• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should we do away with marriage as a legal status?

Should we do away with marriage as a legal status?

  • Yes.

    Votes: 20 45.5%
  • No.

    Votes: 23 52.3%
  • Knibb High football rules!

    Votes: 1 2.3%

  • Total voters
    44
As I said, I don't currently live in the US, but the main one that bothers me everywhere I go is the opportunity to pay less income tax by filing joint tax returns. This can occasionally work the opposite way, but more often than not it leads to married couples getting to keep more of the money they earn than me. Or to put it another way, they get less stolen from them. Depending on the country, married couples also sometimes get a flat rate deduction on their income taxes and capital gains.

Income tax is a big deal to a lot of people. If I could abolish it outright I would. Failing that, I think the rules should be the same for everyone. Government tax breaks are just another manipulation of enslaved economies. They steal your money and make you think they are being generous when they agree to steal slightly less.
Basically, if the lower income spouse makes half or more than the other then the tax is the same as if they filed as singles, which also means, if they have kids they're actually paying more than one spouse filling head of household and the other filling single. The only time it gets funny is when there are no kids and the income is radically different - or you start pushing into the upper 20% bracket.

US tax tables, which are included in the instructions, and tax forms can be downloaded at IRS.gov. Look for i1040 for the tables/instructions and f1040 for the form.
 
Why does marriage have to be a legal concept if not for tax breaks? Why can't marriage just be a promise between two or more individuals? No one is talking about abolishing promises, they are talking about abolishing an out dated legal concept.
Why should I have to file a permission form for my spouse to see me in the hospital when others can't? Why should I have to file a document giving my wife the power of life and death over me if I'm incapacitated? Why should my sister (or whoever) have any right at all to sue my wife over property after I'm gone? There are several other things covered in common law for married couples that two singles don't have. It's not all about money. In fact, most of it isn't about money - unless maybe you're in the upper quintile, and those people have the money to dodge the tax man anyway.
 
Last edited:
You can find many companies that will provide insurance for your significant other without legal marriage. You can also get legal paperwork to have to cover "legal issues". How else would you do this without the government? Wouldn't you still need paperwork? Pretty sure you would and it would be a lot more paperwork that you would need.

Without the government other forms of paperwork would be accepted.
 
1.) then you go to court to file, why on earth would your name not be there if you are married LMAO
2.) no issue file for custody
3.) no they are sperate
4.) nope not required this is a lie
5.) nope legal marriage is fine
6.) facts and this very thread prove oyu wrong
7.) and based on facts
LMAO

1) We're talking about not legally married couples, Einstein. Are you seriously this slow? Keep up...
2) Harder to do without being legally married
3) They are both issues
4) Yes it is
5) Nope, it should be abolished
6) Negative, they prove the opposite
7) Right, in your little mind.

again i simply ask you, if you disagree just prove me wrong, why do you keep dodging this?

please list the facts that prove you are FORCED to marry.

I've already demonstrated why the government being involved in the marriage business coerces people to get legally married rather than religious institutions alone.

If your argument made sense (which it doesn't), then nobody would ever bother getting legally married. They would just have their wedding and that would be that. Obviously there is an incentive to get legally married, which is the result of the government being involved with the marriage business to begin with. You fail at logic, completely.
 
...it is your responsibility to show how they are and why that is unfair when other things aren't.

No, what I did was post a poll asking whether we should do away with marriage as a legal status, and people have chimed in with their opinions. My opinion, to which I'm entitled, is that marriage should be between a married couple and their church/mosque/temple/elvis impersonator/whatever. I don't think the government should have a role because I think marriage is a personal thing and I don't like the government involved in people's personal affairs.

That's my core argument. I realize that not everyone takes the libertarian stance that I do, but that's my opinion on the matter nonetheless due to my ideals.

Now, the tax debate is a side issue. It's an attempt to understand WHY the government would want to be involved in marriage in the first place. The only point I'm trying to make there is that the IRS does give tax write-offs to married people (the only proof I need is that I pay more in taxes than my married siblings).

Even if you don't believe that and you think the amount of taxes paid is a wash at the end of the day, you can still appreciate that the government knows whether you're married, keeps track of it, and treats you differently as a result.
 
Without the government other forms of paperwork would be accepted.

And they would require many more paperwork, whereas one works for everything now. You are suggesting making things less efficient for no good reason, just some people complaining because they believe they are paying more money than married people when it comes to taxes (which isn't true for most).
 
No, what I did was post a poll asking whether we should do away with marriage as a legal status, and people have chimed in with their opinions. My opinion, to which I'm entitled, is that marriage should be between a married couple and their church/mosque/temple/elvis impersonator/whatever. I don't think the government should have a role because I think marriage is a personal thing and I don't like the government involved in people's personal affairs.

That's my core argument. I realize that not everyone takes the libertarian stance that I do, but that's my opinion on the matter nonetheless due to my ideals.

Now, the tax debate is a side issue. It's an attempt to understand WHY the government would want to be involved in marriage in the first place. The only point I'm trying to make there is that the IRS does give tax write-offs to married people (the only proof I need is that I pay more in taxes than my married siblings).

Even if you don't believe that and you think the amount of taxes paid is a wash at the end of the day, you can still appreciate that the government knows whether you're married, keeps track of it, and treats you differently as a result.

I'm willing to bet you and your siblings do not make the same amount of money to begin with either.

What you providing is anecdotal evidence that shows nothing. You can't even show that their marriage is what is having them pay less than you (if they are even doing so when fairly compared to your income).

The government treats married couples differently because two married people are different than one single person. Their keeping track of my marriage benefits me much more than it does the government.
 
Not necessarily.

If it takes more than one legal document to cover everything involved in marriage (which it would), then yes, it would require a lot more paperwork. Marriage takes the place of a medical POA and living will, just to name a couple. There are many more.

Basically whatever same sex couples need now, would be just some of the paperwork all couples would need without marriage.

Legal Documents to Protect Your Family | Resources | Human Rights Campaign

That is just a start. Even the military had to come up with a separate document to cover same sex couples when they offer them even a small bit of the benefits that legally married opposite sex couples (such as myself and my husband) receive through them. (This begins in August, but still won't cover many of the more important things as long as DOMA is in place, including living in housing and medical/dental insurance.)
 
I'm willing to bet you and your siblings do not make the same amount of money to begin with either.

What you providing is anecdotal evidence that shows nothing. You can't even show that their marriage is what is having them pay less than you (if they are even doing so when fairly compared to your income).

The government treats married couples differently because two married people are different than one single person. Their keeping track of my marriage benefits me much more than it does the government.

What do you want me to do, post my tax documents online? Sorry, that wouldn't be very smart.

Two married people should be no different from two single people.
 
The alliance of free lovers and people who are afraid of homosexuals. Cute.
 
What do you want me to do, post my tax documents online? Sorry, that wouldn't be very smart.

Two married people should be no different from two single people.

And for the most part, they aren't. Most just simply average each other's taxes out. One pays more while the other pays less.

When there is a little bit of taxes saved (which is generally just because of good accounting, not because of the marriage itself) it is because of the fact that they are benefiting society, the same reason we give tax breaks for making a home more energy efficient or going to school or saving money.
 
What do you want me to do, post my tax documents online? Sorry, that wouldn't be very smart.

Two married people should be no different from two single people.
As far as the IRS is concerned, in most cases they're not any different. For some cases it's more costly to be married, for others it's less costly. You should look at the tax tables and run some comparisons before you continue trying to make your case with this.
 
Honestly if we're really arguing about monetary benefits, and not keeping SSM illegal out of spite (yeah right), could that not be accomplished by just removing the tax or other benefits, while preserving sensible aspects of marriage (hospital visitation, immigration etc)?
 
preserving sensible aspects of marriage (hospital visitation, immigration etc)?

If I could find myself an American wife, I could bypass the need to invest a million dollars and hire ten full time Americans in order to get a visa to live there. I would also be eligible for citizenship two years earlier. You call that sensible?
 
If I could find myself an American wife, I could bypass the need to invest a million dollars and hire ten full time Americans in order to get a visa to live there. I would also be eligible for citizenship two years earlier. You call that sensible?

Well maybe not, but I don't find that requirement sensible either, nor do I think most who marry foreigners do so for that reason. In any case, there are plenty non-monetary aspects to marriage.
 
1) We're talking about not legally married couples, Einstein. Are you seriously this slow? Keep up...
2) Harder to do without being legally married
3) They are both issues
4) Yes it is
5) Nope, it should be abolished
6) Negative, they prove the opposite
7) Right, in your little mind.



8.)I've already demonstrated why the government being involved in the marriage business coerces people to get legally married rather than religious institutions alone.

9.)If your argument made sense (which it doesn't), then nobody would ever bother getting legally married. They would just have their wedding and that would be that. Obviously there is an incentive to get legally married, which is the result of the government being involved with the marriage business to begin with. You fail at logic, completely.

1.) LMAO i think you are in the wrong conversation. You stated the lie that marriage is forced etc etc and is needed for kids, for paternity its not LMAO
and if you are talking nonlegal marriage you are even MORE wrong because nonlegal marriage has ZERO to do with paternity.

you are the only one behind and you just proved it, FAIL lmao

2.) no its not at all this is 100% false
3.) nope not to the toic being discussed
4.) 100% false, again do you live in america because you are clueless about rights and laws
5.) well come up with a logical argument then because so far you havent
6.) lie all you want facts prove you wrong, if you disagree by all means PLEASE post facts supporting your false claim we'd love to read them lol
7.) again i have posted facts and you have posted nothing buy your failed opinion

laws/rights/facts > than your opinion lol

8.) no you havent you have only listed your OPINION, you listed ZERO facts support force/coercion ZERO

9.) yes there is INCENTIVE to get married legal, to have government protect your rights DUH its the reason for EVERY CONTRACT :lamo

thats that whole point and part of the FACTS that im pointing out, you lose again

let me know when you can post FACTS to support your false claim, we'll be here waiting
 
1.) LMAO i think you are in the wrong conversation. You stated the lie that marriage is forced etc etc and is needed for kids, for paternity its not LMAO
and if you are talking nonlegal marriage you are even MORE wrong because nonlegal marriage has ZERO to do with paternity.

you are the only one behind and you just proved it, FAIL lmao

2.) no its not at all this is 100% false
3.) nope not to the toic being discussed
4.) 100% false, again do you live in america because you are clueless about rights and laws
5.) well come up with a logical argument then because so far you havent
6.) lie all you want facts prove you wrong, if you disagree by all means PLEASE post facts supporting your false claim we'd love to read them lol
7.) again i have posted facts and you have posted nothing buy your failed opinion

laws/rights/facts > than your opinion lol

8.) no you havent you have only listed your OPINION, you listed ZERO facts support force/coercion ZERO

9.) yes there is INCENTIVE to get married legal, to have government protect your rights DUH its the reason for EVERY CONTRACT :lamo

thats that whole point and part of the FACTS that im pointing out, you lose again

let me know when you can post FACTS to support your false claim, we'll be here waiting

1) I think you are too slow to keep up. We're talking about how the government being involved in the marriage business coerces people to seek out the governments services. Thus, let's say you simply had a wedding as a religious ceremony and did not get the government piece of paper that says you are "married." Would this be sufficient to change an immigrant status? To claim your wife as a dependent? Insurance? Taxes? The answer is no. Try to keep up buddy.
2) Yes it is.
3) Yes it is.
4) Yes it is.
5) I have, you are just too slow to understand it.
6) Who is this "we," do you have a mouse in your pocket?
7) Yes, in your little mind I'm sure that is true.
8) Just because you are too slow to pick it up doesn't mean it was not demonstrated.
9) If your argument is that there is an incentive to get married legally, then how on Earth did you come to believe that you were arguing against me. Do you even know what my argument is?
 
1) I think you are too slow to keep up. We're talking about how the government being involved in the marriage business coerces people to seek out the governments services. Thus, let's say you simply had a wedding as a religious ceremony and did not get the government piece of paper that says you are "married." Would this be sufficient to change an immigrant status? To claim your wife as a dependent? Insurance? Taxes? The answer is no. Try to keep up buddy.
2) Yes it is.
3) Yes it is.
4) Yes it is.
5) I have, you are just too slow to understand it.
6) Who is this "we," do you have a mouse in your pocket?
7) Yes, in your little mind I'm sure that is true.
8) Just because you are too slow to pick it up doesn't mean it was not demonstrated.
9) If your argument is that there is an incentive to get married legally, then how on Earth did you come to believe that you were arguing against me. Do you even know what my argument is?

1.) how telling failed insults
im aware of what you are trying to make people think but you are failing because you have ZERO facts to support your claim.
like i said we are all two steps ahead of you
3-6) all proven false already :shrug:
7.) the muiltiple posters that have proved you wrong
8.) if thats whats you think simply list the FACTS for us LMA
9.) yes per your own words below your argument is that there force and coercion which has already been destroyed and there factually is not.
The government has created a situation in which I am forced to use their services.
let me know when you can post FACTS to support your false claim, we'll be here waiting, u lose again

you have an OPINION and thats it, you FELL you are forced, you factually are not and we have already proven that
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom