Many many people from any of those groups you mention ( I can't believe you starting throwing political stances and religious belief in there ) would create much better families than millions of the dysfunctional 'traditional' families out there.
The nuclear family is a concept like a pure free market... it doesnt actually exist in its true ideal form.
Last edited by wilbur; 03-12-2009 at 09:11 AM.
Should the federal government continue to provide SS benefits to married couples? How about protection on pensions and pension beneficiaries? The same favorable tax rate on transfers of property between spouses?
What are the purposes behind the current laws? Are those same purposes properly served by providing them to non-married "couples"?
The State now has a vested interest in reducing its obligations to individuals while still sucking them dry for as long as possible. The "family" structure is no longer of any interest to the State since people are in increasingly unstable relationships and since the burden of caring for children is now juggled between the State and a virtually random group of parental sexual partners, former spouses, and biological parents.
While the State no longer has any interest in promoting family stability, it still does have a huge interest in not paying for any services, if possible. It's in the best interest of the State to promote any financial arrangement in which people (related or not, sexual or not) meet each other's needs in terms of care and finances. This frees up more money for taxes, fees, permits, and the like.
We left Oz quite a while ago, Philly. Try to keep up. :p
If it doesn't - it's because of government interference and individual selfishness and irresponsibility.The nuclear family is a concept like a pure free market... it doesnt actually exist in its true ideal form.
|« Previous Thread | Next Thread »|