One of the benefits of marriage is a spouse cannot be forced to testify in criminal court against the other. Should that be eliminated? Should social security benefits be non-transferable?
Throw that protection out the window in a society that doesn't have a clue what marriage is supposed to be. In fact, that protection becomes a loophole to be used by criminals once a state recognizes: (1) same-sex "marriage," and (2) polygamy (it's only a matter of time before this happens). One these two are in place, you'll have an entire organized crime family getting "married" to shield the entire operation.
Should social security benefits be non-transferable?
Taxpayer-funded benefits doled out by the state should never be a consideration in any definition of a religious institution.
Yep! There are a lot of laws out there, which are actually to the benefit of married couples, so that if they weren’t married, legally so (but only so in some informal and personally recognizable way) ... they would lose out!
That benefit really doesn't have anything to do with marriage. No one can FORCE anyone to testify.
The solution is simple. You show up for court, place you hand on the Bible as instructed, and when you're asked "Do you solemnly swear to tell the truth?", you look them straight in the eye and say - "No, your Honor, I do not."..and don't say anything else.
What's he going to do? Have you arrested? One of the FIRST things they tell you when your arrested is you have a right to remain silent.
Wouldn't that be a legalistic mess of their own making? LOL! Arresting you for exercising the right they're legally obligated to notify you that you have!
The right to free speech includes the right not to speak.
----
DiogenesLamp - Freedom of speech PING.
Social Security shouldn’t exist.