Is it practical to get married?
More and more states are legalizing gay marriage. My question is this.
What ways can a couple benefit from this?
Does it improve your tax refunds ? Your credit rating?
Let's say that neither one of you are wealthy. Perhaps one of you is in a large amount of debt. How is getting married beneficial to the other?
What's the practical value of this institution?
|by Anonymous||reply 47||02/14/2013|
1. hospital visitation rights 2. parental rights- if you have children 3. Inheritance and social security survivor benefits if one of you die.
Other than that, there is no reason to get married aside from sentimental reasons.
|by Anonymous||reply 2||02/12/2013|
[quote]The whole marriage argument just gives a bunch of radical screaming queens something to get their panties in a wad about. Let it go folks.
Well, it's more than "a bunch of radical screaming queens" but I do agree that for many of us marriage is more symbolic than utilitarian.
The issue has been divisive all over the Western world, to say the least. However, the discussion is a good thing. As human beings, we DO have the right to form a marriage contract with any other consenting adult. It's insulting and unjust that governments don't want to acknowledge that right.
|by Anonymous||reply 4||02/13/2013|
Can you get te same tax benefits from a civil union? Marriage, to me, implies religion and therefore has no appeal. If the gay community went for civil unions and left "god" out of it I think we would get that passed more quickly.
|by Anonymous||reply 5||02/13/2013|
OP = Homophobic, freeper frau troll.
DON'T feed the troll.
|by Anonymous||reply 6||02/13/2013|
Civil unions and marriage are NOT the same things under the law, idiot at R5.
Marriage confers many rights and privileges (tax breaks, etc) that are not gotten with civil unions.
|by Anonymous||reply 7||02/13/2013|
It's a legit question r6. If you can't answer it, fine
|by Anonymous||reply 8||02/13/2013|
The main benefit is when one person is financially dependent upon the other. If both spouses earn a good living, then the joint return tax benefit for a couple where one spouse is a housewife becomes the much maligned "marriage penalty". The financially dependent spouse is protected by community property laws, and must be paid alimony when the working partner takes off with someone younger and prettier. Personally, I don't expect any of my male partners to get knocked up, I am not going to financially support anybody, nobody is ever going to take 50% of my hard-earned assets, and I shall never try to emulate the heterosexual population by putting on a farce of one of their "marriages". This effort of the "gay" activists to legalize "gay" marriage is a betrayal of trust. We were all told for decades that this was not their goal, it was not even on the table, and we were only petitioning for the overturn of "sodomy" laws, and an end to discrimination.
|by Anonymous||reply 9||02/13/2013|
It's also a question of legal equality. The back of the bus is a perfectly nice place to sit, but if you're forced to sit there in order to diminish your status, it's a devastating, destructive place to sit, which is the entire intention and point of separate legal statuses for different classes of people. Saying "Well, I didn't want to ride the bus anyway" or "The seats in the back are the same. What's the difference?" entirely misses the point.
Gay couples pay up to thousands of dollars extra in taxes every year to insure their partners through work (and that's even if the company recognizes and will insure domestic partners) and if you can't afford that or if your company doesn't provide that, sometimes it actually does become a matter of life and death: If you're heterosexual and married, your partner is insured, gets treatment and lives. If you're gay and unmarried, your parter is uninsured, doesn't get treatment and dies.
It happens. It's unequal. It must end. It is an unfair and unjust use of the law to do this to people. And there are thousands upon thousands of examples like this where the lack of marriage rights play out in really devastating ways. Equality, people, it's really not that hard to understand.
And whoever said marriage is religious? Atheists marry all the time. my parents are atheists and have been married for many years. I am an atheist and want to marry my partner but I'm being deprived of this most basic civil rights to satisfy the nasty prejudices of a fleeting majority. Stupid.
|by Anonymous||reply 10||02/13/2013|
This is about the end of discrimination. Straights can also be too rebellious, selfish, cool - or whatever you are r9 - for marriage, but they can also marry if they so choose, and so should gays.
It is mostly social. They are many events where you are supposed to bring your spouse and gays used to pretend they are single for those events even if they were not, the implication of which being that a gay relationship is a dirty little secret. Well, it can't be a dirty little secret if it's an official legal marriage, which has the effect of normalizing all gay lifestyles, which has the effect of less homophobia, less teen suicides etc etc.
|by Anonymous||reply 11||02/13/2013|
Some of these posts look suspiciously like they've been authored by freeper plants.
The latest strategy of NOM--they've realized they're not winning any new straight supporters--is to parade out "gays against marriage." It's also well known that the right pays people to troll comment sections and discussion sites.
Anyway, don't trust the freeper "I'm a gay against gay marriage" BS you read here. Take it with a grain of salt and a healthy dose of suspicion.
|by Anonymous||reply 12||02/13/2013|
R13, if you are opposed to gay marriage, don't marry a gay.
|by Anonymous||reply 14||02/13/2013|
What's this "gay" about? I don't get the quotation marks. What is it suggesting?
|by Anonymous||reply 15||02/13/2013|
I got married for the blowjobs. I stayed for the tax breaks
|by Anonymous||reply 17||02/13/2013|
Sad R16, just sad.
Gays aren't the evil villains you imagine us to be.
|by Anonymous||reply 18||02/13/2013|
R7 that's why I asked the question you fat bitter cunt. My partner and I don't give a fuck about the topic. We have iron clad wills, healthcare directives, etc. The "tax breaks" wouldn't be significant enough for us to fuck with given our incomes. I'm guessing that would be important to a bitter retail fairy as you seem to be.
Answer the questions instead of lashing out and maybe you will find a boyfriend and would be ble to marry one day.
|by Anonymous||reply 19||02/13/2013|
So because the marriage benefits might not matter to you gay people shouldn't care?
There exist gay couples whom it does matter for (and no shit, some of them have or want kids), they are not entitled to those same government rights for their spouse solely because they are gay. It is inequality, and it should be fixed.
It isn't that complicated. And no, civil unions don't give you the same rights. Because it isn't a marriage, marriage is a government set up that legally and financially makes life a lot easier for couples who are intertwined.
|by Anonymous||reply 20||02/13/2013|
And the reason why it is such a target for gay activists, outside of the obvious difference it makes in some gay peoples lives, is that symbolically it is an important symbol.
It says that in the eyes of our government, they do not treat me as a gay citizen differently than they would if I happened to be straight.
Marriage only has religious connotations to people than want to give it religious connotations.
|by Anonymous||reply 21||02/13/2013|
[quote]My partner and I don't give a fuck about the topic. We have iron clad wills, healthcare directives, etc.
I had a friend who had all that but when she died, everyone still looked to her parents, not her partner, as "next of kin."
|by Anonymous||reply 22||02/13/2013|
You CANNOT file taxes together because it is not recognized by the Fed. This conversation is moot.
|by Anonymous||reply 23||02/13/2013|
You sound like a nut, r16.
Live your life. Be your own gay. No one here is stopping you.
Some of us happen to want civil rights and equality under the law. You're going to have to learn to deal with that. We will always want legal equality until we get it. Period.
Sorry if this does some sort of damage to you, but you have to try to pick up the pieces of your shattered sense of self and carry on.
|by Anonymous||reply 24||02/13/2013|
[quote] We have iron clad wills, healthcare directives, etc.
You can have all that anmd homophobic family will find a judge to side with them and not you.
Good luck with that.
You can ingerit all you want, but as a legal spouse you wouldn't be taxed on the inheritance.
As nothing more than a friend, legally, you will be.
|by Anonymous||reply 25||02/13/2013|
R25. Nothing at all stops you from co-ownership of assets. Invest in a lawyer. It helps
|by Anonymous||reply 26||02/13/2013|
[quote]Inheritance and social security survivor benefits if one of you die.
You get ZERO social security survivor benefits because it's a federal program.
You're not even entitled to file a joint tax return.
|by Anonymous||reply 27||02/13/2013|
r25, Legal co-owners of property "with right of survivorship" (a very very old legal concept) supersedes any will.
You do need a signed contract, however, by all parties involved.
This can be done with real estate, businesses and bank/brokerage accounts. The relationship of the "partner" has never been an issue throughout history.
It's a two way street, however. partner to partner. You don't get to leave everything to Aunt Ida.
As for contesting your Will, your family, if they're lucky, may be able to win your Precious Moments figurine collection from your partner in court.
|by Anonymous||reply 28||02/13/2013|
Which is why this State by State bullshit is ... well, bullshit.
And the benefits ARE taxes. Which is why this fight isn't over until it is won on the federal level.
Here was the eye-opener for us: in California, DPs (and the 18,000 of us that are legally married) are allowed to file a joint state return. In order to calculate it correctly, you have to fill in a fake "Pro Forma" federal return. Then, obviously, you have to file real, 'single' seperate fed returns, too.
By filling out the fake return, fillled out like you were a "real" married couple, you then see the DIFFERENCE in the amount of your refund - which for us is a difference of a few thousand $$ each year. Makes my blood boil.
For a couple like us, together for 22 years, that is not a small amount of money.
|by Anonymous||reply 29||02/13/2013|
Fuck hiring a lawyer or co-ownership of assets.
If straight couples have the option of doing it through a marriage license then gay couples should have that option too and not be forced to spend hundreds, if not thousands, on a lawyer (and still not be protected or have their relationship recognized by law).
Legal equality. It's REALLY not that tough a concept to grasp, people.
And r28, we're talking about what makes fighting for marriage important (ie full marriage rights). The existence of DOMA hardly qualifies as a good reason not to marry. Gay people marry with the hope that their government will soon wake up to the call for legal equality. Federal benefits still qualify as "among the benefits of marriage," even if they are being presently denied to gay and lesbian people in an effort to discriminate against them.
|by Anonymous||reply 30||02/13/2013|
Self-hating gay people often diminish gay marriage, as if to say, 'see straight people? I'm one of the nice gays, not those aggressive screaming queens!'
Bottom line - it's about government creating a second-class of citizen to be treated worse than those in the first class.
If you are all about masochism and being abused (as many gay men seem to be), fine.
Don't take away from those of us who want to be treated 100% like your straight brothers and sisters.
|by Anonymous||reply 31||02/13/2013|
Don't forget about this fun little bonus!
You get to lose HALF your assets plus Alimony!
|by Anonymous||reply 32||02/13/2013|
Getting married, as illustrated by many posts upthread, is a very important legal contract.
My friend and his partner spent over 13,000 yes, thirteen thousand dollars, in legal fees, to attain what should be attained by a simple courthouse marriage.
They are a family, 25 years together. Two people who care for each other and want the best for one another. Family.
|by Anonymous||reply 34||02/13/2013|
I lost my partner because he lost his Work Visa. He moved back to Europe, and we had to break up...because there's nothing for me there in terms of work.
If there were Federal marriage laws, I could've sponsored him, and we'd still be together.
|by Anonymous||reply 35||02/13/2013|
Great, R35! See how that didn't hurt anyone?
Please remember to vote Republican from now on, so that others can share your experience.
|by Anonymous||reply 36||02/13/2013|
Health insurance benefits from your partner/spouse is also a good reason to get married. But to be honest when/if the US gets government sponsored health insurance for everyone, this won't matter as much.
Also being able to make medical decisions if your partner is very sick or is about to die, is another. Otherwise your partner will have to defer to their parents and "next to kin."
|by Anonymous||reply 37||02/13/2013|
R22 and r25. I have been through lung, brain and throat cancer. My partner made every single decision and my parents were left in the waiting room. They tried but did not win. They will never, ever, be able to trump him. Get a GOOD lawyer. Btw. It didn't cost near $13k
|by Anonymous||reply 38||02/13/2013|
It's all so personal. My partner and I love and are loved by each others family.( parents are long gone). Even so, we took the relatively easy step to have legal, medical and financial power of attorney for each other. Legally as binding as marriage, covering major concerns. I will still spport and fight for the rights of gay marriage, but we personally don't feel we need that particulat piece of paper. Good luck everybody!
|by Anonymous||reply 39||02/14/2013|
The big issue is that it takes a lot of planning and legal finagling. Even then, some states are passing laws in which a judge can deem the same sex couple documents void, because the same sex couple are trying to make their relationship a 'marriage'.
So, r40, there is no real substitute for the legal benefits of marriage. This is why it needs to become legal at the federal level.
|by Anonymous||reply 41||02/14/2013|
Fuck the freeper plants and gay tools here.
Not everyone can afford to hire a lawyer and there are many benefits in a marriage that can never be arranged through other means, One example: Married spouses can't be forced to testify against each other in a court of law. You can't get that through any other legal document. THAT'S how much the bond of marriage is respected by the gov--you and your partner are still just strangers to each other according to our government--and as others have pointed out there are thousands of examples where such things play but in all sorts of devastating ways.
A marriage also gives you access to divorce court, which seeks the equitable distribution of assets, appropriate care for children, etc an enormous legal advantage only bestowed on straights which WE PAY FOR WITH OUR TAX DOLLARS.
Legal equality. If straight couples have the option of arranging these things through marriage--if they can have the benefit of the courts to oversee the dissolution of their relationships--then gay couples deserve that, too. The options should be available to ALL on an EQUAL BASIS. The back of the bus may be a perfectly pleasant place to ride, but it becomes something else entirely if it's your forced position by law.
E-Q-U-A-L-I-T-Y, trolls. The intelligent, awake gay people will never stop the fight until we achieve it. Learn it. Live it. Know it.
This "gays against gay marriage" strategy is a FAIL.
|by Anonymous||reply 42||02/14/2013|
The Jesus PsyOps Brigade makes me giggle with its lame display of logic and argument. I honestly don't understand why you all feed the trolls.
|by Anonymous||reply 43||02/14/2013|
[quote]Any benefit of marriage can be had without it, you just have to get the right legal paperwork
That is simply untrue.
|by Anonymous||reply 45||02/14/2013|
R45 - yes, and anyone who's been paying attention to court rulings in backwaters like Oklahoma and even Oregon (which is not so backwater) have INVALIDATED all those fancy, expensive legal documents.
You might be 25 and beautiful, healthy and single now, but eventually, you'll pair up with someone - happens to many gay people - not all of us just continue sleeping around our entire lives.
|by Anonymous||reply 46||02/14/2013|
r46 is right. Many states have banned not just marriage, but civil unions as well, leaving it up to the whims of a judge whether or not your legal documents simulating marriage violate the state constitution.
Equal marriage rights for all. Period.
I--and millions of other--will never stop fighting until that goal is achieved.
And those in love with the idea of making such arrangements through a lawyer can still do so, even when we've achieved our goal... so everyone is happy.
|by Anonymous||reply 47||02/14/2013|