To the dungeons with Gay divorcees?

Interesting comment left at Dr. Helen's divorce podcast post:

My view is that gay marriage will sink fatherhood even lower, if that is possible. You will have divorced mothers collecting child support, alimony, divorce settlements, tax benefits, and possibly welfare like now. But heterosexual divorced mothers will marry each other for additional cash incentives, including tax breaks and lower insurance costs.

They will just have a revolving door of boyfriends coming and going, and nobody is going to make sure the two mothers are having sex with each other. Heterosexual divorced fathers will have to marry each other to get the financial breaks in order to meet all of their support burdens and stay out of Uncle Sam's gay dungeon debtor's prisons.

What is does to children won't matter any more than now, because its the Bar Associations and the feminists that matter most. Gay marriage will help them both. Lawyers will make more money because fewer women will be able to resist the incentives to divorce, brining in more business than ever. Feminists will love it because women will live like queens without doing anything while men slave away just to stay out of prison. It will be a feminist utopia.

With no incentive to stay married and a financial windfall bonanza awaiting mothers as a reward for making fatherless children, a child being raised by his/her biological parents will be reserved for the fortunate few who have a mother unwilling cash them in just because the government rewards them for doing so, and turning dear old dad into a peon.

Food for thought, and I have discussed the idea of heterosexual same sex marriage in a number of posts.

But I'd like to know more about "Uncle Sam's gay dungeon debtor's prisons."

(Someone might be able to turn such a thing into a profit-making venture.)

posted by Eric on 06.13.06 at 09:09 AM





TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://classicalvalues.com/cgi-bin/pings.cgi/3700






Comments

I'm ignorant of divorce (not personally, but in the law). Can you explain, as a Great White Lawyer, how this scheme works? Because, I don't get why this would work, and divorcing one man and marrying another man (currently legal) wouldn't net the same benefits for the mother.

My big argument against gay marriage is just that, if we decide to say what types of relationships are OK and that that is up for debate, well, we're going to waste a damn long time debating it. I'd prefer just letting people set up their own binding contracts, but that's the hopeless libertarian in me.

Jon Thompson   ·  June 14, 2006 04:50 AM

I agree with your view of SSM.

But "Great White Lawyer"? Don't you mean Great White Shark?

:)

I can't vouch for what was in the commenter's mind, but he might have been thinking about tax loopholes. Same sex marriage would allow any two men to marry and reduce their tax burdens accordingly, without the hassle that often comes from opposite sex marriage. While there might not be love or sex, isn't that also true of many existing marriages?

I think same sex marriages might lead to new IRS rules -- with similar scrutiny to that used by the INS in determining whether a marriage to an immigrant is a "bona fide" marriage.

But what is a "bona fide" marriage? Won't this inviting further state scrutiny?

Eric Scheie   ·  June 14, 2006 11:35 AM

http://www.mediumstor-kvinnlig-student.knu11a.com |
oerfaren servitris |
[URL=http://www.behaglig-galleri.knu11a.com]behaglig galleri[/URL] |

we   ·  June 20, 2006 05:21 AM


December 2006
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31            

ANCIENT (AND MODERN)
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR


Search the Site


E-mail




Classics To Go

Classical Values PDA Link



Archives




Recent Entries



Links



Site Credits