Inbreeding is a real problem for some countries/cultures.
My wife works at a childrens hospital and they have to refer many people to genetic counseling and yes it is more of a problem for certain groups.
Why you would bother posting that information on an inbred Australian forum makes me wonder.
It would be much better if you went in person and delivered that information at the Mosque or local Islamic school

Brian Ross wrote on Oct 31^st, 2013 at 11:50pm:


Brian, Bigot, why do you bother to post?

A rough estimate shows that close to half of the world’s Muslims are inbred as a result of consanguineous marriages. In Pakistan, 70 percent of all marriages are between first cousins – children of siblings – and in Turkey the share is 25-30 percent.

Statistical research on Arabic countries indicates that up to 34 percent of all marriages in Algeria are blood-related as are 46 percent in Bahrain, 33 percent in Egypt, 80 percent in Nubia (the southern part of Egypt), 60 percent in Iraq, 64 percent in Jordan, 64 percent in Kuwait, 42 percent in Lebanon, 48 percent in Libya, 47 percent in Mauritania, 54 percent in Qatar, 67 percent in Saudi Arabia, 63 percent in Sudan, 40 percent in Syria, 39 percent in Tunisia, 54 percent in the United Arabic Emirates and 45 percent in Yemen. According to Dr. Nadia Sakati of King Faisal Specialist Hospital in Riyadh, 45 percent of married Arab couples are blood-related.  The fact that many of these couples are themselves children of blood-related parents increases the risk of negative consequences.

The number of blood-related marriages is lower among Muslim immigrants living in the West.
Among Pakistanis living in Denmark the number is down to 40 percent and it is 15 percent among Turkish immigrants. This may be due to the fact that immigration rules make it difficult to import family-related brides. Another factor may be better information on the risks connected with blood-related marriages. Because of better human rights protection it is also more difficult for traditional Muslim families to force their children to marry within the family.


http://themuslimissue.wordpress.com/2013/05/28/psychologist-serious-consequences...

But there is one culture, one faux "religion," that expressly condones and encourages consanguineous marriage and breeding.  That system is Islam, and the document that explicitly ratifies incest is the Koran, specifically Sura 4 verse 23:



Prohibited for you (in marriage) are your mothers, your daughters, your sisters, the sisters of your fathers, the sisters of your mothers, the daughters of your brother, the daughters of your sister, your nursing mothers, the girls who nursed from the same woman as you, the mothers of your wives, the daughters of your wives with whom you have consummated the marriage -- if the marriage has not been consummated, you may marry the daughter. Also prohibited for you are the women who were married to your genetic sons. Also, you shall not be married to two sisters at the same time -- but do not break up existing marriages.


Sounds like an exhaustive list -- but it is not.  It is the most lax incest prohibition in all of human culture.  There is a massive omission: cousins only once removed.  In the Muslim culture, marriage and breeding between first cousins has existed since day one.  Mohammed himself married Zaynab, who was his father's sister's daughter.  Mohammed and Zaynab were direct first cousins.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/04/the_keystone_of_the_islamic_mi.html

Did you know Brian Cuvnt, was a term of endearment in the 16th century and could not be used as a swear word! As we move forward in time words take on different meanings. So bigot how do you and your cabal intend to move into the present.

It appears I have made a Freudian slip in my punctuation, oh dear I am sure it will not be noticed.

wally1 wrote on Nov 1^st, 2013 at 6:46pm:



As Abraham did not exist how could he have married?

Please enlighten us plagiarist.

This is of course for the edification of all!

Adamant wrote on Nov 1^st, 2013 at 7:14pm:


Prove he didn't exist

|dev|null wrote on Oct 31^st, 2013 at 5:49pm:


You don't think that having 6% of children born with a congenital abnormality is significant?

Quote:


So you are trying to excuse rampant inbreeding across the Muslim world, attributable at least partly to Muhammed marrying his first cousin, by throwing back even further?

Brian Ross wrote on Nov 1^st, 2013 at 7:28pm:


Do you mean erroneously, wrongfully or misattributed?

Brian Ross wrote on Nov 1^st, 2013 at 7:28pm:


I do agree, but you and your cohorts are the ones who refuse to act, you and your ilk are todays fifth column. Your left wing diatribe knows no bounds.

You are not a "GOOD  MAN"

The Barbarians are at the Gates, you are helping to open them!


This is what Burke DID say "There is, however, a limit at which forbearance ceases to be a virtue"

PS Checked up yet what Bigot means? No, thought not! Bigot

Adamant wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2013 at 11:01am:



Answer the simple question Wally, or go away if you find the truth too hard!

Brian Ross wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2013 at 1:01am:





brian,

The only part of that dictionary entry which you quoted, which actually defines the meaning of the word 'bigot', is;

"a person who is bigoted:"

LOL





Try this definition brian;

The futility, of trying to accommodate moslems
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1379892909/9#9
Quote:






brian,

AGAIN I ASK YOU;

If the act of bigotry, involves being intolerant of the expressed opinions of others;

And if 'mainstream' ISLAM [within its published religious doctrine] expresses ISLAM's intolerance of the 'expressed opinions' of others [THAT IS; 'others' who do not want to become moslems]...

e.g.
"If anyone desires a religion other than Islam (submission to Allah), never will it be accepted of him;...."
Koran 3.85


"And fight with them until.....religion should be only for Allah,..."
Koran 2.193




Then brian, do you view ISLAM as being a purveyor of violent religious bigotry in the world ?

It is a serious question.