So, I was watching Dr. Phil today and he has a couple on that met as adults (in their 30s) and were married for 15 months before they found out that they had the same father. Now, this particular couple is having problems resulting from this, but that's not what I want to focus on. Forget this SPECIFIC couple, but....
Do you think it is morally wrong for half-siblings to marry if they didn't grow up together?
I think that what makes my sister and brother MY sister and brother was growing up with them. It's like an adopted sibling....he doesn't share your DNA, but that doesn't make him any less your brother....Can it go the other way, too? If you didn't grow up together.....I don't think it's the same. You don't have the emotional connection that you have with the siblings you grow up with.
So, that only leaves genes, which they do share....but why is sharing genes bad? The only REAL danger here is to possible children. Similar genes mean a higher risk of defects. This is because if you get a gene with a mutation from one parent, chances are the other parent gives you a normal one and you're fine. But the more genes your parents have in common, the higher the risk of getting 2 genes that both have the mutation.
IMO, if they take the appropriate precautions to prevent having children naturally, I don't think they're doing anything wrong. As I said, I'm talking about a situation where there was no contact as siblings during childhood. So, if they're not siblings emotionally (like I am with my siblings) and they don't plan to have children, I don't think it's wrong.
BUT, what do YOU guys think??? I'm sure you won't all agree with me!
Do you think it is morally wrong for half-siblings to marry if they didn't grow up together?
I think that what makes my sister and brother MY sister and brother was growing up with them. It's like an adopted sibling....he doesn't share your DNA, but that doesn't make him any less your brother....Can it go the other way, too? If you didn't grow up together.....I don't think it's the same. You don't have the emotional connection that you have with the siblings you grow up with.
So, that only leaves genes, which they do share....but why is sharing genes bad? The only REAL danger here is to possible children. Similar genes mean a higher risk of defects. This is because if you get a gene with a mutation from one parent, chances are the other parent gives you a normal one and you're fine. But the more genes your parents have in common, the higher the risk of getting 2 genes that both have the mutation.
IMO, if they take the appropriate precautions to prevent having children naturally, I don't think they're doing anything wrong. As I said, I'm talking about a situation where there was no contact as siblings during childhood. So, if they're not siblings emotionally (like I am with my siblings) and they don't plan to have children, I don't think it's wrong.
BUT, what do YOU guys think??? I'm sure you won't all agree with me!






. But I guess it is certainly their right to marry whomever they choose to- just leave kids out of the equation!
), WHY do you think it's skeevy?








On the other hand, they didn't know about it when they met, they weren't raised together and they have no brother-sister relationship. So why not just keep on?



's too!