|
CallaFirestormBW -> RE: Elsewhere on the Ballot: Gay Marriage (9/7/2008 7:42:24 AM)
|
Gee -- the abolishment of government-sanctioned marriage would require people to be personally responsible for all this stuff??? Well, heck, yeah... I've changed -my- mind... We should definitely hold on to government sanctioned marriage so that all these folks can just pawn the responsibility for taking care of the details of the relationships they get into off on the government. (*rolls eyes*)
quote:
ORIGINAL: DomKen
While getting rid of legal government marriage may sound appealing on the surface it is an abysmally bad idea.
Things protected/provided by married status:
inheritance without a will
So stop being a lazy-ass and get a written will...
quote:
decision making and vistation rights (This all falls to blood relations without medical powers of attorney being executed)
So make sure the people you want to be making decisions for you have a medical power of attorney
quote:
employer insurance benefits
Get rid of the concept of "legal marriage" and insurance companies will have to re-create how they determine such issues. When my Darling was at Duke, they allowed an individual to cover 1 selected person as a domestic partner under the 'marriage' rate, and 2 or more selected people under the 'family' rate -- all you had to do was prove relationship of -some- kind (we provided our handfasting cards and all 4 adults and 4 kids in our 'core' were covered for an expanded premium (because of the extra adults)).
quote:
spousal privilege in legal matters (IOW you would be required to testify against your mate in court)
This is already starting to happen, as courts deal with the blowback of non-traditional households. Take away legal justification NOT to accept spousal privilege for same-gender or multi-adult households and the issue of 'who is the spouse' would be individually determined by case (just like it is already in many situations, including North Carolina Family Courts, where both my Darling and I have direct experience.)
quote:
communal property rights ( a spouse who stays home and raises the children is entitled to nothing if 20 years down the line the relationship ends)
So make this part of the domestic partnership agreement. Laziness is not a valid argument for continued government sanction.
quote:
post death arrangements (once again this would fall back to blood relations) Again, make a frigging WILL.
quote:
tax benefits See, now this one -could- disappear. I don't believe that anyone should -get- tax benefits just because they entered into a communal relationship -- get rid of 'legal' marriage and just tax people per capita (and maybe spend some time repairing the out-of-date tax code at the same time). Why should someone in a het or same-gen marriage get a tax break anyway?
[clipped]
quote:
It would be great to get legal standing for poly relationship but that days is a long way off and we shouldn't cause chaos throughout the social structure of the nation by abandoning the legal concept of marriage. I disagree. I don't think it would be beneficial to have government 'standing' for poly or any other relationship. I agree with CL that the government should just get it's damned fingers out of the whole issue of marriage completely. Neither sanction nor deny sanction -- let it be a social construct or religious construct, and keep government out of it.
Calla Firestorm
|
|
|
|
