Muslims suffer insanity, low IQ, recessive disorders from inbreeding

You know, I would respond, but I've no idea what your talking about, nor understand what anything you wrote has to do with anything I wrote in this thread. But I'll be honest, I've never really understood any of your posts so there isn't any reason this one should be different.

 

So, you married your first cousin? And are getting defensive?

So, you being a jew can tell us how many of the jews you know, married their first cousins, and if in the jewish community if they still marry first cousins. So, tell us please.

Jews no longer have the tradition of marrying first cousins, as they no longer sacrifice animals or stone people to death. So, to state a fact about certain muslim nations marrying first cousins, and it being desired behavior is not flame bait. Stating a very unhealthy fact can never be flame bait. So why in the hell did you resort to that? Faux liberal kneejerk when confronted with undesirable facts? Well sir, your tribe does it habitually, while irrationally thinking you can just get others to ignore facts. You are very good at this, as other faux liberals are. But it only works on the irrational, which is your tribe, and is pointless when used on rational, critical thinking people. Just so you know. In case you might not want to waste your time repeating the same behavior while expecting different results.

So, you should just defend marrying first cousins, generation after generation after generation. Tell us why it is an intelligent way to live. Give us evidence from studies that it is desirable from an objective, rational point of view. Convince us it is not damaging not only to physical health, but also mental health. We are listening.

 

LOL - That clears up a lot of questions and explains a lot of what he is posting on the forums.

I was going to repond to his post and ask him if he actually knew the stance he was taking, then I read your awesome reply. Well done!

 

British newspapers are "bigoted"? Not remotely as "bigoted" as American liberals are.
They get by with constantly attacking Christians, Catholics, white men, heterosexual men,
working men, southerners, hunters, U.S. military forces, and conservatives as a "racist, fascist" category.

But back to the thread topic:

British Pakistanis are thirteen times more likely to produce disabled children.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/591577/British-Pakistanis-13-times-more-disabled-children

It gets worse, much, much worse, not that any Leftists care for facts. This from WikiIslam.net:

In Pakistan, where there has been cousin marriage for generations, and according to professor Anne-Marie Nybo Andersen from South Danish University, the current rate is 70%,[5] one study estimated infant mortality at 12.7 percent for married double first cousins, 7.9 percent for first cousins, 9.2 percent for first cousins once removed/double second cousins, 6.9 percent for second cousins, and 5.1 percent among non-consanguineous progeny. Among double first cousin progeny, 41.2 percent of pre-reproductive deaths were associated with the expression of detrimental recessive genes, with equivalent values of 26.0, 14.9, and 8.1 percent for first cousins, first cousins once removed/double second cousins, and second cousins respectively.

 

Read Consanguinity Among Jews from the Jewish Encyclopedia.. Its been posted several times.

 

I think you're misunderstanding the point I was making and getting caught up in the sub-discussion regarding Europe in the middle ages. The first part of my post was again primarily in response the OP claiming that marriage between cousins has been prohibited in Judaeo/Christian tradition since the days of Moses. This claim is made in the very first paragraph of the original post, it isn't in any sense a separation or diversion from the topic, the first point I was making was primarily in response to the topic itself.

Now in regards to Europe in the middle ages, I completely agree with you that the dominate source of authority was the Catholic church, that is clear up until 16th or 17th century. Marriage between first cousins then was more common among Monarchs and Aristocrats than among the general populous, but was also not considered to be outside of the norm, as addressed in the third link I provided (which I do not believe you read). Marriage between cousins wasn't considered taboo in European culture until the age of enlightenment. Now you look at many of the middle eastern countries of today, and they are essentially medieval countries in the modern age. Many of the systems and traditions that European culture outgrew several hundred years ago are still prevalent in much of the middle east.

In any case, the attitude towards marriages between cousins is something that varies between regions. It is especially common in the tribal areas of the world, where people are separated from the general stock of society and intermarry among each other for several generations. Make no mistake, the desire to preserve the ways of the tribal mindset is a very stupid concept. It is to deliberately prevent the society itself from progressing for the sake of keeping to tradition. History I believe proves time and time again that the connected societies have always been able to progress to greater degrees than the isolated societies. If you were interpreting any of my prior posts as being in defense of the medieval system that exist today in many parts of the middle east, you are greatly mistaken. The overall point is that the tribal, monarchical, and theocratic traditions are just that.. medieval... and should not be preserved in any case

 

I wasn't questioning the Bible view or Bible stories on marriage between closely related people. I think I agreed that was the case. It seemed a point that kept coming up in responses to me when that was irrelevant to any of my points or my responses.

So just in case anyone seems to think that I think The Bible opposed cousin marriage, I don't believe that.

I hope I've finally put that topic to bed.

I think the acceptance of first cousin marriage in parts of the third world holds them back. It's why kinship ties are so much stronger than nation state ties. Frankly that's why I oppose the legality of first cousin marriage. It encourages a kinship system and that doesn't translate into modernity very well.

 

"Muslims suffer insanity, low IQ, recessive disorders from inbreeding"

sure some do, just like some Christians, look at the Amish

 

Again, that part had less to do with what you posted, and more to do with the topic of the thread. It does tie in to European culture and what you were discussing about the middle ages, but mostly I was simply discussing the topic of the thread. The discussion about Europe in the middle ages is a sub-topic to the topic of the original post of this thread. If you wish to put the topic of the original post to bed, then I suggest making a separate thread of your own.

In regards to modern culture, it is still legal to marry one's cousin in most parts of the world, but it is also considered to be taboo. I wouldn't go as far as saying we need to make the practice illegal, I think as society advances we naturally become more distant from the ways of tribalism and intermarriages. The areas of the world that still practice intermarriages tend to be the regions that are still separated from the general stock of society, this tradition changes when the people there become connected to the modern world.