re: WTF Kentucky you sick freaks

quote:

---

its a slippery slope, but 1st cousins arent blood related any more than 167th cousins

---

It's been covered, but this is blatantly not true. First cousins, by definition, share a set of grandparents. "167th cousins" share an ancestral couple from before the founding of the Roman Republic.

quote:

---

i could see a point in taking 1st cousins off the incest list, but its still on the "thats creepy as shite, dont do it", list

---

This is where I always get into trouble trying to explain "the real world" on this board.

To reiterate:

1. I am NOT advocating cousin marriage. It IS creepy.

2. If you cannot process and accept point #1, DO NOT READ FURTHER


Now - real talk - before the industrial revolution (i.e. railroads, steamships and ultimately aircraft), the vast majority of human beings never traveled more that 50 miles from where they were born. If they did so, it was usually on a military campaign, a disastrous migration, they were explorers or otherwise part of a nomadic society.

Combine not traveling very far in one's lifetime with lower population densities and, outside of very dense cities, most agrarian folks (which still constituted about 80 to 90 percent of the population in most places, well into the 19th Century, even in the West) were marrying their cousins. It was not even criminal for much of the United States until after the Civil War.

#Facts