11–20 of 77 posts
[flagged]
So... they've gone from "gays go into camps" to "gays can have all the rights of family". That sounds like progress to be celebrated to me. It's sixty years later and things are getting better, hooray? I mean, any discussion of shit getting better in the USA sure has a laundry list of atrocities you can dig up too.
To date no "most progressive family law in the world" has touched the legalization of polyamory; why so? The only thing that comes to mind is that it would become too convenient a loophole to escape taxes.
The other funny thing was that the people against gay marriage by and large were also against inheritance taxes, so you'd think they'd applaud a new loophole.
[flagged]
Lots of countries were doing very bad things 60 years ago. Lots of countries were doing very bad things yesterday. That shouldn't stop us from celebrating when one of those countries stops doing those bad things or makes progress to treat people more fairly.
To date no "most progressive family law in the world" has touched the legalization of polyamory; why so? The only thing that comes to mind is that it would become too convenient a loophole to escape taxes.
To date no "most progressive family law in the world" has touched the legalization of polyamory; why so? The only thing that comes to mind is that it would become too convenient a loophole to escape taxes.
When the US legalized gay marriage (at least for now), one of the talking points against it was that men could marry their sons to avoid the inheritance tax, the same idea you are talking about. But the fact is fathers could marry their daughters and mothers could marry their sons to avoid taxes before that law was passed, yet it wasn't done. It was all just a smokescreen. The other funny thing was that the people ag…
No fathers cannot marry their children. Nor can mothers. That is illegal in every state I believe.
To date no "most progressive family law in the world" has touched the legalization of polyamory; why so? The only thing that comes to mind is that it would become too convenient a loophole to escape taxes.
To date no "most progressive family law in the world" has touched the legalization of polyamory; why so? The only thing that comes to mind is that it would become too convenient a loophole to escape taxes.
To date no "most progressive family law in the world" has touched the legalization of polyamory; why so? The only thing that comes to mind is that it would become too convenient a loophole to escape taxes.
Abuse and violence.
Maybe a more digestible resource: https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/cubans-split-over-mor... My quick read seems to me that these are things that exist in most developed Western societies today: same sex marriage, equal sharing of domestic responsibilities, prenuptial agreements, assisted pregnancy. There's probably more to it - but probably the more significant news is these concepts are taking root in Cuba?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Abuse and violence.
Logically I don't see how a n>2 person marriage would be more likely to be abusive than a two person marriage.
Therefore, introducing additional genetically unrelated adults into a family would likely increase the risk of child abuse.