Actually, there are places where first cousins can marry, and in some of those places where that is encouraged. Not so much for siblings. Prohibitions against consanguineous marriages are vestiges of a narrow-minded and prejudiced past. But it is always interesting to see how people try to defend this denial of the right to marry.
genetics, morals.
Which morality would that be? As far as a genetics, that's not true because there is a difference between marriage and reproduction. Also, we do not criminalize people with genetic diseases who reproduce.
ew why would anyone even be attracted to a cousin or sibling?
Because they're attractive, lovable, dependable, and kind? If your cousins and siblings aren't, too bad for you. And you don't have to marry them anyway. But why deny others what they want?
The same reason people with diabetes or AIDS can't marry; they may pass on ailments to their offspring.
Yes, there is a lot of ignorance out there, folks.
Here's a somewhat intelligent answer...
That was back when the Bible was considered fully legal to use to back laws.
And now that it isn't allowed as much in a court of law, it's still illegal because really no one has challenged it in court.
It's a matter of time. Let's speed that up!
A husband from outside your family was an advantage as it allowed a woman to gain resources from both her birth and husbands family and gave a wider network of family to support her children.
Life is a lot different now. There really isn't a strong enough reason to deny the right to marry to consanguineous lovers. It's mostly ignorance and bigotry keeping this marriage ban in place.
agreed
ReplyDelete