By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Reasonable said:
Kasz216 said:
Reasonable said:

Morally I couldn't care less - genetically it's bad news so I'd actually object on those grounds: bad for the species.


Doesn't it take like... dozens of generations of inbreeding to show effects?

The only real issue is genetic diseases becuase your basically guranteeing it will strike

Yeah but so what?  It's still going to happen.  It's not like people will say "well, we'll just have a couple of generations of incest then stop'.  The risk will be there.  Also, a lot of evolution theory indicates that changes can be pretty quick.  Certainly if we're talking people with genetic diseases you're going to see very quick effects, as you say.

Note I'm not talking about sex that's protected but reproduction.  You're basically increasing the odds per generation of weaker, more disease prone children.  I know I wouldn't feel too happy if I was a tenth generation incest child with a lot of physical issues.

It's just not a good idea from any genetic perspective.

Why not, if your extended family or whatever has *good* genes, lacking any particular recessive traits, though that veers dangerously close to the old arguments for eugenics (which then bound into racism, state racism, holocaust, etc etc)



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.