453
submitted 4 months ago by Wilshire@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] TransplantedSconie@lemm.ee 122 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 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

load more comments (28 replies)
[-] snooggums@midwest.social 79 points 4 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.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Otkaz@lemmy.world 45 points 4 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.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 42 points 4 months ago

Good job living up to stereotypes, Tennessee.

load more comments (8 replies)
[-] ZeroCool@slrpnk.net 36 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 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.

load more comments (14 replies)
[-] noxy@yiffit.net 34 points 4 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 31 points 4 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 11 points 4 months ago

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

load more comments (44 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] randon31415@lemmy.world 30 points 4 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.

[-] catloaf@lemm.ee 28 points 4 months ago

Honestly, it's not that big a deal unless it happens for multiple generations. There is enough genetic difference between first cousins for it to not count as inbreeding.

I would recommend against it if there is a significant risk of genetic diseases being passed down, but that's true even for any two random people.

[-] athairmor@lemmy.world 25 points 4 months ago

Honestly, if it’s consensual I don’t care just let women have control of their own bodies and keep their damn religion out of government. They can have cousin-fucking just leave minorities and LGBTQ+ alone.

[-] inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world 28 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 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

[-] IronpigsWizard@lemmy.world 6 points 4 months ago

Arrested Development does not approve. Such a underrated hiphop group. They lived together communally for a bit!

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Gray@lemmy.ca 22 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Most of the world actually has legal marriage between first cousins. In many places it's not even taboo. And on top of that, the chances of genetic issues with it are actually pretty small. It's multiple generations of first cousins having kids where it becomes a problem.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] jpreston2005@lemmy.world 21 points 4 months ago

Everybody hold up, new kink jus dropped

Gotta have that Habsburg jawline 😍

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] cbarrick@lemmy.world 20 points 4 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?

load more comments (7 replies)
[-] dylanmorgan@slrpnk.net 15 points 4 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.

[-] samus12345@lemmy.world 12 points 4 months ago
[-] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 7 points 4 months ago

God damn east coast woke liberal infiltraitors trying to stop me from picking up women and getting some poon at the family reunion.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] some_guy 6 points 4 months ago

Tennessee has done a lot to outdo Florida as a shitshow lately.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] LEDZeppelin@lemmy.world 6 points 4 months ago

Alabama got the monopoly now

[-] kromem@lemmy.world 6 points 4 months ago

Topical fact of the day: Both Einstein and Darwin married their first cousins.

[-] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 7 points 4 months ago
[-] Lazhward@lemmy.world 6 points 4 months ago

When she was 13.

[-] Manmoth@lemmy.ml 5 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

This is common in arab countries

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 11 Apr 2024
453 points (98.1% liked)

News

22488 readers
5093 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS