I did not supply that link..you did...so blame yourself if it doesnt work.
What I mean is, it took you to the page it ended up on when I tried to search for your "article number."
It is already illegal...LOL...it is already banned.
No, it obviously isn't, since the marriages between cousins is already taking place . . .
The article I mention cites that Pakistani children born to first cousins are 13 times more likely to inherit genetic conditions...if you cant see what implications that has for very close relatives...such as siblings...then I dont think anymore needs to be said LOL.
And as I pointed out with the other article, that "13 times more likely" is at odds with another study done by a
named organization, which says that it's "2 times more likely." And since I doubt you read anything I quoted, you still don't understand that those statistics only apply to
recessive genetic disorders. That does NOT include inherited disorders that are caused by chromosomal disorders, sex-linked conditions, or autosomal dominant conditions. Cousin marriage does NOT influence these.
And who said I can't see the implications? All I'm saying is that your information is weak at best.
I will 'side' with ever is the more accurate...but I certainly will not ignore data supplied from either.
Your statements say otherwise.
As a staff member pointed out...I did not intend to post them in the first place as they were hardly relevant or necessary...so why dont you...yes you know what.
Actually, no I don't know. Why don't I what?
And
now you admit that, after you attempted to pretend it was never there.
I never concede unless I am wrong...and I know I am not about incest
It's a fair assumption to make if somebody conveniently excludes arguments in their refutations in an attempt to take people's focus off of them.
Depends on if their opinions are likely to damage society and the health of the nation at large or not...
So in your little world, if someone has a different opinion on what is damaging to society (as that is subjective) than you do, they shouldn't be allowed to express their beliefs. Okay, got it. I hope you never get into any form of government, as that would be damaging to society.
Why do I hate Libertines?
Because man has no freedoms only duties...hand wringing liberals whine like spoilt children, I cant stand them.
Fallacies in Argumentation (Hasty Generalization)
Fallacies in Argumentation (Sweeping Generalization)
There will always be exceptions...why would I care about that?
The point is, incest can be
beneficial to the gene pool in those cases.
Difficult as incest is not legal and thus no one has ever used it to defend themselves in cases of incestual msexual molestation or rape...obviously
Exactly. So you have no evidence to support your claim.
I was using something called reason....
Obviously not, as reason requires proof.
Not on me but I suppose I could find it?
Why?
Because it would support your claim.
No you havent in the slightest....
Again, you obviously failed to read. I'm talking about the evidence I provided earlier in the thread. I provided a link, which you obviously didn't follow. Though I suppose it makes sense, as you're "not interested in my crappy link." But again, I'll provide it for you, along with an excerpt.
Incest taboo - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
For example,
Trobriand Islanders prohibit both sexual relations between a woman and her brother,
[5] and between a woman and her father,
[6] but they describe these prohibitions in very different ways:
relations between a woman and her brother fall within the category of forbidden relations among members of the same clan; relations between a woman and her father do not.[7] This is because the Trobrianders are matrilineal; children belong to the clan of their mother and not of their father.
Thus, sexual relations between a man and his mother's sister (and mother's sister's daughter) are also considered incestuous, but relations between a man and his father's sister are not.[8] Indeed, a man and his father's sister will often have a flirtatious relationship, and, far from being taboo,
Trobriand society encourages a man and his father's sister, or the daughter of his father's sister to have sexual relations or marry.[9]
Second, anthropologists have pointed out that the social construct "incest" (and the incest taboo) is not the same thing as the biological phenomenon of "inbreeding". In the Trobriand case a man and the daughter of his father's sister, and a man and the daughter of his mother's sister, are equally distant genetically. Biologists would consider mating incestuous in both instances, but
Trobrianders consider mating in one case incestuous and in the other, not. Anthropologists have documented a great number of societies where marriages between some first cousins are prohibited as incestuous, while marriages between other first cousins are encouraged. Therefore, the prohibition against incestuous relations in most societies is not based on or motivated by concerns over biological closeness.[20] Nor can it be explained by the effects of inbreeding or natural selection.[21][22]
Again, the definition of incest is subjective to each society.
lol....what a joke...considering both your evidence and mine suggests to varying degrees that first cousin incest leads to increased risks of genetic abnomalities in Pakistani children...so tragic.
My point was that you're basing your opinions on statistics that are 1) unclear, and 2) are given by some unnamed organization. Please read people's arguments before trying to refute them.
Because of course it costs money to support people with genetic illnesses...
Fair enough. I read the statement out of context.
Lol utter nonesense...incest is taboo in almost all cultures...you really need to to do some learning...your ignorance is shocking.
Your WILLFUL ignorance is shocking. Read the evidence I've given you.
Oh, I did. Trust me.
EDIT: Added descriptions for the "Fallacies in Argumentation" links.
