relatives in love?

[LovinLiberia 0]

To some cultures it's not so ewww.

[pushbrk 12,285]

It's not a second cousin, it's a first cousin once-removed.

Second cousins have the same great-grandparents, but not the same grandparents.

The children of my first cousins are still first cousins, but separated by a generation, hence once-removed.

I am not sure, but I would think that the first cousin rules would apply.

Yes, but they need only marry (not live) in a State where it is legal. They may proceed with the visa process as if their genealogy was not a factor.

That's been debated here on VJ many times, and I'm not so sure you're right. It usually comes up with the issue of divorce and certain states having mandatory waiting periods. I don't think there's ever been any solid conclusions.

I'm not conflicted in the least. My second wife's sister married their first cousin in a State where it was legal and lived their lives in a State where first cousin marriage is not allowed. No sweat, except with the family consternation. There must have been something quite special about this young woman, I couldn't grasp, because two brothers wanted very much to marry her. Such is life.

Immigration law does not concern itself with future legal complications of potential divorce or the inconvenience of potential marriage waiting periods. The marriage needs to be legal where it is intended to occur.

Consensus on VJ is not the be all and end all of each possible immigration question.

Edited May 8, 2007 by pushbrk

[Jenn! 918]

It's not a second cousin, it's a first cousin once-removed.

Second cousins have the same great-grandparents, but not the same grandparents.

The children of my first cousins are still first cousins, but separated by a generation, hence once-removed.

I am not sure, but I would think that the first cousin rules would apply.

Yes, but they need only marry (not live) in a State where it is legal. They may proceed with the visa process as if their genealogy was not a factor.

That's been debated here on VJ many times, and I'm not so sure you're right. It usually comes up with the issue of divorce and certain states having mandatory waiting periods. I don't think there's ever been any solid conclusions.

I'm not conflicted in the least. My second wife's sister married their first cousin in a State where it was legal and lived their lives in a State where first cousin marriage is not allowed. No sweat, except with the family consternation. There must have been something quite special about this young woman, I couldn't grasp, because two brothers wanted very much to marry her. Such is life.

Consensus on VJ is not the be all and end all of each possible immigration question.

Of course not, but are you the be all and end all of each possible immigration question?

ETA: I do not think you are wrong, but I would hesitate to put it out there with such authority that this will not possibly cause any difficulty in thier immigration process.

Edited May 8, 2007 by jenn3539

[pushbrk 12,285]

It's not a second cousin, it's a first cousin once-removed.

Second cousins have the same great-grandparents, but not the same grandparents.

The children of my first cousins are still first cousins, but separated by a generation, hence once-removed.

I am not sure, but I would think that the first cousin rules would apply.

Yes, but they need only marry (not live) in a State where it is legal. They may proceed with the visa process as if their genealogy was not a factor.

That's been debated here on VJ many times, and I'm not so sure you're right. It usually comes up with the issue of divorce and certain states having mandatory waiting periods. I don't think there's ever been any solid conclusions.

I'm not conflicted in the least. My second wife's sister married their first cousin in a State where it was legal and lived their lives in a State where first cousin marriage is not allowed. No sweat, except with the family consternation. There must have been something quite special about this young woman, I couldn't grasp, because two brothers wanted very much to marry her. Such is life.

Consensus on VJ is not the be all and end all of each possible immigration question.

Of course not, but are you the be all and end all of each possible immigration question?

Of course not. The question is ludicrous on its face. Agreement is not the measure by which "correct" is determined.

As you will undoubtedly notice, people with serious immigration related questions are looking for the be all and end all answer to their questions whenever possible.

Edited May 8, 2007 by pushbrk

[Jenn! 918]

Ok, I'm not sure what's going on, and I'm not looking to argue.

I was merely advising that maybe the OP should not take your assessment of the situation as some sort of guarantee that the cousin issue will not interfere with the immigration process.

[pushbrk 12,285]

Ok, I'm not sure what's going on, and I'm not looking to argue.

I was merely advising that maybe the OP should not take your assessment of the situation as some sort of guarantee that the cousin issue will not interfere with the immigration process.

That advice is likely to cause undue stress and worry for the OP's family members. There actually are clear answers to some questions. This is one of those times and one of those answers.

[Jenn! 918]

Ok, I'm not sure what's going on, and I'm not looking to argue.

I was merely advising that maybe the OP should not take your assessment of the situation as some sort of guarantee that the cousin issue will not interfere with the immigration process.

That advice is likely to cause undue stress and worry for the OP's family members. There actually are clear answers to some questions. This is one of those times and one of those answers.

I disagree.

Let's leave it at that.

[no name 1]

Ok, I'm not sure what's going on, and I'm not looking to argue.

I was merely advising that maybe the OP should not take your assessment of the situation as some sort of guarantee that the cousin issue will not interfere with the immigration process.

That advice is likely to cause undue stress and worry for the OP's family members. There actually are clear answers to some questions. This is one of those times and one of those answers.

I disagree.

Let's leave it at that.

I agree with you Jenn. Not sure this is a clear cut answer...

[Sinergy 3]

To some cultures it's not so ewww.

good for them, fortunatly im not in any of those cultures and its ewwwwww!!

[LovinLiberia 0]

[john_and_marlene 162]

1. The I-129F requires you to identify the nature and degree of reltionship (Item 17)

2. They must be legally free to marry according to the laws of both countries. Does the law in the Philippines allow for cousin marriages? If not, a petition for fiance will not be valid.

3. Because of the close family ties, the consulate will most likely take an interest in the relationship between the two and need to verify that the union would be valid. Even if the degree of relationship is valid, they will be taking a hard look at the legitimacy of the engagement.

Edited May 8, 2007 by john_and_marlene

[tom_g 3]

To some cultures it's not so ewww.

The british royal family would be a good example. Keep it in the family, thats their policy

[LovinLiberia 0]

Lol, yeah, a lot of Arab cultures are that way, also. In fact, my best friend is Palestinian/Italian and her father had her marriage arranged to her first cousin. It was the same "keep the money & riches" in the family mentality. They even have a baby together.

[JessiPooh 0]

[TimsDaisy 0]

The question won't arise because two people have the same middle name. That's probably not a wholly uncommon occurance.

The question WILL arise on the I-129F where, if memory served, applicants are asked "are you related to your fiance?"

Then they'll have to understand their level of consanguity to answer correctly and using what titles (first, second, second-once-removed, whatever - I hardly understand that chart since I don't even have first cousins or aunts or uncles of my own).

(side question: is there really a requirement to divorce in the state where you live? what about people going the quickie reno divorce route? or people who move and later divorce? oh well, learn something potentially-new every day . . . )