Would it be Moral to Marry a Conjoined Twin?

November 18, 2009

Would it be Moral to Marry a Conjoined Twin?

Posted by Jason Dulle under Odds & Ends, Sin
[10] Comments

Scott posed an interesting question to me that both of us thought would be a good blog topic: Would it be moral for a man to marry a conjoined twin, or would such constitute polygamy, or even adultery?

Let’s call the conjoined girls Mary and Martha. You wish to marry Martha, but not Mary. Martha accepts your proposal, and Mary has consented to the relationship you’ll have with her sister (she even promises to be at your wedding J ). Would it be immoral to marry Martha under such circumstances. Why or why not?

10 Responses to “Would it be Moral to Marry a Conjoined Twin?”

scottspeig Says:

November 18, 2009 at 9:17 am
Jason,

Thought I’d do a quick start on this!

Existing conjoined twins in America – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abigail_and_Brittany_Hensel can answer emails as “one person” in that they know instinctively what each other think (yet they still can differ).

This led me to believe that their relationship (Mary and Martha) would have to be counted as symiotic (as if they could be split, they probably would have been soon after birth). In this respect, I believe that you could argue that the two are actually a single entity with differing personalities.

If the twins have a single sexual reproductive system, I would argue that a singular male can marry Mary/Martha without it being polygamy. On the other hand, it would be a more difficult scenario if they had separate sexual reproductive systems.

The reasoning is that clearly you couldn’t have two husbands with one reproductive system.

Plus, on a side, I considered that you could (well not most of you obviously being OP’s) make similarities between Mary/Martha’s relationship with the Trinity.

To me, as they are one entity, they should be treated as a singular person with a complex personality disorder…

PS for those that think this is an unrealistic scenario, the conjoined twins I linked to hope to one day be married and have children…..

LikeLike
jasondulle Says:

November 18, 2009 at 11:45 am
Scott,

I have heard other accounts of how close conjoined twins are mentally speaking (not only their intimate coordination to carry out simple tasks, but also their intimate and almost intuitive knowledge of each other’s thoughts/feelings), so I’m with you on that. But they would still be two separate persons, for each would have her own soul. Maybe that’s what you are referring to when you say they have their own personalities. But if that’s the case, I don’t know what you mean by them being a single entity. I would agree that they are a single physical entity, but that doesn’t appear to be the way you meant it given the fact that you go on to call them “a singular person.” Could you clarify?

You argued that it would not be polygamy if they have a single reproductive system, reasoning that “you couldn’t have two husbands with one reproductive system.” But it seems to me the natural way of determining the number of persons in a marriage is by counting heads, not genitals. Marriage involves persons first and foremost, not genitals, even if it is normally the case that one person has one set of genitals/reproductive system and does not share those with another person. After all, we would not claim that two people were not married on the grounds that the woman has had a hysterectomy (no reproductive system), or on the grounds that a man has been castrated (no genitals). So even if Martha and Mary share a reproductive system, when you say “I do,” you are saying “I do” to Martha, not her reproductive system. And since you are only saying “I do” to one person, it would not be polygamy.

It seems to me, then, that a better way to argue that marrying Martha is not polygamy is by appealing to the volitional capacities of each girl: Martha chose to marry you, not Mary. Since they are two persons/personalities, and you are only marrying one person, you are not committing polygamy.

While I would not argue that the possession of a single reproductive system constitutes polygamy (if you marry Martha), I would argue that it entails adultery since a single vagina belongs equally to both women. Having sex with Martha would entail having sex with Mary (which results in the strange phenomenon of committing adultery by having sex with your wife). The experience would be just as real to her as it would be for Martha. And it would feel to Mary that she is having sex with “you” just as much as Martha would feel as though she is having sex with you. Therefore, I think I would conclude that it would be immoral to marry a girl who is conjoined to another girl, who together share one vagina.

Maybe we (or someone else) can carry this discussion further by considering the situation in which the conjoined girls each have their own vagina/reproductive system.

You are giving us OPs fodder when you say Mary and Martha could be compared to the Trinity, and then go on to describe Mary and Martha as having a “personality disorder.” Many OPs would agree with you that if God is a Trinity, He has a personality disorder. 

Jason

LikeLike
Brad Titus Says:

November 20, 2009 at 10:31 am
Jason,

I’m not sure of the “right” or “wrong” answer on this … conjoined twins are a phenomenon that isn’t addressed biblically, and wasn’t in God’s original plan, but is the result of a fallen world. In fact, I’m not sure if there [i]is[/i] a right or wrong answer.

My position on this is simple, though probably unsatisfactory – be gracious. There are sure to be Christian leaders who will speak out about this and call it all sorts of horrible things (an abomination, for one), but what are we to say to these poor girls? That because they’ve suffered a tragic fluke of nature, they can’t have a normal life? They can’t get married (either one or both of them)? They can’t have children? In areas such as this, I think we should respond with grace, and pray for what must be a very difficult, very confusing situation for many people.

LikeLike
jasondulle Says:

November 20, 2009 at 10:59 am
Brad,

I understand where you are coming from, but just because Scripture does not address the issue directly does not mean the Bible does not speak to the issue. We know it is immoral to have sex with a woman who is not your wife. If Mary and Martha share a vagina, to have sex with one girl is to have sex with both girls. Mary and Martha would both have the experience of having sex with you. That is adultery. It’s unfortunate for the girls that they would not be able to marry, but our feeling sympathy for their situation does not mean we should say the adultery that such a relationship would entail is morally acceptable. Now, if they wanted to marry but make it a non-sexual relationship, then that would be ok.

Jason

LikeLike
Arthur Says:

December 6, 2009 at 1:52 pm
The Bible doesn’t say that, simply because Mary and Martha share a vagina, to have sex with one girl is to have sex with both girls.

LikeLike
jasondulle Says:

December 6, 2009 at 9:32 pm
Of course it doesn’t. But it doesn’t need to. I don’t mean to be crass, but the Bible doesn’t tell me to wipe my butt when I use the toilet either, and yet I should! Similarly, I don’t need the Bible to tell me that if two women share a single vagina, that having sex with one woman is to have sex with the other woman since both women feel the penetration/sensation as if it were happening to them.

Jason

LikeLike
Are two heads really better than one? – Law and Sausage Says:

October 2, 2011 at 7:57 pm
[…] rumor of Brittany’s engagement prompted one blogger to pose the question: “Would it be Moral to Marry a Conjoined Twin“? The consensus response among the readers seemed to be that such a marriage would be […]

LikeLike
George Says:

September 18, 2014 at 10:44 am
Sometimes, you just have to look at a situation and be sensible. If a man marries Martha, he then has sex with Mary too, whether Mary likes or loathes this, it doesn’t seem biblically right for it to be happening unless she too is married.
Surely this is one case where polygamy is not only acceptable but actually the best option. Exceptions can be made. I sincerely doubt that the current Pope would hesitate for a second to grant an exception for Mary and Martha to marry one man.

LikeLike
Abrie JF Kilian Says:

December 23, 2024 at 6:19 pm
The ethical, theological, and legal exploration of the hypothetical situation involving a man marrying one conjoined twin while addressing polygyny and adultery from a scriptural perspective reveals the following key points: (See the Abby and Brittany Hensel Case as an example)

Polygyny in Scripture:
1. Biblical Precedent for Polygyny:
  - Scripture contains numerous examples of polygynous marriages among patriarchs (e.g., Abraham, Jacob, David) which were neither prohibited nor condemned by God. Such relationships were often framed as part of God’s providence and governance of His people
  - Deuteronomy 21:15-17 provides laws governing the rights of children in polygynous households, indicating regulation rather than prohibition.
  - There is simply no law or prohibition of polygyny in the Bible and we know that John 3:4 states that sin is the transgression of the law.
2. Adultery in Biblical Law:
  - Adultery in the Bible is defined primarily as a violation of another man’s marital rights, specifically involving sexual relations with another man’s wife.
  - This definition excludes consensual marital relations within a polygynous framework, as long as the women are not bound to other men.
3. Christian Polygyny and Theology:
  - While Western Christian traditions have embraced monogamy, historical interpretations show this was heavily influenced by Greco-Roman legal and cultural norms rather than explicit biblical mandates. (See The Western Case for Monogamy over Polygamy by Witte)
  - Polygyny, when practised according to biblical principles, does not contravene the moral or spiritual ideals of Scripture.
In the Case of Conjoined Twins and Marriage:
1. Individual Personhood:
  - Conjoined twins, despite sharing physical anatomy, are separate persons with distinct souls and identities. The biblical emphasis on individual personhood aligns with this understanding.
  - This perspective is crucial in determining the ethical validity of marrying one twin without it being polygamy, as the union is with one individual.
2. Shared Anatomy and Adultery Concerns:
  - If the twins share reproductive organs, intimacy with one may inadvertently involve the other, raising complex moral and theological questions
  - To avoid the appearance or act of adultery, a strong argument could be made that such a marriage requires both twins to be consentingly involved, effectively resembling polygyny.
3. Scriptural Analogy:
  - The situation could parallel biblical descriptions of oneness, where unity involves mutual agreement and alignment of wills (e.g., marriage between Christ and the Ekklesia (Church) involves distinct members becoming one spiritually)
From a biblical and theological standpoint:
- Polygyny is not inherently sinful and aligns with many scriptural examples and teachings when practised with justice, respect, and adherence to divine laws.
- Adultery remains strictly defined as the violation of another man’s marriage. This is unchanged in the context of conjoined twins married to the same husband unless there is shared anatomy and a lack of consent from one party. (Consent is not the discussion of this article.)
- In the specific scenario of marrying one conjoined twin, context and consent are paramount. Ethical and theological acceptability hinges on ensuring that the relationship respects the autonomy and integrity of both individuals involved and that the twins marry the same man.
Therefore, a man marrying a conjoined twin would constitute polygamy and would not constitute adultery based upon the Biblical definition.

LikeLike
Abrie JF Kilian Says:

December 23, 2024 at 6:19 pm
The ethical, theological, and legal exploration of the hypothetical situation involving a man marrying one conjoined twin while addressing polygyny and adultery from a scriptural perspective reveals the following key points: (See the Abby and Brittany Hensel Case as an example)

Polygyny in Scripture:
1. Biblical Precedent for Polygyny:
  - Scripture contains numerous examples of polygynous marriages among patriarchs (e.g., Abraham, Jacob, David) which were neither prohibited nor condemned by God. Such relationships were often framed as part of God’s providence and governance of His people
  - Deuteronomy 21:15-17 provides laws governing the rights of children in polygynous households, indicating regulation rather than prohibition.
  - There is simply no law or prohibition of polygyny in the Bible and we know that John 3:4 states that sin is the transgression of the law.
2. Adultery in Biblical Law:
  - Adultery in the Bible is defined primarily as a violation of another man’s marital rights, specifically involving sexual relations with another man’s wife.
  - This definition excludes consensual marital relations within a polygynous framework, as long as the women are not bound to other men.
3. Christian Polygyny and Theology:
  - While Western Christian traditions have embraced monogamy, historical interpretations show this was heavily influenced by Greco-Roman legal and cultural norms rather than explicit biblical mandates. (See The Western Case for Monogamy over Polygamy by Witte)
  - Polygyny, when practised according to biblical principles, does not contravene the moral or spiritual ideals of Scripture.
In the Case of Conjoined Twins and Marriage:
1. Individual Personhood:
  - Conjoined twins, despite sharing physical anatomy, are separate persons with distinct souls and identities. The biblical emphasis on individual personhood aligns with this understanding.
  - This perspective is crucial in determining the ethical validity of marrying one twin without it being polygamy, as the union is with one individual.
2. Shared Anatomy and Adultery Concerns:
  - If the twins share reproductive organs, intimacy with one may inadvertently involve the other, raising complex moral and theological questions
  - To avoid the appearance or act of adultery, a strong argument could be made that such a marriage requires both twins to be consentingly involved, effectively resembling polygyny.
3. Scriptural Analogy:
  - The situation could parallel biblical descriptions of oneness, where unity involves mutual agreement and alignment of wills (e.g., marriage between Christ and the Ekklesia (Church) involves distinct members becoming one spiritually)
From a biblical and theological standpoint:
- Polygyny is not inherently sinful and aligns with many scriptural examples and teachings when practised with justice, respect, and adherence to divine laws.
- Adultery remains strictly defined as the violation of another man’s marriage. This is unchanged in the context of conjoined twins married to the same husband unless there is shared anatomy and a lack of consent from one party. (Consent is not the discussion of this article.)
- In the specific scenario of marrying one conjoined twin, context and consent are paramount. Ethical and theological acceptability hinges on ensuring that the relationship respects the autonomy and integrity of both individuals involved and that the twins marry the same man.
Therefore, a man marrying a conjoined twin would constitute polygamy and would not constitute adultery based upon the Biblical definition.

LikeLike