All in the Family 3

I completely agree with the argument that my colleague makes below.  The argument against incest based on genetics (or taboo or both) is only one of the things wrong with incest.  It is not the most important.  Incest threatens the most important function of the family: the nurture of children.  It means that instead of being nurtured, children are exploited.  On the other hand, I suspect that the inhibitions and prohibitions against incest are older than family life.  Moreover, they are very clear to everyone even in modern societies, where the natural function of the family is no longer taken for granted in public discourse. 

The main reason that I did not focus on the more important argument against incest was that my post was not about incest, it was about marriage.  First cousin marriage, to be precise.  Issues of intra-familial exploitation may certainly arise in connection with cousin marriage, especially in cultures where some measure of inbreeding is encouraged.  But in this case I think the genetic argument is more important, especially in the West.  I presented what was, to me at least, a novel argument against first cousin marriage.  I thought that interesting in itself, and it backed up my broader contention that marriage is a matter of public concern. 

Besides, I didn't have to make the more important argument against incest in an already long post, as I could count on my spirited colleague to write a long one of his own.