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.
this post was submitted on 11 Apr 2024
453 points (98.1% liked)
News
23837 readers
3236 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
As a Texan I’m not sure if I should thank Tennessee for making us seem a little less horrible or curse them for taking attention away from our bat-shittery.
Topical fact of the day: Both Einstein and Darwin married their first cousins.
Most of the world actually has legal marriage between first cousins. In many places it's not even taboo. And on top of that, the chances of genetic issues with it are actually pretty small. It's multiple generations of first cousins having kids where it becomes a problem.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Cousin fuckers: Gino Bulso & Monty Fritts
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.
Alabama got the monopoly now