its unlikely for a child to be born with cancer or heart disease, even to parents who have genetic predispositions to them. unlikely enough not to cause much concern over the reproductive qualities in these parents. if there was evidence to suggest otherwise, there would be more literature on the subject condemning these people for throwing their genetic dice to bring life into the world. it's a numbers game. sometimes. sometimes it's random. should none of us have kids because there's a chance they'll be born fucked up?
no. the issue with incest is the overwhelming incidence of childhood mortality and genetic maladaptation. coincidentally, the likelihood of both of these illnesses spike in children born of incest. along with many others. it's statistically incomparable.
i understand you're playing devil's advocate here, but we draw the line where it becomes dangerous enough a circumstance that it warrants litigation condemning the action.
2 people who are HIV positive (and not undergoing treatment) probably should not reproduce imo.
2 people who are siblings should not either. the odds are not in their favor, and more importantly, are not their child's.
your move.
__________________
Zack Wicks for president
|