Re: [UUPoly-L] marriage/civil union/whatever

[licorice gumdrop <licorice.gumdrop@gmail.com>]

IMO, "marriage" is a religious/spiritual concept, not a civil one.

I'd like to see the gov't out of the marriage business - I don't think  
it has any business defining relationships between consenting adults,  
which is what it's doing.

this isn't to say that the benefits currently bestowed by the gov't on  
heterosexual unions don't have a valuable, stabilizing effect on  
society. property rights, pension benefits, etc., all allow adults a  
level of certainty in sharing their resources that is beneficial to  
the system as a whole, and quite frankly, would be a nightmare to  
unravel. but there's no reason these benefits should be limited to  
couples, or even poly groupings. they could also be extended to  
sibling affiliations, or to any other grouping of people willing to  
take responsibility for each other.

I'd like to see a system whereby the gov't recognizes adult  
affiliation, in whatever form it might take. the policing could be  
limited to making sure individuals don't "double dip" impermissibly  
(such as naming two beneficiaries for a pension and trying to get the  
whole sum for both.)

just my two cents.

-j

On Nov 25, 2008, at 11:30 AM, "Alisa WW" <alisaww@comcast.net> wrote:

> > Of course if poly unions ever take off, the legal aspects will get
> > interesting, but that's what they get paid the big bucks to sort out,
> > right?
> >
> >
> > > Have fun with this thought,
> > >       Francesca