They used to do it in the good ol' days. Some of the best leaders of certain kingdoms were the product of brother-sister love. Why no more family love?
2007-07-22 20:04:31 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Only royalty did it. It produced blooming idiots. Most of us believe incest is immoral. I think it is disgusting. However, please feel free to breed with your siblings and/or parent. I certainly do not care.
2007-07-22 20:10:42 · answer #1 · answered by lcmcpa 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Genetics
It's called inbreeding and the British Royal family was guilty of it with European Royalty, and they paid the price with hemophilia; the disease prevents simple cuts from clotting.
When you inter-breed in the family you bring recessive genes to the front. The more you do it the more those recessive genes surface and most of them have problems. So if the Royal Family marry commoners then they have a much smaller chance of having a child with hemophilia, the gene for it is recessive and it doesn't crop up unless both sides of the genetic contribution have it. The more times the both contributors are related to the same contributor the more times the errors have repeat and the higher chances of the damaged recessive genes being expressed in the resulting offspring.
Another reason is that when the royal families breeded with each other they thought of themselves as divine beings so they couldn’t dilute their royal blood with commoners. That would ruin the empire decreasing the general divinity and natural genius of the royal line. Now days we know that while the Queen may be royal, she is still only human and her genes are just as good as mine. So breeding out of the family actually improves the stock.
This problem is the largest in the professional dog world. Breeders start with small stocks of dogs and frequently inter-breed them. They do this to pick the good characteristics that are the ones that set the guidelines for the breed. But, on the way they pick up other problems, and these close families become more prone to certain diseases and health complications; hip dysphasia is one of the most common (the hips spread and the dog can’t walk).
2007-07-22 20:20:01 · answer #2 · answered by Dan S 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Many diseases and syndromes that are rare have a huge increase in chance of occuring in a child when its something like a brother and sister.
Read more in depth about the gold ole days your talking about... yea they would have a leader... and the other kid that was born handicapped or with some disease they kept hidden away somewhere so no one knew.. it happened more than you think.
2007-07-22 20:11:34 · answer #3 · answered by sociald 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Recessive genes causing birth defects, which are normally do not appear in children, are reinforced, and more likely to appear in children who have parents with similar genetic codes.
Defects such as hemophilia, mental retardation, et al can occur.
Thus, it is not only discouraged, but illegal in the US.
2007-07-22 20:09:59 · answer #4 · answered by MenifeeManiac 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Due to genetic issues with reproduction. Too many offspring of "family lovin'" ended up with extra fingers, toes, disorders, mutations, etc.
Smarter to just make it illegal than to pay for all the mutations.
2007-07-22 20:09:20 · answer #5 · answered by Vindicaire 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You got to be kidding. Ever heard of incest? Besides the gene pool would be terrible for the offspring.
2007-07-22 20:09:32 · answer #6 · answered by no_einstein 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes, and they had plenty of inbred chromosomal problems!
It is against the law, and for good reason and that is even putting morality aside!
2007-07-22 20:11:17 · answer #7 · answered by cantcu 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think it is ok, just dont have any kids and there is nothing to worry about.
2007-07-22 20:15:00 · answer #8 · answered by Galahad 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋