argument against other marriage restrictions

Because close family relations almost always result in incest, which has an exponentially increasing chance for genetic deficiency. Same-sex relationships have no such risk, seeing as how there is essentially zero chance of having children in the first place.

 

I did a report on human inbreeding awhile ago for a class.

I believe that prohibition of incest is mostly due to societal taboos. While there is a larger chance of defects, it isn't really an issue unless the inbreeding is carried on through generations. One couple between close family members will most likely not cause any problems unless both as heterozygous for a recessive trait that causes disease. (http://genome.wellcome.ac.uk/doc_WTD020850.html) An interesting case study I read involved a small isolated town in Italy and how the citizens have a large percentage of recessive genomic defects.

Here are a list of books and articles I used for the report, if you are interested:
1. Centre for Human Genetics, Genetic epidemiology in consanguineous populations, http://www.chg.ecu.edu.au/research/consanguinity.php , 29.01/2008, Edith Cowan University, 2002.

2. Consanguinity, Inbreeding and Genetic Drift in Italy, Cavalli-Sforza, Moroni, and Zei, Simon A. Levin and Henry S. Horn, Princeton University Press, 41 William Street Princeton New Jersey 08540, 2004.

3. Human Biology, Inbreeding In Gredos Mountain Range (Spain): Contribution of Multiple Consanguinity and Intervalley Variation, http://muse.jhu.edu/demo/human_biology/v073/73.2fuster.html , 29 /09/2000, 29.01/2008, The Wayne State University Press, 2001.

4. Incest: A Biosocial View, Joseph Shepher, E. A. Hammel, Academic Press, Inc. 111 Fifth Avenue, New York 10003, 1983.

5. Inbreeding and the Genetic Complexity of Human Hypertension, Igor Rudan, Nina Smolej-Narancic, Harry Campbell, Andrew Carothers, Alan Wright, Branka Janicijevic and Pavao Rudan, 19/11/2002, Genetics Society of America, http://www.genetics.org/cgi/reprint/163/3/1011.pdf, 2003.

6. Inbreeding Effects on Fertility in Humans: Evidence for Reproductive Compensation, Carole Ober,Terry Hyslop, and Walter W. Hauck, Am. J. Hum. Genet. 64:225–231, 1999

7. Jocasta’s Crime, Lord Raglan, Horward Fertig, Inc. 80 East 11th Street, New York, N.Y. 10003, 1991.


In many societies, such as India, uncle and niece couples are very popular. So are cousin-cousin relationships. These are mostly arranged though and therefore, I don't support them. It should be noted that sibling marriages and parent-child marriages are pretty much frowned down upon across all cultures. Think Oedipus Rex.

Most people who want to marry close relatives (mother, father, brother, sister...) have some issues anyways. But I know nothing about psychology. But I have no problem with first cousins who want to marry. It kinda grosses me out, but whatever.

(Can you tell I love genetics?:lol

 

Don't ask me why i know this i just do, In Illinois you can legally marry your 1st cousin as long as one of you get your tubes tied; and on a more disturbing note there is no law in Illinois that prohibits necrophelia (having sex with a corpse). there's laws against STEALing corpses but none prohibiting sex with them.

 

I had never thought about that. And I can see why you feel like a hypocrite. Situations like that are so unfair for the individuals involved. They are two consenting adults who love each other and who's to say they can't be together. Unfortunately the risk of conceiving children with genetic disorders is greatly increased. Prohibiting their marriage is society's way of preventing this. You might find this article interesting; about twins separated at birth who ended up getting married....sad story.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7182817.stm

 

That is horrible. Those poor people.

 

I actually have nothing wrong with incest as long as the parties are consenting adults, they don't intend to have biological children, and there truly is no power imbalance between them. This last point more or less excludes all cases where people have been brought up together, because even if you have a parent/child or brother/sister or sister/sister who have been brought up together, even if they are now adults, the inequalities from growing up together would still kind of be there, even if you think they're not.

So a brother and sister who did not grow up together who form a relationship in their adult years and don't intend to have children are doing nothing wrong in my opinion, as long as there is no power imbalance between them (although you get these in non-incestuous relationships too!). I work on the no-harm principal basically. Maybe this is extreme, but it's what I think...

For the record, I'm also theorectically OK with polygamy, if it is practised in such a way where all the parties truly want it, there is no imbalance of power, and it's not patriarchal or whatever. My dislike of polygamy isn't against polygamy as such, as if they're all consenting adults and want to be polygamous that's fine, but because I'm not sure you ever truly get such equal situations in real life. Again, it comes down to the no-harm principal.

Also...

Did you know that if you are separated from a close family member at birth or whatever and you meet them as an adult you are statistically more likely to fall for them than if you weren't biologically related? It's called Genetic Sexual Attraction (google it!), and it's one thing that adoptees get counselled about when they start looking for their birth families. Lots of studies have been done on it, and it's a recognised phenomonenon. Without the effects of growing up together, which usually puts people off wanting to sleep with each other, sexual attraction between close family members can and does often happen. (not talking about personal experience here lol)

 

Yup.

Altho, I don't have problem with close family members relations nor with gay marriage but I have to say they are completely different things.