Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm not going to do a lecture on genetic diversity and mutations here, yes it's guaranteed. And the nasty part is that it can surface a couple generations later, punishing grandchildren for the mistakes of the past generations.
Even in the communities which forbid incest but were historically restricted in their choice of a spouse, say due to religious issues, eventually the marriages between distant relatives lead to all sorts of genetic problems, e.g. the Ashkenazi Jews who lived in small separated communities in Eastern Europe have some cancer causing generic mutations that are specific to that group and aren't found elsewhere.
There was a study on the remains of the pharaohs (who would customarily marry their sisters) and they found some pretty nasty genetic problems, PBS had an interesting documentary about this.
If you read the Old Testament, there are some matter of fact references to brothers marrying sisters, yet it's forbidden by religion. The logical explanation is that it was considered OK in some very distant past, then they noticed the problems it was causing and outlawed the practice, but some old stories with references to this practice remained and were written down.
Only reason incest marriage is still firmly in "eeeewwww" land is because so few people are down with it. Let that number go up, and the whole country will sing a different tune. Again, look no further than the last 40 years of the homosexual issue. In 1974, not even flaming drag queens in San Fran would have taken seriously the idea that state and federal government would allow, much less defend, gay marriage. My oh my, how things change over time, eh?
Polygamy will come first because more people are into it, and it's already bantered about in popular culture with "Big Love" and "Sister Wives", but eventually, our culture will not only accept incest, they'll embrace it. "Moral decay" is nothing more than shedding historical morality norms over time, and our history is quite clear on which direction we are going in that regard.
I think you are correct, and I think the Internet is the tip of the spear in that battle.
Al Gore is not very subjectively libertarian, but his 'invention' of the Internet was the greatest advance for liberty since the printing press.
Even in the communities which forbid incest but were historically restricted in their choice of a spouse, say due to religious issues, eventually the marriages between distant relatives lead to all sorts of genetic problems, e.g. the Ashkenazi Jews who lived in small separated communities in Eastern Europe have some cancer causing generic mutations that are specific to that group and aren't found elsewhere.
All ethnic groups have different degrees of propensity to genetic abnormalities compared to others. If we start making that the measure of everything, we would have to forbid anyone from marrying within their own ethnic group--or perhaps have each partner's genome sequenced before allowing them to copulate.
Now, I do happen to think that sibling marriage ought to be limited to the non-procreative kinds. But the world doesn't come spinning to a halt as it is because sickle cell or Tay-Sachs are centered in certain communities, so we shouldn't make the problem seem more severe than it is.
Polygamy will come first because more people are into it, and it's already bantered about in popular culture with "Big Love" and "Sister Wives", but eventually, our culture will not only accept incest, they'll embrace it. "Moral decay" is nothing more than shedding historical morality norms over time, and our history is quite clear on which direction we are going in that regard.
I think you are correct, and I think the Internet is the tip of the spear in that battle.
Well, as the primary conduit of popular culture and media in the world, the Internet would be the tip of any popular culture spear. So yeah, I agree.
I think incest is a long way off from accepted though, because even with the giant warehouse of pornography on the web, Rule 34, and the random practitioner here and there...incest is pure eeewww ickiness to like 99.999% of the population. It will need to gain a lot more adherents before it moves off its current position at the bottom of the icky barrel.
Polygamy is within 15 years though, imho. It's already accepted in other parts of the world, and popular culture has begun to sympathize with it. Plus, the biggest argument against it is taxes and the exception (not the rule) of the "adolescent wife factory" in certain cults that claim to be the "real" LDS church, but have nowhere near the numbers, money or clout of the real LDS church. The LDS church can slap down the latter argument, and the former is slapped down by an American people who like when citizens annoy the government, especially about taxes.
The poll for this thread might suggest your math is a teensy bit off, Volo, but you're right otherwise.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
