Daisy's family

[Kriton Kyrimis]

DON:

> That's wild! I can't imagine why it would not be allowed.

My previous posting should probably have explained things in a bit more
detail.

> If it's okay for
> the first two to get married, what could be wrong with the second two? Or
> why would it make a difference if they were married at the same time?
> "In-laws" do not suddenly become blood-relations at the instant of their
> siblings' marriage.

No, but they do become related by marriage, which in the eyes of the law
is the same as being related by blood, so they can't get married. If
both couples get married at the same time, the two are not related at
the time of the ceremony, so it's OK.

It may sound weird, but this ensures that by applying both the priviliges
and the obligations of blood relationship to relationship by marriage,
the two types of relationship are completely equivalent. It's like talking
about equality of the sexes when men can't bear children. Until they do,
they can be nothing but second-class citizens.

> Still off-topic, but I'm just curious as to why this is unsettling for
> Europeans! If Daisy's brother married Donald's sister, there would *still*
> be no relation between Daisy and Donald, much less a "disgusting" one.

I can't answer for Shelley, but if one has been accustomed to considering
one's in-laws as one's relatives, period, then any suggestion of any kind
of impropriety among in-laws would be unsettling, to say the least. This
is probably a cultural thing, so I would suggest scrapping the idea. If
you turn out using it, I'd feel awkward, Shelley would be disgusted,
and a few countries your neighbors have never heard of would put a price
on your head. ;-)

>>>> Question for Don Rosa: if a couple gets divorced in Kentucky, are they
> still
> brother and sister?

I've been following these "Kentucky" jokes with puzzlement for some
time now.  Is this a variation of "how many [insert your favorite ethnic
group] are required to screw in a lightbulb", or are incestuous marriages
really common (or even the norm) in Kentucky?


ANDERS CHRISTIAN:

> Doesn't siblings mean brother and sister

Exactly.

> Donald and Daisy aren't brother and sister...

No, but the discussion resulted from talking about the possibility of
Daisy's brother being married to Donald's sister, which would make Daisy
Donald's sister-in-law.

        Kriton  (e-mail: kyrimis at cti.gr)
                (WWW:    http://dias.cti.gr/~kyrimis)
-----
"My dear chap, I don't need a computer!"
-----