• TransplantedSconie@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    135
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    Wtf dude lmao.

    These guys REALLY want to fuck close family lmao.

    “My daddy fucked the shit out of mah sister momma, just like his daddy cousin did to his momma! And ba GAWD I’m gonna fuck my cousin!!” - Jim Bob Smith Senator.

    banjo music intensifies

    • vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      7 months ago

      No they are clearly just into Crusader kings roleplay. The worst family title I ever saw in CK3 was cousin grandfather father brother husband.

      • RedditWanderer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        45
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        7 months ago

        What’s your point?

        We’re literally saying it makws no sense that this ban would get pushback. The fact so many other states allow it just makes the point.

        Americans are weird when it comes to cousins…

        • NoIWontPickAName@kbin.earth
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          22
          ·
          7 months ago

          Why does it matter who’s fucking who?

          Aren’t we in the middle of a big ass motherfucking fight for people to be able to be with who they want to be with, minus adults and children?

          • Frozengyro@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            35
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            7 months ago

            To prevent abuse, and to limit the chances of children being born with serious medical problems they will have to suffer with for the rest of their life.

            • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              8
              ·
              7 months ago

              Risk of genetic defects from cousins is very small, on par with a woman giving birth over age 30.

              And “to prevent abuse”? We already have lots of laws to address that.

              Stop telling people who they’re allowed to sleep with.

          • NoIWontPickAName@kbin.earth
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            7 months ago

            When the fuck did we start being pro stereotype?

            This is another big fight that I remember us being in the middle of right now.

      • Cruxifux@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        24
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        7 months ago

        If those states allow first cousin marrying then yeah, that’s cousin fucker states.

        Most of the world doesn’t live in the states man, did you think naming other states was going to offend people? You guys and all your weird hillbilly sex stuff need to get your shit together man. It’s embarrassing to see.

        • Ranvier@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          It’s legal in most of the world, including most of Europe. I don’t think legality is necessarily the greatest guide for how often it actually happens or social attitudes towards it.

          https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cousin_marriage

          There’s a map in there too of prevalence though and United States isn’t anywhere close to the most prevelant, it’s extremely rare. What’s going on down in Italy, Spain, Portugal, and Belgium though?

          • Cruxifux@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            7 months ago

            Ya know, there’s definitely some towns where I’m from that have shallow gene pools, not gonna lie. But I live in Alberta, we’re sometimes the Texas of Canada, and sometimes the Alabama.

          • ripcord@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            Holy crap, am I reading this right? In Pakistan, more than 50% of marriages are between cousins??

            • Ranvier@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              7 months ago

              That chart technically includes second degree cousins and any closer relations. So if you don’t count second degree cousins it might be less. But yeah there’s a tradition of parellel cousin marriage especially in parts of the middle east, north Africa, and south Asia.

            • Cruxifux@feddit.nl
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              7 months ago

              Yeah I actually knew that one from when I used to listen to Joe Rogan and Gavin Mcinnes was on there. He’s a fucking goof but that fact was disturbing

          • barsoap@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            Dunno about Belgium but Italy, Spain and Portugal have quite communal family structures, at least by European standards. Not necessarily in the living together sense but in the you’ll definitely see the whole extended shebang every other holiday sense.

        • Fredselfish@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          7 months ago

          You read any classic novels from England? Marrying cousins is quite normal at one point in human history. I guess it still is in some backward states.

          • RedditWanderer@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            7 months ago

            It’s not just England. Marrying cousins was considered common practice among royalty and nobles in the past, not “normal” for everyday people.

            They would inbreed to try to keep blood “pure”, or to keep the family in power, or to sell off their family for power. People knew a long time ago this was bad and caused health problems, but the rich kept doing it because theyre egoistical maniacs.

            We don’t have monarchs and royalty anymore, we can do away with inbreeding completely. The fact some conservatives still defend it is ridiculous.

      • gregorum@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        7 months ago

        Except it’s actually illegal and all of those places, and has been for a long time.

  • snooggums@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    85
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    7 months ago

    “Is there a public health issue with a male marrying a male first cousin? Obviously, I think the answer is no,” Bulso said, adding the enhanced risk for birth defects would also not be present for women who marry their first cousin. “A female and a female cannot conceive a child.”

    Guy has a valid point about the justification given for the bill, not to mention that not every couple that gets married will be having biological children between them. Not just limited to gay couples, infertile people and people who choose not to have kids get married too.

    I’m good with socially discouraging cousins who grew up together getting married, but legal restrictions based on flawed logic is not a good idea.

    • ImpishCook@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      7 months ago

      What about extended family members that you’ve never met in your entire life? Obviously procreation is still insanely gross here and we should outlaw it, but like you said not all relations between a heterosexual couple lead to children.

    • uid0gid0@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      If your family doesn’t have a history of consanguination then first cousins marrying every few generations is no big deal, genetically. You share about 5% of your genes with any random first cousin, compared to 2.5% with any random stranger. You should still seek generic counseling, you never know what secrets you might find

  • Otkaz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    46
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    Republicans sure do seem to think you have the right to marry who ever you love when it comes to incest and pedophilia but not LGBTQ.

  • ZeroCool@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    39
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    The bill as amended by Rep. Gino Bulso, R-Brentwood, would prohibit first-cousin marriage unless the parties to the marriage contract received counseling from a genetic counselor licensed by the board of medical examiners. Bulso argued during a House floor session on Thursday the bill – as written – could violate the Obergefell v. Hodges U.S. Supreme Court decision, which made same-sex marriage legal across the country.

    Bulso, while explaining his reasoning, said the bill was introduced as a public health-related matter, adding the law needed to be passed to prevent cousins from getting married and conceiving a child that could have an increased risk for birth defects. Bulso argued two men who are first cousins could get married without the risk of conceiving a child with birth defects.

    This is just another bigoted conservative with an agenda. He’s using this no-brainer anti-cousin-fucking law to push anti-LGBTQ rhetoric. Gino Bulso was a lawyer for just shy of 40 years before joining the Tennessee House of Reps in 2022. He knows this isn’t a reasonable argument and he doesn’t care. He’s just trying to attack Obergefell v. Hodges. He’s basically saying “See what *the gays* are making me vote against?! I don’t want to allow cousin-fucking but Obergefell v. Hodges says we have to! Trust me, I’m a lawyer!

    Edit: JFC nothing brings out the weirdos as quickly as an article about a ban on cousin-fucking.

    • NounsAndWords@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      17
      ·
      7 months ago

      He’s a Tennessee Republican so I’m sure he’s terrible. But you don’t think there is a legal argument of a law being overly broad that restricts the rights of same sex couples where the legislative history shows it was based on increased risk of genetic mutations in pregnancy?

      Maybe (probably) he’s saying it to beat on LGBTQ people, but a broken clock and all that.

      • ZeroCool@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Maybe (probably) he’s saying it to beat on LGBTQ people, but a broken clock and all that.

        I am not willing to give republicans the benefit of the doubt when it comes to their invocations of Obergefell v. Hodges to defend cousin-fucking. If you’d like to that’s your prerogative. But doing so is completely unearned on their part and suggests naivety on yours.

        • NounsAndWords@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          10
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          I’m not giving him the benefit of the doubt. Blatant homophobe or no, it’s a valid legal argument that hasn’t been tested in court.

          Edit: Unless you have some caselaw already addressing this that I’m not aware of, I’m pretty sure we’re having two completely different conversations.

    • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      40
      ·
      7 months ago

      Or - mind blowing possibility - maybe you’re bigoted against cousin marriage like the people you hate are bigoted against gay marriage.

      The risk of genetic defects is extremely small. People don’t like it because it’s icky, which is not logically consistent. People used to think interracial marriage was icky.

      Let people do what they want.

      • Psychodelic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        7 months ago

        Yeah, I don’t get it, personally. I’m really not a fan of governments telling people who they can fall in love with. You’d think there’s more important issues to deal with.

        I mean, I know people who’s parents are cousins. It’s literally a non-issue I couldn’t give less of a fuck since they all seem happy. It’s none of my, or the government’s, business.

        That said, it is weird, the lack of logic that goes on around this issue. It’s simply wrong because it’s wrong so it’s therefore good for the government to make laws prohibiting it.

  • Noxy@yiffit.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    46
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    7 months ago

    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.

    • KaiReeve@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      41
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      7 months ago

      There are 8 billion people on this planet now. Surely you can find someone other than your cousin.

      It really shouldn’t need to be illegal, but I guess residents of the volunteer state require a little more incentive to find dates before the holidays, rather than during them.

      • Noxy@yiffit.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        7 months ago

        wasn’t talking about myself, which shouldn’t need to be pointed out, but here we are.

      • capital@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Most on Lemmy and other lefty spaces are of the “two consenting adults can do what they want” mind but take an inconsistent turn on this, seemingly because it’s “icky” to them.

        How is that any different than conservatives being anti-gay because it’s “icky” to them?

        • KaiReeve@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          7 months ago

          It’s not because it’s “icky”, it’s because if you both have the same grandma then you only have one snickerdoodle recipe for Christmas cookies, genetically speaking.

          • capital@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            As stated several times in this thread, the risk of genetic issues is akin to that of a 40+ year old woman having kids.

            It would seem consistent to also ban that if that is your actual issue, right? So, is that what you’re suggesting?

            • KaiReeve@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              7 months ago

              I never called for a ban. I said maybe go out and explore the forest before climbing up the family tree. And it’s my understanding that most women understand the risk of procreating after 40 and typically avoid it.

              But I’m not your daddy. You don’t need my approval to fuck your uncle’s kids.

              • capital@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                7 months ago

                You said,

                It really shouldn’t need to be illegal, but I guess residents of the volunteer state require a little more incentive to find dates before the holidays, rather than during them.

                I took this to mean that those who don’t voluntarily choose to not marry/have sex with their cousins need to be forced not to by law (a ban). Did I misread that?

      • This is fine🔥🐶☕🔥@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        There are 8 billion people on this planet now. Surely you can find someone

        Not really.

        Speaking from a virgin, and not a cousinfucker, perspective.

        ‘There’s someone for everyone’ is such a fucking bullshit platitude.

      • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        15
        ·
        7 months ago

        There are 8 billion people on this planet now. Surely you can find someone who isn’t black

        Same line of reasoning, just 50 years ago.

        We shouldn’t ban consenting adult relationships solely because they are icky.

            • jpreston2005@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              11
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              7 months ago

              No, I want you to explain your reasoning, you’re the one who made it. please explain how marrying a black person is just like marrying your first cousin.

              • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                9
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                7 months ago

                There’s nothing objectively wrong with either one. Both have been banned because they gross people out for purely social (bigoted) reasons.

                • jpreston2005@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  11
                  arrow-down
                  6
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  Incorrect. One results in higher than normal birth defects that exacerbate over time, and one is perfectly healthy. We, as a society, should try to limit birth defects, no? Are you also in favor of bringing back thalidomide?

    • Wrench@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      Genetically, first cousins are fine. It does slightly increase some risks, I think doubles at most for some very low likelihood cases. I don’t know that it’s any more irresponsible than reproducing with someone that has a family history of genetically passed diseases.

      Humans were tribal until very recently, and reproducing with non-immediate relatives was normal. If it were that detrimental, we would not have survived as a species.

      And no, my wife is not remotely related to me.

  • randon31415@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    7 months ago

    I feel like this is just an extension of the “my child, my property” mindset that republicans have. Sure, like others have argued, there might be cases of 25 year-olds genuinely falling in love with first cousins and the whole goverment-shouldn’t-regulate-love thing; but the vast majority of these cases are going to be home-schooled together groomed kids who parents fear having romantic relations outside the family might introduce them to non-conservative or non-religious viewpoints which might break their narcissistic control over their kids lives.

  • inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    Take me to another place

    Take me to another land

    Let me fuck my cousin firstly

    Let me understand her clam

    Tennessee, Tennessee

    • Liz@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      Apparently this taboo got started as thing by the Catholic Church during the medieval ages as some kind of property inheritance thing. I can’t remember the details. I remember watching a whole video that argued this anti-cousin marriage thing is where the West got it hyper individualism from, compared to the rest of the world, but I can’t find it now.

  • cbarrick@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    7 months ago

    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?

    • Another3quenc@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      7 months ago

      Can you elaborate a little? Like do you mean that if LGBTQ is accepted, first cousins are meant to be accepted as well?

      • cbarrick@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        16
        ·
        7 months ago

        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.

        • Jimmyeatsausage@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          7 months ago

          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.

          • cbarrick@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            7 months ago

            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.

    • sepulcher@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      27
      ·
      7 months ago

      I’ve noticed people on both sides are cool with laws that hurt others.

      Ex: We see plenty of pot smokers supporting banning nicotine products.

      Liberals aren’t immune to this just like conservatives. Most people are shit :(

      • jpreston2005@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        7 months ago

        nah dude. one thing hurts you and has severe impacts on your health. Inbreeding and lung cancer don’t have “both sides” of an argument. they’re bad.

  • dylanmorgan@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    7 months ago

    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.