Some people might say the last panel was not necessary, but it was what made me spit my coffee.
If the first panel was shortened just a bit to hide the bib the third panel would have more impact
🎶 Sweet Home Alabama! 🎶
Roll tide!
Fun fact: a child who is the product of first cousins has about as much chance of genetic defects as a child with a mother who was over 40 when she gave birth. The problem is when it happens for multiple generations.
This doesn’t dismiss the moral issues with it, though.
This doesn’t dismiss the moral issues with it, though.
Genuine question, what are those?
I recognize issues with large power imbalance, such as huge gap in maturity, roles (e.g.: student/teacher, worker/boss), intelligence (severe mental disability on one side), etc. where one party could easily coerce the other into something, possibly even unintentionally (e.g.: one party wants something and is already upset, the other party is worried about not only breaking up, but also getting fired and not being able to afford rent, thus pushing through).
But in this case, if the above doesn’t apply, what are the other problems?
Aside from the aforementioned risk of birth defects there are no ‘other problems’ other than being outside of social norms. It could be argued that the bans of these marriages in the US were motivated not by science but a desire to more quickly assimilate immigrants. Essentially boiling down to xenophobia if not racism.
Normal For Norfolk.
Alternate reading: He was about to torture him for that information. Luckily he only had to ask.
