Why shouldn’t you marry your sister?

[Barnicals]

Quote by: SoylentGreen Fraternal marriage was normal in ancient times. Recessive genes don't just appear they have to be passed on. If a couple does not have them they don't get passed on . If they do then precautions can be taken. Most of euurope and asia practice cousin marriage . No, actually I missed that episode, but would have liked to seen it. This is more an answer to a theist here who complained my morals were so low I would even consider fraternal marriage.

Mmm, precautions can be taken, but they aren't neccesarily. It's just like teen pregnancies.

The episode was good. Had one German brother/sister couple who had had four kids, 2 of whom had genetic defects, and all of whom were taken and put into foster care. I'm sure you can get it on tvnzondemand.co.nz by now.

[Pooeypants]

Quote by: SoylentGreen Inbreeding is no more harmful than outbreeding unless inbreeding is practiced erratically in an otherwise outbreeding population. In outbreeding populations, mates are less likely to share close ancestry and thus the same harmful recessives traits. In this kind of reproductive system, recessive genes do not wash out of the population and thus accumulate as a large genetic load. The result can be the manifestation of harmful characteristics in the offspring of mating relatives. For most of human history, breeding populations were small and isolated, and the community often practiced cousin marriage. The results were a relatively homogenous population of inbred individuals. Such homogenous populations are also common in other species . It is unlikely, therefore, that a naturally selected mechanism would evolve to prevent incest/inbreeding.

Unfortunately, homogenous populations are bad for any given species. Why? A good example would be susceptibility to disease; variations in immunity would mean that a disease won't run rampant throughout the entire population and potentially cause a extinction. Therefore, it would make sense that we don't breed with our closest relatives as homogeneity can have disastrous consequences.

[SoylentGreen]

Quote by: Pooeypants Unfortunately, homogenous populations are bad for any given species. Why? A good example would be susceptibility to disease; variations in immunity would mean that a disease won't run rampant throughout the entire population and potentially cause a extinction. Therefore, it would make sense that we don't breed with our closest relatives as homogeneity can have disastrous consequences.

Only if an entire population started to inbreed. Given that the world is easily traveled these days and not everyone will inbreed then there is no more chance of disease running rampant than there would be if we didn't legalise it.

[gela]

I'm divided on the issue.

On one hand. Why not? If thats what someone wants to do, who is society to say that they can't?

On the other hand.. we have to pay the medical bills through tax here. Genetic disease can't be cured, and requires ongoing care for ones entire life.

Perhaps we should allow marriage, but strongly encourage adoption. If they refuse advice and have a genetically diseased child, then they should be financially responsible for their choice.

I wonder if brothers and sisters aren't generally attracted to each other because of instinct, or societies opinions?
After all, we are more likely to pass on our genes if we avoid mating with a sibling.

[Gods_Mercenary]

I wonder if brothers and sisters aren't generally attracted to each other because of instinct, or societies opinions?

Probably a little of both, though society certainly is responsible for backing up that general taboo.

[The Bacon Guy]

Quote by: Soil Only if an entire population started to inbreed. Given that the world is easily traveled these days and not everyone will inbreed then there is no more chance of disease running rampant than there would be if we didn't legalise it.

But then if people are practicing inbreeding in an otherwise outbreeding population, the issue of genetic disorders still exists. Obviously that's not a legal issue, but there's no point in ignoring it either.

Quote by: gela Perhaps we should allow marriage, but strongly encourage adoption. If they refuse advice and have a genetically diseased child, then they should be financially responsible for their choice.

Would you support the same idea for women over a certain age having children with Down's syndrome? Or people who happen to have similar family histories of disease?

[Pooeypants]

Quote by: SoylentGreen Only if an entire population started to inbreed. Given that the world is easily traveled these days and not everyone will inbreed then there is no more chance of disease running rampant than there would be if we didn't legalise it.

Actually, an easily travelled world makes it far worse, because diseases can now jump continents in as short as a day. A recent example is SARS and a historic example would be Europeans going to Americas.

[SoylentGreen]

Quote by: Pooeypants Actually, an easily travelled world makes it far worse, because diseases can now jump continents in as short as a day. A recent example is SARS and a historic example would be Europeans going to Americas.

Which is an argument against travelling , not incest.

[gela]

Would you support the same idea for women over a certain age having children with Down's syndrome? Or people who happen to have similar family histories of disease?

Why not?
If someone wants to take that risk, then they can take that risk with their own money. There is nothing wrong with adopting. Infact, they would be providing a home for a child who would probably otherwise live in poverty.

[The Bacon Guy]

By extension, you'd also have to deny financial help to everyone with a child who has a genetic disorder because they took the risk of having a kid instead of adopting.

I personally don't have a problem with that; I'm just making sure you're consistent.

[Pooeypants]

Quote by: SoylentGreen Which is an argument against travelling , not incest.

Erm, your point was that it was beneficial for us to have access to easy travel, which I refuted.

[SoylentGreen]

Quote by: Pooeypants Erm, your point was that it was beneficial for us to have access to easy travel, which I refuted.

No I said that it was "Given that the world is easily traveled these days".
There are benefits to that and liabilities as well, as you pointed out.

The Bacon GuyBy extension, you'd also have to deny financial help to everyone with a child who has a genetic disorder because they took the risk of having a kid instead of adopting.

Only if they had a kid knowing there was a risk, otherwise accidents do happen.

[The Bacon Guy]

There's always a risk.

[gela]

By extension, you'd also have to deny financial help to everyone with a child who has a genetic disorder because they took the risk of having a kid instead of adopting. I personally don't have a problem with that; I'm just making sure you're consistent.

There is a significant risk, and there is a 1 in a thousand risk.

If it makes you happy, then they could put a risk percentage on it, and anyone who knowingly has a child that has, say a 10% or more risk of genetic disease, then they have to finance the medical bills. Risk factors are obvious and easy to calculate.

[ironeagle]

Because it causes diformities and mental retardation in many children.

[tinybear]

Quote by: ironeagle Because it causes diformities and mental retardation in many children.

What if the couple vows not to have any children. Would that be OK then?

[Marilyn Monroe]

Quote by: ironeagle Because it causes diformities and mental retardation in many children.

I believe that's an old wive's tale.

[ironeagle]

No it actually is not an old wives tale it causes down syndrome and other deformaties, has something to do with the similarity in genes. It is also pretty desperate if you have to marry your own sister as oppossed to a mate outside your family. No God and the law doesn't think it's ok to marry your sister, and it's partly because it's gross, and because of these deformities. Also I would womder if it was really love or bizzare infatuation like if you fell in love with your mother or something.

Have any of you seen the movie the seven signs (might be seventh sign)? In this movie about the breaking of the seals and basicaly god's messenger coming down to earth to start the end times, this boy kills his parents because his parents are brother and sister, and he has down syndrome, and he ends up getting sentenced to death for killing them. He was following the instruction in the bible to place the blood of their own deaths on their heads, and the boy died a myrtar in the movie.

[SoylentGreen]

No it actually is not an old wives tale it causes down syndrome and other deformaties, has something to do with the similarity in genes.

No, actually it is caused by a deformity in a particular chromosome. This can occur to any couple not just people who are related. There is no indication that a closely related people will automatically produce down syndrome.

[tinybear]

Face it folks, ya can't marry your sister because everyone thinks it's repulsive.