OK, but until then there is. That's reality.
2. A "contractual arrangement" does not allow for exemption form the Estate Tax applicable to the sale of a primary home, only Civil Marriage does that. (When a home is sold a single person can claim up to $250,000 in an exemption, $500,000 for a Civilly Married couple. When one spouse dies the surviving spouse can still claim the married exemption for up to two years after the death if the home is sold. This cannot be duplicated with a power of attorney.)
- There should be no death tax
OK, but until then there is. That's reality.
3. A "contractual arrangement" cannot provide for a spousal privilege in the case of a criminal prosecution.
- Sure it could. The existence of any private marriage contract could be used as the standard.
"Could" but doesn't. OK, but until then there is. That's reality.
4. A "contractual arrangement" cannot provide for a spouse to be buried in a National Cemetery next to a spouse who was an honorably serving veteran of the United States.
- Sure it could, see #3.
"Could" but doesn't. OK, but until then there is. That's reality.
5. A "contractual arrangement" does not convey parenthood upon the birth of a child. A $50 marriage license does, for non-Civilly Married couples it would require a formal adoption costing hundreds if not thousands of dollars.
- A marriage contract doesn't prove paternity either. If there is a divorce then parents have to fight about custody. Marriage solves little here anyway.
I didn't say a Civil Marriage proves paternity I said a Civil Marriage provides "parenthood upon the birth of a child" - similar but a distinct difference. Paternity involves a genetic relationship, parenthood is a legal status under the law. Some examples to clarify:
Ex A: An unweb mother gives birth, since she is unweb she is the only legal parent of the child (not use of "legal parent"). To prove paternity, she would have to get the likely father to submit to a DNA test and then (after the birth) have the individual declared the parent).
Ex B: A married different-sex couple has a child, under the law of most states the opposite gender spouse is automatically (at birth) the legal parent of the child (no paternity test required). Not adoption procedures are required.
Ex C: In states that have the parenthood at birth law and have Same-sex Civil Marriage, then when a same-sex couple has a child (think IVF here) then both spouses are the legal parents of the child at birth (again no adoption required).
I can't believe I'm going to type this (
) ) but legally speaking, Heather will literally have two Mommies.
6. A "contractual arrangement" does not establish a family relationship recognized under the Family Medical Leave Act so that a person can care for their spouse (or be cared for by them) in times of medical emergency.
- Nor should it. Why should that be a marriage function? We should be able to have anyone we want do this. Our spouse, a relative. We could make it easier to establish who we want to speak for us legally.
Yes it should, yes a Civil Marriage establishes in the eyes of the law a famility relationship. Husband and wife/Husband and Husband/Wife and Wife are a family.
We could, but that's what we've got.
7. A "contractual arrangement" cannot waive the tax penalty for employer provided health insurance for a spouse of the same gender. (Same-sex Civilly Married couples are charged this extra tax on employer benefits where Different-sex Civilly Married couples are not.)
- Irrelevant. Private employers should offer the benefits they chose, not the benefits government choses.
Please read the above again, it's not what the employer or the insurance company decide to offer, it about the difference in how the government taxes the individual. If you are Civilly Married, you are not taxed. If you are not Civilly Married and the employer chooses to provide partner benefits (non-Civilly Married) then there is an additional tax
by the government because the additional employers portion is treated as income for the partner benefits, but not for spouse benefits.
8. A "contractual arrangement" does not establish a family relationship under Social Security whereby the surviving spouse can receive benefits at the working spouses rate if higher then their own.
- No one has a right to taxpayer money, BFD.
Never said they did, however people have the right to equal treatment under the law barring a compelling government interest.
It would be interesting to watch the shit-storm that would ensue if a political party tried to cut off social security for elderly spouses of working people that had died. I'm sure that would go over really well.
9. A "contractual arrangement" does not establish a family relationship where a spouse can then sponsor their spouse for immigration purposes.
- Of course it could.
"Could" but doesn't. OK, but until then there is. That's reality.
10. Even with a "contractual arrangement" and a will, not being Civilly Married allows for other relatives to step in and challenge a will under probate court and in some states allows those family members to over ride the decrees of the will.
