First family in California with THREE dads on birth certificate opens up

[TheProgressivePatriot]

If an employer does extend benefits because the law forces them to, I see no reason why they can't do that for multiple spouses, as they already do for multiple children.

That makes NO economic sense for the employer. My guess is that someone who is looking for a job with benefits would be shit out of luck

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

If an employer does extend benefits because the law forces them to, I see no reason why they can't do that for multiple spouses, as they already do for multiple children.

I'm thinking pensions. If I die, my wife gets my full pension. But how many wives would the state extend that benefit to.?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

The family could choose to designate only two people on the birth certificate, or three or more as in the example of three dads that you seemed to have no problem with.

I suppose, if all agree? But would they and if not, then what?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

In both the Morman tradition and the Muslim tradition, the woman marries the male, who later marries another woman, and so on. Each of the women are married to the man, so any divorce would also be between the man and the woman. Morman women call each other "sister wives," but as far as I know, do not consider themselves married to each other.

That is religious marriage. I am talking about legal marriage

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

What is the compelling government interest in stopping plural marriage? Is it the same as the compelling government interest in stopping all plural relationships?

I did not say that there was. I said that there are different issues to consider that must be evaluated on their own merits. It is not an easy leap from the legal arguments for allowing same sex marriage to plural marriage.

 

[Seymour Flops]

That makes NO economic sense for the employer. My guess is that someone who is looking for a job with benefits would be shit out of luck

Obamacare made no economic sense for many employers. That's why Obama gave his buddies at McDonald's and other large corporations a break from it to give them a change to get ready.

In liberal world when did that start mattering?

I'm thinking pensions. If I die, my wife gets my full pension. But how many wives would the state extend that benefit to.?

One pension to be split however the pension-earning spouse decides.

That is religious marriage. I am talking about legal marriage

Fair enough.

I did not say that there was. I said that there are different issues to consider that must be evaluated on their own merits. It is not an easy leap from the legal arguments for allowing same sex marriage to plural marriage.

Nor was it an easy leap from the legal arguments allowing inter-racial marriage to the legal arguments for same-sex marriage.

Now, you're sure that you fully support the legalization of plural marriage? Because is sure sounds like you're coming up with any justification you can to oppose it.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Obamacare made no economic sense for many employers. That's why Obama gave his buddies at McDonald's and other large corporations a break from it to give them a change to get ready.

In liberal world when did that start mattering?

I am not going to folow you down the rabbit hole of Obama Care.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

One pension to be split however the pension-earning spouse decides.

And each gets peanuts.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Nor was it an easy leap from the legal arguments allowing inter-racial marriage to the legal arguments for same-sex marriage.

Actually it was a comparativly easy leap. It was still just two people.

 

[Seymour Flops]

I am not going to folow you down the rabbit holw of Obama Care.

If you don't want to talk about Obamacare, it's probably not a good idea to bring up burdens on employers

And each gets peanuts.

What would they get if only one of them was married to the deceased? More, less, or the same?

Actually it was comparativly. It was still just two people.

Ok.

You're against plural marriage, but you don't want to say so, because you know you have no argument, so you make up this stuff.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Now, you're sure that you fully support the legalization of plural marriage? Because is sure sounds like you're coming up with any justification you can to oppose it.

There you go again with your straw man tactics. I said that I support it with reservations, I am not trying to find reasons to oppose it. I am bringing up pragmatic considerations which tell me that we should go slowly.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

You're against plural marriage, but you don't want to say so, because you know you have no argument, so you make up this stuff.

Good grief! Are you serious?! I told you that I say what I mean. I said that I support it with reservations. What is so hard about that to understand.? You are starting to annoy me

Your problem is that you want simple yes or no, right or wrong, good or bad answers. Most adults know that it does not always work that way with complex issues, and, yes, it is complicated whether or not you want to admit it. I am not trying to make an argument against it. I am just raising the issues that we might face, while you are trying to make them majically go away

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

What would they get if only one of them was married to the deceased? More, less, or the same?

I thought the subject was group marriage

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Hey kid! This is an adult forum. Take your juvenile, school yard bullshit some place else

Birth certificate must mean something else in CA because--- science!

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Birth certificate must mean something else in CA because--- science!

What did I tell you, kid?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

What did I tell you, kid?

You told me that one of the Daddy's has a vagina.

An adoption certificate is different than a birth certificate.

Science