God is a Metaphor

Some perspective on cousin marriage.

From http://www.members.aol.com/ruqaiyyah/articles/index.htm
Scroll on the left to find ``Some Thoughts on Cousin Marriage``
It`s a LOOONG article! Some excerpts,

``In fact, throughout history moderate inbreeding has always been the rule, and not the exception, for humans. Robin Fox, a professor of anthropology at Rutgers University, concluded that it was likely that some 80 percent of all marriages throughout history have been between second-cousins or closer.``

``Inbreeding is also commonplace in the natural world, and contrary to our expectations, some biologists argue that this can be a very good thing. It depends in part on the degree of inbreeding.``

``First-cousin marriage does not necessarily result in congenital defects. An argument can be made that marriages of first cousins descended from strong stock can actually produce exceptional children, and increase their strengths. A founding couple could pass on advantageous genes.``

``A team of scientists led by Robin L. Bennett, a genetic counsellor at the University of Washington and the President of the National Society of Genetic Counsellors, announced that cousin marriages are not significantly riskier than any other marriage. The study determined that children of first cousins did face about a 2 to 3 per cent higher risk of birth defects, and a little over 4 per cent greater risk of early death, than the population at large. But putting it another way, first-cousin marriages entail roughly the same increased risk of abnormality that a woman undertakes when she gives birth at 41 rather than at 30. Banning cousin-marriages therefore makes about as much sense, critics argue, as trying to ban childbearing by older women.``

``The consequences of inbreeding are unpredictable and depend largely on what biologists call the founder effect. If the founding couple pass on a large number of lethal recessives, as appears to have happened in Bradford, these recessives will spread and double up through intermarriage. But whereas it is true that marriage among close kin can increase the chances of pathological recessive genes meeting up in some unlucky individual with dire consequences, the problem is not that of cousin-marriage per se, but rather how many such genes are floating around in that particular family’s pool. If the pool is pretty clean, the likelihood of genetic defects resulting from cousin-marriage is low. If the founding couple hand down a comparatively healthy genome, their descendants could safely intermarry for generations - at least until small deleterious effects inevitably began to pile up and produce inbreeding depression, the long-term decline in the well-being of a family or a species.``

``Any danger can these days be minimized easily with genetic testing. Science is increasingly able to help people look at their own choices more objectively. Genetic and metabolic tests can now screen for about 100 recessive disorders``

``It would be good practice to have a blood test before marriage``

#65 khurram,

This is what I would call `bending over backwards` to be a religious appologist. I can tell you my first hand experience that about 1 in 4 children have died in my father`s family who live in a large haveli usually marrying internally. And I not taling about a sample of 4 kids but about 20 of them. They see all this happenning but religious endorsement is so strong that they keep doing it.

Also, it looks like your experience of god not being a dellusion begs some explanation. Would you bless us with some?

Daktar

As usual, you built up the logic systematically to reach the final cresendo. What you say makes a hell of a lot of sense.

Scripture & religion have proven to be quite a bit of nuisance when used by nit wits.

I wonder how those two brothers of Jama Hafsa would respond to your line of thinking?

Fatwa - behead - Murtid - suicide attack?

Poor Minister Nilofar who did a Paragliding jump has been fatwaad because an elderly person patted her!

I think the Hell is not yet to come - it is already here.

regards

NHK

nazarhayatkhan, malikjahanzeb

Wah, wah, two uncommon visitors blessed with uncommon, astute minds seen at the same board one after another. Only khalid sohail`s high-powered draw could make that happen :)

eastmwest #61

The promise and prospect of 72 houris waiting in Paradise, though a tad unfair to straight women and gay men, is in no way a inconsistent with a more prudish sex ethic for us while we`re earthboud. Islam recognizes, and rightly so, that for social stability, man cannot have his every wish fulfilled. Islam opposition to certain sex does not, like in Christianity, have an erotophobic basis. It is purely utilitarian: Sex is good; but not if it`s gonna upset the social apple cart.

That said, your exposing of Z`s hypocrisy in #60 is both valid and complete! Well done!!

mailk, re. #66
Would it be fairer to say that you`ve presented a case against extened-family set-ups as opposed to cousin-marriages?

Or are the two tied up in some way? Please explain if so.
Thanks.

#62 by khurram,

Since you have the proven ability to decipher Dr. Sohail`s complex thought process, which I don`t, could you kindly advise me if my following reading of #47 is correct?

1) ... for me sex is a private matter between two consenting adults.

It appears from the tone of this that Dr. Sohail is prepared to `condone` the practice but does not encourage it either as being fully natural.

2) ...what you are trying to prove is that secular humanists and atheists are immoral people and only religious people are moral people.

My question didn`t raise any issue of morality, but only of legality. However Dr. Sohail raises the morality question. Why? This is really confusing. To my mind the above statement asserts that secular humanists and atheists are as moral as religious people. But to meet that condition, wouldn`t it be necessary for both sets to regard brother/sister sexual relations as immoral? With the only difference being that the former group condones the practice while the latter group does not? Read together with (1) above, which reinforces this conclusion of the captioned statement, it would appear to be true.

But if the foregoing was true, then although it is clear that the religious people`s morality springs from scriptures, but it remains murky regarding from where the same morality of atheists/humanists comes from. But still, wouldn`t it be curious in that case that the both sets of moralities, irrespective of where these spring from, converge at this point?

Thanks in advance for your comments.

Dr. Sahib,

Glad to know there are other secular humanists in this world and particularly in this chowk community. Would love to read more of your stuff and share some of my own.

Re: # 72
dear zarrar....welcome to the creative dialogue ...you can send me your creations
welcome@drsohail.com
and can see my other creations on
www.drsohail.com
sincerely sohail

Re: # 65

Khurram I am afraid you are confusing two very different situations. Incidental first cousin marriage is not disastrous and the risk of genetic abnormality is minimally increased. What I am talking about is completely different. It is the preponderance of first cousin marriages over generations. The risk here is phenomenally higher for genetic disease. Pakistani`s acount for 3.4% of live births but 30% of recessive genetic disorders in Great Britain. As a physician it has baffled and disturbed me how even educated Muslims are not alarmed by this trend. Do you honestly think such a tendency has not had negative impact on intellectual faculties.This has not been adequately researched. Is it not possible that the poor academic performance of Pakistani students is affected by this? The article you quote is about the ``occasional`` intermarraige but likewise there a numerous jokes about the limited faculties of inbred people in the south of the US. Saudi Arabia is the most telling example. It has one the highest rate of birth defects in the world. The gov`t is not going to go on a public health campaign anytime soon. It is distressing for me as a physician that innocent children pay the ultimate price for this misguided mentality. Here is an article in the BBC:

risks of cousin marriage

By Justin Rowlatt
BBC Newsnight


Many people would find the idea of marrying a first cousin shocking, but such marriages are not unusual in some British communities.

CLICK HERE TO SEND US YOUR VIEWS ON THIS STORY



Watch the report
It is estimated that at least 55% of British Pakistanis are married to first cousins and the tradition is also common among some other South Asian communities and in some Middle Eastern countries.

But there is a problem: marrying someone who is themselves a close family member carries a risk for children - a risk that lies within the code of life; within our genes.

Communities that practice cousin marriage experience higher levels of some very rare but very serious illnesses - illnesses known as recessive genetic disorders.

Open debate

Now, one Labour MP is calling for an end to the practice. ``We have to stop this tradition of first cousin marriages,`` Keighley MP Ann Cryer tells Newsnight.

Family events are really nice because my in-laws and his are related

Neila Butt
Mrs Cryer believes an open debate on the subject is needed because - despite the risks - cousin marriage remains very popular.

Mrs Cryer`s constituency is in the Bradford area, where the rates of cousin marriage are well above the national average. It is estimated that three out of four marriages within Bradford`s Pakistani community are between first cousins.

The practice remains so popular because the community believes there are real benefits to marrying in the family. Many British Pakistanis celebrate cousin marriage because it is thought to generate more stable relationships.

Strong unions

Such unions are seen as strong, building as they do on already tight family networks.


``You have an understanding,`` explains Neila Butt, who married her first cousin, Farooq, nine years ago.

``Family events are really nice because my in-laws and his are related,`` she says.

``You have the same family history and when you talk about the old times either here or in Pakistan you know who you are talking about. It`s just a nicer emotional feel.``

But the statistics for recessive genetic illness in cousin marriages make sobering reading.

British Pakistanis are 13 times more likely to have children with genetic disorders than the general population - they account for just over 3% of all births but have just under a third of all British children with such illnesses.

Indeed, Birmingham Primary Care Trust estimates that one in ten of all children born to first cousins in the city either dies in infancy or goes on to develop serious disability as a result of a recessive genetic disorder.

Variant genes

Recessive genetic disorders are caused by variant genes. There are hundreds of different recessive genetic disorders, many associated with severe disability and sometimes early death, and each caused by a different variant gene.

My skin is really fragile, and can blister very easily with a slight knock or tear

Myra Ali
We all have two copies of every gene. If you inherit one variant gene you will not fall ill.

If, however, a child inherits a copy of the same variant gene from each of its parents it will develop one of these illnesses.

The variant genes that cause genetic illness tend to be very rare. In the general population the likelihood of a couple having the same variant gene is a hundred to one.

In cousin marriages, if one partner has a variant gene the risk that the other has it too is far higher - more like one in eight.

Myra Ali has a very rare recessive genetic condition, known as Epidermolisis Bulosa.

Her parents were first cousins. So were her grandparents.

``My skin is really fragile, and can blister very easily with a slight knock or tear,`` she says.

Myra has strong views about the practice of cousin marriage as a result. ``I`m against it, because there`s a high risk of illness occurring``, she says.

Denial

We all have to get involved in persuading people to adopt a different lifestyle

Ann Cryer MP
According to Ann Cryer MP, whose Keighley constituency has a large Pakistani population, much of the Pakistani community is in denial about the problem.

She tells Newsnight that she believes it is time for an open debate on the subject: ``As we address problems of smoking, drinking, obesity, we say it`s a public health issue, and therefore we all have to get involved with it in persuading people to adopt a different lifestyle``, she says.

``I think the same should be applied to this problem in the Asian community. They must adopt a different lifestyle. They must look outside the family for husbands and wives for their young people.``

Re: # 71
dear khurrum...congratulations for being asked to be the advocate for zeemax...smiles.....sohail

Re: # 65

Khurram, also it seems that the artcile you have quoted is from and Islamic website probably trying to justify this heinous practice. What I am quoting is actual facts on the incidence of birth defects. Anecdotally though I personally know a number of Pakistani families in Canada whose children have learning disabilities, development delays etc... whose parents are first cousins from a long line of intermarriages. These children are NOT counted at birth! I can also forward you educational testing from Britain that when controlled for socioeconomic status and parental education Pakistani children do the worst academically among other South Asians. I really want to understand how this can persist when it is universally accepted that most parents want the best for their child. Why is the the medical community of Pakistani doctors not more vocal about this? Although I do know several who are personally very opposed to this trend.

#75 by drsohail,

Dear Dr. Sohail,

I`m not asking Khurram to be my advocate, but only to clarify your position on the issue, since you tend to be very evasive when confronted with direct questions :)

In fact, asking Khurram to be my advocate would be disrespectful to his far superior intellect to mine.

Re #75 drsohail,
I thought I was being asked to be your advocate ;-)

Re: #66,
``They see all this happenning but religious endorsement is so strong that they keep doing it. ``

religious what? There is no religious mandate or even encouragement for cousin marriages.
It is just not outlawed. The article I referred to makes the point that an outright ban on cousin marriages per se is not necessary. Moderation and rational behaviour is required.

Re: #79

A common man usually trusts religion on questions he has less knowledge about. If I were an average religious guy, this is how I would think:

`If there is something really wrong with it, allah would have forbidded it already. Hence there is nothing wrong with it`.

I know the primary reason for cousin marriages is not religion per se but by all means, Islam fosters such an environment by limiting and discouraging intra-family interactions between males and females (the primary method for couples to know about each other) and creating a paranoia around this whole sex and honour thing. As a result, family marriages become the default and convinient choice.

Yes, I can`t find a hadis saying `marry thy cousins`, but you gotta take practical things into account..... makes any sense?