Why do some Christians refer to Luke chapter 3 as describing Mary's genealogy?

It gets them out of the obvious contradiction between the two gospels. The earliest reference I have found is in the Scopes Bible which tries to find a quote in the Old Testament to base it's claim on. The problem is, the Scopes Bible reference has nothing to do with the subject.

So this angel visited Mary, and Jesus was born of God and Mary by Immaculate conception, so why on earth do they harp on about bloody Joseph - he did not father Jesus, he was not even involved according to the bible?

Jesus could not claim to be any descendant of the line of Joseph, he was the step son! but athough it sounds lame - Jesus was grandson of Heli, Jesus was the step son of Joseph whom was not a son of Heli because he was his son-in-law - so the whole geneology that follows may be Mary's line - its a tenious link at best, and written a long time after Jesus died. The old Saxons used to make up these silly genaologies to link them to Woden, the king of the gods... Yawn

You may be right.

It's a little hard to say with certainty whose is whose. But it does seem you are right on this one.

I think I myself have been mistaken about it in the past.

^^

edit: rereading your question, I should say that it is obvious that one of the two genealogies is Mary's.

You're splitting hairs.