View Single Post
Old 27-09-2005, 14:55   #11
Graham
Inactive
 
Graham's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Age: 61
Posts: 3,170
Graham has a nice shiny star
Graham has a nice shiny starGraham has a nice shiny starGraham has a nice shiny starGraham has a nice shiny starGraham has a nice shiny starGraham has a nice shiny starGraham has a nice shiny starGraham has a nice shiny starGraham has a nice shiny starGraham has a nice shiny star
Re: Son and ex mum-in-law hope to wed

Quote:
Originally Posted by Incognitas
I must say I can't see the point of the present law.
The current laws on consanguinity, even though they were, to some extent, revised by the Sexual Offences Act 2003 date back a *long* time.

"The ways that A may be related to B are as parent, grandparent, child, grandchild, brother, sister, half-brother, half-sister, uncle, aunt, nephew or niece."

(see http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2003/30042--b.htm#64 if you're interested in the details)

Ok, it can be argued that it's sensible not to allow close relatives to marry because of the possible risk of re-inforcing bad genes, but when there's no blood relationship it's just silly.
Graham is offline   Reply With Quote