Good job living up to stereotypes, Tennessee.
removed by mod
removed by mod
Yeah brother all those liberal politicians defending child marriage too
You are completely devoid of both logic and reason
We’re not talking about child marriage.
Watch it, you can’t use logic or reason on these people.
Oh go back to Twitter, Ben Shapiro.
I rest my case.
^ This dude wants to fuck his cousin so fucking badly.
It’s called projection, Lunchbox. You doing a whole theaters worth right now lmao.
Who cares?
With issues like misplaced paternity, people should be dna tested before they marry, anyway. Your first cousin might not actually be your first cousin, and the stranger you meet on the street might actually be family. I’m just saying.
Topical fact of the day: Both Einstein and Darwin married their first cousins.
Edgar Allen Poe as well.
When she was 13.
if both are consenting adults it shouldn’t be illegal. maybe there’s benefit to genetic counseling if there’s intent or possibility to have children, but it shouldn’t be illegal with or without that.
There are 8 billion people on this planet now. Surely you can find someone other than your cousin.
It really shouldn’t need to be illegal, but I guess residents of the volunteer state require a little more incentive to find dates before the holidays, rather than during them.
Most on Lemmy and other lefty spaces are of the “two consenting adults can do what they want” mind but take an inconsistent turn on this, seemingly because it’s “icky” to them.
How is that any different than conservatives being anti-gay because it’s “icky” to them?
It’s not because it’s “icky”, it’s because if you both have the same grandma then you only have one snickerdoodle recipe for Christmas cookies, genetically speaking.
As stated several times in this thread, the risk of genetic issues is akin to that of a 40+ year old woman having kids.
It would seem consistent to also ban that if that is your actual issue, right? So, is that what you’re suggesting?
I never called for a ban. I said maybe go out and explore the forest before climbing up the family tree. And it’s my understanding that most women understand the risk of procreating after 40 and typically avoid it.
But I’m not your daddy. You don’t need my approval to fuck your uncle’s kids.
You said,
It really shouldn’t need to be illegal, but I guess residents of the volunteer state require a little more incentive to find dates before the holidays, rather than during them.
I took this to mean that those who don’t voluntarily choose to not marry/have sex with their cousins need to be forced not to by law (a ban). Did I misread that?
wasn’t talking about myself, which shouldn’t need to be pointed out, but here we are.
There are 8 billion people on this planet now. Surely you can find someone who isn’t black
Same line of reasoning, just 50 years ago.
We shouldn’t ban consenting adult relationships solely because they are icky.
are you seriously comparing marrying a black person with marrying your first cousin
Yes. Explain the difference, if you can.
No, I want you to explain your reasoning, you’re the one who made it. please explain how marrying a black person is just like marrying your first cousin.
There’s nothing objectively wrong with either one. Both have been banned because they gross people out for purely social (bigoted) reasons.
Incorrect. One results in higher than normal birth defects that exacerbate over time, and one is perfectly healthy. We, as a society, should try to limit birth defects, no? Are you also in favor of bringing back thalidomide?
It’s shouldn’t be the role of government to regulate who you want to marry.
But also don’t do that
There are 8 billion people on this planet now. Surely you can find someone
Not really.
Speaking from a virgin, and not a cousinfucker, perspective.
‘There’s someone for everyone’ is such a fucking bullshit platitude.
It’s absolutely true though
Sure buddy. Ever heard of ‘Just World Fallacy’?
I don’t see how that fallacy is relevant here though
…You serious?
…?
do you have anything actually to say?
The just world fallacy is about people getting what they deserve.
That doesn’t seem to really apply to the statistical argument that there are enough people out there, the chance for any given individual to not have any shot is effectively (if perhaps not precisely) zero. Small enough to not be worth considering.
Relationships are subject to much more than just statistics.
Sure. But I don’t think anyone else is suggesting everyone deserves a relationship.
Genetically, first cousins are fine. It does slightly increase some risks, I think doubles at most for some very low likelihood cases. I don’t know that it’s any more irresponsible than reproducing with someone that has a family history of genetically passed diseases.
Humans were tribal until very recently, and reproducing with non-immediate relatives was normal. If it were that detrimental, we would not have survived as a species.
And no, my wife is not remotely related to me.
removed by mod
Not even remotely implied or relevant
I know everyone is like “haha cousin fuckers.”
But really, do we want the government to pass laws restricting who we can and cannot marry?
I can’t help but notice the overlap with LGBT rights. I’m pretty sure I’d prefer them to not pass this law.
Like, from a legal and philosophical perspective, why is it OK for the government to restrict this? Why wouldn’t that same argument apply to gay men getting married?
Can you elaborate a little? Like do you mean that if LGBTQ is accepted, first cousins are meant to be accepted as well?
This isn’t about “acceptance” in the social sense. I’m not saying you have to accept cousin fuckers in your community.
I’m more worried about the legal framework. If it is legal to outlaw this, why is it illegal to outlaw gay marriage? Like, that doesn’t seem ideologically consistent.
Well, we also can’t let communities discriminate like that…you say you’re “not saying you have to accept [them] in your community regardless of legal status” but I’m assuming you don’t feel loke people should be able to chase other types of minorities out of town if they don’t approve. That’s kinda the whole point of law - to set the rules for how we treat each other. I haven’t thought enough about this particular topic to know how I feel about it. I see the state’s interest in reducing incestuous births, and I’m definitely not ok with the state making reproductive choices for people more generally.
What’s really disgusting is that I bet the entire reason they’re even debating this is because they don’t want to allow any exemption from their abortion ban.
I’m intentionally trying to separate the social discrimination problem from the legal problem, and to not make a comment about the former.
I guess I get that the state has an interest in preventing incestuous birth, but marriage is orthogonal sex.
marriage is orthogonal sex>
Rationally speaking, yes. The religious right seem to feel differently.
I’ve noticed people on both sides are cool with laws that hurt others.
Ex: We see plenty of pot smokers supporting banning nicotine products.
Liberals aren’t immune to this just like conservatives. Most people are shit :(
nah dude. one thing hurts you and has severe impacts on your health. Inbreeding and lung cancer don’t have “both sides” of an argument. they’re bad.
Cousin fuckers: Gino Bulso & Monty Fritts
Because, who the fuck cares?
Apparently a lot of people here actually care. It’s so insane that people still want to regulate who others can fall in love with/marry.
I wish we’d just end all the benefits that come with marriage. I don’t actually know why it’s still encouraged by the government. It made sense for religions to push for people to get married but why should our government be designed in a way where it matters so much and there’s so many incentives to marry?
there is no incentive to marry? you don’t get a tax break or anything, that’s just for having kids.
Off the top of my head, I can recall some of the reasons people made for same-sex marriage is that hospitals wouldn’t allow gay couples to see each other in emergency rooms because their marriage wasn’t recognized. Another one, not sure how it works, is what happens when your spouse dies. I don’t think their property would automatically go to their spouse unless it was explicitly spelled out in their will.
something something alabama, something something, it’s now tennessee.
Take me to another place
Take me to another land
Let me fuck my cousin firstly
Let me understand her clam
Tennessee, Tennessee
But I am still thirsty.
Arrested Development does not approve. Such a underrated hiphop group. They lived together communally for a bit!
Tennessee has done a lot to outdo Florida as a shitshow lately.
I can’t tell what you mean by that.
Are you talking about them trying to outlaw it or about them trying to stop it being outlawed?
Everything I read about them is awful and backwards.
Does that mean i have to fight my cousin before i can marry them?
Honestly, it’s not that big a deal unless it happens for multiple generations. There is enough genetic difference between first cousins for it to not count as inbreeding.
I would recommend against it if there is a significant risk of genetic diseases being passed down, but that’s true even for any two random people.
Honestly, if it’s consensual I don’t care just let women have control of their own bodies and keep their damn religion out of government. They can have cousin-fucking just leave minorities and LGBTQ+ alone.
I feel like this is just an extension of the “my child, my property” mindset that republicans have. Sure, like others have argued, there might be cases of 25 year-olds genuinely falling in love with first cousins and the whole goverment-shouldn’t-regulate-love thing; but the vast majority of these cases are going to be home-schooled together groomed kids who parents fear having romantic relations outside the family might introduce them to non-conservative or non-religious viewpoints which might break their narcissistic control over their kids lives.
Republicans sure do seem to think you have the right to marry who ever you love when it comes to incest and pedophilia but not LGBTQ.
deleted by creator
That’s the amendment that was rejected.
