Replies

RE: THE GOVERNMENT DOES NOT AND CANNOT MARRY YOU!

Let’s think about this a bit. Let’s assume that this will be true...

Will the government then be ask to recognize unions of some sort?

There are two possible answers — yes and no.

If the answer is yes, This implies among other things that:

* That the government will still need to recognize marriages that were done overseas of the purposes of say, immigration (surely you don’t want to separate an immigrant from his wife... ).

* The government will have to find a way to administer things like social security, which implies that even if they don’t marry you, they must recognize your marriage (or union, for want of a better word ) done in some church or mosque or temple.

* The government will still need to deal with what constitutes a father or mother for children born in this country.

Now if the answer is “no” (i.e., government won’t recognize any unions at all ).... then the implication would be (among other things ):

* You can’t bring your spouse to America, if you were married overseas because the government does not recognize such union. Only YOU can enter this country.

* If you were to die, your spouse does not have to get anything from the social security funds you paid for during your working years, since “spouses” are not a recognized entity (this will save government a lot of money and they might have an incentive for non-recognition ).

* The government will still need to deal with what constitutes a father or mother for children born in this country.

* You can’t bring your spouse to America, if you were married overseas because the government does not recognize such union. Only YOU can enter this country. * If you were to die, your spouse does not have to get anything from the social security funds you paid for during your working years, since “spouses” are not a recognized entity (this will save government a lot of money and they might have an incentive for non-recognition ). * The government will still need to deal with what constitutes a father or mother for children born in this country.

The first one isn't a problem for me. I suspect however a work around - like proving someone has been a dependent of the immigrant for the last 5 years - could easily be worked out. I do see SS as the biggest problem. However, it'll be morphing into something else soon enough anyway and this might be an easy way for the government to implement changes. Parenthood can now be established first via the parents' word on birth certificates and when that fails, on DNA.

Please explain why I couldn’t create a beneficiary of my SS or will it to my wife. The suggestion that only the government can handle this type of contract seems somewhat non-nonsensical to me.

Father and Mother for a child: I’m not quite sure why that, in law, must be tied to the governments issuing of marriage licenses. I seems self evident that not all Father and Mothers are married to begin with but certainly that doesn’t prevent the government from garnishing wages (In some communities this is quite an industry for the “Single Mothers”)

I don’t deny that there are cases where the Government needs to recognize a union, but not necessarily the union of marriage.

Marriage is a family union which is inherently based upon the power of God not state. Even the State in most divorce proceedings dos not recognize its own power to break that union merely end its own legal enforcement of said union.

If you ask me, then someone who wants a real marriage goes through a religious institution such as the Catholic or Mormon church. Nether of which recognize divorce.

I would very much like my own denomination to provide a similar service in the form of recognizing and registering real marriages.

For now, people need to recognize that the State will offer you no real stability nor unity with your spouse and thus no real marriage. That family bond must come from no other than God & your allegiance to him.

To place your faith in the state in this matter has proven itself to be for noght. The State has not a moral nor stable fiber left in it.

You have just shown how the fabric of our welfare society, going back to the creation of Social Security, has corrupted marriage.

- We used to marry women from other countries without interference.
- We used to have only assets people had as money to be shared with a spouse.
- We used to hold the parents on a birth record as the legal guardians (and sole providers—NOT government) until some legal situation changed that (such as death of parents).

Your points do not prove why it's wrong for government to get out of marriage. Your arguments prove why government should get out of even more pervasive matters.