I was reading in the LGBT news section that the Ohio attorney general said it's fine with him if first-cousin couples leave Ohio to get married (Ohio won't marry cousins) and then come back and have their marriage recognized because it was legal in another state. As of this writing, 17 states allow first cousins to marry with no restrictions, Utah, Arizona, Minnesota, Illinois, Indiana and Wisconsin ban cousin marriage with a few exceptions, Maine and North Carolina allow it with some exceptions, and 25 states ban it all together. The data shows that only about 4,000 women get pregnant by their cousin, married or not, every year, which isn't really a big enough sample to see if there really is a birth defect trend, like we've seen with father/daughter, mother/son, brother/sister relationships. Do you think it's incest for cousins to get married? If not, do you think it's wrong? And do you think you'd ever be interested in a cousin? And is it any better for LGBT cousins in love? Personally, I think it should only be banned if they're blood related or they do intend to reproduce, but only for opposite sex couples. For example, my aunt has a stepdaughter who I'm not blood related to at all, but she's still my cousin by marriage. However, because gay couples can't reproduce, LGBT first cousin couples should be able to get married.
I'm not informed enough on the subject to have a real opinion, but allowing bloodrelated first cousins to marry seems kind of weird. I just found out it's allowed in The Netherlands though. So following this logic, if I had a gay brother, I could marry him too? I mean, we wouldn't be able to reproduce.
Yes, I do think its incest. No, I don't think its wrong. In situations where there is no one else involved (where they don't intend to reproduce), there is not ethical problem that I can see. When they do intend to reproduce, I'm less sure about the ethics. I think its wrong to have a child that could be at risk of serious birth defects, but there are also ethical issues surrounding banning it. In short, not my business to say who can't marry who.
I don't have enough background knowledge to make an informed opinion. I believe it is incest. However, I will say that as long as it doesn't affect me, I'm not going to be one to judge.
That's just wrong. You're not supposed to like your brother like that. But I can understand the cousin thing, because you don't have almost the same genetics.
There is evidence that children of first cousins may have birth defects, based on the large number of such cases reported in England to parents of Pakistani origin, where such marriages are common. One generation may not be a problem, but several are. Should be avoided.
Says who? Obviously it doesn't appeal to you, and it doesn't appeal to me either, but who am I (or you) to say its wrong? Assuming there is no reproduction going on, and full and informed consent has been obtained, I see nothing wrong with it.
By my understanding of the definition, yes, it is incest. And I can't say that I support or suggest this. However, I do support two consenting adults doing as they please, as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else. I don't understand the attraction, but its not for me to judge. So, I don't necessarily see how barring these folks from marriage will help anything.
I don't have much of an opinion on the matter, but I generally believe that consenting adults should be legally allowed to pursue whatever relationship or marriage they so desire. If I expect society to accept same-sex marriages, then I think it is only reasonable to allow these as well. Valid point, however I think that allowing only same-sex couples to have such marriages is wrong. We have spent decades trying to get equal rights with heteros, so it would be hypocritical to impose any additional laws that limit a person based on their sexuality (even if the law would be in reverse of what we are used to dealing with).
Yes, it is legally incest. Genetically it's also a bad idea. It would be especially bad in my case to produce a child since I already have the gene for a birth defect (spina bifida). My first cousin's ex wife looks like a Native American princess. We aren't related by blood. Would it be okay for me to marry her for companionship?
I'd mainly worry about in-breeding and a shallow gene pool...I mean, that's how we got the Royal Family over in the UK, and they can be a pretty weird looking/crazy lot. As for same sex, do what feels right for you.
There isn't any clear cut off for what counts as incest. Everyone is related in some manner to varying degrees - as such any cut off point is always going to be arbitrary. Anyway, it doesn't matter. No outside party has the authority to decide whether a relationship is 'allowed'. If you can't see how hypocritical this is then you are very short sighted. Being against incest due to the risks of genetic diseases in their children is dangerous territory as you would then have to be against other people with high disease risk from having children too. Regardless, this is an argument against having children in incestuous relationships, not incestuous relationships themselves.
Hmmm. I don't really have strong opinions about this but there is one thing that can be a deal breaker. It depends how closely they were growing up. It would be weird if they were really close friends. However, if they barely knew each other, it would be like meeting an entirely new person. There's too many variables for me to decide.
there are only 2 wrong things really IMO 1) abuse of position of trust (ie parent/simillar figure raises child in a deceitful manner in order to form relationship 2) close relatives having children. If 2 cousins/siblings/whatever of legal age and reasonable upbringing want to love each other and have sex I don't care.
Personally, I consider it to be incest and I wouldn't do it. With that being said, what two consenting adults do is none of my business and I couldn't care less (unless they're seriously hurting someone or something). I wouldn't judge someone for it
