Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by wilbjammin
The reality is, however, that many believe that incest causes genetic problems so to decompact "discrimination" against incest requires significant proof that there is no increased chance of offspring having deformities.
By this logic, anything that anyone believes is automatically considered the truth until someone can prove otherwise. Excuse me if I thought the burden of proof should lie with the person making the claim.
|
Indeed, I would like to add to what Filtherton said by asking you again to look closer at the nuance of what I had written. I wrote that <i><u><b>most people</i></b></u> believe that incest generates a much higher chance of genetically caused birth defects. You're claiming that I'm telling you something other than the realistic truth. Do you really think that most people don't think that incest contributes to the possibility of there being birth defects? I don't.
Simply put: I think that you'll have a lot of convincing to do to establish that incest doesn't contribute to the chances of genetic birth defects considering: a) logically, it makes a lot of sense that incest would cause birth defects, b) history has examples of incestuous family lines that have many genetic deformities in them, and c) nearly all cultures in the world have have anti-incest taboos.
So, to summarize: You are making a claim that most people disagree with - it is upon you to prove that what you are saying (which goes against common wisdom and observations) has validity.