T Nation

Right to Marriage Benefits

Since “The Right to Marriage Benefits” is so often narrowly argued, gay marriage mostly, I thought I’d start a post so all may champion various forms of marriage. I’m thinking Polygamy and Bisexual marriages (related to polygamy I suppose), or even heterosexual lifelong bachelors living together, etc. Jump right in and argue your cause!

What’s our cry? The governmental rewarding of sexually monogamous and heterosexual coupling is discriminatory! Favortism is wrong, and the government shouldn’t set aside benefits based on sex of the individuals involved, the presence (or lack of) the sexual act, sexual orientation, or number of individuals involved in the arrangment.

Why create a new thread? Already discussed to death in other threads, anyway.

[quote]forlife wrote:
Why create a new thread? Already discussed to death in other threads, anyway.[/quote]

True, but it always revolves around gay marriage. This one will be for the advancement of other forms of unions, relationships, and arrangement presently discriminated against by a denial of marriage status. I’d respectfully ask that gay marriage not be discussed in this thread.

Brothers, sisters, cousins, and any combination thereof.

[quote]tedro wrote:
Brothers, sisters, cousins, and any combination thereof.[/quote]

True. I hadn’t thought about that. I suppose if medical records were presented that demonstrated one (or both) had underwent a sterilization procedure, there couldn’t be any objections.

On a very liberal message forum I got flamed for saying that even thought I don’t approve of the gay/lesbian lifestyle I would vote for it because I think they have the right to be married.
I really don’t care who marry’s who because thats their business.

THIS! IS! UTAH!!!

[quote]Sloth wrote:
What’s our cry?[/quote]

Goats. Definitely Goats.

[quote]Sloth wrote:
tedro wrote:
Brothers, sisters, cousins, and any combination thereof.

True. I hadn’t thought about that. I suppose if medical records were presented that demonstrated one (or both) had underwent a sterilization procedure, there couldn’t be any objections.[/quote]

Whoa. Fertility is not a pre-requisite for marriage. Also, we haven’t passed any laws stating that older women can’t have children due to their higher incidences of birth defects. Why, then, wouldn’t brothers and sisters be allowed to marry? Also, first cousin marriage is common in the Islamic world. Why not allow it here? Sure, a few IQ points will be missed here or there, but we don’t allow only high-IQ reproduction in our society.

First cousin marriage is legal in several states. http://marriage.about.com/cs/marriagelicenses/a/cousin.htm

I think we should extend civil rights to Muslims as well. The legal marriage age for women should be moved to 9 years, and Muslim men must be allowed up to 4 wives.

[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
I think we should extend civil rights to Muslims as well. The legal marriage age for women should be moved to 9 years, and Muslim men must be allowed up to 4 wives. [/quote]

…whoah, hold up now.

[quote]Sloth wrote:
Since “The Right to Marriage Benefits” is so often narrowly argued, gay marriage mostly, I thought I’d start a post so all may champion various forms of marriage. I’m thinking Polygamy and Bisexual marriages (related to polygamy I suppose), or even heterosexual lifelong bachelors living together, etc. Jump right in and argue your cause!

What’s our cry? The governmental rewarding of sexually monogamous and heterosexual coupling is discriminatory! Favortism is wrong, and the government shouldn’t set aside benefits based on sex of the individuals involved, the presence (or lack of) the sexual act, sexual orientation, or number of individuals involved in the arrangment. [/quote]

You are absolutely right. The government should stay out of the marriage business altogether.

If you want to sign a contract to govern your relationship with another(s), see a lawyer.

[quote]debraD wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Since “The Right to Marriage Benefits” is so often narrowly argued, gay marriage mostly, I thought I’d start a post so all may champion various forms of marriage. I’m thinking Polygamy and Bisexual marriages (related to polygamy I suppose), or even heterosexual lifelong bachelors living together, etc. Jump right in and argue your cause!

What’s our cry? The governmental rewarding of sexually monogamous and heterosexual coupling is discriminatory! Favortism is wrong, and the government shouldn’t set aside benefits based on sex of the individuals involved, the presence (or lack of) the sexual act, sexual orientation, or number of individuals involved in the arrangment.

You are absolutely right. The government should stay out of the marriage business altogether.

If you want to sign a contract to govern your relationship with another(s), see a lawyer.

[/quote]

That’d be nice. And would work except that others don’t have to honor that contract. It means shit with the respect to the outside world. Take hospitals as just one example. You can show a hospital that you consider Person X as family/significant other/lifelong friend, and they don’t have to accomodate you one bit.

Marriage is the only status that holds legal weight with the outside world. Well, things like domestic partnerships in states that have those. If this wasn’t true, there would be no debate, and government WOULDN’T need to play any role.

Changing this would require a much more fundamental overhaul to the legal system than specifying what groups receive legal benefits that the oustide world must recognize. It would result in binding individuals to the terms of contracts they are not party to. And that opens up a whole nother can of worms.

Single. Don’t fall for all that bullshit. Live life on your terms. Answer to you!

[quote]jsbrook wrote:
debraD wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Since “The Right to Marriage Benefits” is so often narrowly argued, gay marriage mostly, I thought I’d start a post so all may champion various forms of marriage. I’m thinking Polygamy and Bisexual marriages (related to polygamy I suppose), or even heterosexual lifelong bachelors living together, etc. Jump right in and argue your cause!

What’s our cry? The governmental rewarding of sexually monogamous and heterosexual coupling is discriminatory! Favortism is wrong, and the government shouldn’t set aside benefits based on sex of the individuals involved, the presence (or lack of) the sexual act, sexual orientation, or number of individuals involved in the arrangment.

You are absolutely right. The government should stay out of the marriage business altogether.

If you want to sign a contract to govern your relationship with another(s), see a lawyer.

That’d be nice. And would work except that others don’t have to honor that contract. It means shit with the respect to the outside world. Take hospitals as just one example. You can show a hospital that you consider Person X as family/significant other/lifelong friend, and they don’t have to accomodate you one bit.

Marriage is the only status that holds legal weight with the outside world. Well, things like domestic partnerships in states that have those. If this wasn’t true, there would be no debate, and government WOULDN’T need to play any role.

Changing this would require a much more fundamental overhaul to the legal system than specifying what groups receive legal benefits that the oustide world must recognize. It would result in binding individuals to the terms of contracts they are not party to. And that opens up a whole nother can of worms.[/quote]

You’ve apparently never heard of giving power of attorney.

[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
I think we should extend civil rights to Muslims as well. The legal marriage age for women should be moved to 9 years, and Muslim men must be allowed up to 4 wives. [/quote]

The age issue is a bad analogy and isn’t particularly relevant, but the polygamy issue is definitely relevant.

I don’t see how anyone can logically argue that disallowing gay marriage is discriminatory, while claiming that the same is not true for polygamy.

[quote]Sloth wrote:

What’s our cry? The governmental rewarding of sexually monogamous and heterosexual coupling is discriminatory! Favortism is wrong, and the government shouldn’t set aside benefits based on sex of the individuals involved, the presence (or lack of) the sexual act, sexual orientation, or number of individuals involved in the arrangment. [/quote]

You summed it up perfectly.

[quote]Beowolf wrote:
jsbrook wrote:
debraD wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Since “The Right to Marriage Benefits” is so often narrowly argued, gay marriage mostly, I thought I’d start a post so all may champion various forms of marriage. I’m thinking Polygamy and Bisexual marriages (related to polygamy I suppose), or even heterosexual lifelong bachelors living together, etc. Jump right in and argue your cause!

What’s our cry? The governmental rewarding of sexually monogamous and heterosexual coupling is discriminatory! Favortism is wrong, and the government shouldn’t set aside benefits based on sex of the individuals involved, the presence (or lack of) the sexual act, sexual orientation, or number of individuals involved in the arrangment.

You are absolutely right. The government should stay out of the marriage business altogether.

If you want to sign a contract to govern your relationship with another(s), see a lawyer.

That’d be nice. And would work except that others don’t have to honor that contract. It means shit with the respect to the outside world. Take hospitals as just one example. You can show a hospital that you consider Person X as family/significant other/lifelong friend, and they don’t have to accomodate you one bit.

Marriage is the only status that holds legal weight with the outside world. Well, things like domestic partnerships in states that have those. If this wasn’t true, there would be no debate, and government WOULDN’T need to play any role.

Changing this would require a much more fundamental overhaul to the legal system than specifying what groups receive legal benefits that the oustide world must recognize. It would result in binding individuals to the terms of contracts they are not party to. And that opens up a whole nother can of worms.

You’ve apparently never heard of giving power of attorney.

[/quote]

Power of attorney provides someone the right to act on a another’s behalf just as if they were the person themself. It in no way provides benefits akin to a legally recongized marriage.

There are numerouous other problesm. If one is not next of kin, one is always at risk that some blood relative will step in with a lawyer and challenge whatever will, power of attorney or other legal document one might have.

There are situations, say in a hospital emergency room, in which saying “this is my husband/wife” opens doors immediately, but where you might otherwise be forced to say, “oh, excuse me, I need to go home and get my copy of the power of attorney, and maybe my lawyer too.”

And get ready for this. Below is a list of benefits copied from another website that marriage provides that no other recognized institution does. Until this is not the case, it’s not just whining, and there is a legitimate beef whether or not you think the status of ‘married’ should automatically yield these or not. It does. Nothing else does.

Tax Benefits

Filing joint income tax returns with the IRS and state taxing authorities.

Creating a “family partnership” under federal tax laws, which allows you to divide business income among family members.

Estate Planning Benefits

Inheriting a share of your spouse’s estate.

Receiving an exemption from both estate taxes and gift taxes for all property you give or leave to your spouse.

Creating life estate trusts that are restricted to married couples, including QTIP trusts, QDOT trusts, and marital deduction trusts.

Obtaining priority if a conservator needs to be appointed for your spouse – that is, someone to make financial and/or medical decisions on your spouse?s behalf.

Government Benefits

Receiving Social Security, Medicare, and disability benefits for spouses.

Receiving veterans’ and military benefits for spouses, such as those for education, medical care, or special loans.

Receiving public assistance benefits.

Employment Benefits

Obtaining insurance benefits through a spouse’s employer.

Taking family leave to care for your spouse during an illness.

Receiving wages, workers’ compensation, and retirement plan benefits for a deceased spouse.

Taking bereavement leave if your spouse or one of your spouse?s close relatives dies.

Medical Benefits

Visiting your spouse in a hospital intensive care unit or during restricted visiting hours in other parts of a medical facility.

Making medical decisions for your spouse if he or she becomes incapacitated and unable to express wishes for treatment.

Death Benefits

Consenting to after-death examinations and procedures.

Making burial or other final arrangements.

Family Benefits

Filing for stepparent or joint adoption.

Applying for joint foster care rights.

Receiving equitable division of property if you divorce.

Receiving spousal or child support, child custody, and visitation if you divorce.

Housing Benefits

Living in neighborhoods zoned for “families only.”

Automatically renewing leases signed by your spouse.

Consumer Benefits

Receiving family rates for health, homeowners’, auto, and other types of insurance.

Receiving tuition discounts and permission to use school facilities.

Other consumer discounts and incentives offered only to married couples or families.

Other Legal Benefits and Protections

Suing a third person for wrongful death of your spouse and loss of consortium (loss of intimacy).

Suing a third person for offenses that interfere with the success of your marriage, such as alienation of affection and criminal conversation (these laws are available in only a few states).

Claiming the marital communications privilege, which means a court can?t force you to disclose the contents of confidential communications between you and your spouse during your marriage.

Receiving crime victims’ recovery benefits if your spouse is the victim of a crime.

Obtaining domestic violence protection orders (in some states, executive orders estend this to other relationships)

Obtaining immigration and residency benefits for noncitizen spouse.

Visiting rights in jails and other places where visitors are restricted to immediate family