Reassignment Possible For Gay Wedding Refusals

My expectations are in line with what I'm given to work with. I listed 3 topics. You didn't disprove any of them.

G.S.M.

I'm glad you enjoyed your day. I had a blast.

What was the third?

You made the assertions (financial disaster), it is up to you to back them up.

SS: you didn't make your case that polygamy would put any more strain on the system than serial monogamy has.

Bereavement leave: you didn't make your case as such leave is at the discretion of the employer and not a federally (or state, at least in WV) protected right. If polygamists (or anyone, for that matter) abuse the leave, the employers can change the rules, perhaps by allowing up to so many bereavement days per annum.

Whatever your third one was, I doubt you did any better than you did with the above.

At least we agree that polygamy should be legal.

No, we agree the government shouldn't be defining marriage or in the marriage business at all.

As for the current situation and the legality of any marriage, that would depend on the hundred of financial implications (which was what I stated and have proven many times over-G.S.M.) and how they are resolved.

As for the current situation and the legality of any marriage, that would depend on the hundred of financial implications (which was what I stated and have proven many times over-G.S.M.) and how they are resolved.

Aaron, cite me the post in which you proved any of your assertions.

A wiki of benefits to a spouse in a "traditional" marriage doesn't count.

I can't wait...

It doesn't matter how many links I post. I've provided numerous examples and you've failed to address each one of them. I told you, as far as I'm concerned, G.S.M.

It doesn't matter how many links I post. I've provided numerous examples and you've failed to address each one of them. I told you, as far as I'm concerned,

Cite me one post from this board where you have proved any of your assertions.

You can't because you haven't...

If polygamous marriages are allowed, each widow would be entitled to widower’s benefits. If they have children under the age of 18 (26 if in college), that amount can go up to as much as $36,000/year. It would add financially to the taxpayers. That is a fact that you cannot disprove.

I've proven what I stated.

Again.

If polygamous marriages are allowed, each widow would be entitled to widower’s benefits. If they have children under the age of 18 (26 if in college), that amount can go up to as much as $36,000/year. It would add financially to the taxpayers. That is a fact that you cannot disprove.

"...can [possibly] go up to as much as..."

That is assuming that the widows don't work and aren't putting money into the system.

You have proven NOTHING. You have merely speculated.

How about some of those "hundreds" of other "financial problems"?

It is assuming nothing. It is fact. If you die, your wife is elegible for SS widowers benefits. That is based not what she paid in but what you paid in. If you have 17 wives under a legal polygamous marriage law, all would be elegible for those same benefits. If all had children, the amount would be increased. As I said, that is fact. I've proven my point.

That is based not what she paid in but what you paid in.

Are you sure? What if she makes more money?

Even if she doesn't, what if she works and pays into the system? It will be nowhere near the drain you estimate.

Again, you have proven nothing except that you know how to speculate.

G.S.M.

Aaron wrote:It is assuming nothing. It is fact. If you die, your wife is elegible for SS widowers benefits. That is based not what she paid in but what you paid in. If you have 17 wives under a legal polygamous marriage law, all would be elegible for those same benefits. If all had children, the amount would be increased. As I said, that is fact. I've proven my point.

And when those 17 wives reach retirement age, they each would be able to draw part of their SS from their husbands SS account.

.

TerryRC,

I think the SSA could figure out a way to accommodate polygamous situations such that each wife or husband got a certain percentage of any benefits, and that this was common knowledge such that someone entering into such a legal situation would have to be aware of it.

Of course, just because I think they "could" figure out a way to make this work does not mean that I would "trust" them to.

All the same, on this one I'm with you. If someone wants a thousand wives more power to them (and more coffee while they are at it!) I still wish we would not sanction anyone's marriage legally, and let whoever believes what they wish act on those beliefs in whatever way they see fit. God knows I deal with some screwed up families and I have to think polygamy wouldn't make things any worse.

All Lawyers and Courts are against pologamy.

If a Divorce action was filed, ....... no Lawyer in his right mind would take the Case for any of the parties ....... and therefore the Court would have to appoint Lawyers for all litigants.

.

So if polygamous marriage were legal and all the financial implications, many of which I've mentioned and proven, could be solved, would the additional women be marrying just the man or would it be a community wedding in which they were bound to everyone in the household including the other women?

And how would that effect divorce? Would they be able to sue the other women for support? And what about child custody? Suppose Mary has a child but Stephanie raises them while Frank spends all of his time with Mary, completely ignoring Stephanie to the point that she gets fed up and wants to go marry Sam and Melissa and April and Shawna and Gertude? Can she get custody of Mary's child since it is she that raised the child and not Mary?