Should marriage have any legal status?

Question

Society discriminates against those which do not want to have a monogamous, heterosexual relationship. If two people want to make a life-long commitment to each other, that's fine by me, but why should they be rewarded for it?

I mean rewarded in the sense of tax breaks, inheritance tax, reduced life insurance for partners etc. But surely these things can be sorted out by consulting a lawyer? e.g. make a will for when you die defining who your money goes to. Why should unmarried people pay more in inheritance tax than married people?

Interesting point, 261980, but can you explain more fully?

Both biological parents should be equally responsible for the child, you don't need a marriage certificate to prove that.

Answer 1

There is a difference between a legal marriage recognized by the State and a marriage recognized by a religious body. The problem is that people seem to think the two are the same and therefore mix their religious recognition of marriage with government recognition of marriage.

The last time I check the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights specifically separates Church and State. But for some reason, Church keeps creeping into our governments idea of who can be married and who can't.

To give you an example of this separation, when you are married by a church your marriage is recognized by both the Church and the state and federal government. When you are married by a judge or justice of the peace, your marriage is only recognized by the state and federal government and not the Church.

If you are married in the church but don't seek church recognition of a divorce issued by the State, in the eyes of the Church you are still married until you petition to have the Church recognize your divorce, which if you want to be remarried in the Church you must do.

My personal opinion... Keep government recognized marriage separate from the Church's. If two people of the same sex want to get married, and a religion's beliefs are against it, let them get married by the state and not in the Church.

One is simply inalienable rights, the other is religious beliefs.

Answer 2

I agree, I think marriage is outdated. Lots of my friends are married and happy, but I never want to get married myself, and it's something I feel quite strongly about. I don't think marriage should be banned; I think people should still be able to get married if they want to, but it should be left as a religious or personal thing, especially if they feel a need (why?) to tell the whole world (or God) they love each other.

Human beings have a tendency towards heterosexual monogamy anyway, but that's no reason to discriminate against those who aren't heterosexual - or monogamous!

I think people get married mainly for a sense of security. People want to know that they will be loved for the rest of their life. I think that's silly. I mean, you can always get a divorce.

I think I can sort out my legal position (I'm trying!), who I want to be responsible for me if I become incapacitated, what happen to me and my things if I die without a marriage certificate. In fact, not being married will is making me think about my legal status more, since marriage is so deeply engrained in people's minds.

I agree with the whole tax thing. If inheritance tax is a must (40% for unmarried, nothing for married? Correct me if I'm wrong), everybody should be judged against the same prinicples. For example, if a sister or friend was poor, and I wanted to leave my money to her, and not my "husband" when I die, why should I have to pay more tax? That's just daft.

"Civil partnerships" - lots about this in the news recently - not quite the same as a marriage, but at least the same sorts of rights. Maybe it makes things easier, but I think rather than giving the same rights to homosexual couples, why not just take away the rights of married people? The whole system is outdated. People are afraid of change.

Now if people say that marriage protects the rights of the children, that's just rubbish. I agree, both parents have to care for the child, and perhaps that should be enforced by law, unless there's a good reason why one shouldn't. Paternity can easily be proved now, so there's no excuse for men to go round impregnating woman and not accepting the consequences.

OK, rant over. In general, I think people should take more responsibility for their own actions, and not just assume they're protected by the state.

Answer 3

I think marriage should have a legal status. It makes people feel better to know that they have joined a self-supporting group. It has a feeling of niceness and propriety.

Even in primitive societies, they have an equivalent of our 'civilised' customs.
Why look down on that? It has a ceremony, a feeling of something to formalize a stage of life: birth, going to school & graduating, marriage, children ......and that is very nice.

That is why we celebrate things. Even if people aren't getting formally married, is there no wish to celebrate the union? No party, no flowers, no private vows among friends only with no state and no church .... nothing at all? No new clothes, no parties, no decoration, no gifts or a festive meal to share ... nothing?

In what way are married people rewarded? Tax breaks, is that what you mean? The court power to chase down an absentee father? Well then ...ok ... if that is the way it is working ...

If society discriminates against those mentioned in your first sentence, maybe ---considering how old society is --- there is a reason for it.

(I don't see the connection between your first and second sentence. I am sorry.)

Peace, Peace ....

Answer 4

First, what do you mean "rewarded" for it? Are you talking about when it comes to tax brackets, etc?
1. The Bible says that homosexuals will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven. Would you say this was a reward? (Yes, I am a Christian and beleive that that marriage was intended for one man and one woman.)
2. What about children? Is it a reward that they can't have children of their own. A husband and wife (man and woman) create a life together and then share in the joy the birth. A homosexual couple can adopt or have one inpregnanted, but the child doesn't belong to both of them in the eyes of the law.
3. When my mother-in-law passed away. My brother (who is gay) was able to come down to see her before she passed. However, his boyfriend was not. Because they were not a married couple, she was not consider his immediate family and therefore wasn't able to come until she passed away.

I don't believe that homosexual reep rewards for their lifestyle. However, I don't look down on them either. There are three people near and dear to me (2 gay and 1 bi) and I wouldn't love them any more or less if they were heterosexual. So, before all the thumb downs start, I am not judging anyone's lifestyle here. It's not my place to do so.

ETA: I see what you're saying in regards to taxes, etc.

Answer 5

Marriage isn't a reward. It's a license that people want to obtain because they love each other and legally want to be with each other. Then there are couples who are still having the same kind of relationship but don't think marriage is necessary. To each their own. =) I lived with someone for a long time and not marry and I felt like we were playing house. It's just not the same idea depending on what it is you want.

Answer 6

I think it is right that two people who form a committed relationship investing financially and emotionally into their assets should not have ot pay inheritance tax when inhertiting cos it sort of is 'theirs' already. However I do not necessarily agree that we need some kind of marriage or civil partnership to prove that commitment. I would prefer some kind of form or just an acceptance that if you have bee living with someone for X years then you are as good as married.

I married my partner of 8 years largely to secure our assets in the event of one of us dying and I wanted to make sure that my 'living will' was adhered to and I trust my partner more than my parents to do that.

Answer 7

True marriage is a meshing of two souls who serve and bless each other, deriving bliss as the byproduct.

I have been married many times, searching for the right girl.

Now, I am not married, and have greater joy than I ever thought possible in this life.

I have a friend as my mate. A lover as my companion. A co-traveler as my beloved.

Marriage is like a fancy house. A headache, really.

Try a hut filled with loving kindness.

Way cool.

Answer 8

Hello,
Yes marriage has to have legal status, as there are so many benefits to be gained from it, such as when you have children, home purchase, and insurance and banking schemes that are available to married people, as well as their own peace of mind knowing that they are doing the right thing for everyone in their family, hope I advised well...Tony M

Answer 9

Marriage needs to have legal status to protect the rights of the children.

Answer 10

Legal status, yes. Reward for being married? To me, a "reward" is the person you are married to, not the lega benefits or status quo.