To add on:

The argument around homosexuality used rights (which don’t exist) vs sin (which also doesn’t exist at least in the sense they say it does).  There were also lots of complaints that it is “unnatural”, which was nonsensical.  That’s the level of debate by the normals.  I watched it happen.

A nuanced position based on the actual benefit to society did not occur.  

If the ideology of rights wins, then people have a right to cousin marriage and it is perceived as immoral for villainous consequentialist Nationalists (comme moi) to demand that the State should have an interest in not creating generations of new higher-genetic-risk children for very little gain, which it will then have to subsidize.

All of society must live with the consequences.