(no subject)

[theweaselking]

Mormons: once again, ruining things for everyone.

(Short version: Plural marriage remains illegal among consenting-adults-as-equals because Mormons insist that trafficking children for sexual purposes is a religious obligation *and* that it's the same as plural marriage, and the Mormons themselves were the test case before the court.)

Comments

[theweaselking.livejournal.com]

"The state is still treating everyone the same: every adult gets one legal marriage to a member of the opposite sex. There is no discrimination in that"

Which is another way of saying: there's actually ONE very good reason to prevent plural or serial marriages. That one single good reason is "What a fucking pain in the ass it is to change all the paperwork everywhere in all the laws that implicitly assumes a two-person partnership".

Apart from that, there's no good reason to prevent three people from filing taxes together and getting hospital visitation rights on each other if you're allowing two people to do it. And that reason is mostly an acknowledgement that the work should be done, not an excuse to not do it.

The fact that these guys were douchebags and this violation of their rights is a good thing for society as a whole does not change that there are other people negatively impacted by the same law, where the violation of *their* rights protects nobody and produces nothing.

I'm not poly, but I think the argument is stupid. Plural marriage, unlike gay marriage, *does* have a real hangup in the implementation step, but that does't make it not doable.

[sucrelefey.livejournal.com]

Is it some kind Freudian/Pavlovian slip to insert "to a member of the opposite sex" into the quote that wasn't there?

So long as marriage carries some kind of predefined legal/economic benefits from the state that non marriage doesn't it can be rationed by the sate. The solution there is to get rid of marriage as a default legal/economic status all together. Let adults go to lawyers and negotiate domestic contracts custom to their needs.

[theweaselking.livejournal.com]

Is it some kind Freudian/Pavlovian slip to insert "to a member of the opposite sex" into the quote that wasn't there?

No, it was making a point. Specifically, that your argument was identical (and identically asinine) to the one about gay marriage.

Let adults go to lawyers and negotiate domestic contracts custom to their needs.

And carry said lawyer around in their pocket with them to explain the details to everyone else's pocket lawyers every time a question come up about what may or may not be included in any given couple-contract?

There's a useful benefit to being able to say "we have a standard spousal contract!" And, pointedly, there are a great many people who are legally obliged to treat you differently if you're married - so it's of a very great benefit to be able to tell THEM "I have a standard spousal contract with him"

[maelorin]

as charles dickens once wrote: "the law is an ass!" ;)

[kierthos.livejournal.com]

What? Give lawyers more work? STUFF AND NONSENSE!

[ronebofh.livejournal.com]

It's "Hear, hear!"

[torrain.livejournal.com]

Oh, thank you. I was trying to figure out a way to ask if they were advertising their services as a lawyer, and could not for the life of me come up with something that didn't sound snarkier than I wanted to be.

[torrain.livejournal.com]

*raises hand* My needs involve being recognized as a legal spouse/chosen family member/adult-in-partnership of my spouse. Because if I end up in a car accident and am not in a state to authorize medical treatment, finding a parent of mine who's on the other side of the continent and who anyway isn't at their usual place of residence is an unnecessarily lengthy process which is stupidly cruel to the individual I have chosen to spend my life with.

It's not the domestic aspect of the contract that needs negotiating. It is the recognition of that contract by third parties.

[snakey.livejournal.com]

See also: immigration and child custody rights. (My ex cannot emigrate to be with her boyfriend and girlfriend because said boyfriend and girlfriend are married to each other, and in her situation marriage is the only way she would realistically get residence.)

[maelorin]

consider a (medical) power of attorney?

[the great thing about law is that there is always a way. unfortunately, that works both ways.

which is why some of us get reputations for being creative. or sneaky. or ornery. depending upon your point of view :D]

[torrain.livejournal.com]

It's a start. Now, on to the matter of said spouse being recognized as family by my insurance carrier...?

(I honestly think I'm just going to go with the marriage license.)