About Us

Boating All Out

In article ,
says...

On Fri, 29 May 2015 13:35:30 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

Republicans at work?

Oklahoma House passes bill restricting marriage to people of faith

Marriage is a religious ceremony and it should be completely unbundled
from the government.
The government has no business in the marriage process.

We have eliminated all of the actual constraints of marriage in the
law so it should simply be recognized as pure contract law and dealt
with as a civil partnership between any 2 or more adults.

Let the church deal with the spiritual issue of "marriage".

Marriage bestows tax benefits, and legal perquisites.
THAT's why queers want it, and I don't blame them.
That's the bottom line, nothing to do with any religion.
And that's why they're getting married (mostly) in non-religious
venues. I don't know the numbers, but I venture to say most weddings
are non-religious.

Boating All Out

In article ,
says...

On Fri, 29 May 2015 22:05:42 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Fri, 29 May 2015 13:35:30 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

Republicans at work?

Oklahoma House passes bill restricting marriage to people of faith

Marriage is a religious ceremony and it should be completely unbundled
from the government.
The government has no business in the marriage process.

We have eliminated all of the actual constraints of marriage in the
law so it should simply be recognized as pure contract law and dealt
with as a civil partnership between any 2 or more adults.

Let the church deal with the spiritual issue of "marriage".

Marriage bestows tax benefits, and legal perquisites.
THAT's why queers want it, and I don't blame them.
That's the bottom line, nothing to do with any religion.
And that's why they're getting married (mostly) in non-religious
venues. I don't know the numbers, but I venture to say most weddings
are non-religious.

The question is why?
In real life there are plenty of people who take a tax hit by being
married (AKA the marriage penalty) but perhaps that is simply a flaw
in the tax system. Maybe we should not even be looking at marital
status when we are looking at taxes. Just look at dependents and move
on.
In fact, right now, the most lucrative tax status is "single head of
household"
If 2 people with dependents get married, they take a bath at tax time.
It is even true if only one has kids. That happened to us.

The real issue is only taxes and perhaps pension benefits tho. The
pension thing is pretty much moot these days anyway. Nobody will have
pensions in a few years if things keep going the way they are going.
IBM pretty much destroyed the pension plan during the first Clinton
administration (why I retired in 96) and other companies followed
suit. Now it is basically your 401k and you can give that money to
anyone you like on your death..

There are plenty of extant pension plans that legally include spouse
benefits. I have one. Then the big one - Social Security.
Single head of household is only "lucrative" for single heads of
household. Not a place I want to be.
You can try to game the tax system, but it usaully doesn't bear fruit.
Wealthy people excepted.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Fallout, Leaks and toxic waste	Flying Pig[_2_]	Cruising	4	May 28th 10 10:14 PM
China Says Too Late to Recall Toxic Turkeys	HK	General	3	November 26th 07 05:40 PM
Disposing of toxic waste in rural areas...	Kickin' Goober's Faggot Ass	General	0	May 24th 07 06:29 PM
Toxic Turd Location Map	Bob Crantz	ASA	0	August 21st 06 08:16 PM
Toxic paint	[email protected]	Boat Building	0	June 29th 06 09:32 PM

Menu

About Us