| Register  | FAQ  | Search | Login 
It is currently Sun Apr 20, 2014 1:04 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 65 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Confused about the law and polygamy
PostPosted: Sat Nov 02, 2013 9:36 pm 
Dead by dawn
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2010 9:54 pm
Posts: 7443
Location: Seattle
My company and biker boy's company both offer benefits to domestic partners and all that means to them is someone whom you are in a committed relationship with and are cohabitating with. No legal status required. I don't know what kind of proof we'd have to offer and yeah, I can see how there'd be a fair amount of fraud potential there.

_________________
facebook
"The PPK: Come for the pie; stay for the croissants." - tinglepants!
"Cockblocked by Richard Branson- again!" - Erika Soyf*cker


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Confused about the law and polygamy
PostPosted: Sat Nov 02, 2013 9:39 pm 
WRETCHED
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2010 6:54 pm
Posts: 7994
Location: Maryland/DC area
monkeytoes wrote:
My company and biker boy's company both offer benefits to domestic partners and all that means to them is someone whom you are in a committed relationship with and are cohabitating with. No legal status required. I don't know what kind of proof we'd have to offer and yeah, I can see how there'd be a fair amount of fraud potential there.


I know some people have had trouble utilizing those benefits when they aren't between people of the same sex.

_________________
You are all a disgrace to vegans. Go f*ck yourselves, especially linanil.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Confused about the law and polygamy
PostPosted: Sat Nov 02, 2013 9:43 pm 
Mediocre Tart
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 2:55 pm
Posts: 4571
Location: under the skyscrapers
Obviously I don't understand American insurance and this paying for medical care thing, but really why shouldn't non-married couples get that right to cover? Why should it only be for married people? Absolutely people should have the same rights if they're in a long-term relationship; they shouldn't have to get married for it. In many places they can't get married for it.

_________________
"I will take a drugged, sex-crazed, punk rock commie over Mrs. Thatch any day of the week" - Vantine
"I have so much more creepiness inside of me that I should share with the world" - bastah


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Confused about the law and polygamy
PostPosted: Sat Nov 02, 2013 9:45 pm 
WRETCHED
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2010 6:54 pm
Posts: 7994
Location: Maryland/DC area
Well obviously companies don't want to pay for it. It is a benefit offered by companies, and I'm not even sure it is legally required for married couples? An employer doesn't want to pay for your insurance for your non-spouse. Since same sex couples couldn't get married, companies started having insurance for domestic partners.

And I think there is some concern about abuse like adding your roommate (and maybe even charging someone to add them to your policy?).

_________________
You are all a disgrace to vegans. Go f*ck yourselves, especially linanil.


Last edited by linanil on Sat Nov 02, 2013 9:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Confused about the law and polygamy
PostPosted: Sat Nov 02, 2013 9:46 pm 
Double double, toil and trouble
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 9:24 pm
Posts: 313
Location: Boulder, CO
monkeytoes wrote:
My company and biker boy's company both offer benefits to domestic partners and all that means to them is someone whom you are in a committed relationship with and are cohabitating with. No legal status required. I don't know what kind of proof we'd have to offer and yeah, I can see how there'd be a fair amount of fraud potential there.


At my last job I had to provide proof of marriage to add my partner, and this is part of the reason we married when we did (we would have eventually anyway, but he has chronic health issues and needed the insurance immediately). So glad that many companies are changing to include domestic partnership coverage these days.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Confused about the law and polygamy
PostPosted: Sat Nov 02, 2013 9:56 pm 
Had sex with a vampire that sparkles.
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2010 6:24 pm
Posts: 5315
Location: BRLA
mrsbadmouth wrote:
I don't think there should ever be a time where employers provide insurance coverage for non-married couples, there would be so much fraud because how would you prove that you're in a relationship? Not that some people don't go through with getting married just for insurance purposes. I think even if polygamy were legal, that could get really dicey. Now that I think about it, are the kids on Sister Wives covered? I know before they moved, one of the moms was working a regular 9-5 job so her kids could be covered, but in the third season it doesn't appear that any of them are working at all.


In the beginning Cody's employer covered all his kids and his legal wife. He said he felt very fortunate for that and them being so understanding. Then when they moved he lost his job so they probably had to get private policies.

_________________
The thing about this thread is, it's dumb. - IJDI


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Confused about the law and polygamy
PostPosted: Sat Nov 02, 2013 10:06 pm 
Mediocre Tart
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 2:55 pm
Posts: 4571
Location: under the skyscrapers
linanil wrote:
Well obviously companies don't want to pay for it. It is a benefit offered by companies, and I'm not even sure it is legally required for married couples? An employer doesn't want to pay for your insurance for your non-spouse. Since same sex couples couldn't get married, companies started having insurance for domestic partners.

And I think there is some concern about abuse like adding your roommate (and maybe even charging someone to add them to your policy?).

They may well not want to pay, but the bloody should! Actually, the government should pay, but anyways.

And really, who cares about potential abuse? Ok, the companies. But, to me, the benefits for the genuine far outweigh that.

_________________
"I will take a drugged, sex-crazed, punk rock commie over Mrs. Thatch any day of the week" - Vantine
"I have so much more creepiness inside of me that I should share with the world" - bastah


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Confused about the law and polygamy
PostPosted: Sat Nov 02, 2013 10:12 pm 
Queen Bitch of Self-Righteous Veganville
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2010 2:21 pm
Posts: 9581
Location: Illinoize
interrobang?! wrote:
Obviously I don't understand American insurance and this paying for medical care thing, but really why shouldn't non-married couples get that right to cover? Why should it only be for married people? Absolutely people should have the same rights if they're in a long-term relationship; they shouldn't have to get married for it. In many places they can't get married for it.


I think I worded what I was trying to say badly, in my head I include domestic partnerships/common law marriages in with 'married people', I was thinking about people who don't live together or anything like that. And I think everyone should have affordable health insurance, I just meant that in our current system if that were an actual allowance, a lot of people would abuse it. Which...I guess I really don't care about because insurance is a giant scam anyway. Brian's mom stayed married to my father-in-law for a good year after they split because she had breast cancer and that was the only way she'd be covered.

So I guess I retract my previous post! But seriously, most things that require you to be legally married are stupid anyway.

_________________
"The Tree is His Penis"

The tree is his penis // it's very exciting // when held up to his mouth // the lights are all lighting // his eyes start a-bulging // in unbridled glee // the tree is his penis // its beauty, effulgent -amandabear


Top
 Profile WWW  
 
 Post subject: Re: Confused about the law and polygamy
PostPosted: Sat Nov 02, 2013 10:17 pm 
Queen Bitch of Self-Righteous Veganville
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2010 2:21 pm
Posts: 9581
Location: Illinoize
I'm sorry if it sounds like I was saying something incredibly shitty, that wasn't what I was going for. For once!

_________________
"The Tree is His Penis"

The tree is his penis // it's very exciting // when held up to his mouth // the lights are all lighting // his eyes start a-bulging // in unbridled glee // the tree is his penis // its beauty, effulgent -amandabear


Top
 Profile WWW  
 
 Post subject: Re: Confused about the law and polygamy
PostPosted: Sat Nov 02, 2013 10:49 pm 
Plays The Sims 2 religiously
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 11:20 pm
Posts: 6766
Location: Portland, OR
mrsbadmouth wrote:
But that's still a legal status, yes? I meant the idea that you can bring someone in and say, "This is my partner, give them insurance!" without any kind of proof that you're even together.

All insurances that I ever heard of that cover spouses definitely accept domestic partnership, and no, it's not even remotely a legal status. Or at least, it doesn't have to be. They ask that you get a notary to sign off on that, and most notaries that I know of ask (or are at least supposed to) for some proof of co-habitation like bills/bank statements.

_________________
i would schmear marmite on a moist scrotum for Mars. - interrobang?!
"Not everything." ~ mumbles (1973-2013) - mumbles


Top
 Profile WWW  
 
 Post subject: Re: Confused about the law and polygamy
PostPosted: Sun Nov 03, 2013 12:14 am 
***LIES!!!***
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 4:10 pm
Posts: 3436
mrsbadmouth wrote:
But that's still a legal status, yes? I meant the idea that you can bring someone in and say, "This is my partner, give them insurance!" without any kind of proof that you're even together. Of course, we should all have insurance in the first place without having to get married.

Also I think the laws that keep boyfriends/girlfriends/partners out of hospital rooms are stupid no matter what.


I think people who have non legal relationships with partners and don't create legal documentation so that they will be permitted to make decisions for them when necessary need to get their acts together and create that documentation - all the same sex couples I know have documentation out to wazoo around this stuff, hetero long term unmarried couples ought to do the same if they expect any protections. Simple visitation issues aren't about laws though, they're just bullshiitake hospital policies, and they're actually pretty rare in the US these days. In most hospitals, in most units, they let anybody walk in to visit patients, even places like the ICU. There's also a law that has been in effect for three years which gives patients the right to choose their visitors and requires hospitals give same sex partners full and equal access to partners.

In NJ there is a domestic partnership legal category (I think it involves going through a ceremony like marriage) and it is open to both gay and straight couples (the straight couples have to be a certain age to qualify). If you get benefits for a domestic partner through work they have to be your legal domestic partner usually. Part of that law was intended to protect older couples who didn't want to get married for whatever reason since the whole idea of common law marriage has no legal force anymore.

I would much rather see the dismantling of the legal categorization of marriage entirely and the benefits it involves than see polygamous relationships made into legal marriages with the regular benefits of marriage. Health insurance issues are an argument for a single payer system, not for an extremely convoluted new category of marriage that would likely just lead to a lot of fraud. I think the reasons against having legal polygamous marriage are more compelling than the reasons for, and so really the only reason I would want to see legal recognition would be to have greater protection for women and children in those relationships.

I have never heard of having to show proof of marriage to rent an apartment or buy a house, unmarried people do such things together all the time. That is really bizarre, unless they thought it was a sign of your financial stability. I don't even understand the request.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Confused about the law and polygamy
PostPosted: Sun Nov 03, 2013 12:39 am 
Queen Bitch of Self-Righteous Veganville
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2010 2:21 pm
Posts: 9581
Location: Illinoize
Ariann wrote:
I would much rather see the dismantling of the legal categorization of marriage entirely and the benefits it involves than see polygamous relationships made into legal marriages with the regular benefits of marriage. Health insurance issues are an argument for a single payer system, not for an extremely convoluted new category of marriage that would likely just lead to a lot of fraud. I think the reasons against having legal polygamous marriage are more compelling than the reasons for, and so really the only reason I would want to see legal recognition would be to have greater protection for women and children in those relationships.


Yeah, this is basically what I worked out in my head. If all of the legal benefits of marriage disappeared, there would be no need for polygamous marriages to be made legal because there's nothing to gain. People could just get married because they forking want to, not because they need the legal status.

When Brian was going into the army, I did a lot of research and I found that we had to get married for him to be allowed to live off post with me. If you're a single soldier and you're higher ranked, they'll let you live off post or in army housing but otherwise you need to live in the barracks because, obviously, it's more cost efficient. So all of the other benefits aside, if we hadn't gotten married I would've had to live alone, off post, and not get any housing money or extra money for Brian having a dependent, since legally, I did not exist to the army. We were fine with getting married because we had been together for four years and it was in the cards anyway, but when we met with the recruiter and I brought it up he was like, "Oh, they'll totally let you live together if you push it. You don't HAVE to be married." And I was like, "What? Why are you telling me that? I know that's not true." He was just trying to tell me whatever I wanted to hear so I wouldn't tell Brian not to sign up because they have quotas and stuff. And finally he conceded that they don't 'like' it when soldiers who aren't married live off post.

_________________
"The Tree is His Penis"

The tree is his penis // it's very exciting // when held up to his mouth // the lights are all lighting // his eyes start a-bulging // in unbridled glee // the tree is his penis // its beauty, effulgent -amandabear


Top
 Profile WWW  
 
 Post subject: Re: Confused about the law and polygamy
PostPosted: Sun Nov 03, 2013 8:35 am 
WRETCHED
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2010 6:54 pm
Posts: 7994
Location: Maryland/DC area
Mars wrote:
mrsbadmouth wrote:
But that's still a legal status, yes? I meant the idea that you can bring someone in and say, "This is my partner, give them insurance!" without any kind of proof that you're even together.

All insurances that I ever heard of that cover spouses definitely accept domestic partnership, and no, it's not even remotely a legal status. Or at least, it doesn't have to be. They ask that you get a notary to sign off on that, and most notaries that I know of ask (or are at least supposed to) for some proof of co-habitation like bills/bank statements.


It really isn't the insurance but it is the employer paying for the insurance. I've heard of many people who considered themselves to be in a domestic partnership but when they tried to get insurance through an employer, they were told no because they weren't the same sex. I know my employer covers domestic partnerships but I'm pretty sure the language says they have to be of the same sex.

And I agree, that if we just had health insurance for everyone, these issues wouldn't come up. Our employers wouldn't be the ones dangling the insurance coverage above our heads. My employer only offers 1 option of health insurance and that is it.

_________________
You are all a disgrace to vegans. Go f*ck yourselves, especially linanil.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Confused about the law and polygamy
PostPosted: Sun Nov 03, 2013 1:56 pm 
Flat Chesty McNoBoobs
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2010 11:41 am
Posts: 6850
Location: Portland
mrsbadmouth wrote:
But that's still a legal status, yes? I meant the idea that you can bring someone in and say, "This is my partner, give them insurance!" without any kind of proof that you're even together. Of course, we should all have insurance in the first place without having to get married.

Also I think the laws that keep boyfriends/girlfriends/partners out of hospital rooms are stupid no matter what.


Actually, in my case, there is no legal status. There is such thing as registered domestic partner status in Oregon, but my BF and I aren't registered. Honestly, I really appreciated that his employer is willing to be trusting of its employees with respect to insurance coverage for partners.

I agree everyone should just have health care. I am all for making it more accessible whether by sanctioned means or grey areas.

_________________
If you spit on my food I will blow your forking head off, you filthy shitdog. - Mumbles
I can tell you this - no mother hubbard is going to tell me where to pee. - Vantine


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Confused about the law and polygamy
PostPosted: Sun Nov 03, 2013 3:17 pm 
Lime and a Coconut
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 1:42 am
Posts: 2392
Location: Smugville, CA
mrsbadmouth wrote:
But seriously, most things that require you to be legally married are stupid anyway.


147% truth. I was with my ex-husband for 11 years in total (6 of them married), and we're still best friends, and I can say with absolute confidence that we never would have gotten married if it hadn't been for immigration issues.

Mars wrote:
mrsbadmouth wrote:
But that's still a legal status, yes? I meant the idea that you can bring someone in and say, "This is my partner, give them insurance!" without any kind of proof that you're even together.

All insurances that I ever heard of that cover spouses definitely accept domestic partnership, and no, it's not even remotely a legal status. Or at least, it doesn't have to be. They ask that you get a notary to sign off on that, and most notaries that I know of ask (or are at least supposed to) for some proof of co-habitation like bills/bank statements.


I don't know about other states, but I am a California Registered Notary and my duty extends only to ensuring that the person signing the document is who they say they are. I don't have the obligation or the authority to establish someone's residence or who they're residing with. A notary (again, at least in CA) is basically a glorified witness- we're someone 'official,' who's registered with the state, who can be counted on to check someone's ID and testify that they did indeed sign the document in question themselves. As to how truthful the document is, that's down to the individual signing it. I can notarize a statement saying that someone is secretly Superman, but as long as their government-issued photo ID says their name is Clark Kent, I have done my job.

_________________
"Maybe Miley just needed to have her anal glands expressed?" -Tofulish
Sews Before Bros


Top
 Profile WWW  
 
 Post subject: Re: Confused about the law and polygamy
PostPosted: Sun Nov 03, 2013 4:03 pm 
Nooch of Earl
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2010 2:18 pm
Posts: 3396
Location: Bella Napoli
I am all in favor of people's rights to get married or not, as they see fit, and basically think that marriage is useful as a legal shortcut to enumerate common wishes in various circumstances. I don't think you should be barred from conferring these benefits on whoever you choose, but I do find it very confusing when people want all the basic legal protections of marriage but don't want to get married or make the appropriate documents to lay these rights out.

I've had this discussion with my sister - she's not married, but is in a long term (legal domestic partnership) with her partner. I've had to ask her explicitly who she would like to make decisions for her in the event that something should happen, because legally I'm fairly certain that would still be my parents, and that they would legally inherit things like her house (and it would be a big pain in the butt / tax burden to give them to my brother-out-law). She doesn't seem very concerned about this but does want him to be able to handle things, and just assumes that my family would know this without her making it explicit. That's fine if she does, but….you gotta tell people this, you know? Because otherwise they assume that not marrying someone is a sign that you don't want them having all the responsibilities/rights of marriage. Luckily my family would respect her wishes, but it is necessary to make them known!!

Husband and I had been in a 7 year relationship before marrying and would have married eventually anyway, but were really pushed towards it by an overseas assignment. It would've been much more difficult for me to join him abroad if I had to secure an individual visa, plus the Navy was very adamant that they would not waste language training on a mere fiancee! So I couldn't even start Dutch class until 3 months after he did.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Confused about the law and polygamy
PostPosted: Sun Nov 03, 2013 4:04 pm 
Double double, toil and trouble
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 9:24 pm
Posts: 313
Location: Boulder, CO
Ariann wrote:

I have never heard of having to show proof of marriage to rent an apartment or buy a house, unmarried people do such things together all the time. That is really bizarre, unless they thought it was a sign of your financial stability. I don't even understand the request.


I believe it did have something to do with finances, perhaps illustrating financial interdependency? We told them we were looking for a one-bedroom apartment, and "Are you a married couple?" is the first thing they asked before giving us a list of available units. Proof of marriage is also required by many campus housing complexes if the applicant wishes to co-habitate-- domestic partnership status is acceptable in many areas, but in states that do not have a DP registry this isn't always the case.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Confused about the law and polygamy
PostPosted: Mon Nov 04, 2013 1:25 am 
Plays The Sims 2 religiously
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 11:20 pm
Posts: 6766
Location: Portland, OR
Erika Soyf*cker wrote:
Mars wrote:
mrsbadmouth wrote:
But that's still a legal status, yes? I meant the idea that you can bring someone in and say, "This is my partner, give them insurance!" without any kind of proof that you're even together.

All insurances that I ever heard of that cover spouses definitely accept domestic partnership, and no, it's not even remotely a legal status. Or at least, it doesn't have to be. They ask that you get a notary to sign off on that, and most notaries that I know of ask (or are at least supposed to) for some proof of co-habitation like bills/bank statements.


I don't know about other states, but I am a California Registered Notary and my duty extends only to ensuring that the person signing the document is who they say they are. I don't have the obligation or the authority to establish someone's residence or who they're residing with. A notary (again, at least in CA) is basically a glorified witness- we're someone 'official,' who's registered with the state, who can be counted on to check someone's ID and testify that they did indeed sign the document in question themselves. As to how truthful the document is, that's down to the individual signing it. I can notarize a statement saying that someone is secretly Superman, but as long as their government-issued photo ID says their name is Clark Kent, I have done my job.

Ah well that's neat! Yeah I might be remembering the order wrong. We had to get notarized, and the proof of cohabitation part might have been to the insurance company.

Moral of my story is simply that if they offer coverage for domestic partnerships, no, it's not a legal status thing, but also no, it's not like just 'heeeeey I just signed up my brosef 'cause like fork it'... I mean, there's notarizing, and it's not like the insurance is free or anything, in fact the non-employee partner's share is usually fairly steep, it's not like those who do tell some white lies to get it are forking over some system.

_________________
i would schmear marmite on a moist scrotum for Mars. - interrobang?!
"Not everything." ~ mumbles (1973-2013) - mumbles


Top
 Profile WWW  
 
 Post subject: Re: Confused about the law and polygamy
PostPosted: Mon Nov 04, 2013 5:09 am 
Mispronounces Daiya
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 1:31 pm
Posts: 1418
Location: In the land of Druids and Moonrakers
I know I'm like a goddamn Euro-commie and all, but this thread just reinforces to me how much work there is to do to change the thinking that changes society - so that any person's access to services and support rests in their own personhood, not in the legitimacy (or illegitimacy) of their relationship with someone else.

_________________
Cake is always the appropriate intervention. - choirqueer
We are here to discuss the gender politics of cats, not your mommy issues. - Expired Sanity


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Confused about the law and polygamy
PostPosted: Mon Nov 04, 2013 8:39 am 
Drinks Wild Tofurkey
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2011 1:50 pm
Posts: 2863
Location: The Bene
Ruby Rose wrote:
I know I'm like a goddamn Euro-commie and all, but this thread just reinforces to me how much work there is to do to change the thinking that changes society - so that any person's access to services and support rests in their own personhood, not in the legitimacy (or illegitimacy) of their relationship with someone else.


Quoted for forking truth.

_________________
Ain't no guarantees in life, and nothing that comes out of my vagina can change that. - Erika Soyf*cker

I'd rather have a cupcake and a matte stomach. - Desdemona


Top
 Profile WWW  
 
 Post subject: Re: Confused about the law and polygamy
PostPosted: Mon Nov 04, 2013 10:03 am 
WRETCHED
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2010 6:54 pm
Posts: 7994
Location: Maryland/DC area
And we should say that although there are plenty of instances where people can get married to get access to thir partner's insurance, there are plenty of relationships where neither partner has insurance so getting married does nothing for them. I don't know why employers are responsible for our health insurance, it makes little sense to me although I've always been covered since I graduated college and got my first post-college job. It is a dumb system.

And really it is affordable insurance that is the issue because insurance can always be paid for individually but it is pricey. I'm not sure how much the ACA will change things but I hope it does.

Oh and I've been watching Sister Wives which I think is fascinating. It also seems to be beneficial for women on some level but so is communal/extended family living.

_________________
You are all a disgrace to vegans. Go f*ck yourselves, especially linanil.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Confused about the law and polygamy
PostPosted: Mon Nov 04, 2013 10:49 am 
Naked Under Apron
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2011 11:13 pm
Posts: 1739
Location: NYC/Schenectady, NY
Mars wrote:
mrsbadmouth wrote:
But that's still a legal status, yes? I meant the idea that you can bring someone in and say, "This is my partner, give them insurance!" without any kind of proof that you're even together.

All insurances that I ever heard of that cover spouses definitely accept domestic partnership, and no, it's not even remotely a legal status. Or at least, it doesn't have to be. They ask that you get a notary to sign off on that, and most notaries that I know of ask (or are at least supposed to) for some proof of co-habitation like bills/bank statements.


They definitely don't all cover them. My SO's union doesn't offer insurance to domestic partnerships, unfortunately. We have financial reasons for not getting married but he has really good insurance and I'd take advantage of that if possible.

_________________
If a milkshake is going to change the world then it should be at least be an Oreo one. - daisychain


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Confused about the law and polygamy
PostPosted: Wed Nov 06, 2013 5:53 pm 
Drunk Dialed Ian MacKaye
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 3:05 pm
Posts: 1877
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
I am with Ruby Rose on this. I am so so so happy that we have universal health care, and I can't even imagine getting married in order to.. make sure you can stay alive if you get sick? That really really shouldn't have anything to do with whether or not you're married to someone with insurance. It shouldn't really have anything to do with your financial situation either.

Actually, just fork capitalism. Everyone deserves to live freely as they choose as long as they aren't being complete dicks and everyone deserves to have their basic needs covered always.

Polygamy is illegal here as well. I think it's basically because of old christian morality and people getting their noses into other people's business, though. I can't imagine being in a polyamorous relationship, but I sure don't think it's my place to decide if that makes other people happy. I'd definitely rather have a polygamist family living upstairs than someone who loves playing techno at 2am, that's for sure!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Confused about the law and polygamy
PostPosted: Wed Nov 06, 2013 6:22 pm 
Has it on Blue Vinyl
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2010 6:15 pm
Posts: 2191
It's so ridiculous that the nature of a relationship has anything to do with insurance coverage. If I had a job that offered health insurance (I do not) why should it be fraud to use that to also get insurance for my roommate? Or my best friend? Or my mom? Why is it the insurance company's business whether I am having sex with the person or however you measure what "partner" means? Basically it is ludicrous for health insurance to be related to employment at all.

_________________
"No one with hair so soft and glossy could ever be bad at anything." - Tofulish


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Confused about the law and polygamy
PostPosted: Sat Nov 09, 2013 5:23 pm 
Naked Under Apron
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2010 1:03 pm
Posts: 1711
Location: Central PA
I know a few different couples who were in the "we're going to get married someday, but there's no rush" stage, and then one of them lost their job, and it suddenly had to become "we're getting married in two months, so that we can both have health insurance."


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic  [ 65 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
Template made by DEVPPL/ThatBigForum and fancied up by What Cheer