Husband And Wife Discover They Are Siblings.

[Minnesota]

Phnom Penh - A Cambodian man's joy turned to dismay after he discovered that his long-lost mother, who had survived the bloody Khmer Rouge regime, is also the mother of his wife. Tep Song, 35, and his wife Tep Ly, 38, had been removed from their village in the southern province of Svay Rieng and separated by Khmer Rouge troops in 1975 when they were five and eight, respectively.

The pair told aid workers they met again when Song was 17 and extremely ill in hospital in neighbouring Takeo province and Ly was assigned as his nurse. They fell in love and married soon afterwards, unaware that they had any more in common than having been born in the same province. "It should have been a time of great joy, but now the mother cries all day and all night," Prom Bopha said. "They are surprised and very upset and all three are now very ill."

The couple has four children, aged between 14 years and 14 months.

source

Questions.

1a. Was their relationship immoral?

1b. If so, why

2a. If not, would it be immoral for them to continue with it with intimacy?

2b. without intimacy?

[$cirisme]

Um, wow. That would really suck.

[TheOneAndOnly]

Didn't the fact that their children were such good swimmers give them a clue?

[NeilUnreal]

Question 1: No. They had no reason to suppose their relationship was anything unusual.

Question 2: This is the tough one. They've got several children, so it is imperative that they maintain as normal a family as is possible. Most doctors would probably counsel against having further children. As far as intimacy without further children, since this is pretty much a special case, I’m content to let them make their own decision about what to do when the bedroom door closes.


-Neil

[Kenny]

Dang that sucks!

1a. Was their relationship immoral?

No. They were acting in good faith given the knowledge they had.

2a. If not, would it be immoral for them to continue with it with intimacy?

Yes.

2b. without intimacy?

No.

[EvoUK]

Didn't the fact that their children were such good swimmers give them a clue?

[Ryokan]

Question 1: No. They had no reason to suppose their relationship was anything unusual.

Question 2: This is the tough one. They've got several children, so it is imperative that they maintain as normal a family as is possible. Most doctors would probably counsel against having further children. As far as intimacy without further children, since this is pretty much a special case, I’m content to let them make their own decision about what to do when the bedroom door closes.


-Neil

I'm with Neil. This si the only choice that makes sense to me.

[Barry Desborough]

Sorry, can't remember the details, but some while ago I watched a TV documentary about several pairs of siblings, separated during childhood and meeting in early adulthood. It seems to be an established phenomenon that such pairs experience extreme attraction for one another. This fits with studies of attraction that say people have a statistical tendency to prefer mates that are genetically similar to themselves. The mechanism for incest avoidance (to avoid the danger of common recessive genes in the offsping) appears to be familiarity during childhood rather than any innate ability to detect too much genetic similarity, witness the refusal of unrelated kibbutzniks, raised together, to intermarry.

[C. D. Ward]

1a. Was their relationship immoral?

No.

2a. If not, would it be immoral for them to continue with it with intimacy?

No.

There is nothing inherently immoral with incest. It seems to be primarily a cultural taboo.

There certainly could be genetic issues involving offspring, but I think the most one could ask is that the couple refrain from having any more children, if such issues seem likely.

[Minnesota]

There is nothing inherently immoral with incest. It seems to be primarily a cultural taboo.

I assume that by "inherently" you mean that unless inbreeding takes place, which carries the increased chance of congenital birth defects, there is no other physical consequence that would justify moral censure. I would suggest that even if this is your contention, morals can be grounded in principles that are purely idealistic rather than practical. Take the moral prohibition against eating meat in some cultures and with some individuals. Whatever their line of reasoning, respect for life or religious mandate, the fact remains they have established the prohibition on grounds of right and wrong. But I do agree that incest seems to be primarily a taboo, but not a cultural one. I believe it appears in all cultures in one form or another. Yet, I doubt many people could cite a moral principle as a basis for it--aside, perhaps, from the notion that we shouldn't bet against the greater statistical outcome of producing children with congenital birth defects. And this may well be prevented in the future by genetic testing that allows couples to establish they do not carry any of the recessive genes known to become dangerous. And, of course, the whole issue of congenitally defective offspring is moot when it comes to females past the child bearing age.

[Nicholas]

Why does this story bring to mind Star Wars?

[Minnesota]

Why does this story bring to mind Star Wars?

Wash your mouth out!!!!

[Nicholas]

Wash your mouth out!!!!

[razzendahcuben]

I think its silly that some of the Christians here are saying that the couple continuing in an intimate relationship would be immoral. The reason sibling marriage seems repulsive is because we grow up with our siblings... we are family and have a different relationship with them than with other boys or girls. But if a sibling doesn't share this special bond, what makes it disgusting? Chromosomal similarity? This is silly---we're all descended from the same two people and have DNA differences below a tenth of a single percentage.

Not only is the 'yuck' issue unfounded in this situation, but also the issue of immorality. Not all of God's laws are equal. Some laws are inherently part of His nature, such as those found in the Decalogue. Then there are ceremonial laws, such as those temporarily imposed on the Jews. Finally, there are civil laws, which I believe would include the law against marrying one's sibling. This law was instituted after the Exodus for two reasons. First, as mentioned, siblings share a special brotherly/sisterly bond that differs from a man and woman leaving his and her father and mother and cleaving to one another. But more importantly, this law prevents the hereditary problems common in the offspring of incestuous relationships. These hereditary problems are the result of the Fall and have more effect now than 6000 years ago when the human genome was more pure. Cain married his sister, did he not?

[Minnesota]

Cain married his sister, did he not?

Yeah, but both the bridal shower and bachelor party were washouts.