Skip to content Skip to sidebar Skip to footer
Home / Are There Any States in the United States Where You Can Marry a Family Member

Are There Any States in the United States Where You Can Marry a Family Member

Post a Comment

Wikipedia listing commodity

Laws regarding first-cousin matrimony in the States

 First-cousin marriage is legal

 Immune with requirements

 Banned with exceptions1

 Statute bans spousal relationship1

 Criminal criminal offence1

i Some states recognize marriages performed elsewhere, while other states do non.

Cousin wedlock laws in the U.s.a. vary considerably from one state to another, ranging from cousin marriages being legal in some to being a criminal offense in others. Still, even in united states of america where it is legal, the practice is not widespread. (See §Incidence.)

Current position [edit]

Several states of the United States prohibit cousin marriage.[1] [2] As of February 2014[update], 24 U.S. states prohibit marriages betwixt first cousins, 19 U.Southward. states permit marriages between first cousins, and vii U.Due south. states let only some marriages between kickoff cousins.[iii] 7 states prohibit first-cousin-once-removed marriages.[4] Some states prohibiting cousin matrimony recognize cousin marriages performed in other states, but despite occasional claims that this holds true in full general,[5] laws also be that explicitly void all foreign cousin marriages or marriages conducted by state residents out of country.[ citation needed ]

Summary [edit]

State Showtime cousin marriage immune Sexual relations or cohabitation allowed First-cousin marriages void Out-of-land marriages by state'south residents void All out-of-state marriages void Sterility requirement to marry cousin Showtime-cousin-once-removed union allowed Half-cousin marriage immune Adopted-cousin marriage allowed
Alabama[6] Yes Yeah No No No Yes Aye Yeah
Alaska[7] [8] No Yes Yes No No No Yep Yep Aye
Arizona[9] [10] [11] Merely if both parties are 65 or older, or i is infertile No[12] Yes Yes[13] Yes Yes Yes Yes[14] Yes
Arkansas[xv] [xvi] [17] No Yes Yes No[xviii] No No Yes Un­known Un­known
California[19] [20] [21] Yes Yeah No No No No Yes Yes Aye
Colorado[22] [23] Yes Yes No No No No Yes Yes Yes
Connecticut[24] [25] Yeah Yes No No No No Yep Aye Yes
Delaware[26] [27] [28] [29] No Yes Yes Yes Un­known No Yes Un­known Un­known
District of Columbia[xxx] Yes Yeah No No No No Aye Yes Yes
Florida[31] [32] Yep Yeah No No No No Maybe Yes Yes
Georgia[33] [34] Aye Yes No No No No Aye Yes Yeah
Hawaii[35] [36] Yeah Yes No No No No Aye Yeah Aye
Idaho[37] [38] [39] [40] [41] No Yes Un­known Un­known United nations­known No Yes Un­known Un­known
Illinois[42] [43] [44] [45] [46] [47] Merely if both parties are fifty or older, or i is infertile Yes Aye Aye[48] Un­known Yes Yes No[49] Un­known
Indiana[50] [51] [52] [53] Only if both parties are 65 or older Yes Aye No No[54] No Yes Yes Aye
Iowa[55] No Yes Yes United nations­known No No Yes Un­known United nations­known
Kansas[56] [57] [58] No Aye Yes No[59] No[60] No Yep Yes Un­known
Kentucky[61] [62] [63] [64] No No[65] Aye Yes[66] Un­known No No No United nations­known
Louisiana[67] [68] [69] No Yes Yep Un­known No[70] No Yes No If judicial blessing in writing is obtained
Maine[71] [72] Proof of genetic counseling from a genetic advisor Aye No No No No Yes Un­known Yes
Maryland[73] [74] Yes Yes No No No No Yes Yes Yes
Massachusetts[75] [76] [77] Yeah Yeah No No No No Yes Yes Yeah
Michigan No[78] Yes Yeah No[79] No[80] No Yes Un­known Un­known
Minnesota[81] [82] [83] Just certain types Yes Aye Un­known Un­known No Yes No Un­known
Mississippi[84] [85] [86] No No Yes Yes Un­known No Yeah Un­known Yes
Missouri[87] [88] No Aye Yes Un­known United nations­known No Yep United nations­known Un­known
Montana[89] [90] [91] No Yes Yeah Un­known Un­known No Aye Yes Un­known
Nebraska[92] [93] [94] [95] No Yes Yes No No No Yes Yep Yep
Nevada[96] [97] No No Yes Un­known Un­known No No Yes Un­known
New Hampshire[98] [99] [100] No Yes Yep Yes Yes No Yes Un­known No[101]
New Bailiwick of jersey[102] [103] Yes Yes No No No No Yes Yes Yes
New Mexico[104] [105] Yes Yeah No No No No Yes Yes Yes
New York[106] [107] Yes Aye No No No No Yeah Yes Yes
N Carolina[108] [109] Yes, except in the rare case of double first cousins Aye Yes, but cannot be declared void after all of cohabitation, birth of outcome, and death of one of the parties has occurred Un­known United nations­known No Yes Un­known Un­known
North Dakota[110] [111] [112] No No Yes Yes No No Yes No United nations­known
Ohio[113] [114] [115] No Aye No No No No No Un­known Un­known
Oklahoma[116] [117] No Yes Yes No No No Aye Aye United nations­known
Oregon[118] [119] [120] No Aye Yes No[121] No No Yes Yes Yes
Pennsylvania[122] [123] [124] Yeah Yes Yes United nations­known United nations­known No Yes United nations­known Un­known
Rhode Island[125] [126] Yeah Yes No No No No No Yeah Aye
Due south Carolina[127] [128] Yes Yes No No No No Yes Yes Yes
S Dakota[129] [130] [131] No No Yeah No[132] No No Yes Yep Un­known
Tennessee[133] [134] Yeah Yes No No No No Yeah Yep Yeah
Texas[135] [136] [137] [138] No No No No No No Yes No No
Utah[139] [140] [141] Just if both parties are 65 or older, or both are 55 or older with a district courtroom finding of infertility of either political party No Yes Aye Yes Yes No Un­known United nations­known
Vermont[142] [143] Aye Yeah No No No No Aye Yes Yes
Virginia[144] [145] Yeah Yes No No No No Yes Yes Aye
Washington[146] [147] [148] No Yes[149] Yes No[150] No No No No Un­known
West Virginia[151] [152] [153] [154] [155] [156] No Yes Un­known Un­known United nations­known No Yes No Yes
Wisconsin[157] [158] [159] [160] [161] Only if the woman is at least 55, or either is permanently sterile No No No United nations­known Yes Merely if the woman is at least 55, or either is permanently sterile Yes Yep
Wyoming[162] [163] [164] No Yes Yes No No No Yep Un­known Yes
State Offset cousin marriage allowed Sexual relations or cohabitation immune Outset-cousin marriages void Out-of-state marriages by state's residents void All out-of-state marriages void Sterility requirement to marry cousin First-cousin-in one case-removed marriage allowed Half-cousin marriage allowed Adopted-cousin marriage allowed

Incidence [edit]

Data on cousin marriage in the United States is thin. It was estimated in 1960 that 0.2% of all marriages between Roman Catholics were between first or second cousins, just no more than recent nationwide studies have been performed.[165] It is unknown what proportion of that number were first cousins, which is the group facing marriage bans.

While recent studies accept cast serious doubt on whether cousin marriage is as unsafe as is popularly causeless, professors Diane B. Paul and Hamish Grand. Spencer speculate that legal bans persist in part due to "the ease with which a handful of highly motivated activists—or even 1 individual—can be constructive in the decentralized American system, specially when feelings do not run high on the other side of an effect."[166]

History [edit]

Cousin marriage was legal in all states before the Ceremonious War.[167] Anthropologist Martin Ottenheimer argues that marriage prohibitions were introduced to maintain the social order, uphold religious morality, and safeguard the cosmos of fit offspring.[168] Writers such as Noah Webster (1758–1843) and ministers like Philip Milledoler (1775–1852) and Joshua McIlvaine helped lay the groundwork for such viewpoints well before 1860. This led to a gradual shift in concern from affinal unions, like those betwixt a man and his deceased wife'due south sis, to consanguineous unions. By the 1870s, Lewis Henry Morgan (1818–1881) was writing about "the advantages of marriages between unrelated persons" and the necessity of avoiding "the evils of consanguine spousal relationship", avoidance of which would "increase the vigor of the stock". To many, Morgan included, cousin marriage, and more specifically parallel-cousin marriage was a remnant of a more primitive stage of human social organization.[169] Morgan himself had married his cousin in 1853.[170]

In 1846, Massachusetts Governor George N. Briggs appointed a committee to study mentally handicapped people (termed "idiots") in the state. This study implicated cousin marriage as responsible for idiocy. Within the next two decades, numerous reports (east.g., ane from the Kentucky Deaf and Dumb Asylum) appeared with similar conclusions: that cousin matrimony sometimes resulted in deafness, blindness, and idiocy. Perhaps well-nigh important was the report of physician Samuel Merrifield Bemiss for the American Medical Association, which concluded cousin inbreeding does lead to the "physical and mental deprivation of the offspring". Despite beingness contradicted past other studies similar those of George Darwin and Alan Huth in England and Robert Newman in New York, the report'due south conclusions were widely accepted.[171]

These developments led to thirteen states and territories passing cousin matrimony prohibitions by the 1880s. Though contemporaneous, the eugenics move did not play much of a direct role in the bans. George Louis Arner in 1908 considered the ban a clumsy and ineffective method of eugenics, which he thought would eventually be replaced past more refined techniques. By the 1920s, the number of bans had doubled.[172] Since that fourth dimension, Kentucky (1943) and Texas have banned first-cousin marriage and since 1985, Maine has mandated genetic counseling for marrying cousins to minimise risk to any serious health defect to their children. The National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform Country Laws unanimously recommended in 1970 that all such laws should be repealed, but no state has dropped its prohibition.[173] [174] [175]

Proposed changes [edit]

A pecker to repeal the ban on beginning-cousin marriage in Minnesota was introduced by Phyllis Kahn in 2003, merely information technology died in commission. Republican Minority Leader Marty Seifert criticized the bill in response, saying it would "plow united states into a common cold Arkansas".[176] According to the Academy of Minnesota's The Wake, Kahn was aware the bill had little chance of passing just introduced information technology anyhow to draw attention to the effect. She reportedly got the thought subsequently learning that cousin union is an acceptable class of marriage amid some cultural groups that have a strong presence in Minnesota, namely the Hmong and Somali.[177]

In dissimilarity, Maryland delegates Henry B. Heller and Kumar P. Barve sponsored a bill to ban first-cousin marriages in 2000.[178] It got farther than Kahn'due south beak, passing the House of Delegates by 82 to 46 despite most Republicans voting no, but finally died in the country senate. In response to the 2005 matrimony of Pennsylvanian first cousins Eleanor Amrhein and Donald W. Andrews Sr. in Maryland, Heller said that he might resurrect the bill because such marriages are "like playing genetic roulette".[179]

Texas did pass a ban on starting time-cousin marriage the same year equally Amrhein and Andrews married, evidently in reaction to the presence of the polygamous Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-24-hour interval Saints (FLDS). Texas Representative Harvey Hilderbran, whose district includes the main FLDS compound, authored an subpoena[180] to a child protection statute to both discourage the FLDS from settling in Texas and to "preclude Texas from succumbing to the practices of taking child brides, incest, welfare corruption, and domestic violence".[181] While Hilderbran stated that he would not have authored a bill solely to ban starting time-cousin union, he also said in an interview, "Cousins don't get married but similar siblings don't get married. And when information technology happens you have a bad upshot. Information technology's just not the accepted normal thing."[182]

Some news sources so only mentioned the polygamy and kid corruption provisions and ignored the cousin marriage portion of the nib, as did some more than recent sources.[183] [184] [185] [186] The new statute fabricated sex with an adult beginning cousin a more than serious felony than with adult members of one'due south immediate family. Notwithstanding, this statute was amended in 2009; while sex with close adult family members (including start cousins) remains a felony, the more than serious penalty now attaches to sex with an individual's direct ancestor or descendant.[187]

The U.S. land of Maine allows starting time-cousin marriage if the couple agrees to accept genetic counseling, while North Carolina allows information technology and then long as the applicants for marriage are not rare double first cousins, meaning cousins through both parental lines.[188] In the other 25 states permitting at least some first-cousin union, double cousins are not distinguished.[189]

States accept diverse laws regarding marriage betwixt cousins and other shut relatives,[190] which involve factors including whether or not the parties to the marriage are half-cousins, double cousins, infertile, over 65, or whether it is a tradition prevalent in a native or ancestry civilisation, adoption status, in-law, whether or not genetic counselling is required, and whether information technology is permitted to marry a kickoff cousin once removed.

See also [edit]

  • Cousin wedlock court cases in the United States
  • Laws regarding incest in the United States

References [edit]

  1. ^ Ottenheimer 1996, p. 90
  2. ^ ""Facts About Cousin Marriage."". CousinCouples.com. Archived from the original on 2018-02-04.
  3. ^ "The Surprising Truth Nearly Cousins and Marriage". xiv February 2014.
  4. ^ Saletan, William (10 April 2002). "The Love That Dare Not Speak Its Surname" – via Slate.
  5. ^ Wolfson, Evan (2004). Why marriage matters: America, equality, and gay people's correct to ally . Simon & Schuster. p. 256. ISBN978-0-7432-6458-7.
  6. ^ Code of Ala. § 13A-13-iii. Alabama appears to have several laws voiding incestuous marriages, although § xxx-ane-3 does mention incestuous marriages being annulled.
  7. ^ Alaska Stat. § 25.05.021 (2010)
  8. ^ Alaska Stat. § 11.41.450 (2010)
  9. ^ A.R.S. § 25-101 (2010)
  10. ^ A.R.Due south. § 25-112 (2010)
  11. ^ A.R.Due south. § 13-3608 (2010)
  12. ^ Come across Etheridge v. Shaddock Archived 2013-09-09 at the Wayback Automobile (PDF), 288 Ark. 481, 706 S.Westward.2d 395 (1986).
  13. ^ In addition to statute, see In re Mortenson'due south Estate, 83 Ariz. 87, 316 P.2d 1106 (1957)
  14. ^ Sheri Stritof. "What Are the Cousin Marriage Laws in Your Land?". theSpruce.com. Archived from the original on 2021-03-02.
  15. ^ A.C.A. § 9-11-106 (2010)
  16. ^ A.C.A. § 9-11-107 (2010)
  17. ^ A.C.A. § 5-26-202 (2010)
  18. ^ See Incest Statutes 2013 Archived 2015-01-19 at the Wayback Car (PDF).
  19. ^ Cal Fam Code § 2200 (2010)
  20. ^ Cal Pen Code § 285 (2010)
  21. ^ Estate of Levie (1975, Cal App 1st Dist) was a California example on a purported first-cousin marriage contracted in Nevada. It plant the union void per the usual rule.
  22. ^ C.R.S. xiv-ii-110 (2010)
  23. ^ C.R.South. 18-half-dozen-301 (2010)
  24. ^ Conn. Gen. Stat. § 46b-21 (2010)
  25. ^ Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-191 (2010)
  26. ^ 13 Del. C. § 101 (2010)
  27. ^ thirteen Del. C. § 102 (2010)
  28. ^ 13 Del. C. § 104 (2010)
  29. ^ xi Del. C. § 766 (2010)
  30. ^ D.C. Code § 46-401.01 (2010)
  31. ^ Fla. Stat. § 741.21 (2010)
  32. ^ Fla. Stat. § 826.04 (2010)
  33. ^ O.C.G.A. § 19-3-3 (2010)
  34. ^ O.C.G.A. § 16-6-22 (2010)
  35. ^ HRS § 572-1 (2010)
  36. ^ HRS § 707-741 (2010)
  37. ^ Idaho Code § 32-205 (2010)
  38. ^ Idaho Code § 32-206 (2010)
  39. ^ Idaho Code § 32-209 (2010)
  40. ^ Idaho Lawmaking § 32-501 (2010)
  41. ^ Idaho Code § xviii-6602 (2010)
  42. ^ § 750 ILCS 5/212 (2010)
  43. ^ § 750 ILCS v/213 (2010)
  44. ^ § 750 ILCS five/216 (2010)
  45. ^ 750 ILCS 5/301 (2010)
  46. ^ 720 ILCS 5/eleven-11 (2010)
  47. ^ In re Estate of Mary Kathrein was an Illinois Supreme Courtroom case ruling that first cousins once removed are not to be confused with first cousins.
  48. ^ In improver to statute, see Meisenhelder v. Chicago & N.W. Ry. Co., 170 Minn. 317, 213 N.W. 32 (1927)
  49. ^ Run into In re Flores, 96 Sick. App. 3d 279, 51 Sick. Dec. 885, 421 North.Due east.2d 393 (1 Dist. 1981)
  50. ^ Burns Ind. Lawmaking Ann. § 31-11-one-ii (2010)
  51. ^ Burns Ind. Lawmaking Ann. § 31-11-8-3 (2010)
  52. ^ Burns Ind. Lawmaking Ann. § 31-11-8-6 (2010). Note that the laws listed do not pertain to cousin marriage.
  53. ^ Burns Ind. Code Ann. § 35-46-1-three (2010)
  54. ^ See Mason five. Mason, 775 N.E.2nd 706, 2002 Ind. App. LEXIS 1605 (2002).
  55. ^ Chapter 595.xix Void Marriages
  56. ^ K.Due south.A. § 23-102 (2009)
  57. ^ K.S.A. § 23-115 (2009)
  58. ^ Thou.Southward.A. § 21-3602 (2009)
  59. ^ Moore, A Defense of First-Cousin Union, x Cleveland Marshall L. Rev. 136 (1961)
  60. ^ Encounter In re Estate of Loughmiller, 229 Kan. 584, where a strange beginning cousin spousal relationship was recognised in Kansas.
  61. ^ Kentucky Revised Statutes § 402.010 (2010)
  62. ^ KRS § 402.040 (2010)
  63. ^ KRS § 402.990 (2010)
  64. ^ KRS § 530.020 (2010)
  65. ^ Course B misdemeanour if marriage entered into; Class A misdemeanour if the couple cohabits after being convicted of entering into a prohibited marriage.
  66. ^ A marriage betwixt first cousins will non be recognised in Kentucky even if information technology is consummated in another state. OAG 71-78.
  67. ^ La. C.C. Art. 90 (2010)
  68. ^ La. C.C. Art. 94 (2010)
  69. ^ La. R.S. 14:78 (2010)
  70. ^ Encounter Ghassemi 5. Ghassemi
  71. ^ "You lot searched for united_states/Maine/Index » U.S. Union License Laws".
  72. ^ "Human Services Legislation and Legislative News from NCSL". www.ncsl.org.
  73. ^ Doc. Family LAW Code Ann. § two-202 (2010)
  74. ^ Md. CRIMINAL Law Code Ann. § 3-323 (2010)
  75. ^ ALM GL ch. 207, § 1 (2010)
  76. ^ ALM GL ch. 207, § two (2010)
  77. ^ ALM GL ch. 272, § 17 (2010)
  78. ^ "Michigan Marriage License Laws > MI Wedding Officiants". Retrieved 10 February 2013.
  79. ^ See In re Miller's Manor, 239 Mich. 455, 214 Northward.West. 428 (1927)
  80. ^ In addition to statute and preceding reference, see Toth five Toth (1973) 50 Mich App 150, 212 NW2d 812.
  81. ^ Minn. Stat. § 517.03 (2009)
  82. ^ Minn. Stat. § 518.01 (2009)
  83. ^ Minn. Stat. § 609.365 (2009)
  84. ^ Miss. Code Ann. § 93-1-one (2010)
  85. ^ Miss. Code Ann. § 93-one-3 (2010)
  86. ^ Miss. Code Ann. § 93-five-29 (2010)
  87. ^ § 451.020 R.S.Mo. (2010)
  88. ^ § 568.020 R.S.Mo. (2010)
  89. ^ Mont. Code Anno., § 40-1-104 (2010)
  90. ^ Mont. Code Anno., § 40-1-401 (2010)
  91. ^ Mont. Code Anno., § 45-5-507 (2010)
  92. ^ R.R.S. Neb. § 42-103 (2010)
  93. ^ R.R.South. Neb. § 42-117 (2010)
  94. ^ R.R.S. Neb. § 28-702 (2010)
  95. ^ R.R.S. Neb. § 28-703 (2010)
  96. ^ Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 125.290 (2010)
  97. ^ Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 201.180 (2010)
  98. ^ RSA 457:2 (2010)
  99. ^ RSA 457:iii (2010)
  100. ^ RSA 639:two (2010)
  101. ^ Prohibition of marriages betwixt first cousins is applicable where the persons to be married are related only by adoption. 1987 Op. Att'y Gen. 46. (New Hampshire)
  102. ^ North.J. Stat. § 37:1-one (2010)
  103. ^ N.J. Stat. § 2C:14-2 (2010)
  104. ^ N.G. Stat. Ann. § xl-1-7 (2010)
  105. ^ N.M. Stat. Ann. § 30-10-3 (2010)
  106. ^ NY CLS Dom Rel § 5 (2010)
  107. ^ NY CLS Penal § 255.25 (2010)
  108. ^ N.C. Gen. Stat. § 51-iii (2010)
  109. ^ N.C. Gen. Stat. § fourteen-178 (2010)
  110. ^ Northward.D. Cent. Lawmaking, § 14-03-03 (2010)
  111. ^ N.D. Cent. Code, § 14-03-08 (2010)
  112. ^ Northward.D. Cent. Code, § 12.1-20-11 (2010)
  113. ^ ORC Ann. 3101.01 (2010)
  114. ^ ORC Ann. 3105.31 (2010)
  115. ^ ORC Ann. 2907.03 (2010)
  116. ^ 43 Okl. St. § 2 (2010)
  117. ^ 21 Okl. St. § 885 (2010)
  118. ^ ORS § 106.020 (2009)
  119. ^ ORS § 163.525 (2009)
  120. ^ "Wedlock in Oregon". Oregon State Bar . Retrieved 2021-10-31 .
  121. ^ Meet Leefield v. Leefield, (1917) 85 Or 287, 166 P 953.
  122. ^ 23 Pa.C.Southward. § 1304 (2010)
  123. ^ 23 Pa.C.S. § 3304 (2010)
  124. ^ 18 Pa.C.S. § 4302 (2010)
  125. ^ R.I. Gen. Laws § 15-1-ane (2010)
  126. ^ R.I. Gen. Laws § 15-1-2 (2010)
  127. ^ Southward.C. Code Ann. § 20-1-10 (2009)
  128. ^ Southward.C. Code Ann. § 16-15-20 (2009)
  129. ^ South.D. Codified Laws § 25-i-6 (2010)
  130. ^ South.D. Codified Laws § 22-22A-2 (2010)
  131. ^ South.D. Codified Laws § 25-i-38 (2010)
  132. ^ See Garcia v. Garcia, 25 Due south.D. 645, 127 N.Westward. 586 (1910)
  133. ^ Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-iii-101 (2010)
  134. ^ Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-15-302 (2010)
  135. ^ Tex. Fam. Lawmaking § 2.004 (2010)
  136. ^ Texas Family Code, Title 1, Chapter vi, Subtitle B
  137. ^ Tex. Fam. Code § 6.201 (2010)
  138. ^ Tex. Penal Lawmaking § 25.02 (2010)
  139. ^ Utah Code Ann. § 30-1-1 (2010)
  140. ^ Utah Code Ann. § 30-ane-4 (2010)
  141. ^ Utah Lawmaking Ann. § 76-7-102 (2010)
  142. ^ 15 Five.S.A. § 1a (2010)
  143. ^ xiii V.South.A. § 205 (2010)
  144. ^ Va. Code Ann. § 20-38.1 (2010)
  145. ^ Va. Code Ann. § eighteen.2-366 (2010)
  146. ^ Rev. Code Wash. (ARCW) § 26.04.020 (2010)
  147. ^ Rev. Lawmaking Wash. (ARCW) § 26.09.040 (2010)
  148. ^ Rev. Code Launder. (ARCW) § 9A.64.020 (2010)
  149. ^ While no longer a criminal offence in Washington, prosecutions for sexual relations between cousins had taken place under a sometime statute. Run across Land v. Nakashima, 62 Wash. 686, 114 P. 894 (1911).
  150. ^ Evasive marriages were held to be void in Washington fifty-fifty though there was no statute specifically making them such. See Johnson v. Johnson, 57 Wash. 89, 106 Pac. 500 (1910).
  151. ^ W. Va. Code § 48-2-302 (2010)
  152. ^ W. Va. Code § 48-two-303 (2010)
  153. ^ W. Va. Code § 48-2-503 (2010)
  154. ^ W. Va. Lawmaking § 48-iii-103 (2010)
  155. ^ W. Va. Code § 48-two-602 (2010)
  156. ^ W. Va. Code § 61-8-12 (2010)
  157. ^ Wis. Stat. § 765.03 (2010)
  158. ^ Wis. Stat. § 765.04 (2010)
  159. ^ Wis. Stat. § 765.21 (2010)
  160. ^ Annotation that marriage away to circumvent the laws carries criminal penalties in Wisconsin; see Wis. Stat. § 765.xxx (2010)
  161. ^ Wis. Stat. § 944.06 (2010)
  162. ^ Wyo. Stat. § 20-one-111 (2010)
  163. ^ Wyo. Stat. § 20-ii-101 (2010)
  164. ^ Wyo. Stat. § 6-four-402 (2010)
  165. ^ "Global prevalence tables". www.consang.net.
  166. ^ Paul and Spencer.
  167. ^ Paul, Diane B; Spencer, Hamish G (2008-12-23). Keller, Evelyn Fox (ed.). ""Information technology's Ok, Nosotros're Not Cousins by Claret": The Cousin Wedlock Controversy in Historical Perspective". PLoS Biology. Public Library of Scientific discipline (PLoS). vi (12): e320. doi:ten.1371/periodical.pbio.0060320. ISSN 1545-7885.
  168. ^ "Alphabetize of /~omar". www-personal.ksu.edu.
  169. ^ Ottenheimer. p. 111.
  170. ^ Ottenheimer, Martin (1996). "Chapter two". Forbidden Relatives: The American Myth of Cousin Marriage . University of Illinois.
  171. ^ Ottenheimer, Martin (1996). "Affiliate 3". Forbidden Relatives: The American Myth of Cousin Matrimony . Academy of Illinois.
  172. ^ Brandon Keim (23 December 2008). "Cousin Matrimony OK by Science". Wired.
  173. ^ Paul, Diane B.; Spencer, Hamish G. (23 Dec 2008). ""It'south Ok, We're Not Cousins past Claret": The Cousin Marriage Controversy in Historical Perspective". PLOS Biology. 6 (12): 2627–30. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0060320. PMC2605922. PMID 19108607.
  174. ^ "Go Ahead, Osculation Your Cousin". Discover Magazine.
  175. ^ Bittles and Black 2009, Section 2
  176. ^ "TPT St. Paul. "Quotes for Inspiration." June 25, 2009". Archived from the original on September 6, 2009.
  177. ^ "The Wake. Vol. 3, Issue 8" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2011-07-17. Retrieved 2019-05-21 .
  178. ^ "Bill INFO-2000 Regular Session-HB 459". mlis.state.md.usa.
  179. ^ "Steve Chapman. "Keeping Marriage in the Family."".
  180. ^ C.Due south.H.B. 3006. Texas Legislature 79(R).
  181. ^ Plocek, Keith (27 April 2006). "Big Beloved, Texas-Style".
  182. ^ Kershaw, Sarah (26 November 2009). "Shaking Off the Shame". The New York Times. Archived from the original on February 25, 2020.
  183. ^ "Beak takes aim at polygamists". www.dentonrc.com. [ permanent dead link ]
  184. ^ Writer, NATALIE GOTT Associated Press. "Lawmaker files bill raising age of marriage consent".
  185. ^ "Trish Choate. "FLDS TRIAL: All eyes still on Jessop, for at present". St. Angelo Standard-Times.
  186. ^ "85th Texas Legislature: News, issues, commentary & more".
  187. ^ "PENAL CODE Affiliate 25. OFFENSES AGAINST THE FAMILY". world wide web.statutes.legis.state.tx.united states.
  188. ^ N.C. Gen. Stat. § 51–3 (West 2009).
  189. ^ "State Laws Regarding Marriages Between Starting time Cousins". National Conference of Country Legislatures. Retrieved ten September 2013.
  190. ^ "US State Laws". CousinCouples.com. Archived from the original on 2015-02-08.

priestwhimall.blogspot.com

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cousin_marriage_law_in_the_United_States

Post a Comment for "Are There Any States in the United States Where You Can Marry a Family Member"