This is an idea I have been tossing around for a few months now. I want to see what everyone on here thinks of it. It's a law that not only recognizes marriage as a univeral right for all consenting adults, but also defines and limits the role of government in marriage. Here is what the law would do. 1; No government, federal, state, or local, will interfere in the marriages between consenting adults. Except for establing the age of consent, and deciding how much a married couple/group pays in taxes. 2; When it comes to polygamy and bigamy, tax breaks will be limited to a certain number of people in the marriage. 3; It will be illegal for a guardian figure to have a sexual relationship with a dependent who is under 18, even if they are over the age of consent. This is already a law in many states, called Criminal Seduction. It includes teachers, parents, ect... It is based on the idea that a guardian's authority over the minor allows them to coerce them into consenting. 4; All states must recognize marriages which take place in other states. That's all I have rtight now....I would like some feedback and any ideas for aditions parts.
Ya got my support. Sounds to simple though ..... you would need at least a few more thousand pages for it to make it through the house.
In plane english, most laws are quite simple. THey do not take up much paper until they get translated into legal jargin
But that law speaks nothing of excluding people from marriage on religious grounds. We must protect our religulious institutions with the government!
In law, the State is NOT part to the marriage contract. They do NOT care about your marriage or mine.. In short they do NOT interfere NOW. They only enter the picture when there is a contract dispute and one party or the other requests arbitration. The one thing the state does care about is support of minor children.. Child support is vested in the child and the State doesn't want to PAY to raise your offspring.
Incest between consenting adults should be as legal as anything else. Just because it offends you does not mean it should be outlawed.
You are forgettig that the republican party is pushjing for a law to outlaw all forms of marriage that they do not agree with. This law is mainly to prevent that, by barring the government from passing any laws on who consenting adults can marry.
You need a short course in domestic law theory.. All the state does is register the marriage contract.. based on certain criteria.. You can have multiple 'wives" or live with your sister as man and wife.. You just can't get either registered by the state. There is NOTHING in your new rules that matters or is not already covered in law.
I had the idea of adding that a church or other religious organization that performs marriages have the right to exclude non-religius peoples from their service. Then for secular marriages, one could either go to a state licensed judge or justice of the peace, a ship captain, or some private business that is licensed as a for profit secular marriage service.
Having multiple wives causes welfare fruad, if none of them are legally married, but one.....A Mormon sister-wife, for example is recognized as an unmarried mother, if she has kids. And she gets welfare she would not get if she were married legally. This is one of the main causes of wasted welfare money.
Before presenting a new law, you need to make a good case for why the current one needs to be replaced. I see no problem with the existing one. Most of the arguments against it are based on straw men and fallacies.
Mormons considered every wife of a man to be a legal wife, even though they are not.....They abuse the welfare system by taking advantage of the fact that sister-wives are not married legally to get wellfare.....If polygamy were legallized and the state recognized sister-wives as legallly married, they would not be recognized as single mothers, and would not be allowed to get assistance as such.
