Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by spk)
    Why not?
    Answering a question by asking another, does not suffice.

    Howard got in first - give him an answer!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by spk)
    Well, they could just abort the feotus then or give it to a nice gay couple to look after.
    sorry but that is just wrong why decide to have a baby without doing your homework first come on everyone knows of the possibility of genetic problems in relationships with blood relatives so to get pregnant then terminate that life that you willingly created is just so damn wrong.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by fishx)
    sorry but that is just wrong why decide to have a baby without doing your homework first come on everyone knows of the possibility of genetic problems in relationships with blood relatives so to get pregnant then terminate that life that you willingly created is just so damn wrong.
    Yes, you just convinced me.
    Offline

    0
    Nowadays, incestuous relationships at the cousin level seem fine to me.

    Afterall, the old incest laws on the books today, were written well before the days of safe birth control.

    I'd say....have a go at it.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Sleeping with a cousin is not incest at law anyway.
    Offline

    0
    (Original post by LuverlyLawyer)
    Sleeping with a cousin is not incest at law anyway.
    How about sleeping with your uncle??
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    In Hinduism, marriages bw cousins are not allowed and cosuins are treated and given the same rights as one's sibblings. In Islam, marriages bw cousins are allowed. I don't see why marriages bw cousins are not allowed in Engalnd and Wales,as someone else stated. Personally, I will never even dream of marrying any of my cousins. They are all horrible.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Yes that is incest. The laws against consanguinity are pretty precise.

    Incest is brother/sister, parent/child, grandparent/grandchild, niece/uncle

    You are also not allowed to marry an adoptive child/parent or, interestingly, mother-in-law to son-in-law or vice versa, if their spouses are still alive. This has recently been subject of review and may be abolished.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ArthurOliver)
    Unless the OP has personal issues that were best kept private, I'm assuming this thread was started as a result of the recent press coverage of Pak/Bangi cousin marriage health issue. My earlier post offered the links, here's a quote, links in original:Also covered here: http://isteve.blogspot.com/2005/11/m...n-britain.html

    Cousin marriage is an issue for the forum and for the Brits only as it affects Pak/Bangis and as they affect us. We have to bring them and their cultural norms into the debate, or discuss them in their absence...
    Wait, why are 'we' in the West supposed to hate arranged marriages, don't make me have to explain to everyone the difference between the words arranged and forced again.

    How about this time you give us a link that doesn't have such an obvious bias?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ArthurOliver)
    Unless the OP has personal issues that were best kept private, I'm assuming this thread was started as a result of the recent press coverage of Pak/Bangi cousin marriage health issue. My earlier post offered the links, here's a quote, links in original:Also covered here: http://isteve.blogspot.com/2005/11/m...n-britain.html

    Cousin marriage is an issue for the forum and for the Brits only as it affects Pak/Bangis and as they affect us. We have to bring them and their cultural norms into the debate, or discuss them in their absence...
    IN THEIR ABSENCE? and why would their marriages affect you? Do you mean affect Brits as a nation?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I used to fancy my cousin.

    I would never have done anything with them though. Proper cousins (not any of this half cousin stuff) are quite closely related.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by claireharmz)
    What do you think about cousins having relationships, as a couple or not, do you consider it wrong?
    It isn't illegal in a law sense, but I think it should be and why is it allowed but still people frown it?


    xxx
    years ago, it was acceptable (pride and prejudice: mr collins thought it was ok to propose to his cousin elizabeth bennet )

    but nowadays its socially unacceptable, obviously.. ethically speaking it's not wrong, they are not harming anyone in the proccess, so i dont see why it is 'wrong' but i dont agree with it because its a horrible idea, to be honest, and family is family, intertwining of blood and all the rest has been seen to have unnatural effects on the offspring- so obviously nature doesnt think it's right either.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ayaan)
    Wait, why are 'we' in the West supposed to hate arranged marriages, don't make me have to explain to everyone the difference between the words arranged and forced again.

    How about this time you give us a link that doesn't have such an obvious bias?
    "Arranged marriages" are between people of a single ethnic community--very often between people who share a local connection to a specific village or region.

    In the West we are encouraged --even forced by law-- to say that race, ethnic background, and family history and genes are inappropriate criteria for judging the social assimilability of either individuals or groups. We are encouraged by the state to disavow racism and similar socially exclusive ideas which advance the interests of a certain racial /ethnic /religious groups over others.

    We all recognise this state of affairs, and we all know that "arranged marriages" fundamentally go against these ideals - ideals which are themselves supposed to be the basis for our acceptance of massive immigration of the communities which choose to practice "arranged marriages".

    Do we lie to ourselves about the fact minorities shamelessly tell us lies which advance their culture and community interest or do we be honest...? Some of us lie.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by GandalfdaGoblin)
    IN THEIR ABSENCE? and why would their marriages affect you? Do you mean affect Brits as a nation?
    If the groups in question had managed to recreate their unusual marriage traditions from within their immigrant communities that would not seriously affect the rest of the community -- but they import brides and grooms from other countries and therefore it becomes a question of national concern.

    I believe that the parents involved choose against the best interests of their children for benefits of community-pride, racism, and economic gain--as well as to continue a tradition which undermines the universalist moral claims which South Asian communities frequently shout loudly when they wish to defend their disruptive and unwelcome presence in Britain. If we could judge groups equally we might find that they show themselves to be racist liars.
    Offline

    0
    (Original post by lady_daisychain)
    , to be honest, and family is family, intertwining of blood and all the rest has been seen to have unnatural effects on the offspring- so obviously nature doesnt think it's right either.
    C'mon D'chain, the Op (claireharmz), clearly stated that she had no intentions of having children.

    For Chris sake, Just state your opinion, with no malice aforethought.....should she, or shouldn't she?????????????
    Offline

    0
    (Original post by ayaan)
    Wait, why are 'we' in the West supposed to hate arranged marriages, don't make me have to explain to everyone the difference between the words arranged and forced again.
    Doesn't "arranged" = "forced" ???

    Cheers.......................D
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ArthurOliver)
    "Arranged marriages" are between people of a single ethnic community--very often between people who share a local connection to a specific village or region.

    In the West we are encouraged --even forced by law-- to say that race, ethnic background, and family history and genes are inappropriate criteria for judging the social assimilability of either individuals or groups. We are encouraged by the state to disavow racism and similar socially exclusive ideas which advance the interests of a certain racial /ethnic /religious groups over others.

    We all recognise this state of affairs, and we all know that "arranged marriages" fundamentally go against these ideals - ideals which are themselves supposed to be the basis for our acceptance of massive immigration of the communities which choose to practice "arranged marriages".

    Do we lie to ourselves about the fact minorities shamelessly tell us lies which advance their culture and community interest or do we be honest...? Some of us lie.
    That's not racism!
    That's like marrying somebody from the same town as you, you share a connection but it doesn't necessarily equal exclusion of other races.

    An arranged marriage is by defintion, when someone else, in this case your parents finds a suitable potential husband/wife and presents them to their son/daughter. Where in that defintion is there exclusion on the basis of race? There's a difference between keeping it in the family and keeping it in the race. If parents who favour arranged marriages wouldn't like to have their child marry outside the village I don't think they'd be more upset by a person from another country than they would by someon from another area.

    And what's wrong with discriminating by culture in such a case? If a hindu would prefer to marry another hindu, why should we object?

    It wouln't be any of my business whether a white person wouldn't want to marry outside the race so why should I care about something as understandable as a religious/cultural affiliation affecting someone's life?

    As long as it's not forced, then I don't think there's anything that 'we' can or indeed should do about it.

    --------------

    (Original post by Douglas)
    Doesn't "arranged" = "forced" ???

    Cheers.......................D
    No, it's kind of like a forced marriage, but for the fact that it's not actually forced. You can say yes or no and you usually get to meet beforehand.

    You guys have been watching too much 'east is east', haven't you?

    --------------

    (Original post by ArthurOliver)
    If the groups in question had managed to recreate their unusual marriage traditions from within their immigrant communities that would not seriously affect the rest of the community -- but they import brides and grooms from other countries and therefore it becomes a question of national concern.

    I believe that the parents involved choose against the best interests of their children for benefits of community-pride, racism, and economic gain--as well as to continue a tradition which undermines the universalist moral claims which South Asian communities frequently shout loudly when they wish to defend their disruptive and unwelcome presence in Britain. If we could judge groups equally we might find that they show themselves to be racist liars.
    Stop calling people that you don't know(and me) liars!
    How can you make an accusation as serious as saying that a parent doesn't want the best for their child without so much as batting an eye-lid?

    What you fail to see here is the importance of family culturally and even if they're not acting in their childrens best interests, trust me they at least think that they are.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ayaan)
    That's not racism!
    That's like marrying somebody from the same town as you, you share a connection but it doesn't necessarily equal exclusion of other races.

    An arranged marriage is by defintion, when someone else, in this case your parents finds a suitable potential husband/wife and presents them to their son/daughter. Where in that defintion is there exclusion on the basis of race? There's a difference between keeping it in the family and keeping it in the race. If parents who favour arranged marriages wouldn't like to have their child marry outside the village I don't think they'd be more upset by a person from another country than they would by someon from another area.

    And what's wrong with discriminating by culture in such a case? If a hindu would prefer to marry another hindu, why should we object?

    It wouln't be any of my business whether a white person wouldn't want to marry outside the race so why should I care about something as understandable as a religious/cultural affiliation affecting someone's life?

    As long as it's not forced, then I don't think there's anything that 'we' can or indeed should do about it.
    Are you saying it makes sense, and we should accept, that when it comes to deeply personal life choices people (or minorities at least) will place primary value on such things as race, genes, ethnic heritage, religion etc, but that when it comes to deciding issues of national importance these issues have no meaning at all even though they are they are the main cause of genocide and internal division?

    I think it suits immigrants to sell the double standard and make it appear morally superior, but in their homelands, particularly in Islamic homelands, few dare try to make these differences unimportant. They often end up dead if they do.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ArthurOliver)
    Are you saying it makes sense, and we should accept, that when it comes to deeply personal life choices people (or minorities at least) will place primary value on such things as race, genes, ethnic heritage, religion etc, but that when it comes to deciding issues of national importance these issues have no meaning at all even though they are they are the main cause of genocide and internal division?
    No. I'm saying that there is nothing we can do if people want to live in cultural isolation in their personal lives.
    And I'm all for being more comfortable marrying someone from a similar/the same culture it makes decisions like what to raise the kids and living daily life easier. Culture however is not the same as race.
    And having any other personal relationships isn't really hindered by cultural differences as long as understanding is promoted. The how much more so in issues of national importance, where personalities don't come into it.

    (Original post by ArthurOliver)
    I think it suits immigrants to sell the double standard and make it appear morally superior, but in their homelands, particularly in Islamic homelands, few dare try to make these differences unimportant. They often end up dead if they do.
    We don't try to make differnces unimportant, it's important to me that I don't eat pork, it's important to you that you're allowed to. Where is the conflict?

    Where people make it exist. The only problem that I have with the idea of race or any of the differences that you mention(apart from supremacy) is that when the idea of difference exists, it's easier to create dischord.

    What makes you think that ethnic minoritie promote double standards? I believe what I say, and would say that in any society I happen to live.
    Offline

    0
    (Original post by ayaan)
    --------------
    No, it's kind of like a forced marriage, but for the fact that it's not actually forced. You can say yes or no and you usually get to meet beforehand.
    -
    Uhmm, Ayaan, you wanna pass this by me again??? I don't think I get it..................
 
 
 
Poll
Black Friday: Yay or Nay?
Useful resources

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

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