U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 07-05-2010, 08:31 PM
 
Location: Arlington, VA
5,412 posts, read 3,918,796 times
Reputation: 916

Advertisements

I don't think so. It's religious, thus private. If you want to get married, then great. But married people should get zero benefits from the government for being married. No tax benefits, no inheritance rights by statute (intestacy), no divorces in the courts.

I think marriage is a waste of taxpayer money, and the states shouldn't recognize a private act. Given it's not treated like a valid contract, it shouldn't be litigated in court in cases of divorce. You come up with your own agreement, and if that's violated, then you can sue on breach of contract and you pay ALL court fees/costs INCLUDING the portion of the salary for the judge and employees for the amount of time they are wasting on your private matter instead of other things.

Sound good?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-05-2010, 08:37 PM
 
Location: Southcentral Kansas
44,884 posts, read 31,198,518 times
Reputation: 4269
Quote:
Originally Posted by betamanlet View Post
I don't think so. It's religious, thus private. If you want to get married, then great. But married people should get zero benefits from the government for being married. No tax benefits, no inheritance rights by statute (intestacy), no divorces in the courts.

I think marriage is a waste of taxpayer money, and the states shouldn't recognize a private act. Given it's not treated like a valid contract, it shouldn't be litigated in court in cases of divorce. You come up with your own agreement, and if that's violated, then you can sue on breach of contract and you pay ALL court fees/costs INCLUDING the portion of the salary for the judge and employees for the amount of time they are wasting on your private matter instead of other things.

Sound good?
Our present government has taken away any marriage benefits as far as taxes are concerned and they have taken away inheritance by taking most of it in taxes so divorce is all that is left. I had one of those many years ago and it cost me nothing since it was amicable and cost my wife very little to get it done.

I really don't agree with you in that I think it should be a legal action although most people just live together these days and give their kids some name and go on when they tire of each other. I am against all that but then I am very old and old fashioned.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-05-2010, 08:47 PM
 
Location: Not far from Fairbanks, AK
18,463 posts, read 32,801,459 times
Reputation: 14549
Quote:
Originally Posted by betamanlet View Post
I don't think so. It's religious, thus private. If you want to get married, then great. But married people should get zero benefits from the government for being married. No tax benefits, no inheritance rights by statute (intestacy), no divorces in the courts.

I think marriage is a waste of taxpayer money, and the states shouldn't recognize a private act. Given it's not treated like a valid contract, it shouldn't be litigated in court in cases of divorce. You come up with your own agreement, and if that's violated, then you can sue on breach of contract and you pay ALL court fees/costs INCLUDING the portion of the salary for the judge and employees for the amount of time they are wasting on your private matter instead of other things.

Sound good?
All depends. For example, the idea of marriage years ago was not only to have a religious union between a man and a woman, but also to prepare the couple to have a family (children), and these in turn would later become part of the society. The whole thing would eventually result in the creation of more members of the workforce and tax-paying society. But now with the break-up of the family, such things will go by the wayside along with our economy, and of the decline of the morals of our nation. While the union of the family goes down the drain in the US and EU, it's a lot slower with some other societies around the world.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-05-2010, 08:58 PM
 
48,507 posts, read 91,346,262 times
Reputation: 18214
Yes as that is what the majority wants.But it may not matter to those who are religious at all really.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-05-2010, 09:26 PM
 
Location: Texas
5,872 posts, read 7,561,974 times
Reputation: 2967
No. It's the main vehicle into the privacy and personal decisions that the gov't (State and Federal) use to interfere and attempt to regulate the citizens.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-05-2010, 09:56 PM
 
10,050 posts, read 9,313,141 times
Reputation: 9128
Quote:
Originally Posted by betamanlet View Post
I don't think so. It's religious, thus private. If you want to get married, then great. But married people should get zero benefits from the government for being married. No tax benefits, no inheritance rights by statute (intestacy), no divorces in the courts.

I think marriage is a waste of taxpayer money, and the states shouldn't recognize a private act. Given it's not treated like a valid contract, it shouldn't be litigated in court in cases of divorce. You come up with your own agreement, and if that's violated, then you can sue on breach of contract and you pay ALL court fees/costs INCLUDING the portion of the salary for the judge and employees for the amount of time they are wasting on your private matter instead of other things.

Sound good?
People who aren't religious still get married - by a judge.

You've never known anyone to go through a nasty divorce? It ain't pretty and can go on for years.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-05-2010, 10:40 PM
 
Location: Long Beach
2,348 posts, read 2,622,685 times
Reputation: 928
Marriage could be a religious matter, but is ALWAYS a civil matter and therefore a matter of state. Marriage is a social contract.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-05-2010, 10:41 PM
 
Location: Long Beach
2,348 posts, read 2,622,685 times
Reputation: 928
Quote:
Originally Posted by betamanlet View Post
I don't think so. It's religious, thus private. If you want to get married, then great. But married people should get zero benefits from the government for being married. No tax benefits, no inheritance rights by statute (intestacy), no divorces in the courts.

I think marriage is a waste of taxpayer money, and the states shouldn't recognize a private act. Given it's not treated like a valid contract, it shouldn't be litigated in court in cases of divorce. You come up with your own agreement, and if that's violated, then you can sue on breach of contract and you pay ALL court fees/costs INCLUDING the portion of the salary for the judge and employees for the amount of time they are wasting on your private matter instead of other things.

Sound good?
So gay marriage would be okay...as long as it was private. Some Christian churches will perform them.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-05-2010, 10:45 PM
 
Location: Imaginary Figment
11,456 posts, read 13,700,683 times
Reputation: 4777
Quote:
Originally Posted by betamanlet View Post
It's religious, thus private.
My marriage has nothing to do with religion. Zip, nada, zilch.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-05-2010, 10:49 PM
 
1,856 posts, read 2,816,898 times
Reputation: 1603
I think the government should issue a civil union for any two consenting adults (underage people should require parental consent) leaving marriage ceremonies and such to the individuals and religious organizations that guide them.

Option 2 would be to do like Betamanlet said and do away with all legal and tax benefits the government currently issues from a marriage contract which kind of makes sense too. Why should someone get tax breaks for being in love?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2022, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top