Posted on 09/07/2016 6:00:38 PM PDT by Olog-hai
A woman and her daughter are facing incest charges after authorities learned the pair were legally married in Oklahoma this year, and that the mother had married her son a few years earlier.
The motivation behind the March marriage was unclear Wednesday, when 43-year-old Patricia Ann Spann and her daughter, 25-year-old Misty Velvet Dawn Spann, made initial appearances in Stephens County district court.
Under Oklahoma law, marrying a close relative is considered incest whether or not a sexual relationship exists. …
(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...
As Mrs. Don-o said.
Leaving aside my elliptical sarcasm, now that our society has changed the meaning of marriage to mean a relationship based on romantic and sexual attraction regardless of the sex of the participants or whether the pairing could ever produce children, I believe that mine is a reasonable question.
Why should two people whose relationship is not sexual or romantic, but is the closest one they have, not be able to declare a legal partnership, with inheritance rights, next of kin rights, medical decision making, etc?
in a sinister way I hope this kind of gets okayed....let the animals see what they have wrought....
Poor girl has three porn star names. Not cool, mom.
It is not “our society” that did that. It is lawless politicians and judges.
imagine a old guy having 4 young women in a "partnership" each one pulling in SS and other benefits....
That would depend upon their skin color.
Did she marry the dog?
It would have to be a mutual partnership. No cult leaders inheriting and making medical decisions for a thousand followers.
But they CAN do that, and have always been able to do that. It's called "leaving a will," "financial powers of attorney," "medical proxy," "contract."
Every one of those things can be covered w/o a bastardization of "marriage".
Except pensions, insurance coverage, social security, and exemption from inheritance tax. And rent-controlled apartments.
It always comes down to the money.
A domestic partnership package would be convenient, instead of having to account for all the legal contingencies separately.
Just for being couple-y?
Why not threesies and foursies?
Interested in your response.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.