4 ms·

Sure you can, it's not exclusive to your kids. But let me give you an example. My ancestry is very well documented back to 1100ish. Most of my ancestors had e

Sure you can, it's not exclusive to your kids. But let me give you an example. My ancestry is very well documented back to 1100ish. Most of my ancestors had either a military function or later on were law enforcement officers. When I grew up, my parents left me the choice to do anything I want.My grades were good enough to go to a University and become a doctor or lawyer. But since I've been a child I had a natural desire to protect people. I did that in school. And well I am retired now, but I did that for all of my life more or less. This could of course just be imagination as there is no scientific proof. But I think that some of these values were passed down our bloodline. And that is just different than learning values from someone else. It's like an imprint. So if you decide not to have kids and you don't have a brother or sister who can keep the bloodline going that is an absolutely fine choice, but it's also a shame that that genetics and traits that were passed down for centuries get lost. English is not my mother tongue, I hope you can get my point.

Thiez 10y ago
> So if you decide not to have kids and you don't have a brother or sister who can keep the bloodline going that is an absolutely fine choice, but it's also a shame that that genetics and traits that were passed down for centuries get lost. That's silly, unless you family has been has been having a single child for each generation the last 9 centuries, the genes of your ancestors from back then will probably be in hundreds or thousands of people living today. On average, people have been having more than two children per family for hundreds of years, so each generation you go back will have exponentially more descendants, and up to some limit the number of ancestors you have also doubles each generation you go back. Of course once you go back far enough it turns out we're all related. So it may be the case that some of the genes of your direct parents will not get passed on if you and your siblings never have children. But it's extremely unlikely that this means the end of a 900 year bloodline.

Thiez 10y ago

> So if you decide not to have kids and you don't have a brother or sister who can keep the bloodline going that is an absolutely fine choice, but it's also a shame that that genetics and traits that were passed down for centuries get lost. That's silly, unless you family has been has been having a single child for each generation the last 9 centuries, the genes of your ancestors from back then will probably be in hundreds or thousands of people living today. On average, people have been having more than two children per family for hundreds of years, so each generation you go back will have exponentially more descendants, and up to some limit the number of ancestors you have also doubles each generation you go back. Of course once you go back far enough it turns out we're all related. So it may be the case that some of the genes of your direct parents will not get passed on if you and your siblings never have children. But it's extremely unlikely that this means the end of a 900 year bloodline.