of cousin marriages is still a hot button topic. Even with science clearly on their side, cousins fight to be accepted by their family and, sometimes, ill-informed doctors and lawmakers.

Why shouldn't cousins be allowed to marry? Opponents of cousin marriage generally cite the Bible or genetic birth defects. As we have learned, the Bible loves cousin marriages. So what about birth defects? The facts show that first-cousins have the same increased risk of having a baby with birth defects as a woman over 30 or 35. If a lawmaker even thought of passing a law that would prohibit women from having children after they reach age 35, the lawmaker would be ran out of town. This is confirmation that marriage restrictions against cousins are based only upon faulty presuppositions and prejudice.

The map on the previous page perpetuates the cousin marriage myth. This map is not indicative of fact or reason. The states that prohibit cousin marriages should reconsider their marriage restrictions. Most of these laws were passed before modern genetic knowledge, and are in fact, baseless. Case in point: Maine now requires genetic counseling before allowing cousins to marry. The old law prohibiting cousins to marry was amended in 1987. New Hampshire based this on current findings. Requiring cousins to undergo genetic counseling is quite restrictive. Perhaps all couples should undergo genetic counseling before marriage, as non related couples have only a slightly lower chance of having birth defects anyway.

Genetic counseling is a valuable option for any couple concerned with birth defects. This begs the question: should genetic counseling be required for cousins as a prerequisite to marriage? If the purpose of such a requirement is to reduce the number of birth defects, the government should start by requiring genetic counseling for all couples that have an elevated chance of having children with birth defects. Cousin couples are a very small segment of our population with a slight increase risk; however, cousin couples appear to catch the brunt of our ill-informed lawmakers attempt to reduce birth defects. Marriage prohibitions and restrictions for cousin couples defy common sense.

The 31 states, which do not allow cousin marriages, are still in the dark ages. It is evident that states resist change to civil laws. Consider the law that prohibited interracial marriages:
should genetic counseling be required for cousins as a prerequisite to marriage? If the purpose of such a requirement is to reduce the number of birth defects, the government should start by requiring genetic counseling for all couples that have an elevated chance of having children with birth defects. Cousin couples are a very small segment of our population with a slight increase risk; however, cousin couples appear to catch the brunt of our ill-informed lawmakers attempt to reduce birth defects. Marriage prohibitions and restrictions for cousin couples defy common sense.

The 31 states, which do not allow cousin marriages, are still in the dark ages. It is evident that states resist change to civil laws. Consider the law that prohibited interracial marriages:

Loving v. Virginia Richard and Mildred Loving were married in 1958 in Washington D.C. because their home state of Virginia still upheld the anti miscegenation law which stated that interracial marriages were illegal. They were married, and then lived together in Caroline County, Virginia. In 1959 they were prosecuted and convicted of violating the state's anti miscegenation law. They were each sentenced one-year in jail, but promised the sentence would be suspended if they agreed to leave the state and not return for 25 years. Forced to move, they returned to Washington D.C. where, in 1963, they initiated a suit challenging the constitutionality of the anti miscegenation law. In March of 1966, the Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals upheld the law, but in June of 1967, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled the law unconstitutional. Thus, in 1967 the 16 states which still had anti miscegenation laws on their books were forced to erase them.

I must liken cousin marriages to interracial marriages here. These types of marriage restrictions were born out of the Eugenics Movement. It's the movement that brought us segregation sterilization, strict immigration restrictions (i.e. cousin marriage restrictions), and finally the Holocaust. These laws were based upon "solid" science at the time and supported by top scientists..

Interracial marriages are still considered odd, and is another cultural taboo (in the US anyway) . The good news is that laws rooted in bigotry and ignorance can and must be changed! Perhaps laws banning cousin marriages are one of the laws that must be challenged as in the Loving v. Virginia case.

Love is an intoxicating gift. Love will cause people to do things they might not do normally. For instance, cousin & interracial marriages. Love sees through cultural boundaries. Love doesn't care what someone else may think. The "normal" boundaries seem insignificant when you are in love.

Everyone reading this has first-cousins in their family tree. If there were any truth to the myth of cousins and birth defects, we would all be in wheelchairs -- if we could figure out how to make them.

[khushal]

well, yes I added some comical effect, but marriage between cousins is still medically not advised. Besides your parents and siblings, you share a lot of your DNA with your cousins.

Rise in marriages between cousins ‘is putting children’s health at risk’ - Times Online

Here's a book to any interested party written by anthropologist Martin Ottenheimer "Forbidden relatives the American myth of cousin marriage"

Martin Ottenheimer / Forbidden Relatives: The American Myth of Cousin Marriage

But here are some highlights in the book.

• The U.S. is virtually alone among developed nations in outlawing marriage among first cousins. European countries have no such prohibition. In some cultures, particularly Islamic ones, first-cousin marriage is encouraged. Even in the U.S. laws forbidding the practice are far from universal. First-cousin marriage is currently illegal or restricted in 31 states. (Some states allow it if there's no chance of procreation--interesting in light of conservative opposition to gay marriage on the grounds that the institution's function is to produce children.) It's legal in the rest--and no, Kentucky and West Virginia aren't among the permissive ones. Try California and New York.
• First-cousin marriage isn't a surefire recipe for congenital defects. True, marriage among close kin can increase the chance of pathological recessive genes meeting up in some unlucky individual, with dire consequences. The problem isn't cousin marriage per se, however, but rather how many such genes are floating around in the family pool. If the pool's pretty clean, the likelihood of genetic defects resulting from cousin marriage is low. A recent review (Bennett et al, Journal of Genetic Counseling, 2002) says that, on average, offspring of first-cousin unions have a 2 to 3 percent greater risk of birth defects than the general population, and a little over 4 percent greater risk of early death. While those margins aren't trivial, genetic testing and counseling can minimize the danger. An argument can be made that marriages of first cousins descended from strong stock can produce exceptional children. Charles Darwin, for example, married his first cousin Emma, which wasn't at all unusual in their prominent and successful family--their common grandparents were cousins too. Three of Charles and Emma's ten kids died in childhood, it's true, but that was standard for Victorian England; the others went on to productive and in some cases distinguished careers.
• All kidding aside, the formerly high incidence of congenital defects, specifically hemophilia, among European royal families isn't the classic demonstration of the perils of inbreeding that everybody thinks it is. The short explanation is that hemophilia is an X-chromosome-related characteristic, transmitted only through the female line. The children of royal female carriers would have been at risk no matter whom their mothers had married.

[Gulbabo]

i realy don't mind inter family marriages...and there is a lack of evidence (in practicality) that such marriages produce defective babies.

[shisha]

its looked down upon by my family

[khashayar]

^yeah right we all know your parents are cousins....lol

[Sheenka]

LOL ^ aww poor family

[khashayar]

^ lol and yours tooo..hahahahaha