Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: cuban leaf
The irony is that the Obergefell decision was correct on the facts. There's something untenable about having provisions of the Federal tax code that apply to married couples when there is no Federal authority over marriage law.

The error of the Obergefell decision was in the remedy it applied. Rather than come up with a ludicrous justification for forcing every state to change its marriage laws, the Supreme Court should have just struck down every provision of every Federal law that applies to married couples. That would simply mean the end to such tax provisions as "married couples filing jointly" and special treatment of spouses under deferred retirement plans and estate tax laws. That's it.

Interestingly, I can easily see us getting to the point where some states simply stop recognizing ANY marriages -- and treat "marriage" as nothing more than a contractual arrangement. That means you can be "married" to one spouse, a dozen spouses, or even 35 spouse and six pets. Let the retarded mutants on the Supreme Court figure out how to deal with that sh!t.

11 posted on 10/07/2020 7:48:41 AM PDT by Alberta's Child ("There's somebody new and he sure ain't no rodeo man.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: Alberta's Child

It all started with the IRS trying to preserve/coerce culture with tax laws.

If you are going to make people pay taxes, just make them pay taxes based on raw data like income. This is why I hate tax incentives like tax credits.


15 posted on 10/07/2020 7:53:46 AM PDT by cuban leaf (The political war playing out in every country now: Globalists vs Nationalists)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson