Edit: Wait...can step-siblings marry actually?
In the The Simpsons episode, Lady Bouvier's Lover, Marge's mom dates Homer's dad. Here, Homer and Marge are characters who are married.
If he marries your mother, Marge, we'll be brother and sister!
And then our kids, they'll be horrible freaks... with pink skin, no overbites and five fingers on each hand!
In the How I Met Your Mother, The Over-Correction, Lily's dad dates Marshall's mom. Here, Marshall and Lily also are characters who are married.
So, we, um we just wanted to say that we're sorry for the way that we acted when we found out about you two. Your happiness is what is most important, so, if you two want to date, it's okay by us.
Who said anything about dating?
This is just about sex.
We're family with benefits.
- Generally, co-siblings-in-law can marry, so Homer's brother could marry Marge's sister. But generally, could co-parents-in-law marry?
This question might be specific to a location, so if need be I choose the US. If I need to be more specific, I choose New York, the setting of How I Met Your Mother.
The thing is, if this were legal, that is step brothers and step sisters cannot marry but co-parents-in-law can marry even if it would make their respective married children step-siblings, then I think there seems to be a loophole:
If A and B are widows and dating each other and their respective children C and D are dating, then it's allowed for C and D to first be married and then for A and B to be married, BUT the reverse order isn't allowed? What logic.
- Let me clarify: The spirit of the law I believe is for C and D to not be both step-siblings and married. The letter of the law prevents marriage if they are already step-siblings but does not prevent them becoming step-siblings by their widowed parents' marriage if C and D are first married. There's no issue here if the spirit of law is actually to prevent "step-sibling then married" and doesn't really care about "married and step-sibling", that is, doesn't care about "married then step-sibling". I guess such a marriage of A and B would be something like not incestuous by itself but would imply an incestuous marriage namely of C and D. So an indirectly incestuous marriage is I believe a loophole based on my belief of the spirit of certain marriage laws.
- I could not seem to find any question like this online except this. What are the keywords here?
I think something about consanguinity?
I don't believe this is location-specific.