I've been wondering...
If my understanding of how the system currently stands is correct, state and federal governments currently use legal marriages as a guide to distribute tax rebates and such, with (I assume) the goal of promoting a stable households - Or something of the likeI've been wondering...
If my understanding of how the system currently stands is correct, state and federal governments currently use legal marriages as a guide to distribute tax rebates and such, with (I assume) the goal of promoting a stable households - Or something of the like…
Or at least, I understand that such was the goal in the past, as stable households were seen to provide better child-rearing environments, better citizens, etc.
This, IMO, should still be the goal.
Not as in the past, promoting only heterosexual families and such, but rather with the core goal of promoting a stable citizenry and such.
Which is one of the reasons I support a more distinct separation of the religious and legal sides of the current marriage system.
If an obvious divorce between the two can be made, much less turmoil will occur if the government grants tax breaks and such to a multi-person union of 3 males and 5 females supporting 15 children, with one of the males and three of the females being bi, two of the females and one of the males being gay, and one of the males being fully heterosexual – For example.
:mrgreen:
If this were tried in the current system, great public outcry would occur, however warranted.
But if a system could be devised that obviously was directed towards the goals previously mentioned, I think far fewer would have issue.
This idea is one of the reasons I would like to see a much more obvious split between religious and legal unions.
Perhaps I could have been more clear...but meh.