Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

It's okay to marry your first cousin. Discuss. Watch

    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pokémontrainer)
    Good generalisation. How constructive to the thread.
    Shut up.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Depends on 2 things for me:

    1. How they were brought up. Socially, what kind of relationship they were taught to have and how they close they were growing up to the present day. Me personally, I am close with my cousin and as I was brought up with them, respecting them as cousins and being fairly close to them. If two people were cousins however they rarely saw each other growing up and didnt have much of a cousin-cousin relationship then it becomes more acceptable in my eyes.

    2. Are they planning to have kids? Obvious one here but as long as they're not planning to have any children then I dont see much of a problem here.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Vicky628)
    That is also stigmatised, but in many cases, you can't help your age... But you can help who you have sex with
    I wouldn't say women having babies at that age is stigmatized really. My mum gave birth to my brother over 40 and it wasn't considered unusual by anybody.

    You can help the age you choose to have a baby at.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cosmic angel)
    Some people may not?
    I have first cousins living all across the world, some of whom I haven't even met yet.
    I also have first cousins living across the world, it won't change my opinion.

    There are over 7 billion people in the world... so many people who aren't first cousins.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    The thought actually makes me feel ill. I love my cousins but I'd rather castrate myself than marry any of them, even if they're 7th cousins 5 times removed
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by k.m.b)
    I also have first cousins living across the world, it won't change my opinion.

    There are over 7 billion people in the world... so many people who aren't first cousins.
    You said you see your cousins as siblings, which prejudices you into viewing cousin marriages as wrong. Some people like myself have cousins we haven't even met so lifting that preconception should make a difference.

    So there are, but that in itself isn't reason enough to make cousin marriages socially wrong or taboo.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cosmic angel)
    Spoiler:
    Show
    Hello TSR, time for something a bit controversial today.

    The science shows that for the children born to first cousins, the risk of genetic defects is no more than the risk of a woman over the age of 40 having a baby. It is around 1.7-2% higher than the average risk for non-cousin couples. This is double the average risk, but because it is so low in the first place, scientists contend that it is still insignificant.

    Also, around 80% of all marriages throughout history were probably between second cousins or closer, according to anthropology professor Robin Fox.

    Marriages to first cousins are stigmatized in UK society, but with the facts above I argue that they should become socially acceptable, and that the stigmatization of the practice of marrying your first cousin is based more on prejudice than on any scientific proof that it it causes harm. Discuss.

    Sources:
    News articles
    (1) http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/theres-nothing-wrong-with-cousins-getting-married-scientists-say-1210072.html
    Journal articles
    (2) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/arti...o-0060320-b013
    (3) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26141656

    This is a serious thread. The views presented here are genuinely supported by myself.
    Some very poor arguments being made so far. Just because you're blood related doesn't make it morally wrong. That would imply you do a blood check on every partner you sleep with. Also, just because there is a risk of birth defects doesn't make it wrong. You might as well make the case for not sleeping with anyone above a certain age. It is very judgemental against people who are living happy, legal marriages.

    So the question really boils down to 'okay to whom?' and my answer would be today's society. Since no-one can prove an objective morality that everyone has to live by, it really depends on the values this country places on marriage right now. And no-one can deny that the whole value of marriage has plummeted over the last generation anyway. Anyone can get married as far as I'm concerned, so it really doesn't bother me. Plus, unlike some people, I personally don't like to interfere in the lives of people that don't affect me so as long as it is legal who am I to say what people should and should not do?

    End of rant. :bigsmile:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    If thats what your parents decree, then you're duty bound to go along with it; their judgement will be second to nobody. Personal choice should never come in to play in marriage.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Yes.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    INCEST
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gaya Ramanathan)
    Yeah I did and even if it's 5% that's still 40 versus 60. It's still a marked difference, I mean we're talking about children's quality of life here.
    Not sure if you are trying to be funny or just hopeless at maths. Either way you are repeatedly creating confusion in your replies to me.

    If 5%, then the difference would be 40 versus 50 -not versus 60- out of 1000. 40 unhealthy children to 960 healthy ones compared to 50 unhealthy children to 950 healthy ones isn't a mathematically significant difference. You clearly have no idea what it means for something to be mathematically significant.

    The difference isn't enough to justify accepting one and stigmatizing the other, which is more to the point.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by xylas)
    Some very poor arguments being made so far. Just because you're blood related doesn't make it morally wrong. That would imply you do a blood check on every partner you sleep with. Also, just because there is a risk of birth defects doesn't make it wrong. You might as well make the case for not sleeping with anyone above a certain age. It is very judgemental against people who are living happy, legal marriages.

    So the question really boils down to 'okay to whom?' and my answer would be today's society. Since no-one can prove an objective morality that everyone has to live by, it really depends on the values this country places on marriage right now. And no-one can deny that the whole value of marriage has plummeted over the last generation anyway. Anyone can get married as far as I'm concerned, so it really doesn't bother me. Plus, unlike some people, I personally don't like to interfere in the lives of people that don't affect me so as long as it is legal who am I to say what people should and should not do?

    End of rant. :bigsmile:
    That's right. But the argument that the status quo should dictate morality sounds equally poor to me.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Vicky628)
    If it risks harming the child, it's wrong
    It doesn't.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Biologically speaking, you are reducing the genetic pools and the genetic diversity of genes in the family. That means that the subsequent generations of individuals to come after are going to be at a huge disadvantage due to the loss of natural selection of genes for adapting to a different environment to the ones we used to grow up in.

    Socially speaking, I am more on the against side as some families are backward minded (no offence given to anyone here and these are just my perspectives, js) and to stay in that mindset of "Let's get our son/daughter married to my brother's/sister's son/daughter" and to actually pre-pick an individual, whom your kid may not even like nor envisaged in their dreams to be with, just pushes them to a tight-end corner and really reduces their confidence to actually go against their parents to fight for what they want in life. All this about families banging about pride and honour of marrying within a family... I totally disagree.

    There are just too many disadvantages to speak of, it just outweighs the mere advantages it may have.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    The morality argument isn't really relevant anymore since there are loads of things accepted today which used to be considered morally wrong eg. homosexuality.

    The "why take that risk?" argument could be applied to a lot of things that we don't think about. eg. drinking alcohol, gambling, extreme sports etc. But that wouldn't be practical for most people. These things have pull factors. If two people fall in love but happen to be cousins, who are we to say they can't be together because of a ~1% extra chance of complications?

    People here also talk about a multiplying effect of the risk of genetic disorder by narrowing the gene pool, but that would have to happen down several generations which hasn't been implied in the question. True it is (slightly) safer to marry someone further than a 1st cousin, but if the odd couple want to do it, I see no harm in it.
    This was a good question.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Look up Amish and inbreeding
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Guinevera)
    Look up Amish and inbreeding
    Look at my comment above yours
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nayzar)
    Look at my comment above yours
    so you think that if incest was made legal it would only stop at the first generation?
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Guinevera)
    so you think that if incest was made legal it would only stop at the first generation?
    Amesh are an anomaly, theyre not a good example. Its like if you showed me some alcoholics causing trouble, and then said this is why alcohol should be made illegal.

    Or being gay for example. Leagalising it doesnt mean everyone turns gay and then the population stops reproducing... that would also be pretty bad wouldnt it (bit of an extreme example but i hope u see my point)
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Guinevera)
    so you think that if incest was made legal it would only stop at the first generation?
    The fact remains that the chance of negative consequences is tiny. Just as the chance of becoming an alcoholic is tiny. But no one said dont drink alcohol at all.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you like to hibernate through the winter months?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.