Where do you stand on this?

[R_E_Z_A]

Brother and sister in love !! making babies too . Where do you stand on this? disgusted? just ignore it? or let them be? or support it?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6424937.stm

Reading this I go back to my belief of why a society without religion will fail eventually, this is what I have been saying "without religion a society has no fixed boundries. Boundries of today can be removed tomorow by the majority"

This activity some day may have majority who will support it? dont you think?

 

[Farsi Zaban]

Brother and sister in love !! making babies too . Where do you stand on this? disgusted? just ignore it? or let them be? or support it?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6424937.stm

Reading this I go back to my belief of why a society without religion will fail eventually, this is what I have been saying "without religion a society has no fixed boundries. Boundries of today can be removed tomorow by the majority"

This activity some day may have majority who will support it? dont you think?

Actually the basis for the law in Germany is science not religion. Countries like Iran, Iraq and Turkey where marriage between cousins is commonplace should adopt the same law to discourage cousin marriages. Additionally, abortion should be made legal and readily available to prevent the birth of a defective baby.

 

[Abedzaadeh]

Reading this I go back to my belief of why a society without religion will fail eventually, this is what I have been saying "without religion a society has no fixed boundries. Boundries of today can be removed tomorow by the majority"

True and the above example is horrible but don't forget in Islam interfamily marriages (cousins) are normal and I think in the olden days even advocated.

But science has proven that genetically it is a risky thing to do

BTW Am not trying to mock Islam for this and in my family there are many interfamily marriages but science (and odd unfortunate instances) has proven its extremely unwise.

 

[mashdi]

True and the above example is horrible but don't forget in Islam interfamily marriages (cousins) are normal and I think in the olden days even advocated.

let mashdi put it in an old popular saying:

عقد ِ پسرعمو با دخترعمو ، توی آسمونها بسته شده

 

[General Parsaian]

I dont see anythings wrong in it becouse all brothers & sisters love eachother:confused-
مشتی اکثر بیماریهای ژنتیکی بخاطر ازدواج دختر عمو پسر عمو رخ میده چی چی اسمونها بسته

:4: :--wink:

 

[mashdi]

I dont see anythings wrong in it becouse all brothers & sisters love eachother:confused-
مشتی اکثر بیماریهای ژنتیکی بخاطر ازدواج دختر عمو پسر عمو رخ میده چی چی اسمونها بسته

:4: :--wink:

ژنرال
اون تعلیمی را غلاف کن

چرا بنده را مواخذه می کنید؟
مشدی فقط بیان ِ عامیانه را اعلام کرد

 

[Motori]

Brother and sister in love !! making babies too . Where do you stand on this? disgusted? just ignore it? or let them be? or support it?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6424937.stm

Reading this I go back to my belief of why a society without religion will fail eventually, this is what I have been saying "without religion a society has no fixed boundries. Boundries of today can be removed tomorow by the majority"

This activity some day may have majority who will support it? dont you think?

REZA,
Sure I'm disgusted but too much more than when I see first cousins marrying each other.

 

[Niloufar]

Its actually condemned by Science and not by Religion.

Science forids any kind of interfamily marriages because of serious health damages(genetics) to the baby, whereas in religion there is no such a verse that condemns interfamily,brother/sister marriages. They never condemned it.

 

[Fatso]

I think all religions condemn brothers and sisters getting married to each other.
Nothing about cousins though.

 

[Bi-honar]

Its actually condemned by Science and not by Religion.

Science forids any kind of interfamily marriages because of serious health damages(genetics) to the baby, whereas in religion there is no such a verse that condemns interfamily,brother/sister marriages. They never condemned it.

Not to mention Nilou jaan, that the whole concept of Adam & Eve paints a very incestuous beginning for mankind.

 

[General Parsaian]

Its actually condemned by Science and not by Religion.

Science forids any kind of interfamily marriages because of serious health damages(genetics) to the baby, whereas in religion there is no such a verse that condemns interfamily,brother/sister marriages. They never condemned it.

What? :--wierd:

 

[Silverton]

Its actually condemned by Science and not by Religion.

Science forids any kind of interfamily marriages because of serious health damages(genetics) to the baby, whereas in religion there is no such a verse that condemns interfamily,brother/sister marriages. They never condemned it.

Emm, yes they do! Of course they condemn it, with religion, there is dualistic right or wrong categories ... for instance, in the Quran, it stipulates WHO you can marry, while implicitly condemning all other forms of marriage.

And who speaks on Science's behalf? I feel science has become more of an abstraction than religion! Almost nothing in science is 100% fact, have you not hear of the principle of Falsification (that science cannot prove what is 100% true, only what is false?)??

 

[pansari]

I find this wrong,

With such great advances in the medical field, which has proven that incest is not a favourable form of reporduction, and could potentially be hazoradus to the entire population. Cousins marriage although wrong, is a type of lesser wrong, for they have some genetic variation, but bother/sister have virtually identical genes.

 

[Niloufar]

Emm, yes they do! Of course they condemn it, with religion, there is dualistic right or wrong categories ... for instance, in the Quran, it stipulates WHO you can marry, while implicitly condemning all other forms of marriage.

And who speaks on Science's behalf? I feel science has become more of an abstraction than religion! Almost nothing in science is 100% fact, have you not hear of the principle of Falsification (that science cannot prove what is 100% true, only what is false?)??

hmm, Ive never read those verses then explicitly mentioning whom we can marry,etc, can you provide the verses?!

about science ofcourse its never 100% bc it gets updated and contradicts the prev idea. but it has never been contradicted by any scientist that interfamily marriages does not cause serious damage to the health of the baby. but even in science they mention it as high probability(I think its 70% in this case? I have to double check) that health of baby will be in danger.

+ Science always provides proof(through genetics/lab testing) why is this happening whereas in Religion it just says "it is haram,etc" so its much harder to convince interfamily parents to not ignore the religious verses(since they can just say we r aethist and dont believe in these stuff), instead of being proved by science(through genetics) that its a high probability their baby will be born defected.

 

[Iranpaak]

I see another science vs religion debate going on here. The question to me in this particular case should be asked from morality point. It is moral for siblings to get to marry each other, science simply says there is a possiblity of defect in the resulting offspring. Is that a good enough reason for not allowing it? I do not think so. IMHO, one has to look this issue from morality point (which the realm of religion) ; the question that must be asked is what would be the consequences of such action to a family units if such taboos are lefted.
Science and religion should not be contracting each other in this case or any other case IMHO.

 

[Niloufar]

It is moral for siblings to get to marry each other, science simply says there is a possiblity of defect in the resulting offspring. Is that a good enough reason for not allowing it? I do not think so. IMHO, one has to look this issue from morality point (which the realm of religion) ..

ofcourse its enough reason for not allowing it. If a doctor tells u your baby will be born defected bc u married your cousin, would u just ignore him and just see what religious verses say?!
Morality of an issue may differ for each person depending on percieveness of an issue. If one Marje Taghlid percieves that what Quran is saying is interfamily marriages is haram, where another Marje Taghlid contradicts him, then its the matter of which one ppl want to follow.
Even if it turns out its haram, its not a good reason to take it over scientific proof that your baby will be born defected.

I dont personally think its a good idea for ppl to prefer their personal moralities and beliefs over a clear proof where health of their baby is at sake. considering their baby may not even agree with his/her parents' moralities!!

 

[Iranpaak]

ofcourse its enough reason for not allowing it. If a doctor tells u your baby will be born defected bc u married your cousin, would u just ignore him and just see what religious verses say?!

In my previous post, I said I do not see a contradiction between the science and religion. Therefore, if the doctor in your example says the baby will be born defective, I would listen.
Having said that, if the same doctor tells a brother and sister that their baby would be OK, what the course of action should be? Of course morality of one person differs from another, and there comes a place for religion's order and rules, science does not require, or mandates morality, what is right and what is wrong, it is the realm of the religion.

 

[Niloufar]

Of course morality of one person differs from another, and there comes a place for religion's order and rules, science does not require, or mandates morality, what is right and what is wrong, it is the realm of the religion.

Yes,ofcourse and because not all religions have the same stand on the issues, diff religions may rule differently. and there are also people who dont follow any religion and there r those who are aethist. so I guess thats the job of Parlimant members of each country to vote on and decide whether these kind of brother-sister kind of marriages should be allowed or not.

 

[Farsi Zaban]

In my previous post, I said I do not see a contradiction between the science and religion. Therefore, if the doctor in your example says the baby will be born defective, I would listen.
Having said that, if the same doctor tells a brother and sister that their baby would be OK, what the course of action should be? Of course morality of one person differs from another, and there comes a place for religion's order and rules, science does not require, or mandates morality, what is right and what is wrong, it is the realm of the religion.

I'm not much of a science person, but I think part of the evolutionary theory argues that it is in the animals nature to diversify the gene pool of the population. If you ever watch nature shows you will see older male cubs getting kicked out of their pride or the same with elephant tribes. One of the things Dawkings has said if you listen to some of his speeches on youtube is that which we perceive as morality maybe in our genes.

 

[dpour]

Wait so lets just say, theoretically, that you marry your brother or sister. Then you make the woman pregnant. Then the doctor says that hte baby would be born genetically "defective"(I really hate that word, its like illegimate. How can someone be illegimate or defective). Would you get an abortion?