**MissBlush**

tfarabians

Just wondering if I can pick your brain.  Below is WA law on marriage and incest.  So would you read it that since my bil is a first cousin once removed that it would be illegal for them to marry?  And if that is the case would you read it that this is incest? 

Ugh this is all so gross and even worse... my fil does not think its wrong???!

 

Washington

RCW 26.04.020
Prohibited marriages.
(b) When the husband and wife are nearer of kin to each other than second cousins, whether of the whole or half blood computing by the rules of the civil law; or
(c) When the parties are persons other than a male and a female.
(2) It is unlawful for any man to marry his father's sister, mother's sister, daughter, sister, son's daughter, daughter's daughter, brother's daughter or sister's daughter; it is unlawful for any woman to marry her father's brother, mother's brother, son, brother, son's son, daughter's son, brother's son or sister's son.

RCW 9A.64.020
Incest.
(1) A person is guilty of incest in the first degree if he engages in sexual intercourse with a person whom he knows to be related to him, either legitimately or illegitimately, as an ancestor, descendant, brother, or sister of either the whole or the half blood.
(2) A person is guilty of incest in the second degree if he engages in sexual contact with a person whom he knows to be related to him, either legitimately or illegitimately, as an ancestor, descendant, brother, or sister of either the whole or the half blood.
(3) As used in this section, "descendant" includes stepchildren and adopted children under eighteen years of age.
 

 

MissBlush

Well, it's definitely not incest. ?A cousin isn't an ancestor or descendant, nor a brother or sister.

I don't know if a first cousin once removed is considered "nearer of kin" than a second cousin.?I'll have to look it up when I'm at work tomorrow, and I'll let you know. ?It really doesn't matter, however, unless they're planning to get married.

Legal or not, it's still totally gross.?