Do you avoid morphs with known genetic flaws?

[WingedWolfPsion]

I don't understand the logic behind demanding that people give up morphs that have secondary physical characteristics that are unusual or make people uneasy, due to the CHANCE that in the future, some OTHER morph might be bred that has serious problems.

Can you explain...well...why we should? Would I really need to avoid breeding dogs with shorter muzzles, like St Bernards, just because someone, one day, might breed an English Bulldog? It doesn't make sense to me.

Just like calling the super-cinnamon duckbilling a 'jaw deformity'....it is an alteration in their appearance, but it's no more a deformity than the extra vertebrae in a greyhound, or semi-floppy ears on a terrier. It doesn't interfere with their ability to function normally, at all.

I consider spiders and womas to be the 'fainting goats' of the ball python world. They have a neurological abnormality, but it's not detrimental to them in a captive situation, because the mutation that creates it makes them desirable to us, so we propagate them. That makes it a positive mutation for them. Evolution cares only about whose genes are passed on. Spider ball pythons are successful in evolutionary terms, because WE like them, and care for them.

If there is no real evidence that the animal's quality of life is impeded, then it's fine. That's my stance.