Well, I didn’t claim it contained prevalence. I just stated: “There is quite a good chart here,”
I agree with you, it is uncommon.
I can not cite and federal laws pertaining to it nor any percentages, (after an hour or so searching).
2 Likes
Federal law does not concern itself with marriage, and Congress has no power to regulate it.
What the U.S. Supreme Court should have done when it got Obergefell instead of rhapsodizing about love. was say: the US government is not concerned with weddings, leave those to the folk. Our only concern is with citizens’ status vis à vis the government. ANY two people, regardless of sex, consanguinity, etc., can form a “domestic partnership” which will determine their federal income tax liability during life and for purposes of federal estate taxes. The end.
Obergefell has been challenged by some brave clerk who refused to issue same-sex marriage licenses, and when the Supreme Court gets the case and revisits the issue, I’d like to hope they’ll deal with it as above. They wouldn’t have to invalidate all the “weddings” conducted since Obergefell, just make the ruling prospective. They probably won’t though, and these travesties of humanity’s oldest and most ubiquitous ceremony will continue apace.
2 Likes
I wonder how prevalent first cousin marriage in MinneSomalia
2 Likes
Why go that far afield when you could marry your brother?
1 Like