Skip to Content

Halo Halo: Cake, Flowers, Pizza and Jesus

14 posts / 0 new
Last post
rodmanlewis
Offline
Joined: 22/06/2011

Same-sex marriage is even sterile on the property front. If partner A dies, their property goes to partner B. When B dies without "remarrying" what happens to their property? Even if they leave a will their estate will still be taxable--they're back to square one.

It's a bit like the old days when people got married just before the end of the financial year, so that they could gain the greatest tax benefit.

rodmanlewis

einstürzende
einstürzende's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/12/2015

rodmanlewis wrote:

Heterosexual marriages exist to establish property rights, and to indicate the lineage of any children. These days, it may be useful to highlight inherited medical problems. Historically, it also had the effect of gaining societal approval of activities you otherwise didn't talk about.

Same-sex "marriages" are biologically sterile unions, and seem only to exist to establish property and inheritance rights with the maximum tax avoidance on the same basis as heterosexual marriage.

And why stop there? How about bisexual (i.e. three-way) marriage? Or four-way?

Same-sex "marriage" is no more marriage than nationalisation is socialism.

Let me ask a hypothetical question with a factual basis. My aunt and my uncle were wed in 1977 and my uncle passed away last year but they never had children. Since the marriage was devoid of "lineage", is their marriage to be considered null and void?


rodmanlewis
Offline
Joined: 22/06/2011

It would only be null and void if it was their stated intention at the time of their marriage not to have children. Again, I'm not saying I'm supporting or opposing these institutions. It's a question of definition.

rodmanlewis

Login or register to post comments