Christian/Muslim ThreadsObservations on ChristianityContrary to widely held beliefs and longstanding taboos in America,
first cousins can have children together without a great risk of
birth defects or genetic disease, scientists are reporting today.
They say there is no biological reason
to discourage cousins from marrying.
http://www.geocities.com/luvacuzn4/Cous ... usins.html
Oh I see its an American thingy.
Marriage of first cousins is illegal in 30 states and is taboo in many Western cultures, but that is not the case in other places, particularly the Middle East, Asia and Africa. In some countries, up to 60 percent of
the population is related by blood, and cousin marriages are preferred to unions of unrelated couples.
http://www.coej.org/Medical/marrying_co ... _risky.htm
Yup seems to be an American law. Its perfectly fine in other parts of the world except the west.
The Bible does not forbid marriage between cousins. However, marriage between first cousins is illegal in about half the states in the U.S.; the Biblical principle here is that God has instituted the government's authority, so there may be a legal issue depending on where you live. But it's not a sin biblically.
http://www.probe.org/docs/e-cousins.html
Terrible, only in the US.
Before the Lewis scandal, due as much to the young wife's age as the pair's shared genes, America mostly turned a blind eye to cousins who married, and in fact many of us who can trace our lineage back far enough will find a "consanguineal" couple or two. The rest of the civilized world doesn't seem to care, either. Charles Darwin married his first cousin, Emma Wedgwood, and spawned 10 kids, four of them scientists, as supporters of "cousin couples" like to point out. Albert Einstein's second wife was, in fact, his first cousin, and Einstein's no dummy….
…Post-war America, it seems, is unique in its societal disdain for cousins who marry. In Europe, the Middle East and elsewhere, the marriage of first cousins is more common and less profane.
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05094/482448.stm
Wow imagine that! Americans use to marry cousins and all of a sudden its incest. Even its brother country Europe are still playing Bingo with cousins.
Some people are fixated on the fallacy that cousin couples pose an intolerable risk to their offspring. However it is likely that we are all descendants of cousin marriages. Before civil laws banning cousin marriages, it was preferable to marry a cousin in some communities as it is to this day in many countries. The notion “why marry a stranger" is just as prevalent in many countries as the cousin marriage taboo in America today.
There is a wide range of opinions on the subject of cousin marriages. This is fuelled by erroneous information, bigotry, and presumptions. Further we have civil laws and religious creeds based on obsolete information.
The facts about cousin marriages are much clearer.
http://www.cousincouples.com/info/facts.shtml
The above site is the bomb. It tells you about the history of cousin marriage in western culture that all of a sudden went blitz.
Fact: No European country prohibits marriage between first cousins. It is also legal throughout Canada and Mexico to marry your cousin. The USA is the only western country with cousin marriage restrictions.
http://www.cousincouples.com/info/facts.shtml
Imagine that ! Liberate judges people based on his own cultural ideology. Its like saying someone is guilty of a crime when the law never existed whereas the ultimate Law ie the law of G-d makes no such thing prohibit or even a sin.
Now since Liberate brought back up the pedophile thingy again lets take a glimpse into other parts of the world.
In India during the 1860’s, marriage meant girls getting married below 8 or 9 years old. Socio-reform religious movements such as the Brahmo Samaj and the Arya Samaj pioneered work against child marriage. Late in the 1860’s some success was met when the Indian Penal Code prohibited intercourse with a wife who had not reached ten years of age.
http://www.stormloader.com/munaypata/India.htm
Well we see they start at 10 years of age by law.
In order to marry, the couple was expected to have reached puberty, thought to be 14 years old for boys and 12 for girls. However, the ages of the partners sometimes complicated the union. One scholar points out that: considerations of compatibility in age are not emphasized in the sources. Although Terentia apparently criticized Cicero for marrying a young girl, the matching of a man with a woman young enough to be his daughter or even granddaughter was generally accepted ... For a man to marry a woman who was much older than himself was discreditable. A couple who were both old might also be criticized. While there are many examples in Roman history of older men marrying young girls, it was the decision of the paterfamilias and not the girl.
http://famromo.wiccan.net/women.htm
The Roman even had it going on with older men marrying extremely young women.
Let go back way way back. Lets look into the practice of the Jews before America was even founded:
Said Rabbi Joseph, "Come and take note: A girl three years and one day old is betrothed by intercourse. And if a Levir has had intercourse with her, he has acquired her. And one can be liable on her account because of the law prohibiting intercourse with a married woman. And she imparts uncleanness to him who has intercourse with her when she is menstruating, to convey uncleanness to the lower as to the upper layer [of what lies beneath]. If she was married to a priest, she may eat food in the status of priestly rations. If one of those who are unfit for marriage with her had intercourse with her, he has rendered her unfit to marry into the priesthood. If any of those who are forbidden in the Torah to have intercourse with her had intercourse with her, he is put to death on her account, but she is free of responsibility [M.Nid. 5:4].
Sanhedrin 7/55B
Hmm. There you have it ladies and gentlemen.
| View Parent Message View dfilename Return Home |