Sibling Marriage

[The_Flying_Dutchman]

As I understand it, same sex marriage is legal in Canada, The Netherlands, Iceland, France and Massachusetts.

Is sibling marriage permitted in these jurisdictions as well ?

[Otto]

No.

[Tim_T-Bonham.net]

No.

Neither is:

• marriage between more than 2 people,
• marriage to an underage person,
• marriage between a human and an animal, etc.

What ever gave you the idea that any of these was permitted in Canada?

[malkavia]

@t-bonham@scc.net

No.

Neither is:

• marriage between more than 2 people,
• marriage to an underage person,
• marriage between a human and an animal, etc.

What ever gave you the idea that any of these was permitted in Canada?

Are you implying that adult, consenting siblings or polygamus individuals being in a romantic relationship is the same as being in a relationship with a child or an unsuspecting housepet?

Jesus, that’s pretty harsh.

[Hadrian0117]

@grienspace

As I understand it, same sex marriage is legal in Canada, The Netherlands, Iceland, France and Massachusetts.

Is sibling marriage permitted in these jurisdictions as well ?

Neither Iceland or France has same-sex marriage. Iceland has civil unions. Why would assume and juridiction that has SSM would have legalized incest? Sibling marriage along with parent-child marriage is illegal in every country on Earth. Even the Romans condemed brother-sister unions (Caligula notwithstanding). The only civilization I can think of at the moment (I’m sure they are a few others) that allowed it was ancient Egypt and even then on Pharoahs could do it.

[UDS]

@t-bonham@scc.net

No.

Neither is:

• marriage between more than 2 people,
• marriage to an underage person,
• marriage between a human and an animal, etc.

What ever gave you the idea that any of these was permitted in Canada?

I doubt very much that grienspace thinks that any of these things are permitted in Canada. I suspect that he’s seeking to refute the extremely stupid “slippery slope” argument which is sometimes put forward that a society which allows same-sex marriage will inevitably move on to allowing marriage between a man and a camel.

[JRDelirious]

@UDS

I suspect that he’s seeking to refute the extremely stupid “slippery slope” argument which is sometimes put forward that a society which allows same-sex marriage will inevitably move on to allowing marriage between a man and a camel.

Multiple camels, mind you.

[Jinx]

Just wait until the US says you can’t marry a smoker and expect the same rights to health benefits as nonsmokers…

Isn’t this what it’s really all about?

• Jinx

[EllisDee]

I read it as can two gay brothers or two gay sisters marry each other. I’m wondering why they shouldn’t…

[Otto]

Asked and answered, people.

Can we maybe not ascribe sinister motives until such time as there’s a little more cause?

[clairobscur]

@grienspace

As I understand it, same sex marriage is legal in Canada, The Netherlands, Iceland, France and Massachusetts.

You can remove France from your list. There’s only a kind of half-assed “Civil Pact”, that doesn’t grant all the rights of a marriage. Actually, SSM is a current issue due to the marriage of two men by a well-known politician, on the basis that the laws didn’t specifically prevent him from marrying them.

On the other hand, you can add Spain. If I’m not mistaken, they passed a law allowing SSM a couple months ago.
As for siblings, they can’t marry under french law, as mentionned by previous posters. First cousins can, and it wouldn’t appear gross to most people. Uncle/niece and aunt/nephew can marry if they intend to do so for “serious cause” (I assume it was intended to mean pregnancy) with a dispensation from the president. It would appear gross, and I don’t know if any such presidential dispensations are actually granted or not.

[Otto]

@clairobscur

On the other hand, you can add Spain. If I’m not mistaken, they passed a law allowing SSM a couple months ago.

You are mistaken. Spain’s government has proposed the law but not yet passed it. The Vatican is having fits about it but the government’s not backing down.

[Muffin]

@t-bonham@scc.net

No.

Neither is:

• marriage between more than 2 people,
• marriage to an underage person,
• marriage between a human and an animal, etc.

What ever gave you the idea that any of these was permitted in Canada?

In Ontario marriage is permitted between more than two people under certain circumstances. If you are presently married to more than one person then those marriages are recognized with respect to property division, spousal support and child support, however, you can not get married to another person in Ontario if you are presently married.
http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/DBLaws/Statutes/English/90f03_e.htm#1.(2)

In Ontario marriage to an underage person is permitted under certain circumstances. You can marry an underage person sixteen or older if that person is a widow, or is divorced, or has parental consent.
http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/DBLaws/Statutes/English/90m03_e.htm#5.(2)

As far as marying animals in Ontario goes, animals are not defined in law as persons, so you can not mary an animal.
http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/DBLaws/Statutes/English/90m03_e.htm#5.(1) and
http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/DBLaws/Statutes/English/90i11_e.htm#29.(1)
On a related note, bestiality is a criminal offence.
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/C-46/42053.html#section-160

[Paul_in_Qatar]

Humm, why do you know so much about your local laws about bestiality? Never mind, don’t answer that. Forget I asked.

[BwanaBob]

@Hadrian0117

Even the Romans condemed brother-sister unions (Caligula notwithstanding). The only civilization I can think of at the moment (I’m sure they are a few others) that allowed it was ancient Egypt and even then on Pharoahs could do it.

I believe you can add the Incas to your list.

[BwanaBob]

@BwanaBob

I believe you can add the Incas to your list.

That is to say Inca royalty.

[Angua]

@grienspace

As I understand it, same sex marriage is legal in Canada, The Netherlands, Iceland, France and Massachusetts.

And as of last night, SSM was legal in the UK as well, well, Civil Partnerships, but the rights are practically the same. Link

[Bryan_Ekers]

Regarding allowing same sex marriage / civil unions, I should point out that Canada doesn’t, but several (well, most) of the provinces do. Alberta will likely be the last holdout.

[The_Flying_Dutchman]

@Ellis Dee

I read it as can two gay brothers or two gay sisters marry each other. I’m wondering why they shouldn’t…

That is exactly one of the points of my question.

And I would assume that it is possible given the longstanding concerns of the results of incest, that old statutes prohibiting incest may very well be gender specific , and as a result, where gay marriage is legal, gay sibling marriage might be legal as well.

[Otto]

@grienspace

That is exactly one of the points of my question.

And I would assume that it is possible given the longstanding concerns of the results of incest, that old statutes prohibiting incest may very well be gender specific , and as a result, where gay marriage is legal, gay sibling marriage might be legal as well.

Well, Wisconsin statute 765.03(1) on who may marry is not gender-specific except to the extent that it references females over 55 and not males.

(1) No marriage shall be contracted while either of the parties has a husband or wife living, nor between persons who are nearer of kin than 2nd cousins except that marriage may be contracted between first cousins where the female has attained the age of 55 years or where either party, at the time of application for a marriage license, submits an affidavit signed by a physician stating that either party is permanently sterile. Relationship under this section shall be computed by the rule of the civil law, whether the parties to the marriage are of the half or of the whole blood. A marriage may not be contracted if either party has such want of understanding as renders him or her incapable of assenting to marriage.

So were SSM to suddenly become legal in WI this section would prohibit sibling marriages.

When VT legalized civil unions, it wrote as part of the civil union chapter a mirror image to its marriage statute, substituting male references for female and vice versa as appropriate. It’s Title 15, chapters 1 (for marriage) and 23 (for civil unions).

A man shall not marry his mother, grandmother, daughter, granddaughter, sister, brother’s daughter, sister’s daughter, father’s sister or mother’s sister.

A woman shall not marry her father, grandfather, son, grandson, brother, brother’s son, sister’s son, father’s brother or mother’s brother.

(a) A woman shall not enter a civil union with her mother, grandmother, daughter, granddaughter, sister, brother’s daughter, sister’s daughter, father’s sister or mother’s sister.

(b) A man shall not enter a civil union with his father, grandfather, son, grandson, brother, brother’s son, sister’s son, father’s brother or mother’s brother.

© A civil union between persons prohibited from entering a civil union in subsection (a) or (b) of this section is void.

Also clearly prohibiting sibling unions.

MA has not AFAIK amended through the legislature its “incestuous marriage” statutes (chapter 207), but presumably should siblings present themselves to a court petitioning for a marriage license the court would reject it as an absurd result.

No man shall marry his mother, grandmother, daughter, granddaughter, sister, stepmother, grandfather’s wife, grandson’s wife, wife’s mother, wife’s grandmother, wife’s daughter, wife’s granddaughter, brother’s daughter, sister’s daughter, father’s sister or mother’s sister.

No woman shall marry her father, grandfather, son, grandson, brother, stepfather, grandmother’s husband, daughter’s husband, granddaughter’s husband, husband’s grandfather, husband’s son, husband’s grandson, brother’s son, sister’s son, father’s brother or mother’s brother.

So my original answer, “no,” appears to be complete and correct.