Why are some people fine with gay marriages but find cousin marriages disgusting?

[Mian]

Isn't it hypocrisy? They are happy to accept same gender marriages and fully support to legalize them but find cousin marriage disgusting and compare it with incest.

Why all this hate?

(I know what medical says about cousin marriages but i am talking about the general view here specially in west about cousin marriages)

 

[Enigma_]

Two homosexual men cannot conceive a child. Whereas cousins can. It is medically proven that cousin marriages increase the chances of a genetic disease compared to marriages outside of the bloodline. By most people's definiton, cousin marriages are as close to as actual incest you can get and frankly it is disgusting and you give your child an increased chance of having a miserable life. What is so hard to understand about this concept?

 

[Black Zero]

Two homosexual men cannot conceive a child. Whereas cousins can. It is medically proven that cousin marriages increase the chances of a genetic disease compared to marriages outside of the bloodline. By most people's definiton, cousin marriages are as close to as actual incest you can get and frankly it is disgusting and you give your child an increased chance of having a miserable life. What is so hard to understand about this concept?

"by most people's defination"

Most people are not bright anyway.

I feel pork/dog eating disgusting. ..but I cannot present my disgust as an argument against eating pork/dog.

Regarding genetic defects, there is couple of points difference. ...
People should avoid cousin marriage if this tradition is coming from generations and take proper medical guidance to know the odds of having unhealthy child.


Note: institution of marriage is outdated anyway.

 

[troodon]

2 Gays do not produce offspring.
Cousins (boy and girl) produce offspring.

 

[shaz619]

Two homosexual men cannot conceive a child. Whereas cousins can. It is medically proven that cousin marriages increase the chances of a genetic disease compared to marriages outside of the bloodline. By most people's definiton, cousin marriages are as close to as actual incest you can get and frankly it is disgusting and you give your child an increased chance of having a miserable life. What is so hard to understand about this concept?

Am not sure but [MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION] is a medical expert and he said that the genetic disease risks are limited to 1st cousin marriages only.

Yeah people should avoid 1st cousin marriages, the inbreeding is rampant in Bradford especially

 

[Leo23]

second cousin marriages are totally safe

 

[Heisenberg]

Isn't it hypocrisy? They are happy to accept same gender marriages and fully support to legalize them but find cousin marriage disgusting and compare it with incest.

Why all this hate?

(I know what medical says about cousin marriages but i am talking about the general view here specially in west about cousin marriages)

One is an example of two normal people deciding to spend their lives together.

The other is an example of two normal people deciding to spend their lives together and possibly having a child which may or may not be born with an incurable disease/disability.

Hard to say, really. Pure hypocrisy as you say.

 

[TM Riddle]

I find 2nd cousin marriages absolutely fine.

 

[TM Riddle]

1st cousin marriage is incest no matter how hard you try to twist that. And a bit disgusting as well when you think about it.

 

[Third_Umpire]

How are these even comparable?

One is a decision to marry between two consenting adults (who's gender should be irrelevant), the other is a decision to marry between two consenting adults with a high likelihood of producing offspring with demonstrable biological defects. Not to say anything about strange, deviant social implications of this....you grow up looking at someone as a brother/sister, then all of a sudden enter into the most intimate of relationships with them?

 

[Leo23]

How are these even comparable?

One is a decision to marry between two consenting adults (who's gender should be irrelevant), the other is a decision to marry between two consenting adults with a high likelihood of producing offspring with demonstrable biological defects. Not to say anything about strange, deviant social implications of this....you grow up looking at someone as a brother/sister, then all of a sudden enter into the most intimate of relationships with them?

what about the strange, deviant social implications of growing up with two fathers and two mothers when everyone else in your society has a mother and a father? imagine dealing with society as a child of a gay couple

completely unnecessary pressure on a child because two people were wired the wrong way

 

[PetroDollars]

About children,

You maybe give birth to child who will have disabilities, but i think a child being adopted by gays is even worse, imagine growing up with daddy and daddy.

Its hypocrisy to call cousin marriages disgusting and not same gender marrages.

 

[Third_Umpire]

[/b]

what about the strange, deviant social implications of growing up with two fathers and two mothers when everyone else in your society has a mother and a father? imagine dealing with society as a child of a gay couple

completely unnecessary pressure on a child because two people were wired the wrong way

It is uncommon yes, and carries it's own set of stigmas to deal with, and should be carefully thought of by same sex couples if they have the right circumstances to parent a child. That said, nothing about this is deviant.

But this debate may be lost on you, given your belief in a right/wrong way to be wired...

 

[Third_Umpire]

Care to explain how and why?

Is it really worse to have two fathers than to have down's syndrome?

 

[Obeid]

Am not sure but [MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION] is a medical expert and he said that the genetic disease risks are limited to 1st cousin marriages only.

Yeah people should avoid 1st cousin marriages, the inbreeding is rampant in Bradford especially

Not quite. Risk of genetic disease is greater the more closely related a couple is. Yes there is only a slight increased risk with second cousin marriages but it is still greater than marrying someone not closely related. The closer the biological relationship is between parents, the greater number of genes shared, and the greater the chance to have a child with birth defects.

To clarify, second cousins are predicted to share 3.1% (1/32) of their genes. 3.1% is not an insignificant number and genetic counseling is highly recommended in such cases. First cousins on the other hand are predicted to share 12.5 % (1/8) of their genes, thus making the likelihood of offspring having genetic disease much higher, especially in high risk communities. This is why certain diseases are more prevalent in close knit communities that generally marry within the community (for example higher prevalence of Tay-Sachs disease in Ashkenazi jews).

A lot of genetic diseases are quite harrowing which is why I would never marry a relative (on top of family politics, and similar **). For me personally, 3.5% is too high a risk to take when taking children into consideration. Although there are no KNOWN genetic diseases within my family alhamdulillah, the chance of a hidden disease appearing is there.

 

[troodon]

[/b]

what about the strange, deviant social implications of growing up with two fathers and two mothers when everyone else in your society has a mother and a father? imagine dealing with society as a child of a gay couple

completely unnecessary pressure on a child because two people were wired the wrong way

Things are changing.

What you think deviant may be normal soon.

Also, the kids of gay couple are perfectly normal. It is accepted in West at least. Rest of the world needs to catch up.

Asian and African countries would be better off if a big chunk of their population become gay. One way of reducing population.

 

[shaz619]

Not quite. Risk of genetic disease is greater the more closely related a couple is. Yes there is only a slight increased risk with second cousin marriages but it is still greater than marrying someone not closely related. The closer the biological relationship is between parents, the greater number of genes shared, and the greater the chance to have a child with birth defects.

To clarify, second cousins are predicted to share 3.1% (1/32) of their genes. 3.1% is not an insignificant number and genetic counseling is highly recommended in such cases. First cousins on the other hand are predicted to share 12.5 % (1/8) of their genes, thus making the likelihood of offspring having genetic disease much higher, especially in high risk communities. This is why certain diseases are more prevalent in close knit communities that generally marry within the community (for example higher prevalence of Tay-Sachs disease in Ashkenazi jews).

A lot of genetic diseases are quite harrowing which is why I would never marry a relative (on top of family politics, and similar **). For me personally, 3.5% is too high a risk to take when taking children into consideration. Although there are no KNOWN genetic diseases within my family alhamdulillah, the chance of a hidden disease appearing is there.

POTW

I agree with you, better not to take the risk lads 3.1% is still significant especially when 12.5% is enough to cause some serious damage going by your post. Very insightful btw, are you a doctor ?

Always had assumed second cousins and beyond were generally ok but there's always a risk isn't there regardless, there is one case in my family but I need to ask my mom how close the couple are related to each other but from what I gather think their parents were family friends and that's how they met I think, will need to confirm that one

 

[Obeid]

Care to explain how and why?

Is it really worse to have two fathers than to have down's syndrome?

Although some studies have shown cousin marriages to have a slightly higher incidence of Down Syndrome, it is not due to a specific trait passed on. Generally, it is a natural error that occurs when sperm/eggs are produced. Down syndrome is caused by an individual having an extra copy of chromosome 21 which is a random event. The parents are genetically NORMAL. With that being said, the higher incidence (small) in close relatives MAYBE due to relatives having a higher rate of making this trisomy 21 mistake. Down syndrome that is "inherited" is extremely rare.
But I get it. The point you are trying to make is valid. Why take the risk of having a child with a painful/deadly genetic disease where the quality of life of not just the child, but family is hindered? Best to be safe.

 

[Slog]

Not quite. Risk of genetic disease is greater the more closely related a couple is. Yes there is only a slight increased risk with second cousin marriages but it is still greater than marrying someone not closely related. The closer the biological relationship is between parents, the greater number of genes shared, and the greater the chance to have a child with birth defects.

To clarify, second cousins are predicted to share 3.1% (1/32) of their genes. 3.1% is not an insignificant number and genetic counseling is highly recommended in such cases. First cousins on the other hand are predicted to share 12.5 % (1/8) of their genes, thus making the likelihood of offspring having genetic disease much higher, especially in high risk communities. This is why certain diseases are more prevalent in close knit communities that generally marry within the community (for example higher prevalence of Tay-Sachs disease in Ashkenazi jews).

A lot of genetic diseases are quite harrowing which is why I would never marry a relative (on top of family politics, and similar **). For me personally, 3.5% is too high a risk to take when taking children into consideration. Although there are no KNOWN genetic diseases within my family alhamdulillah, the chance of a hidden disease appearing is there.

Yes this.

Disease doesnt always mean something physically apparent.

It could be anything. Maybe even small and insignificant but why go through that?

 

[Slog]

well at the end of the day its also in Allah's hands

You could have no relation to your wife and you might have a kid with a genetic disease and you could be 1st cousins and your kids could be totally fine

 

[shaz619]

well at the end of the day its also in Allah's hands

You could have no relation to your wife and you might have a kid with a genetic disease and you could be 1st cousins and your kids could be totally fine

That's a good point, because a far cousin of mine has a serious disability; I don't know what to call it but he has the body of a grown adult in their 20's which is his age but is still young / not developed in other areas and entirely dependent on his family who look after him. It's really sad and depressing, whenever I visit him he doesn't let me leave. From what I know don't think his mom and dad are cousins. So there are a lot of factors that must come into this.

 

[Obeid]

POTW

I agree with you, better not to take the risk lads 3.1% is still significant especially when 12.5% is enough to cause some serious damage going by your post. Very insightful btw, are you a doctor ?

Always had assumed second cousins and beyond were generally ok but there's always a risk isn't there regardless, there is one case in my family but I need to ask my mom how close the couple are related to each other but from what I gather think their parents were family friends and that's how they met I think, will need to confirm that one

The 3.1% number I threw out there is not the chance of second marriages having a child with genetic disease. It is simply the percentage of genes shared. If there is no known history of genetic disease in the family, the likelihood of a child having a genetic disease is very low and so such a relationship would be safe for the most part. Even more so if the history of consanguinity (blood relations) within the family is minimal.With that being said, it is important to note the genes shared with a couple could be more than 3.1 % the greater the degree and history of blood relations in the family tree. Genetics is a very difficult topic to discuss and there are a lot of variables at hand. I am no expert on it but would love to delve into it more when I start medical school next year iA.

 

[Obeid]

That's a good point, because a far cousin of mine has a serious disability; I don't know what to call it but he has the body of a grown adult in their 20's which is his age but is still young / not developed in other areas and entirely dependent on his family who look after him. It's really sad and depressing, whenever I visit him he doesn't let me leave. From what I know don't think his mom and dad are cousins. So there are a lot of factors that must come into this.

Without knowing what the disease it, one can't deduce whether it is genetically passed on from the parents. For instance, Down syndrome which I described above is caused by an error in cell division. Normal parents can have children with Down syndrome. Also, sorry to hear about your cousin.

 

[James]

I think both are ok.

 

[Abdul]

They are equally disgusting.

 

[Abdul]

Cousin marriages are for hopeless people with zero game.

 

[Snak3eye5]

I've heard it's common among Hindus and predominantly Kerala Hindus ? I've heard from a friend who said he married his second cousin and he was told ever since he was a kid by his parents that he would marry his cousin once they were older and done with college and seems it's quite common. No birth defects among children from what I know. It's also to keep all the ancestral wealth within the family is what I was told.

 

[Justcrazy]

I think only atheists are okay with gay marriages. I do not think any religion is with this kind of marriages.

 

[mani1]

Am not sure but [MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION] is a medical expert and he said that the genetic disease risks are limited to 1st cousin marriages only.

Yeah people should avoid 1st cousin marriages, the inbreeding is rampant in Bradford especially

Actually

The figures show that up to 20 per cent of the children treated for congenital problems in cities such as Sheffield, Glasgow and Birmingham are of Pakistani descent, a figure significantly greater than the background populations, which can be four per cent or lower.

Bradford's Pakistani population is 20% as per 2011

In Glasgow, the proportion is about 18 per cent, even though Pakistanis account for 3.8 per cent of the local population.

Dramatic as this picture is, the true overall figures could be higher still, as our data does not include statistics from London’s Great Ormond Street, which deals with some of the most complex cases.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-tackles-ethnic-taboo-costs-NHS-millions.html

London borough finds one in five child deaths caused by parents being related
Children of consanguineous couples accounted for 19 per cent of child death cases in Redbridge between 2008 and 2016, report shows

Half of child deaths reviewed were among children of Asian ethnicities, with the highest numbers of deaths (18 per cent) within this category among children of Pakistani ethnicity.

There were no deaths among White Irish or Mixed White and Black African ethnicities, and only 1 per cent among the Arab, Asian, Chinese and any other ethnic group.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...kistani-families-council-report-a7741146.html

 

[Gayle_Force]

I don't understand how some people can support cousin marriages with all the information available out there.

 

[sjahmed23]

Intriguing question, if you ask me, I would say I am against both.

I guess being a conservative society that Pakistan is, people are afraid of taking risks, hence why marrying cousins is so common. I think in most cases offspring turns out to be just fine.

However, it is appalling to see some Pakistani men putting no effort to improve their life/lacking motivation because they know that they have phuppo ki beti waiting in pind.

 

[saadibaba]

Is there any law in western countries preventing 1st cousin marriages, just curious?

What if one falls in love with their 1st cousin, then what ? Not that I am married to my 1st cousin but I know some people who are and unless there is a law stating that one cannot marry their 1st cousin, I don't see the point of getting so outraged about it.

The cousins who are getting married should know the risks of having genetic disease in their child, but if they are fine with taking that risk than who are we to object to that. People get married to others with long term illnesses and disease which are sometime genetic as well like Type 1 diabetes and no one objects to them.

If the health of future generation is being taken as the utmost priority than everyone should get a complete physical exam with genetic testing before deciding to tie the knot as most people won't even know what diseases they are carrying and what they might end up passing to their kids.

 

[Badsha]

Cousin marriages are sort of odd. To be honest, I do find gay marriage kind of gross but I support their right to get married. If two people want to be gross with each other what right do I have to stop them?

 

[Haripotter]

Few years ago I got to know that one of my uncle and Aunt were actually cousins before they got married back in 90s.
Now they have a 23 years old perfectly healthy son who is also working as an engineer .

So all this unhealthy child explanations can be just speculations

 

[kingusama92]

Few years ago I got to know that one of my uncle and Aunt were actually cousins before they got married back in 90s.
Now they have a 23 years old perfectly healthy son who is also working as an engineer .

So all this unhealthy child explanations can be just speculations

The risk is increased not guaranteed.

Kind of like HIV/AIDS. Going unprotected doesn't mean you're guaranteed to contract HIV but you do increase your chances significantly.

 

[Napa]

Two of the greatest scientists ever, Darwin and Einstein married their first cousins.

The risk of genetic diseases is more pronounced if the partners are from small endogamous communities. For others, the risk is not that great from marrying cousins.

 

[Napa]

Few years ago I got to know that one of my uncle and Aunt were actually cousins before they got married back in 90s.
Now they have a 23 years old perfectly healthy son who is also working as an engineer .

So all this unhealthy child explanations can be just speculations

My uncle married his first cousin, produced 4 healthy daughters who in turn produced 7 healthy grandchildren. The risk of genetic diseases in small in communities that are not small and endogamous.

 

[WebGuru]

My grandparents were 1st cousins, My father and mother are first cousins and Alhamdulillah all my brother sisters uncles aunts and their children are normal. I also personally know 2 sisters who got married outside their relatives and still all their children had different mental and physical diseases. So in my personal opinion it can happen in and outside relatives.

 

[shaz619]

Actually

The figures show that up to 20 per cent of the children treated for congenital problems in cities such as Sheffield, Glasgow and Birmingham are of Pakistani descent, a figure significantly greater than the background populations, which can be four per cent or lower.

Bradford's Pakistani population is 20% as per 2011

In Glasgow, the proportion is about 18 per cent, even though Pakistanis account for 3.8 per cent of the local population.

Dramatic as this picture is, the true overall figures could be higher still, as our data does not include statistics from London’s Great Ormond Street, which deals with some of the most complex cases.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-tackles-ethnic-taboo-costs-NHS-millions.html

London borough finds one in five child deaths caused by parents being related
Children of consanguineous couples accounted for 19 per cent of child death cases in Redbridge between 2008 and 2016, report shows

Half of child deaths reviewed were among children of Asian ethnicities, with the highest numbers of deaths (18 per cent) within this category among children of Pakistani ethnicity.

There were no deaths among White Irish or Mixed White and Black African ethnicities, and only 1 per cent among the Arab, Asian, Chinese and any other ethnic group.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...kistani-families-council-report-a7741146.html

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-23183102

The number of babies born with birth defects in Bradford is nearly double the national average, research conducted in the city has shown.

The study's authors said it was the largest of its kind ever conducted and the first to include significant numbers of people in both consanguineous and non-consanguineous groups.

 

[mani1]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-23183102

The number of babies born with birth defects in Bradford is nearly double the national average, research conducted in the city has shown.

The study's authors said it was the largest of its kind ever conducted and the first to include significant numbers of people in both consanguineous and non-consanguineous groups.

Not really relevant to compare when no study's have been conducted in Glasgow, Birmingham, Ilford, etc. The Country is nearly 90% White British so of course the figure is going to be more than the average

What we do know is


The figures show that up to 20 per cent of the children treated for congenital problems in cities such as Sheffield, Glasgow and Birmingham are of Pakistani descent, a figure significantly greater than the background populations, which can be four per cent or lower.

Bradford's Pakistani population is 20% as per 2011


In Glasgow, the proportion is about 18 per cent, even though Pakistanis account for 3.8 per cent of the local population.

So in Bradford if inbreeding was any where as rampant as places like Glasgow, Ilford, Birmingham the proportion would have to be nearly 100%.

Hence why the daily mail mentions Bradford but conveniently leaves it out when mentioning City's most prevalent in inbreeding.

 

[DW44]

Few years ago I got to know that one of my uncle and Aunt were actually cousins before they got married back in 90s.
Now they have a 23 years old perfectly healthy son who is also working as an engineer .

So all this unhealthy child explanations can be just speculations

Do they not teach statistics, especially basic probability, in Indian schools?

On topic, there's no equivalence between homosexuality and incest, which is what cousin marriages are. One has the potential to ruin an uninvolved party's life. The other is strictly between two adults with very few, if any, implications for anyone other than said adults. The arguments against incest are scientific in nature and therefore supported by fairly established science. The arguments against homosexuality, on the other hand, are religious and therefore based on a moral code many rightly consider outdated and seriously flawed. Those who follow it are disgusted by homosexuality but they have zero rational basis to justify their stance beyond 'RNGesus said so'.

 

[Yossarian]

2 Gays do not produce offspring.
Cousins (boy and girl) produce offspring.

That's fine, as long as they then don't go around looking for surrogate mothers to produce offspring with.

Unless of course you're saying that it's perfectly ok for the child to be born to a surrogate mother (sometimes for direct cash payment), and then have the child forcibly removed from the child's mother just so that two men can play at being happy families, all the while depriving the child from any contact, sometimes even any knowledge, of the mother who gave birth to the child

Note: This decision is taken before the children is even conceived. And no way should be equated to a mother giving away her child because she is unable to look after the child for various reasons.

 

[shaz619]

Not really relevant to compare when no study's have been conducted in Glasgow, Birmingham, Ilford, etc. The Country is nearly 90% White British so of course the figure is going to be more than the average

What we do know is


The figures show that up to 20 per cent of the children treated for congenital problems in cities such as Sheffield, Glasgow and Birmingham are of Pakistani descent, a figure significantly greater than the background populations, which can be four per cent or lower.

Bradford's Pakistani population is 20% as per 2011


In Glasgow, the proportion is about 18 per cent, even though Pakistanis account for 3.8 per cent of the local population.

So in Bradford if inbreeding was any where as rampant as places like Glasgow, Ilford, Birmingham the proportion would have to be nearly 100%.

Hence why the daily mail mentions Bradford but conveniently leaves it out when mentioning City's most prevalent in inbreeding.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-23183102

The number of babies born with birth defects in Bradford is nearly double the national average, research conducted in the city has shown.

The study found this was largely because of marriages between first cousins in the Pakistani community.

http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co....rth_defect_rate_being_twice_national_average/

Parents who are blood relatives and older mums are the two main causes for Bradford’s birth defect rate being twice the national average, according to new research.

Bradford is the capital of inbreeding in the UK, big big problem

 

[mani1]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-23183102

The number of babies born with birth defects in Bradford is nearly double the national average, research conducted in the city has shown.

The study found this was largely because of marriages between first cousins in the Pakistani community.

http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co....rth_defect_rate_being_twice_national_average/

Parents who are blood relatives and older mums are the two main causes for Bradford’s birth defect rate being twice the national average, according to new research.

Bradford is the capital of inbreeding in the UK, big big problem

Hahahaha actually it is Sheffield, Glasgow, Ilford Manchester

 

[miandadrules]

Isn't it hypocrisy? They are happy to accept same gender marriages and fully support to legalize them but find cousin marriage disgusting and compare it with incest.

Why all this hate?

(I know what medical says about cousin marriages but i am talking about the general view here specially in west about cousin marriages)

What do you mean general view separate from the medical one?

 

[miandadrules]

second cousin marriages are totally safe

Any supporting evidence?

 

[shaz619]

Hahahaha actually it is Sheffield, Glasgow, Ilford Manchester

The consensus suggests otherwise though

http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co...._killer_of_children_in_the_Bradford_district/

THE sheer scale of Bradford's birth defect problem has been laid bare in a new report on child deaths.

When people think of inbreeding in the UK those cities don't come to mind, it's always been Bradford

 

[miandadrules]

[/b]

what about the strange, deviant social implications of growing up with two fathers and two mothers when everyone else in your society has a mother and a father? imagine dealing with society as a child of a gay couple

completely unnecessary pressure on a child because two people were wired the wrong way

Can you elaborate on the social implications and these pressures you speak of?

 

[miandadrules]

My grandparents were 1st cousins, My father and mother are first cousins and Alhamdulillah all my brother sisters uncles aunts and their children are normal. I also personally know 2 sisters who got married outside their relatives and still all their children had different mental and physical diseases. So in my personal opinion it can happen in and outside relatives.

If you knew someone who regularly drove drunk without incident would you encourage others to do so?

Would you also encourage them to have their child in the car with them whilst they are behind the wheel when under the influence? I mean children die in road traffic accidents more often with people not drunk than drunk.

I mean according to your logic it can happen either way.

 

[mani1]

The consensus suggests otherwise though

http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co...._killer_of_children_in_the_Bradford_district/

THE sheer scale of Bradford's birth defect problem has been laid bare in a new report on child deaths.

When people think of inbreeding in the UK those cities don't come to mind, it's always been Bradford

I don't really care what comes to mind only facts.

The figures show that up to 20 per cent of the children treated for congenital problems in cities such as Sheffield, Glasgow and Birmingham are of Pakistani descent, a figure significantly greater than the background populations, which can be four per cent or lower.


In Glasgow, the proportion is about 18 per cent, even though Pakistanis account for 3.8 per cent of the local population.


Dramatic as this picture is, the true overall figures could be higher still, as our data does not include statistics from London’s Great Ormond Street, which deals with some of the most complex cases.


London borough finds one in five child deaths caused by parents being related
Children of consanguineous couples accounted for 19 per cent of child death cases in Redbridge between 2008 and 2016, report shows

Half of child deaths reviewed were among children of Asian ethnicities, with the highest numbers of deaths (18 per cent) within this category among children of Pakistani ethnicity.

There were no deaths among White Irish or Mixed White and Black African ethnicities, and only 1 per cent among the Arab, Asian, Chinese and any other ethnic group.

 

[shaz619]

I don't really care what comes to mind only facts.

The figures show that up to 20 per cent of the children treated for congenital problems in cities such as Sheffield, Glasgow and Birmingham are of Pakistani descent, a figure significantly greater than the background populations, which can be four per cent or lower.


In Glasgow, the proportion is about 18 per cent, even though Pakistanis account for 3.8 per cent of the local population.


Dramatic as this picture is, the true overall figures could be higher still, as our data does not include statistics from London’s Great Ormond Street, which deals with some of the most complex cases.


London borough finds one in five child deaths caused by parents being related
Children of consanguineous couples accounted for 19 per cent of child death cases in Redbridge between 2008 and 2016, report shows

Half of child deaths reviewed were among children of Asian ethnicities, with the highest numbers of deaths (18 per cent) within this category among children of Pakistani ethnicity.

There were no deaths among White Irish or Mixed White and Black African ethnicities, and only 1 per cent among the Arab, Asian, Chinese and any other ethnic group.

Like I said:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-23183102

The number of babies born with birth defects in Bradford is nearly double the national average, research conducted in the city has shown.

The study found this was largely because of marriages between first cousins in the Pakistani community.

http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.u...ional_average/

Parents who are blood relatives and older mums are the two main causes for Bradford’s birth defect rate being twice the national average, according to new research.

Bradford is the capital of inbreeding in the UK and those sources have provided the real facts, the inbreeding in Bradford is DOUBLE THE NATIONAL SURVEY ! that's why Bradford is synonymous with inbreeding

 

[mani1]

Like I said:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-23183102

The number of babies born with birth defects in Bradford is nearly double the national average, research conducted in the city has shown.

The study found this was largely because of marriages between first cousins in the Pakistani community.

http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.u...ional_average/

Parents who are blood relatives and older mums are the two main causes for Bradford’s birth defect rate being twice the national average, according to new research.

Bradford is the capital of inbreeding in the UK and those sources have provided the real facts, the inbreeding in Bradford is DOUBLE THE NATIONAL SURVEY ! that's why Bradford is synonymous with inbreeding

OK what is the average for Glasgow? Birmingham Sheffield? Ilford?

Older mums have nothing to do with cousin marriage as they are mostly white British. So your own figures are heavily skewed lol

 

[mani1]

@ Shaz whats your view on

Older mums have nothing to do with inbreeding below is inbreeding.

The figures show that up to 20 per cent of the children treated for congenital problems in cities such as Sheffield, Glasgow and Birmingham are of Pakistani descent, a figure significantly greater than the background populations, which can be four per cent or lower.

Bradford's Pakistani population is 20% as per 2011

In Glasgow, the proportion is about 18 per cent, even though Pakistanis account for 3.8 per cent of the local population.

Dramatic as this picture is, the true overall figures could be higher still, as our data does not include statistics from London’s Great Ormond Street, which deals with some of the most complex cases.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-millions.html

London borough finds one in five child deaths caused by parents being related
Children of consanguineous couples accounted for 19 per cent of child death cases in Redbridge between 2008 and 2016, report shows

Half of child deaths reviewed were among children of Asian ethnicities, with the highest numbers of deaths (18 per cent) within this category among children of Pakistani ethnicity.

 

[shaz619]

OK what is the average for Glasgow? Birmingham Sheffield? Ilford?

Older mums have nothing to do with cousin marriage as they are mostly white British. So your own figures are heavily skewed lol

@ Shaz whats your view on


The figures show that up to 20 per cent of the children treated for congenital problems in cities such as Sheffield, Glasgow and Birmingham are of Pakistani descent, a figure significantly greater than the background populations, which can be four per cent or lower.

Bradford's Pakistani population is 20% as per 2011

In Glasgow, the proportion is about 18 per cent, even though Pakistanis account for 3.8 per cent of the local population.

Dramatic as this picture is, the true overall figures could be higher still, as our data does not include statistics from London’s Great Ormond Street, which deals with some of the most complex cases.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-millions.html

London borough finds one in five child deaths caused by parents being related
Children of consanguineous couples accounted for 19 per cent of child death cases in Redbridge between 2008 and 2016, report shows

Half of child deaths reviewed were among children of Asian ethnicities, with the highest numbers of deaths (18 per cent) within this category among children of Pakistani ethnicity.

From the same daily mail source you were using:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-4703306/Why-inbreeding-really-deadly.html

"

Despite being highly controversial for its substantial links to defects, 55 per cent of British Pakistanis marry their first cousins.
In Bradford, which has a large Muslim population, it is as high as 70 per cent, figures suggest. This triggered leading geneticist Professor Steve Jones, of University College London, to call the town 'very inbred' six years ago.
Earlier this year, a documentary displayed the real-life dilemma many Pakistani girls living in Bradford face when it comes to marriage.
BBC Three's 'Should I Marry My Cousin' showed the tale of Hiba Maroof, who toyed between the idea of following family tradition and marry her cousin or tie the knot with a man of her own choice.

"

 

[miandadrules]

There isn't a moral equivalency between incest and homosexuality.

The only people that try to derive one are those that are mired in their own prejudice.

By all means marry your cousin but when you produce off-spring you are putting the health and quality of life at risk of someone who did not consent to be put in such danger, simply uphold your primitively cultural practices.

Homosexuality is between consenting adults who are putting no one else at risk.

One is about love whist the other is about disregarding the health implications of others just to appease your own desires.

One should actually understand what morality is before making blanket statements.

 

[mani1]

From the same daily mail source you were using:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-4703306/Why-inbreeding-really-deadly.html

"

Despite being highly controversial for its substantial links to defects, 55 per cent of British Pakistanis marry their first cousins.
In Bradford, which has a large Muslim population, it is as high as 70 per cent, figures suggest. This triggered leading geneticist Professor Steve Jones, of University College London, to call the town 'very inbred' six years ago.
Earlier this year, a documentary displayed the real-life dilemma many Pakistani girls living in Bradford face when it comes to marriage.
BBC Three's 'Should I Marry My Cousin' showed the tale of Hiba Maroof, who toyed between the idea of following family tradition and marry her cousin or tie the knot with a man of her own choice.

"

In Bradford, which has a large Muslim population, it is as high as 70 per cent yet

The figures show that up to 20 per cent of the children treated for congenital problems in cities such as Sheffield, Glasgow and Birmingham are of Pakistani descent, a figure significantly greater than the background populations, which can be four per cent or lower.

Why isn't Bradford on the list 20% is the Pakistani population and according to it 70% are involved in cousin marriage yet

In Glasgow, the proportion is about 18 per cent, even though Pakistanis account for 3.8 per cent of the local population.

The figures would have to be 100% in Bradford to match Glasgow with congenital problems.

 

[shaz619]

In Bradford, which has a large Muslim population, it is as high as 70 per cent yet

The figures show that up to 20 per cent of the children treated for congenital problems in cities such as Sheffield, Glasgow and Birmingham are of Pakistani descent, a figure significantly greater than the background populations, which can be four per cent or lower.

Why isn't Bradford on the list 20% is the Pakistani population and according to it 70% are involved in cousin marriage yet

In Glasgow, the proportion is about 18 per cent, even though Pakistanis account for 3.8 per cent of the local population.

The figures would have to be 100% in Bradford to match Glasgow with congenital problems.

I used your own source which contradicts your self proclaimed facts

"In Bradford, which has a large Muslim population, it is as high as 70 per cent "



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-4703306/Why-inbreeding-really-deadly.html

70% !!!!!!

And the previous sources have also indicated that inbreeding in Bradford is DOUBLE THE NATIONAL AVERAGE !

 

[Yossarian]

Can you elaborate on the social implications and these pressures you speak of?

How about joining in and having an indepth discussion on this topic in the other thread I've started? By extending the 'different faith/ethnicity' to include 2 men or 2 women as 'parents'.

"Foster care and adoption - by foster parents of a different faith/ethnicity to that of the child".

Read more at http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/s...city-to-that-of-the-child#hJwdKFthsJkYRUgT.99
http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/s...ifferent-faith-ethnicity-to-that-of-the-child

 

[miandadrules]

I guess inbreeding must be going on for many many more generations in plcaes like Glasgow, Birmingham,Sheffield Ilford

Does Bradford not have a problem with consanguinity?

 

[mani1]

I used your own source which contradicts your self proclaimed facts

"In Bradford, which has a large Muslim population, it is as high as 70 per cent "



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-4703306/Why-inbreeding-really-deadly.html

70% !!!!!!

And the previous sources have also indicated that inbreeding in Bradford is DOUBLE THE NATIONAL AVERAGE !

My facts were referring to children treated for congenital problems. now you haven't posted any facts showing the % of inbreeding in places like Glasgow or Birmingham.

And the previous sources have also indicated that inbreeding in Bradford is DOUBLE THE NATIONAL AVERAGE !

no they have not as Parents who are blood relatives and older mums are the two main causes for Bradford’s birth defect rate being twice the national average, according to new research.

 

[shaz619]

My facts were referring to children treated for congenital problems. now you haven't posted any facts showing the % of inbreeding in places like Glasgow or Birmingham.

And the previous sources have also indicated that inbreeding in Bradford is DOUBLE THE NATIONAL AVERAGE !

no they have not as Parents who are blood relatives and older mums are the two main causes for Bradford’s birth defect rate being twice the national average, according to new research.

Your own source indicated that inbreeding in Bradford is at a percentage of 70% ! and also higher then the national average in fact double it! No wonder they make all them programmes with regards to inbreeding in Bradford , they obviously have all the statistics and material to make content which highlights the inbreeding but you still have folk denying it, Bradford will always be synonymous in Bradford until they stop keeping it in the family !

 

[mani1]

Does Bradford not have a problem with consanguinity?

The figures show that up to 20 per cent of the children treated for congenital problems in cities such as Sheffield, Glasgow and Birmingham are of Pakistani descent, a figure significantly greater than the background populations, which can be four per cent or lower.

Bradford's Pakistani population is 20% as per 2011

In Glasgow, the proportion is about 18 per cent, even though Pakistanis account for 3.8 per cent of the local population.

Now if Bradford had a similar problem as Glasgow with consanguinity what would be the %?

There is a reason the daily mail included the % of "Inbreeding" yet left Bradford out in the figures.

 

[shaz619]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...ck-muslim-perspec-0606-jm-20170605-story.html

Depressed old mill town, down on its luck, a city of about 500,000 that included 50,000 Muslims who were so isolated from the city around them that they might as well have been living in a walled ghetto.

The Bradford Muslims remained inbred.

 

[mani1]

Your own source indicated that inbreeding in Bradford is at a percentage of 70% ! and also higher then the national average in fact double it! No wonder they make all them programmes with regards to inbreeding in Bradford , they obviously have all the statistics and material to make content which highlights the inbreeding but you still have folk denying it, Bradford will always be synonymous in Bradford until they stop keeping it in the family !

I think denying it isn't a problem hence why baby's born with disables are much less prevalent than in places like Glasgow, Sheffield, Ilford, Birmingham whom deny it as the Daily mail showed.

Again older mums have nothing to do with inbreeding.

 

[shaz619]

I think denying it isn't a problem hence why baby's born with disables are much less prevalent than in places like Glasgow, Sheffield, Ilford, Birmingham whom deny it as the Daily mail showed.

Again older mums have nothing to do with inbreeding.

The same daily mail also highlight that 70% of the Brit Paks in Bradford are inbred and multiple sources say it is double the national average

 

[mani1]

The same daily mail also highlight that 70% of the Brit Paks in Bradford are inbred and multiple sources say it is double the national average

Children born to older mum's.

 

[miandadrules]

The figures show that up to 20 per cent of the children treated for congenital problems in cities such as Sheffield, Glasgow and Birmingham are of Pakistani descent, a figure significantly greater than the background populations, which can be four per cent or lower.

Bradford's Pakistani population is 20% as per 2011

In Glasgow, the proportion is about 18 per cent, even though Pakistanis account for 3.8 per cent of the local population.

Now if Bradford had a similar problem as Glasgow with consanguinity what would be the %?

There is a reason the daily mail included the % of "Inbreeding" yet left Bradford out in the figures.

Are you stating the Bradford Pakistanis do not have rampant consanguinity in their communities?

If you also want to draw conclusions then you'll need to provide stats with regards the number of consanguineous relationships, the percentage that have children and spouses outside of the country, fertility rates, demographics of age etc....

 

[shaz619]

[MENTION=396]mani1[/MENTION] On a level, I've not denied anything with regards to the city's you highlight there very well could be a problem but seriously it seems to be more prevalent in Bradford then anywhere else, maybe things are starting to improve now I don't know. Maybe [MENTION=53290]Markhor[/MENTION] can answer for us

 

[mani1]

[MENTION=396]mani1[/MENTION] On a level, I've not denied anything with regards to the city's you highlight there very well could be a problem but seriously it seems to be more prevalent in Bradford then anywhere else, maybe things are starting to improve now I don't know. Maybe [MENTION=53290]Markhor[/MENTION] can answer for us

He is from Sheffield which according to the daily mail is on par with Glasgow.

 

[mani1]

Are you stating the Bradford Pakistanis do not have rampant consanguinity in their communities?

If you also want to draw conclusions then you'll need to provide stats with regards the number of consanguineous relationships, the percentage that have children and spouses outside of the country, fertility rates, demographics of age etc....

No but the daily mail figures show the problem is much much worse in many many other places.

 

[miandadrules]

[MENTION=396]mani1[/MENTION] On a level, I've not denied anything with regards to the city's you highlight there very well could be a problem but seriously it seems to be more prevalent in Bradford then anywhere else, maybe things are starting to improve now I don't know. Maybe [MENTION=53290]Markhor[/MENTION] can answer for us

It's a problem throughout the Pakistani diaspora.

The first step is to acknowledge it and then form a consensus to tackle it.

It's a human tendency to to try deflect criticism on to another group. We see it all the time. In the Pakistani context we see it with Mirpuris being scapegoated for the ills of British Pakistanis, pathans being blamed for terrorism and criminality in Pakistan and so on

 

[Chrish]

You can create messed up genetics from incest but not from gay marriage

 

[mani1]

You can create messed up genetics from incest but not from gay marriage

What is the % for HIV/Aids for Gays compared to Hetro's?

 

[miandadrules]

No but the daily mail figures show the problem is much much worse in many many other places.

Like I said to counter it you'll have to provide far more detailed analysis.

To deflect analysis serves no one.

 

[shaz619]

It's a problem throughout the Pakistani diaspora.

The first step is to acknowledge it and then form a consensus to tackle it.

It's a human tendency to to try deflect criticism on to another group. We see it all the time. In the Pakistani context we see it with Mirpuris being scapegoated for the ills of British Pakistanis, pathans being blamed for terrorism and criminality in Pakistan and so on

Yeah it is a problem, but am confident my generation will not fall into the same trap; all of my relatives have married out of the family and marrying a cousin is generally considered taboo amongst the British Pakistani's born in the 1990's. The mentality amongst the first generation hasn't changed as much though, they would still encourage you to keep it in house if the opportunity presented itself; they will not accept the medical consensus and will point out that it's all in the hands of god; it's not something which we can defeat because they're highly spiritual people in that way.

Although genetically speaking quiet a few posters have highlighted that the risk of disease is very complex and dependent on many factors which can at times go beyond cousin relations as we've seen folk with various issues despite marrying outside the family.

The positive is that the first generation days have come and gone, 10-20 years from now this all will be non-existent.

 

[mani1]

Like I said to counter it you'll have to provide far more detailed analysis.

To deflect analysis serves no one.

So are you suggesting that it is far more prevalent in Bradford based on one study which shows older mums and cousin marriage is responsible for Bradford having slightly less than double the national average of disabled babies?

If so where is the comparison data for Glasgow Sheffield Ilford Manchester etc? All areas which according to the figures shown by the daily mail have much more serious issues than Bradford in regards to this.

 

[Mian]

One of my cousin who was born in UK and is a practicing doctor there got married with his first cousin a couple of years ago without any hesitation.

 

[miandadrules]

So are you suggesting that it is far more prevalent in Bradford based on one study which shows older mums and cousin marriage is responsible for Bradford having slightly less than double the national average of disabled babies?

If so where is the comparison data for Glasgow Sheffield Ilford Manchester etc? All areas which according to the figures shown by the daily mail have much more serious issues than Bradford in regards to this.

Where have I suggested anything of the sort?

I don't draw conclusions based on something I haven't don't rigorous analysis on.

Do you have a demographic data on the ethnicities of older mothers amongst other variables.

 

[mani1]

Where have I suggested anything of the sort?

I don't draw conclusions based on something I haven't don't rigorous analysis on.

Do you have a demographic data on the ethnicities of older mothers amongst other variables.

The study was done by the University of Bradford I think, It showed that older mostly White mothers over 34 had the same risk as cousin marriage for having disabled babies.

 

[miandadrules]

Yeah it is a problem, but am confident my generation will not fall into the same trap; all of my relatives have married out of the family and marrying a cousin is generally considered taboo amongst the British Pakistani's born in the 1990's. The mentality amongst the first generation hasn't changed as much though, they would still encourage you to keep it in house if the opportunity presented itself; they will not accept the medical consensus and will point out that it's all in the hands of god; it's not something which we can defeat because they're highly spiritual people in that way.

Although genetically speaking quiet a few posters have highlighted that the risk of disease is very complex and dependent on many factors which can at times go beyond cousin relations as we've seen folk with various issues despite marrying outside the family.

The positive is that the first generation days have come and gone, 10-20 years from now this all will be non-existent.

I agree there has been a shift and more awareness of the issues at hand which is very encouraging.

That said there are still far too many incidents. In my opinion to put a single child's health at risk is too many whilst we wait for a change.