But seriously, how is genetic diversity? Especially from a scientific standpoint?
>sadly, we all know you guys won't be able to keep it to a scientific standpoint

I see a lot of people arguing against it (yes, for /pol/-like reasons - but not always), but all my research into it always find that diversifying genes is a good thing. In fact, it tends to be a key to a species survival. For example, it's theorised that a lack of genetic diversity is what led to the Neanderthals dying out. But other than that, genetic diversity only seems to be a net-positive, so I don't get why anyone (especially these days) would argue against it.

I guess you could argue about having bad genes slip into you someone how. But that's more of an issue of the quality of specific genes, rather than general genetic diversity. And even then, there's been studies that found having bad genes from different sources tend to balance each other and net you various health benefits (having bad genes from the same sources just lets them gang up on the organism and produce a lot of problems). Kind of like how two different types of poison can form together and produce the world's most common seasoning (salt).