First cousins get married in Maryland

[truthpusher]

Posted on Tue, Mar. 29, 2005
--------------------------
First cousins get married in Maryland
--------------------------
Associated Press
--------------------------
ALTOONA, Pa. - First cousins who were denied a marriage license by a Pennsylvania judge earlier this month were wed in a civil ceremony in Maryland, the couple said Monday.

Tonight Show host Jay Leno and conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh both commented about the story after Blair County Judge Jolene Kopriva refused to marry Eleanor Amrhein, 46, and Donald W. Andrews Sr., 39, of Logan Township.

The couple petitioned the judge March 14, three days after a court clerk refused to marry them after learning they were first cousins. The couple's mothers are sisters. But they hoped the judge would grant an exception to the Pennsylvania law, which was meant to prevent birth defects and other problems caused by marriage of close relatives, by telling the judge they didn't plan to have children.

"Everybody thought I should be ashamed of it," Amrhein said. "I am not."

story: http://www.timesleader.com/mld/timesleader/news/breaking_news/11261780.htm

[Devlzown]

1. I thought marriage was for procreation.

That's what they say when gays try to get married.

[Maple]

2. Einstein was

married to his first cousin.

So was...wait for it...Charles Darwin.

[Spinzonner]

25. His second wife

after he had three children with his first wife.

She also had been married and had children (maybe just one).

Later in life and not intended - if capable - of producing children.

[Maple]

50. Well he offered

to marry either her, or her daughter, so I don't think he was worried about producing children.

[Gasping4Truth]

31. As was Wernher von Braun

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wernher_von_Braun

[1monster]

3. Don't know why the date line is Altoona, PA. The county seat for Blair

County is Hollidaysburg, PA. I know because that is the town I grew up in. Gorgeous brownstone courthouse.

Don't know any of the player in that article though. It's been 31 years since I left there.

[Momof1]

21. Channel 10 said Logan township

I'm not from that county, so I have no idea if it is in Altoona or Holidaysburg.

[1monster]

37. If I recall correctly, Logan Township is located between Hollidaysburg

and Altoona. When I lived there, there was a couple of sparsely populated miles between the two cities. Now, if one does not know the area, one cannot tell where Altoona leaves off and Hollidaysburg begins.

My point was that the denial of the right to marry would have taken place in Hollidaysburg, where the Court system for Blair County is located.

However, I guess this paper got the story from the local daily paper, THE ALTOONA MIRROR and took the dateline from that. There is a local weekly paper for Hollidaysburg (at least, I think there still is), that my father used to work for, but, darned if I can remember the name of it!

[kskiska]

4. Rudy Giuliani was married to a cousin

Others were Victoria and Albert, and Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt.

[Spinzonner]

26. Franklin and Eleanor

were fifth cousins once removed. Not prohibited by any state as far as I know.

[SemperEadem]

48. Mary Stewart and Henry Stuart

The Queen of Scots married her first cousin, Lord Darnley and thus ushered in the Stuart house in Scotland then England through King James I&VI.

[Wickerman]

5. About half of the states allow first cousins to marry, according to statel

I have to admit - I did not know that.

:blush:

yes, i am trying to use each of the new smilies.

[lavenderdiva]

6. its legal in Texas...

I should know.

[Trillo]

7. Any experts here? Just curious...

Why is inbreeding considered 'bad'?

I've read that some civilizations practiced incest routinely to no ill effect. Are there valid scientific reasons to why relatives should not procreate? Or is it all just about guilt and shame?

[lavenderdiva]

mostly its uneducated opinion...

read here:

http://www.cousincouples.com/index.shtml?./pages/facts.htm

snips:
No European country prohibits marriage between first cousins. It is also legal throughout Canada and Mexico to marry your cousin. The USA is the only western country with cousin marriage restrictions. Those restrictions predate modern genetics. Current studies indicate that cousin couples have a lower ratio of miscarriages -- perhaps because body chemistry of cousins is more similar. The verdict is still out. The National Society of Genetic Counselors estimated the increased risk for first cousins is between 1.7 to 2.8 percent, or about the same as any woman over 40 years of age. Children of non-related couples have a 2-3% risk of birth defects, as opposed to first cousins having a 4-6% risk. Genetic counseling is available for those couples that may be at a special risk for birth defects (e.g. You have a defect that runs in your family) In plain terms first cousins have at a 94 percent + chance of having healthy children.

to answer your question: any experts here? I guess I am, as I am married to my first cousin...

[Trillo]

11. Thanks, I read about it in one of Durant's books.

I can't excerpt a quote easily, perhaps even find one easily, but there's always google :)

A controversial topic concerns the practice of incestual marriages in ancient Egypt; some scholars suspect this lies behind the otherwise puzzling passage in Genesis 26:7-11, where Isaac tells his wife Rebekah that she should claim to be his sister, rather than his wife, otherwise he might be killed.

Some experts claim that these incestual marriages were widespread at least during part of Egyptian history, such as Naphtali Lewis (Life in Egypt under Roman Rule: Oxford, 1983), who claims that numerous papyri attest to many husbands and wives as being brother and sister.

When instances of brother-sister marriages first began to appear in the papyri, they were greeted with great scepticism in some quarters, where doubt was expressed that any society would really have countenanced such common violation of the incest taboo... Such arguments are ingenious, but they collapse completely in the face of the cumulative evidence of scores of papyri, official as well as private documents, in which the wife is unequivocally identified as the husband's "sister born of the same father and the same mother". (pp.43f)

more...

[kutastha]

29. birth defects

Since nonrelated couples have a 2-3% chance of having children with birth defects, then according to your link, related couples are twice as likely to have children with defects.

It increases the likelihood of autosomal recessive traits' expressing themselves (i.e. no dominant gene to compensate for the defective recessive allele).

[Freddie Stubbs]

66. According to those numbers

Cousins have twice the chance of having children with birth defects that normal couples do.

[WindRavenX]

13. It does increase the chance of certain recessive genetic disorders

So yes, there is a reason why most civilizations do not allow incest; the exceptions seem to be when it's known that the family involved doesn't have a history of genetic disorders...

[politicat]

60. Or Royal, then genetics don't matter.

EOM

[jwirr]

20. It was believed that there is more

chance of genetic defects when the couple are closely related. I think that theory has been debunked in recent years. I do genealogy as a hobby and have documented many 1st cousin marriages, some even over several generations. It is interesting that this was not seen as a problem in early America. In our case they were merely discharged from the Quaker church and most were reinstated later.

[XemaSab]

46. Basic genetics

If there's a recessive gene, such as the gene for sickle cell anemia, in a family, marrying family members increases the likelihood that the children will wind up with two copies of the gene and develop full blown sickle cell.

If there are no genes for anything bad in the family, then the children can be completely genetically "normal," however having more than one copy of the same gene can increase the likelihood of developing some illnesses.

A lot of the taboo is cultural, but there are historic biological reasons why inbreeding is bad. Modern genetic testing has negated a lot of the concerns about rogue genetic diseases in the offspring of cousin marriages.

As far as ancient civilizations goes, it's hard to say what the effects were of inbreeding. The Egyptian royal family were some serious inbreeders, but calling the Pharaoh's daughter a mutant probably wasn't a good way to earn brownie points. The royal families of Europe were terribly inbred, and they had all kinds of genetic issues, such as hemophilia, running through their line.

[Silverhair]

64. No valid scientific reasons. Economic ones.

First, recent studies have shown that for first cousin pairings, the risk of birth defects is about the same as for non related couples. However, if there are known genetic problems in the family, then it can be unwise.

In most of the world a first cousin marriage is a preferred marriage. However, in the US they are frowned upon. Limiting cousin marriage helps to break up the inherited wealth of very rich families. After a few generations, the wealth has been scattered - usually. However, is wealthy cousin marry inside the extended family, the wealth stays in the family.

There are no statistics on cousin marriage & divorce, but in general such marriages have a better chance of lasting. You get far fewer surprises as you frequently know your cousin already while growing up. You already know your future in-laws too. Your aunt will be your mother-in-law. The couple will get more assistance if needed from the family. Your cousin will most likely share your background and culture so there will be fewer conflicts.

BTW - Yes, I am married to my cousin (1st once removed) and am wonderfully happy. It has been lots of years and we still act like newlyweds.

[lynne]

8. Marriage of 1st cousins was a rather common practice -

- about 100 years ago and earlier. It was encouraged in some families for retention of family owned property. Other families inter-married as cousins were all that lived within the area and traveling far from home to look for a mate wasn't possible.

Only within the last 100 years or less has the practice become a social taboo. Should you look back into your family tree, quite likely you will find cousin-marriage in your ancestry.

[Yupster]

10. My scandalous family tree

My great grandfather was the first in the family to come to America. His wife joined him and they had a child. Then she died. He then brought over her sister, married and had four more kids with her.

A scandal in the first generation.

[lynne]

12. Quite honestly -

- it was very common for a widower/widow to marry the sibling of their spouse after the spouse died. I do a good bit of family history and find it time and again. Especially during the Civil War when the husband would be killed, the wife would many times marry his brother.

No scandal there! ;-)

[Ilsa]

34. Of course, there wouldn't be an increased risk for genetic defect

in a case such as that.

[muriel_volestrangler]

35. But it was specifically illegal in Britain for most of the 19th century

A sister-in-law was considered part of one's own family; marrying her after the death of one's wife was seen as marrying one's sister, thought almost incestuous. In England, such a marriage was a violation of canon law and in 1835 it became a violation of civil law as well.
...
Beginning in the 1860s, bills were introduced in Parliament annually to allow marriage with a deceased wife's sister, but it wasn't until 1907 that the Deceased Wife's Sister's Marriage Act finally made it legal. And not until 1921 (!) did the Deceased Brother's Widow's Marriage Act make marriage to a brother-in-law legal.

http://morgue.anglicansonline.org/030817/

[SemperEadem]

51. that's interesting

I suppose it would have been law for a while after Henry VIII and Katharine of Aragon's relationship problems.

Leviticus XVIII, 16 clearly stated 'Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy brother's wife: it is thy brother's nakedness'. And, later, in chapter XX, 'If a man shall take his brother's wife, it is an unclean thing: he hath uncovered his brother's nakedness; they shall be childless'.

That's part of the arguement on which he based his divorce from Katharine. Interesting to see England come full circle on this.

[Silverhair]

65. That's if the brother is still alive, then leave his wife alone.

I don't feel like looking it up, but it was the law in the time of David until Jesus that if a man died, his brother was supposed to take his widow as wife. Kind of a family insurance policy. It continued to be a common practice.

It happened in my family. My grandfather took his brother's wife when the brother died. I am descended from that marriage.

[SemperEadem]

67. I'm not talking about biblical times

the context in which I am referring was the late 1520's... and at that time, it meant a dead brother, too. After all, if it didn't, there would have been no need for Henry to send for a papal dispensation from Rome because Arthur was well dead by the time Henry became king.

What you say may have been the case way back then, but that's not what I was talking about.

[Silverhair]

70. OK, I missunderstood you. Sorry. NT

[SemperEadem]

49. I would shank my brother if he ever suggested such a thing to me

how disgusting.

[raccoon]

58. right, in 19th century

it was fairly common. Queen Victoria married her first cousin.
Charles Darwin married a cousin. And in novels (which of course are fiction, but do indicate how society thought about issues) characters frequently did, such as in WUTHERING HEIGHTS.

[ScrewyRabbit]

9. "Incest is a family affair!"

That's all I got.

[Virginian]

14. I married my third cousin.

Our grandmothers were first cousins. You hear about cousins marrying, but cousins also divorce. We did.

My neighbor was in an arranged marrisge with her mother's younger brother. He left her for a younger woman. Her two kids seem normal.

[NickB79]

22. Ouch, family reunions must be rough

I can only imagine how much more difficult a divorce would be if the two divorcees are related.

[Virginian]

38. His mother is nicer now. We exchange Xmas cards.

She didn't like her son and didn't think much of me for marrying him.
She used to invite his first wife and her new husband to thanksgiving and us also. That was difficult.
He is dead now, so I won't be bumping into him.

[Virginian]

42. The neighbor?

Her parents live with her. It was her mother who told me her younger brother was the ex-husband of her daughter.

He doesn't come around. The kids have no contact with their father. They hate him for leaving them and their mother for another woman.

Divorce is very rare in Indian families. I am sure it is difficult for all of them.

[Skittles]

30. of all the people in this world

perhaps one should stray farther than the freaking family tree, ya know? I don't know if it's right or wrong but it surely is creepy

[Virginian]

39. Most people don't know their third cousins.

Most people don't know their third cousins. Think about it. Do YOU know the grandchildren of your grandmother's cousins? If you haven't mapped out your geneology, you too could be married to your third cousin.

[Cicero]

61. "I'm my own Grandpa!" (nt)

[kittykitty]

72. Couldn't resist the explanation. . . .

Now many, many years ago, when I was twenty-three,
I was married to a widow who was pretty as could be.
This widow had a grown-up daughter who had hair of red.
My father fell in love with her, and soon they, too, were wed.

This made my dad my son-in-law and changed my very life,
My daughter was my mother, cause she was my father's wife.
To complicate the matter, even though it brought me joy,
I soon became the father of a bouncing baby boy.

My little baby then became a brother-in-law to Dad,
And so became my uncle, though it made me very sad.
For if he was my uncle, then that also made him brother
Of the widow's grown-up daughter, who, of course, was my stepmother.

Father's wife then had a son who kept him on the run,
And he became my grandchild, for he was my daughter's son.
My wife is now my mother's mother, and it makes me blue,
Because, although she is my wife, she's my grandmother, too.

Now if my wife is my grandmother, then I'm her grandchild,
And everytime I think of it, it nearly drives me wild,
For now I have become the strangest case you ever saw
As husband of my grandmother, I am my own grandpa!

I'm my own grandpa.
I'm my own grandpa.
It sounds funny, I know, but it really is so,

[Skittles]

62. actually I have mapped it out!

very limited family tree, half in England, half from Norway. And as far as I know I am the ONLY one living in Texas! :D

[regnaD kciN]

17. Relatively speaking...

:evilgrin:

[kimchi]

15. My cousins did it.

And yes, they DO live in West by God. Their kids, however, are absolutely beautiful and normal.

More power to them. It just freaks me out; to me it is like marrying your brother, because we all played together as kids.

[WearyOne]

16. cousins in British & European Royal families often marry

[regnaD kciN]

18. Which may explain a lot about the British and European Royal Families?

:evilgrin:

[WearyOne]

24. which is why they bring in outside blood like Camilla ..mmmm???

[JVS]

28. Camilla is the outside blood to which Chuck desires to be a tampon!

[Virginian]

40. I think her age is a factor to their getting married.

I think they waited until after she passed menopause so that there would be no royalty from this union.

Ed for typo.

[Mist]

43. That's how the gene for hemophaelia became dominant

with big repercussions for the Russian royal family.

[happyslug]

19. Forbidding Cousins to Marry was a Catholic Medieval Concept

And had more to do with the Catholic Church trying to break up some of the big families of the Late Roman Period than worrying about inbreeding.

People tend to forget that during the Roman Empire about 5 % of the population owed almost EVERYTHING and under Roman law you could marry your cousin. Cousin marrying is one way to make sure all money stays in the Family and thus power stays within the family.

The Catholic Church seems to have developed a hostility to this concept more to do with the fact that the mere concentration of wealth was one of the main reason the Western Empire fell (Either in 476 when the Last Roman Emperor was removed from office or 570 AD when the Lombards invaded Italy and the Eastern Empire was NEVER able to take back Northern Italy). This concentration was so large that these large land owners preferred to buy off the Barbarians than to give rights and land to their peasants.

One way this concentration wealth stayed in these families was by the families marrying their own cousins. This concentration of wealth even survived the fall of the Empire, you have Roman Property owners going to Constantinople in the 600s complaining of the high taxes their had to pay to their Frankish overloads. The Franks and other Germanic invaders took over very little land from these Roman Aristocrats and for that reason the Roman Aristocracy system survived till almost the tenth Century. It is only in the tenth century and the invasions of the Northmen, Magyars and Moors during the tenth Century that these Roman Aristocrats were replaced by the Feudal overloads of the Middle ages(And this started with Otto I of Germany in 900 AD and spread across Europe only being implemented fully in Britain after 1066 AD).

This replacement of the old Roman Elite with new overloads was almost 100%, in fact no noble family in Europe can trace their family (through the male line) before 900 AD (Some can through a female but NOT through a male). Given this revolution (and that what it was) you had a drop in the concentration of wealth and even the concept of what was the duty of the overload.

The change from landowner to overload to our modern eyes appear minor, but this change was very important during the time period in question. Under the Roman Empire large land owners, owned the land much like we own property today, i.e. the land owner owned the farms, may not own the peasants who worked the farm, but such peasants were under the complete control of the land owner as long the peasants were on his property and worked for the land owner. The Land owner did NOT own the peasants any duties BUT the peasant had the duty to work for the land owner if the peasant stayed on the owner's land.

With the advent of true Feudalism you switched from a Employer/Employee situation to a more Captain/Soldier situation. Under Feudalism in the tenth century, the Peasants had rights and their Overload had duties to the peasants, these rights and duties was defined by custom but were more like the rights and duties of Soldiers to their Commander than workers to their employer (or even slaves to their master).

Part of this switch was the Catholic Church Rule against Cousin marrying. Now the Church did not make the rule absolute, it could be waived (and often was) but with the adoption of the rule you would see wealth (and land) disperse over a broader group of people as opposed the same 5% that had owned everything during the time of the Roman Empire.

Thus with the adoption of the Rule Against Cousin marrying the heavy Concentration of wealth of the Roman Empire came to an end, a gradual end, took almost 500 years but an end.

The Church continued its policy against cousin marrying (With exceptions being possible) to this day and for the same reason to dispense wealth to a broader group of people than the top 5% of the population.

Now this anti-Cousin marrying policy has become so ingrain to modern Western people we rarely want to marry our cousins and most such marriages are viewed as exceptions to the general rule, but that was NOT the case in ancient Rome or most societies. Even in Iraq today it is more common for Cousins to marry than to marry a non-cousin. One of the problems we are having fighting the insurrection in Iraq is this Cousin marrying causes these families to be extremely close nit. A person can NOT just turn in his or her spouse or cousin without cutting herself or himself from their whole support group. Cousin marrying not only permits concentration of wealth but also power.

We in the west have almost 1500 years of NOT marrying our cousins. It spreads out the wealth (at least a little) but also permit people to be independent of their extended family. If a western person gets in a dispute with a relative NOT all of his relatives will have to be involved nor will it cut off his whole support group.

Thus today AS THE RESULT OF 1500 YEARS OF RULES AGAINST COUSIN MARRYING, the social problems caused by Cousin Marrying are minor, and will remain minor as long as Cousins rarely marry (i.e. the most people do NOT marry their Cousin).

[hedgehog]

27. I've been wondering if there were other related reasons

such as the protection of children from older relatives. The prohibitions against marriage to uncles and aunts could also be a protection for a young orphan or widow from someone with an eye on the family holdings.

[happyslug]

32. To a degree yes, The medieval Church also wanted to keep its own assets

And if you had more relatives to argue with (and to split up a person's property with) the church would get more benefits from each relative AND from the deceased person.

Like most ancient rules like the rule against Cousin marrying, there tend to be various reasons for the rule with some dominating during certain times and other rationales in other periods (For example the Rule was based on inbreeding popular in 1800s, while during the 1200s the Rule was based more on spreading the wealth).

[NickB79]

23. My great-grandparents did it, and the results were not pretty

Unfortunately, both of them carried the defective gene responsible for cystic fibrosis. My grandmother lost two brothers to CF.

[TexasSissy]

41. My great-great-grandparents did it. You won't believe their names...

Aladin and Clementine. For real. Is that a hoot or what?

As far as I can tell, no defective gene was passed down. (Unless, of course, I'm it but I'm too crazy to know it.) Seriously, several of the men in that branch of the family died from heart failure in middle age, so I don't know if there's a heart defect. Or it was just pure-d too much butter and booze and no exercise. more likely the latter.

[shantipriya]

33. First cousins marrying

What a sick society!!

[dolo amber]

36. Are they forcing you to marry your cousin?

If not, then what do you care?

I say Mazel Tov! Best wishes to ANYONE who finds true love. :toast:

[lavenderdiva]

45. thanks dolo amber

for your perspective... I found a wonderful partner, late in life, I might add, in my first cousin. We have been married 3 years now, and are very happy. While it may not be the choice for everyone, many people have found love and happiness this way. They shouldn't be prevented from sharing their lives and love by uneducated, uninformed people making laws and decisions for them. Thanks again. :hi:

[WarNoMore]

44. It was very common in my family;

you wouldn't believe how many of my ancestors married cousings and had huuuge families. (maybe *that's* my problem, lol)
The other branch of the family is plagued with polycystic kidney disease.

[SemperEadem]

47. Ewwwwwwwwwwwwww!!!

Cousin effers!!!

[Megahurtz]

55. Lol!

Totally!:freak::freak:

[brooklynite]

52. Time for a Constitutional Amendment!

After all, we can't expect other states to have to recognize this, can we?

[lavenderdiva]

54. they already do.... n/t

[umass1993]

53. Lots of people have genetic "Defects'"

does this mean we shouldn't allow them to procreate.

All you people with Chrones, or Huntingtons disease are not allowed to marry and have children?

This "defects" issue is a bunch of crap made up to rationalize a cultural taboo.

[alfredo]

56. I'm from Kentucky

My family tree has no branches.

[blueheeler]

57. Wasn't gay marriage......

supposed to be the thing that got this started? lol!!!!!
:pals:

[Danmel]

59. First Cousin Marriage is legal in NYS

Seems a little close to me, but we were very close with our cousins growing up- they were like siblings so the whole idea of marrying them seems kind of perverse.
For a cautionary tale on incest, read Middlesex, by Jeffrey Eugenides- it was fascinating and the characters are really interesting. I was sad when I finished it because I wanted to keep reading.

[Lab2112]

63. RE: First cousins get married in Maryland

Like West Virginia, I guess it's all relative in Maryland as well.

LAB

[guitar man]

68. this marriage is statistically

....much more likely to produce Republican offspring. :)

[captain crunch]

69. Isn't this incest ?

Can you imagine your child marrying your siblings child??
I assumed this was not legal in the United States.

[Silverhair]

71. No. Not incest. Legal in half the states. NT

[wildflower]

73. Boy am I glad I kept reading

after this point:

"ALTOONA, Pa. - First cousins who were denied a marriage license by a Pennsylvania judge earlier this month were wed in a civil ceremony in Maryland, the couple said Monday.

Tonight Show host Jay Leno and conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh..."

I thought, Leno and Limbaugh are first cousins? Luckily I finished reading the sentence. LOL.

-wildflower