Is it hypocritical to point out that Rudy was married to his 2d cousin

[CatWoman]

whereas FDR and Eleanor were 5th cousins?

[Fresh_Start]

1. That would make him more attractive to GOP'ers

since lots of them are married to their first or second cousins.

[CatWoman]

2. what does a Republican call his sister?

Mom :)

[liberal N proud]

3. Most republicans must be inbred

[JohnLocke]

4. Not hypocritical, just stupid.

It's not dangerous (incestuous) to have a relationship with your first cousin, never mind your second cousin, and such unions produce normal, genetically-healthy children.

It's not against the law in any state or country to have a relationship with your second cousin.

It's not against against the tenets of any major religion; in the Bible there are at least three different incidents of (first) cousins marrying, and cousins are not among the lengthy list of forbidden relationships in Leviticus 18.

It's a non-issue. If you want to go personal with Rudy, talk about his divorces.

http://www.slate.com/id/2064227/

[Ignacio Upton]

5. Well, at least with 5th cousins, there is more genetic diversity

So you're less likely to have the same problems with kids as you would with 1st or 2nd cousins.

[treestar]

6. In no state is is unlawful to marry your second cousin

There is no reason to pick on someone for that.

What a shocking idea. I cannot believe anyone would be so narrow minded and try to attack any candidate on such ridiculous grounds.

Isn't there a political issue that he has a stand on that can be attacked?

[Forkboy]

7. I don't know.We'd better ask everybody

using print and thirty second spots on tv and radio :)

[EFerrari]

8. For now, he is. n/t

[johncoby2]

9. EWWWWWWWWWWWWWW!

With that said, it wouldnt bother the hillbillies of the republic party.

[noamnety]

16. That's offensive on several levels

First off, it's stereotyping, which is pretty much always offensive.

Second, it's ignorant. Cousin marriages are as likely to occur between the elite, historically, so they don't "damage" their bloodline. (Offensive in and of itself, but such is the history of nobility)

Third, it's culturally insensitive, as most of the world allows marriages between first cousins. What you are basically saying is that those other cultures are backwards and repulsive. "In Iraq, as in much of the region, nearly half of all married couples are first or second cousins to each other. A 1986 study of 4,500 married hospital patients and staff in Baghdad found that 46% were wed to a first or second cousin, while a smaller 1989 survey found 53% were "consanguineously" married." http://www.isteve.com/cousin_marriage_conundrum.htm

[SoCalDem]

20. European monarchies have been doing this forever

but on the downside, that's also how inherited diseases continue too.. Hemophilia was once called the "royal disease" because so many "families" intermarried.

[CatWoman]

26. especially on the Portugese and Spanish sides

which produced the hideous Carlos in the Hapsburg line.

[Spider Jerusalem]

32. There was a bit more going on than just a few cousin marriages with Carlos II...

his father was his mother's uncle, and one set of his grandparents were ALSO uncle and niece (there's a good reason why marriages between first cousins are allowed today, but marriages between an aunt or uncle and a nephew or niece aren't).

[Ilsa]

17. I used to think the same way, but after I read more about

the medical side of it, I realized there is very little chance of having genetic problems -- it is only very slightly higher than the general population.

I can see where marrying cousins might be advantageous to a family trying to keep family property from having to be split up.

[noamnety]

10. I dunno. Is ignorance and bigotry hypocritical?

Is there a problem with 2nd cousin marriages we ought to know about?

Or is this another case of attempting to separate people into minority groups based on random characteristics and stir up hatred about them for no apparent reason, letting the collateral damage fall where it may?

[HockeyMom]

11. No. It's HOW he left his second cousin wife

to run off with Donna while his wife was in the hospital with a mental breakdown. It's on par, though, with his announcing on TV that he was divorcing Donna (seeing Judith then) before he even told Donna.

Do you see a pattern with this man? THAT is the real issue here.

Incidentally, I had an uncle who was married 5 times. I can see a lot of similarities.

[Cha]

19. YEah, who cares how close in

blood he was to one of his wives? It's the arrogance and greed of rudy that shows up in every damn thing he does.

If the bushites hadn't of let 9/11 happen..we wouldn't even be having this conversation. rudy ghouliani came to power stepping up the ladder on thousands of New Yorkers.

[papau]

12. Was FDR married 3 times, moving mistress into home while waiting for wife leaving? n/t

n/t

[WinkyDink]

27. FDR ain't running now, is he?

[KG]

13. just add 'serial adulterer' after his name every time you type it. same with newt.

...Rudy Guliani, serial adulterer this, ....Rudy Guliani, serial adulterer that...

...Newt Gingrich, serial adulterer this, ....Newt Gingrich, serial adulterer that....

see how easy that is?

[CatWoman]

15. LOL

:hi:

noted :)

[mitchum]

14. That will appeal to a lot of red staters

[TheCowsCameHome]

18. How sweet. The GOP version of "family" values

I'm getting misty................

[Venus Dog]

21. But what about that kid of his

Andrew? He's one strange little "tyke" although he's probably humongous now. Whatever happened to him? Did Rudy put him in a John Hinckley, Jr. training camp, or what?

[louis-t]

22. People forget the scandals of Rudy before 9/11.

It'll come up again if he gets the nom.

[DeeDeeNY]

23. Not hypocritical but not useful for campaigning against him

There is so much to go after him on the issues, that it's besides the point to bring up his personal life.
Supposedly he decided to divorce her as soon as he found out they were cousins.

[Benhurst]

24. I never realized how dangerous incest was until I met

some North Carolina politicians.

[LeftyMom]

25. Hypocritical or not, it's stupid.

Unless there's a family history of dangerous recessives which both parties carry and an intent to have children, there's no problem with marrying a cousin. One just shouldn't make a habit of it over many generations.

[CatWoman]

28. Well, stupid is as stupid does

I was on another blog discussing Rudy's first wife, and a wingnut jumped in railing about FDR.

The thing is, I was talking about the low and sleazy way in which he treated Donna Hanover and their children.

on edit: stupid or not, some people view marrying one's cousin as sleazy. I'm in that group.

[LeftyMom]

30. The majority of human pairings, historically, have been second cousin or closer

Why? Because only the wealthy ever met somebody who lived more than a day's walk away, and everybody closer was a relative or some sort.

The risks associated with a first cousin paring are similar to those of having a child in one's late 30's. A second cousin pairing, absent a family history of a recessive trait illness such as albinism or tay sachs, is no more risky than having a child with a stranger.

In most of the world, marrying a cousin is normal. In some places, marrying outside of one's extended family is strange. You're displaying a very provincial attitude in dismissing the marriage customs of the rest of the planet and what science has to say about them. The idea that marrying a cousin is the exclusive domain of banjo-plucking rednecks and results in children destined for the cover of the Weekly World News is a very American superstition, with no basis in science.

[noamnety]

35. Bigotry is sleazier.

I always thought cousin marriages were creepy. It's a cultural thing that we're taught in America. Danged if I know the reason why - the stigma began before modern genetics was even a science. That's how bigotry is - it's an unexamined learned value. So I'm not proud of it, but I can fairly say I learned from a young age to be a bigot about this issue - stereotyping like you've seen elsewhere on this thread.

I took the opposite position once in an online argument, just to play devil's advocate, for no real reason. While I was researching my position, I stumbled across http://www.cousincouples.com - the folks on the forum there were pretty patient with my stupid questions, and I became friends with a few of them, watched from the sidelines as one of the couples went on national tv (20/20 I think) to talk about the issue. Anyway, it's amazing what prejudices you can get over with a small bit of education and just listening to people.

I learned that "it's icky, can't help it, that's just my gut feeling" is the same logic that was behind much of the taboo against interracial marriage. If you can't break down the reason for a cultural taboo, there's a good chance it's founded in bigotry or ignorance. Most of the time we just let that go unexamined, til we are forced to put it under the microscope.

If some wingnut on another blog was discussing a white person's black wife, would it even occur to you to respond by pointing out that so-and-so (a republican) also married a black woman - and she had even darker skin? Cause that's kind of what you're talking about doing here, imho.

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

29. It's relevant if Republicans put character at issue again

and if they attack the character of Democratic candidates. Frankly I don't care who the candidates are married to. I hate that "People's Magazine" aspect of US politics. I don't think there should be a First Lady or First Gentleman. I don't want to know who their children are or see the First Dog on his own video cam show. I don't want to hear, smell, or see the person the President chooses to sleep with, as that is a personal matter and has nothing to do with how that person will make executive decisions, in my opinion.

But if Republicans start attacking the character of others, while claiming that their own party is the party of good ole time values, then Giuliani's past character is itself put at issue. It's the deception, artifice, and hypocrisy that matter, not who shares a candidate's bed.

[Poiuyt]

31. I think it's kind of creepy myself

Reading this thread, it seems that a lot of people don't have a problem with it. I don't care that royalty were married to their cousins. In today's American society I would think it would be looked down upon, legal or not.

The Republicans are going to have a hard time taking the high moral ground if Giuliani, McCain, or Gingrich become the nominee. We'll see just how important family values really are to them.

[NNN0LHI]

34. "We'll see just how important family values really are to them."

They ran to the polls to vote for Ahnold by the thousands.

I think I know how important family values really are to them.

Don

[npincus]

33. oh, well.... like Repukes fight fair.

I won't lose any sleep over it.

The GOP shitstorms against our folks don't hesitate for fairness or accuracy.