What blasphemy. Do you have any links for the following claims: 1. Inbreeding was brought to the Middle East from Europe 2. "Christians, Jews and Hindus in the Middle East, North Africa and the Indian subcontinent engage in the same practice just as often" - this is clearly a false statement emanating from your Islam bias (see point 4) 3. The practice is declining in popularity every day, despite: http://www.unl.edu/rhames/courses/212/arab_inbreed/arab_inbreed.htm 4. "It isn't an Islam thing, it's a cultural thing". Yet somehow, the two aren't interlinked? This to me is a bluff because an overwhelming majority of consanguineous marriages in India are in Muslim communities. It's not unique to poverty after all - rather, it's unique to Islamic communities in southeast Asia, the Middle East, and Africa. http://indianpediatrics.net/nov1998/nov-1110-1113.htm I appreciate your clarification of the thought process behind it continuing in the Middle East, but after more research it is clear that the social aspect of it derives from an outdated thought process that needs to change. I don't buy the logic behind it - and it's the oppressive interpretation of Islam in these communities that is causing all of these issues. It would be nice to put up a chart like this one on billboards in the Persian Gulf and Pakistan showing why this practice should not be sustained: BTW Deckard, I think you owe me an apology and a positive rep for proving my point in this thread - in comprehensive fashion.
Are you sure this extends to all Pakistanis? And not just those living in England? As for the Hindu comparison, I don't know how I can make myself more clear on this. There's a difference between the following. A: Telling people you feel their beliefs are not in their best interest B: Telling them they're stupid/wrong/ignorant/whatever C: Force them to change their ways I personally feel one should not go beyond (A) unless it violates a law directly. In this case, UK can pass a law preventing marriages between first cousins and be done with it. And in the case of Pakistan or any other country, there's nothing one can do beyond handing them booklets or flyers or whatever. I dislike choice B because it solves nothing and only makes people angry. I dislike choice C because it involves taking over other countries, either in a cultural capacity or in a real capacity. Thanks. I'll try that. It's been a while though, and doesn't really bother me. ALthough I guess it's definitely handy for certain occasions.
1) No, don't have any links. You know what, I'll retract it despite it being blatantly obvious that this is what happened. The whole concept of marriage to relatives came from the upper-class trying to preserve their wealth, and the middle class and lower class following suit. However, I'll be clear that I'm not BLAMING anyone here. I'm just stating what seems to be logical. Anyway, it's immaterial to the argument, so it's gone. 2A) Christianity: Your link lists Iraq, Jordan and Egypt as some of theplaces where this happens most. Incidentally, those countries have non-Muslim populations of 3 to 10% each which consists mainly of Christians, so there you go. 2B) Hinduism: Muslims represent the majority in Jammu and Kashmir and Lakshadweep,[30] and high concentrations in the states of Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, West Bengal, Assam, and Kerala.[30][31] Almost all of these are Northern states. Also from Wiki, in southern India, it is common for cross cousins to marry, with matrilateral cross-cousin (mother's brother's daughter) marriages being especially favored, and this may be arranged deliberately by parents. Matrilateral cross-cousin marriage results in especially strong ties between a nephew and his maternal uncle, who is then also his father-in-law.[44] Incidentally, wiki states (in the same link, with sources) that the Hindus in the North consider it to be incest. If any conclusion can be reached, it's that in India, the location determines whether or not this practice is acceptable. It also states that this rarely happens in Northern and Central India, whereas it is common in Southern India. Hopefully, I need not mention that over 80% of the Indian population is Hindu. I would appreciate you providing me with an independent source which me and you can both trust re: consanguinity in India. The goal here is to determine that this is significantly more common among Muslims than others in India. Obviously, it is more common for Muslims versus others in the North, but that doesn't address why the practice is overwhelmingly higher in the South. 2C) Judaism: W. Stieda found that there were 23.02 per cent per thousand consanguineous marriages among the Jews of Alsace-Lorraine as compared with 8.97 among Catholics and 1.86 among Protestants ("Die Eheschliessungen in Elsass-Lorhringen," 1872-76, Dorpat, 1878). It would therefore appear that the proportion of first-cousin marriages among Jews is about three times greater than among the non-Jewish population. Judaism is a unique example as it virtually combines race and religion. As Israel (as well as the USA and Australia which come to mind) are less likely to have this going on because the people of those country came from completely different places and haven't been rooted in one single territory for thousands and thousands of years. An example to contrast: Palestine will undoubtedly see a sharp drop in this practice due to the dispersed nature of its population. 3) The reason is that those people see different sides of the conversation, unlike yourself unfortunately. For example, they take this article into consideration. Additionally, they do more sensible and intelligent things like: all states in the Persian Gulf currently require advance genetic screening for all prospective married couples. So I see their point when they decide that they will accept a potential 7-8% mitigated through genetic testing versus 5% untested, especially since those marriages appear to everyone who has seen them to be far more stable. Despite this, I'm glad to see the practice IS declining everyday. This is precisely why I don't see what your problem is with this thing. It is declining in popularity at the same rate that it declined in popularity elsewhere in the world. For example, your link estimates around 60% among Emarati families (which, anyone living here can see is baloney) in 1990 engage in this practice. I'd be surprised if it were higher than 20% today (based on your figure) and think it's far more likely to be around 10%. It's dissapearing. 4) I can see that you would like to see it that way. However, this practice pre-dates Islam in the Middle East. Nothing in Islam encourages this. This practice would continue to exist in the Persian Gulf region had Islam never come to them. Furthermore, Islam does not BAN it. But that doesn't necessarily mean Muslims can't stop doing this based on scientific evidence. In fact, I am a Muslim and I have decided that I won't do this based on the scientific evidence behind it and no Sharia scholar can compel me or encourage me to do it, nor can he/she show that I am doing something forbidden. There is overwhelming evidence that you are wrong as well. - The G.H. Darwin method for studying consanguity starts by estimated how many marriages are betweeen people with the same surname and then goes onto picking an appropriate percentage of those marriages which are consanguinous. This region contains an OVERWHELMING number of people with the same surname who have absolutely NO relation to each other whatsoever. Take, for example, Muhammad. That's the most common name in the world and is used as a surname as well. Abdullah. Ibrahim. Al Alawi. Also consider that.. - There are people with the same surname in the same city who are part of the same tribe who have no relation to each other. Reason being, tribes would take orphans and lost children into the tribe and raise them. Generations later, no one would even know this happened. This is EXTREMELY common in the Persian Gulf region. - The Arabic Culture Leech has been tacked onto Islam in Pakistan and you can see it everyday. There is absolutely no difference between Pakistani Islam and Saudi Arabian Salafi Islam - they are both infested with Pre-Islamic Arab Culture. It is absolutely no surprise and completely insignificant that Pakistan and Saudi Arabia share this trait. - Why is this trend not as prevalent among American muslims? German muslims? French muslims? Because their Islam is clean. I'll agree with you on one thing. The oppressive interpretation of Islam is causing issues in these countries. However, the oppressive influence is Arab culture and not Islam. Since I've responded to your request as best I could, I'd very much appreciate if you'd back up your accusations towards Islam with sources going forward. It's not diffucult at all to find Quraan, Hadith, Tafseer, or Fatwas online and in English. Thanks.
So is this what it's come to, Mathloom? Word manipulation? One liners from wikipedia based on 19th century "descriptions" by the British as your sources? If you think you can play dodgy and get away with it, you've come across the wrong guy. Because I am Clutchfans' Black Mamba. ... and do we have any links on who the 3 to 10% minority populations are marrying? Source 44 is from a report written by WH Rivers in 1907 (the e-book is on google, a mere 465 pages) when the caste system was much more prevalent in India, and families feared losing status by marrying outside of the caste. Again, this was severely reduced during the British rule and the class system is much more diluted today. It was the introduction of an outside force into India that caused this change, an outside force of reason and logic that hasn't been able to penetrate Pakistan and the Persian Gulf. See above. That study is from a small region next to Germany, a nation where Jews don't exactly have a great track record? Ala, a perfect place for statistics to be skewed. From your link, a better example would have been the occurrence of cousin marriage between Jews in England, where the rate is 7.5%. Far less than the Pakistani contingent. In America, Jews have been marrying more and more outside of the faith, as intermarriage rates have risen from 6% in 1950 to 50% in 2000 (same source, as well as wiki:American_Jews). Again, this is just the Jewish contingent adapting to modern times and not being rooted in extremist Zionist beliefs where they would be betraying their culture by marrying outside the family. From the same paragraph you cited the "advanced genetic screen": So it isn't decreasing. My theory is that parts of the Persian Gulf have the funds to implement these policies and inform the public because they have unlimited funding from black gold. But that outdated thought process is still the reason they feel it necessary to marry cousins, to keep the wealth in the family and not lose status by marrying someone of another ilk. It is only NOW that the Persian Gulf has started advanced genetic screening after accepting they had an abnormally high rate of genetic disorders. You think half of Pakistan and other Islamic nations can afford to do that? Fair enough. My thoughts are that Islam doesn't encourage having sex with your cousins, but it makes it very difficult for it's followers to adapt to modern times. Unless have they have had a phenomenal education like yourself growing up, they aren't going to be able to see things for what they really are... and are likely targets to be brainwashed by an oppressive culture that is associated in regions with high concentrations of Muslims. That probably came off as racist, but we can't fear speaking our minds so we can be politically correct, and let the citizens of the world continue to suffer. ***Busy, will respond to the rest of your post in the next 24 hours.***
Any logical person can see you have an agenda. So you read a story about Danish Minhas and the "fact" (LOL) that Pakistan is a failed state made you think about this subject. Ya right haha... No matter how compelling you think your own arguments are, you didn't come here to debate. You came here to troll. If it makes you feel better and helps you sleep, then go ahead and tell yourself that your here to challenge the mindset of Americans to think outside their comfort zone. Good luck on your quest to "teach" everyone how Pakistan...well...just plain sucks hehe. Typical response from our very own Clutchfan's version of The Fat b*stard. Thinks "Uhhhh I just said something stupid" and basically brushes off all valid counterpoints to his so-called argument as "well that's just what I think" or, how it was in this case, "ZOMG Why so serious?". But it's ok, DaDakota won't take this harshly as he isn't sooo sensitive like the rest of us.
Ronny, I suggest you save your time as I understand your side of the coin now. I don't think you're here to discuss as much as you're here to state your point repeatedly. Since the validity of my/your point seems to have no chance of being discussed, I have to say I really don't have much else to say on this. I'll give you a quick run down of my final thoughts if you're interested: - Genetic screening has been around for a long time. Qatar has implemented it late. This is because Qatar is lagging in development to Dubai and Saudi. Even before this became mandatory for everyone, it was common practice for a short while. - You're willing to believe that 60% of Emaratis are marrying their cousins, but require statistics to show if the same figure for Jordan/Iraq/Egypt applies to non-Muslims in the country? Your link provides figures for the country, and unless otherwise stated, the sample they used should be representative of the population. It would be nice to have a statistic for every minor thought you have, but in the absence of statistics, I ask you to just ask a Jordanian/Iraqi/Egyptian rather than using the unknown as a part of your argument. You and I both know you will not find a single person who will tell you that the figure doesn't apply to non-Muslims in those countries. Let me know if you do. Honestly, this kind of implied that you may have an agenda where you require a gold standard for anything which counters your argument, but no standard at all for supporting your argument. - I'm not particularly well educated for someone in the Persian Gulf, nor do I have access to any kind of resources that anyone else has. Nor do I expect that anyone would consider my position to be 'wrong'. You will find that the popular position here is "it's their choice". You say you're concerned about the people suffering, but your concern is invisible in your arguments. This practice is shrinking in popularity everyday, much like it did in every other developing society in the past. There is nothing unique about the situation here. The countries you mention are/were 3rd world up until very recently, and are shunning this practice at the same phase of their growth as everyone else did. If you have an issue with Islamic extremists, then let's discuss Islamic extremists. In reality, their popularity is declining as well. Also, their views don't represent the views of the Muslim world because, much like everything else in the Muslim world, they have not attained their position in a democratic way. It is wrong of you to hold Muslims responsible for the actions of someone who they don't support and did not put in place. Let me show you something: That's 14 years, and the new picture would look even more different today (metro, tallest building, business bay). The rate at which Muslims are adjusting to rapid development puts the rest of the world to shame IMO. There will obviously be more difficulty with more growth, but you must understand the dynamics of this region. It was an empty desert and now it is the most liquid region in the world. Throw in a bunch of invasions, runaway terrorists and evil dictators. All of this over roughly 20 years. Pakistan will follow as soon as the US stops lining the pockets of those who would rather use Osama's life for blackmail than justice. The pattern is simple: there is a downward trend, identical and probably steeper than that of any other place historically speaking. Dude, I have literally 30+ FEMALE cousins or second cousins in Dubai despite the fact that I lived in Turkey and have 20+ cousins or second cousins in Turkey as well. I am only half Emarati. There are less than 500k Emaratis in Dubai. I have 30 in half a million. How many cousins per million of population do you have? Do you know my number is considered average? Do you know that there are millions of people who share my family name in the Persian Gulf? Do you know that my father did not own or commonly see a mobile phone, computer or car till he was in his 40's? That he didn't speak English and that his father ate lizards as a snack? What the heck does Islam have to do with this? Though I see that in remote situations (small villages in Saudi Arabia) you do have a point, you are overstating that point dramatically and drawing a conclusion based on that overstatement. As is, the Persian Gulf + Pakistan overall are moving away from this practice at a more than acceptable rate, despite the impediments (extremists, poor education, poverty) in place. That's the bottom line, and I can see that you're beginning to see that as well as your argument shifted from "Islam causes this problem" to "Islam does not actively attempt to solve this problem". But again, that shows a misunderstanding of Islam because the Quran does not adjust for its environment and it never will. In this case, the absence of a prohibition means that it is for us to decide what is appropriate and what is not. I'm curious as to who you think should push the agenda of minimizing this practice?
There is no debate when I am right.... Ignorance is not knowing any better, some of the people doing this are IGNORANT of the genetic issues behind the dangers of marrying a cousin. If you think that marrying your cousin is not risky genetically, then....well.....Ignorance is bliss. Watch out for the 3rd eye nipples though..... DD
I still don't see the difference between that and how people eat unhealthy knowing that they could become obese or have a chance at health problems, and how people smoke even though they know it screws up their lungs. They know it harms then but they continue to do it. Thats ignorance as well. Hell, there's probably a higher probability of suffering the negative effects of eating unhealthy or smoking than your kid that you brought into this world with your cousin will be abnormal.
The difference is that those people are hurting only themselves and not some innocent child by giving them a deformity due to negligent ignorance. If you can't see the difference between people choosing something that can harm themselves versus something that can harm an innocent child then you are pretty ignorant yourself. Nice attempt, but try not to make a Jethro type of argument. Apples to apples people....avoid the ignorance. DD
You do know that the single biggest factor in childhood obesity is obese parents, right? And you really think people who screw themselves up are okay, as long as they're not giving birth to deformed kids? So single-parent families, families with stacks of hospital bills, and families with obese/smoker/alcoholics are good for kids to grow up in? Personally, I'm not really sure.
All those things listed (eating unhealthy, smoking, etc) can harm an innocent newborn child more than the 1-1.7% deformity rate in cousin marriages. If you can't see there is no difference in these types of ignorance, then you are pretty ignorant yourself.
Coming from you that means....well nothing ! LOL - all you want to do is come in and make personal insults.....keep on trucking kid ! As for the argument it is not relevant to the discussion in here about the genetic risks inherent in marrying a relative. So, I know a lot of you want to find a way in which it will help you cope with the facts of the dangers involved by making you feel more comfortable because well...other people have fat kids....it ain't happening. So, go ahead, marry your cousin, weaken your line.....have that 3rd eyed nipple..... It is your choice.....of course......the r****ded, 3rd eyed nipple kid....that is actually going to suffer his whole life never got asked about it, now did he/she? Oh, and while I think Ronny is a loon in many of his thoughts in this thread he has flat out PWNED.......the Middle Eastern apologists. Well done Ronny. DD
I am a Pakistani Muslim. I will give my perspective. There is nothing wrong with marrying your cousin. And also whatever tiny increase of getting a genetic disorder is heavily outweighed by the benefits. IMO, the stigma of marrying cousins among Americans is mostly a cultural one.
This is a 2009 article from Pubmed. Link: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2765422/?tool=pmcentrez "Another estimate puts the offspring of first cousin unions at a 1.7-2.8% increased risk for congenital defects above the population background risk" 1.7-2.8%? Not anywhere even close to as bad as you made it out to be....
