UK MP opposes calls to ban first-cousin marriage in the UK saying it can 'help build family bonds' - Guess

1733855436278.png

An MP has spoken against calls to ban first-cousin marriage in the UK, and suggested “advanced genetic test screening” is made available to prospective couples.

Independent Iqbal Mohamed said rather than “stigmatising” cousin marriages, a “much more positive approach” should be adopted to respond to health concerns linked to the children of those relationships.

He suggested measures could include the UK adopting similar screening efforts to those undertaken in Arab countries in the Persian Gulf.

The MP for Dewsbury and Batley also used his Commons speech to insist “freedom of women must be protected at all times”, but said he did not believe a ban on first-cousin marriages would be “effective or enforceable”.

Mr Mohamed was responding to Conservative former minister Richard Holden, who was allowed by MPs to introduce his Marriage (Prohibited Degrees of Relationship) Bill for further consideration.

Existing legislation states the prohibited degrees of relationship for marriage include those to a sibling, parent or child, but not marriages between first cousins.

Mr Mohamed told the Commons: “There are documented health risks with first-cousin marriage and I agree this is an issue that needs greater awareness on.”

Mr Mohamed spoke of the need to prevent so-called “virginity testing” and forced marriages, and also to protect freedom of women.

He told MPs: “However, the way to redress this is not to empower the state to ban adults from marrying each other, not least because I don’t think it would be effective or enforceable.

“Instead the matter needs to be approached as a health awareness issue, a cultural issue where women are being forced against their will to undergo marriage.

“In doing so it is important to recognise for many people that this is a highly sensitive issue and in discussing it we should try to step into the shoes of those who perhaps are not from the same culture as ours, to better understand why the practice continues to be so widespread.”

Mr Mohamed said an estimated 35% to 50% of all sub-Saharan African populations either “prefer or accept” cousin marriages, and it is “extremely common” in the Middle East and south Asia.

He added: “The reason the practice is so common is that ordinary people see family inter-marriage overall as something that is very positive, something that helps build family bonds and helps put families on a more secure financial foothold.

“However, as is well documented, it is not without health risks for the children of those relationships, some of whom will be born out of wedlock.

“Instead of stigmatising those in cousin marriages or those inclined to be, a much more positive approach would be to facilitate advanced genetic test screening for prospective married couples, as is the case in all Arab countries in the Persian Gulf, and more generally to run health education programmes targeting those communities where the practice is most common.

“I would therefore urge the House to vote against this motion and find a more positive approach to addressing the issues that are caused by first-cousin marriages, including the health risks and the consequences of modern conflicts and displacement of population around the world.”

The motion to introduce the Bill to the House was approved without the need for a formal vote.

Mr Holden asked for his Bill to be considered at second reading on January 17 next year, although it faces a battle to become law due to a lack of parliamentary time.

Moving the motion, Mr Holden said: “Members across the House may wonder why first-cousin marriage is not already illegal, in fact many in this House and in the country may already believe that it is – and that is understandable.”

He said a ban on first-cousin marriage was in place until 1540, explaining: “King Henry VIII broke with Rome and legalised marriage between first cousins so that he could marry Catherine Howard, his fifth wife and a cousin of his second wife Anna Boleyn.”

1733855251367.png


Mr Holden highlighted variations in cousin marriage in countries around the world, adding: “Certain diaspora communities have extremely high rates of first-cousin marriage, with Irish Travellers being 20% to 40% and higher rates still among the British Pakistani community.”

Mr Holden said “health, freedom and national values” are the reasons why he moved the Bill.

Shadow justice secretary Robert Jenrick, who backs the proposal, earlier told justice questions: “Cousin marriage has absolutely no place in Britain. The medical evidence is overwhelming, it significantly increases the risk of birth defects, and the moral case is clear. We see hundreds of exploitative marriages which ruin lives. Frankly, it should have been stamped out a long time ago.

“Will the Justice Secretary commit to ending this medieval practice which is rearing its head once again in modern Britain?”

Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood replied: “You will know that there has been a recent Law Commission report on marriage law more generally and the Government is going to consult on broader reform to marriage law, we will certainly consider the issues he has raised before setting out a public position.”

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/pol...arriage-commons-batley-dewsbury-b1199171.html (Archive)

 
If you want to be more horrified, “first cousin” in Indian and Pakistani culture is code word for “half sibling”.

I remember once watching a documentary on this very subject. Felt bad for the children, they didn’t ask to be born as inbred abominations. On the other hand, I think it’s unwise to interrupt your enemy as they make a fatal mistake.

This severe inbreeding leads to much higher infant mortality rates.

According to Google:
“Pakistan's infant mortality rate in 2022 was 51 deaths per 1,000 live births. This is the number of infants who die before their first birthday per 1,000 live births in a given year.”

And India

“India's infant mortality rate in 2024 is projected to be 25.799 deaths per 1,000 live births, a 3.08% decline from 2023. Here are some other recent infant mortality rates for India”

It doesn’t sound like a big deal until you compare it to first world countries.

“Canada's infant mortality rate is 4.7 deaths per 1,000 live births in 2022. This is based on data from Statista.”

“The infant mortality rate in the United States in 2022 was 5.6 infant deaths per 1,000 live births, a 3% increase from 2021”

Now, the USA gets the benefit of doubt of having a higher population than Canada. Among other things. But even with their corrupt health insurance companies, they still have a good infant mortality rate.

India and Pakistan have high infant mortality rates in part due to inbreeding. Because of how dishonest the Indian government has proven to be, time and time again, I suspect the infant mortality rate to be a fuckton higher than they’re reporting.
 
I remember once watching a documentary on this very subject. Felt bad for the children, they didn’t ask to be born as inbred abominations. On the other hand, I think it’s unwise to interrupt your enemy as they make a fatal mistake.
True, but in a similar vein to someone's reply to me here our tax-supported healthcare system will have long been destroyed before they've bottle-necked themselves.

That's probably what our Gov is aiming for though - let them all in, ruin our "free" healthcare then shake hands with the American companies to bring in hideously expensive alternatives that accumulate into piles of debt that only a declaration of bankruptcy can release you from. (That's my understanding of the system, at least, any Americans are welcome to correct me)

But if it puts a dent in the Pakis' potato-manufacturing business then I suppose that's something.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kiwisee and Otterly
An MP has spoken against calls to ban first-cousin marriage in the UK, and suggested “advanced genetic test screening” is made available to prospective couples.
"spend more of your tax money so pakis can keep fucking their cousins without consequence".
Why are there paki MP's?

TOTAL PAKI DEATH.
 
Muslims aren't helping the stereotype....
I agree with him somewhat. While first cousin marriages should normally be banned, an exception should be made when the local Catholic bishop issues a dispensation. Banning first cousin marriages outright might infringe upon the rights of the Church.
I feel bad for the future generations of your family
 
To be frank, how long can third-world retards keep doing this shit until it reaches the point where their babies drop dead the very second they exit the womb?
The NHS is unironically collapsing in the Northern Paki hives because they're fucking their cousins so much that a third of British-Pakistani babies are born with genetic defects. Illnesses that are normally 1-in-1,000,000 levels of rarity are unsettlingly common in their communities. They won't stop because of two reasons:
  1. Muhammad fucked his cousin, so it's therefore acceptable under Islamic law, which the only law that they actually listen to.
  2. Cousin marriages make it easier for them to bring their entire extended family over.
 
I mean I'm also Irish so...yeah we have the best looking women. Also the ugliest. You know the weird thing is that that's even true in my family. I have one cousin who is ugly as shit and the other one who I will hit on whenever I drink.
The Irish truly are the niggers of white people.
 
I agree with him somewhat. While first cousin marriages should normally be banned, an exception should be made when the local Catholic bishop issues a dispensation. Banning first cousin marriages outright might infringe upon the rights of the Church.
Cmon, St.Thomas Aquinas and St.Augustine were impetus for the Church to ban consanguinity to the seventh degree in the Medieval ages. We even have the Council of Trent threaten excommunication for doing it, backed up by previous Popes Alexander the 2nd and Clement the 5th. It was temporal and secular States that weakened their stance.
Catholic is anti-cousinfucking / https://archive.ph/fAprJ
The Church was prompted by various reasons first to recognize the prohibitivelegislation of the Roman State and then to extend the impediment of consanguinity beyond the limits of the civil legislation. The welfare of the social order, according to St. Augustine (De Civ. Dei, XV, xvi) and St. Thomas (Suppl. Q. liii, a. 3), demanded the widest possible extension of friendship and love among all humankind, to which desirable aim the intermarriage of close blood-relations was opposed; this was especially true in the first half of the Middle Ages, when the best interests of society required the unification of the numerous tribes and peoples which had settled on the soil of the Roman Empire. By overthrowing the barriers between inimical families and races, ruinous internecine warfare was diminished and greater peace and harmony secured among the newly-converted Christians. In the moral order the prohibition of marriage between near relations served as a barrier against early corruption among young persons of either sex brought habitually into close intimacy with one another; it tended also to strengthen the natural feeling of respect for closely related persons (St. Thomas, II-II, Q. cliv, a. 9; St. Augustine, De Civ. Dei, XV, x).
---
For civil effects the civil law’s computation of degrees must be known. In most European countriesthe law follows mainly the computation of the Roman civil law. In England, since the Reformation, the Levitical law has been recognized as the standard by which to determine the prohibitions of marriage. For Catholics everywhere, as Alexander II decreed (c.C. 35, q. 5), the ecclesiastical calculation (computatio canonica) must be followed for the direct question of the lawfulness of marriage. Clement V, in the Council of Vienne (1311), decreed that any one who knowingly contracted marriage within the forbidden degrees should by the fact incur excommunication, though not reserved; this penalty has ceased since the Bull “Apostolica Sedis” of Pius IX (1869). The Council of Trent (1563) required the absolute separation of those who knowingly contracted marriage within the prohibited degrees, and denied all hope of obtaining a dispensation, especially if the attempted marriage had been consummated. But in this regard the practice of the Church, probably on account of the recognition of such marriages by the State, and the consequent difficulty of enforcing the dissolution of illicit unions, has tended towards greater leniency.
 
If you want to be more horrified, “first cousin” in Indian and Pakistani culture is code word for “half sibling”.
Could be both!

I'm actually kind of surprised England is banning cousin marriage considering their monarchy's family tree might as well be a fucking stump.
Eh... Charles and Diana were very distant cousins; Elizabeth and Philip were third cousins; it's not clear that George VI and the Queen Mother were related at all; George V's wife was a great-granddaughter of George III (who begat Prince Edward, who begat Queen Victoria, who begat Edward VII, who begat George V; you can figure out the cousinship there); it's not clear that Edward VII and his wife were related at all; Queen Victoria did marry her first cousin; it's not clear that Prince Edward and his wife were related; it's not clear that George III and his wife were related... Maybe I'm missing something but this doesn't seem exceptionally Islamic to me.

I mean yeah the royal families of Europe are all related and kinda-sorta inbred, but they're kinda-sorta inbred in the way where if you dumped 500 people on an island, added another 100 people every century, and came back in 1000 years they'd all be kinda-sorta inbred.

Powerlevel but I've done my family tree and everyone's family has a cousin marriage or ten in the tree, but it's not a problem if the vast majority of marriages are with unrelated people.
 
Back