Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Two men, but not three men. Two women, but not five women and fifteen men. SSM is limited to one legal marriage partner at a time, just as opposite sex marriage is.
BTW, I'm still hoping you will answer my question. Why is it that you believe no one will enter a poly marriage for health insurance or tax reasons? You also stated that no one will enter a straight marriage for those reasons. Yet I believe plenty of people have and continue to marry for financial reasons. Others choose to not marry for financial reasons. Why wouldn't people choose to act in their own best interests?
Because I've never seen it happen. I've never seen two people get married solely for health or tax reasons. Ever.
Because I've never seen it happen. I've never seen two people get married solely for health or tax reasons. Ever.
I have. A man I know married a female friend with 3 kids so they would be covered under his insurance policy. The youngest has medical issues and they had no insurance. They don't even live together.
There are also green card marriages, that could be fun with polygamy go marry a village and bring them to the US.
I have. A man I know married a female friend with 3 kids so they would be covered under his insurance policy. The youngest has medical issues and they had no insurance. They don't even live together.
There are also green card marriages, that could be fun with polygamy go marry a village and bring them to the US.
In your first example did they marry ONLY because of the benefits or was there a committed relationship first? That, I've seen. Marrying because you get benefits but not marrying only for tax or health insurance benefits.
Because I've never seen it happen. I've never seen two people get married solely for health or tax reasons. Ever.
I have known no small number of military marriages entered into for that very reason. I imagine many people affiliated with the military for a long time will tell you the same. And, yes, that is exactly why the non-military person sought them out.
__________________
When I post in bold red that is moderator action and, per the TOS, can only be discussed through Direct Message.
I have known no small number of military marriages entered into for that very reason. I imagine many people affiliated with the military for a long time will tell you the same. And, yes, that is exactly why the non-military person sought them out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magritte25
In your first example did they marry ONLY because of the benefits or was there a committed relationship first? That, I've seen. Marrying because you get benefits but not marrying only for tax or health insurance benefits.
Polygamy is actually one of the oldest forms of human marriage arrangements
And that was before government sanctioned marriage with all its benefits and privileges in a time when women could not support and protect themselves and their children and men could.
I have no problem with it morally. I don't understand the want to legally be married to multiple people unless it is to reap government benefits. The reason most people marry today is for the privileges of a government sanctioned marriage, perhaps some feel a need for moral reasons but they could just as easily cover that by being married in a ceremony before their God.
You have people saying the gov. should get out of the marriage business at the same time they advocate for plural and gay marriage. Why do they want that piece of paper?
In your first example did they marry ONLY because of the benefits or was there a committed relationship first? That, I've seen. Marrying because you get benefits but not marrying only for tax or health insurance benefits.
They were and still are just friends. They do not live in the same house, and never have. They do not date each other and never have. They are not in a romantic or sexual relationship and have never been. THEY ARE FRIENDS. They got married so that her and her children would be covered under his insurance.
"Marrying because you get benefits but not marrying only for tax or health insurance benefits."
What? Marrying for benefits includes insurance benefits.
They were and still are just friends. They do not live in the same house, and never have. They do not date each other and never have. They are not in a romantic or sexual relationship and have never been. THEY ARE FRIENDS. They got married so that her and her children would be covered under his insurance.
"Marrying because you get benefits but not marrying only for tax or health insurance benefits."
What? Marrying for benefits includes insurance benefits.
That's insurance fraud. I hope someone reports them.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Why do they want that piece of paper?
