You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Reply #92: But that fraud/abuse is directed towards the partner, not the government. [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
wickerwoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-10-09 03:12 PM
Response to Reply #88
92. But that fraud/abuse is directed towards the partner, not the government.
Edited on Fri Apr-10-09 03:13 PM by wickerwoman
Seriously, I would be thrilled if the government legalized state-sanctioned plural marriage. I could line up at least fifteen to twenty Chinese husbands and wives tomorrow at $10,000 a pop, I could net $150-200,000 in a year by filling out paperwork. That's just people I personally know who would jump at the opportunity. I'm sure they have friends and relatives and I could make 10-20x as much. But there's no way in hell that the government is going to do this because it would destroy the entire current immigration framework.

Likewise, I know a couple vets who would marry me so I could get their spousal benefits if I cut them in on part of it and I could go to college forever for free on the government dime. And so could everyone else. And since everyone in America could marry a single vet and go to college on his/her benefit scheme no one would be working or paying taxes. How long would society go on at that rate?

And, like I said above, I don't think it's a bad thing to force some of these larger partnerships into pairs for legal purposes since it's inherently dangerous to have a large number of people dependent on a single person for financial support, health care, citizenship, welfare, social security etc. If eight people want to get married, more power to them. They can arrange it anyway they want within their own home and religious community. But when they register for benefits they need to do it as four pairs of benefit-holders/dependents not as one benefit holder with seven dependents.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
  -Should Polyandry and Polygamy be Legal. Pryderi  Apr-08-09 08:34 PM   #0 
  - No,  smalll   Apr-08-09 08:53 PM   #1 
  - lot of marriages with just 2 partners devalues women too..  Mari333   Apr-08-09 09:01 PM   #6 
  - those "choices" will be made in the context of existing power arrangements.  Hannah Bell   Apr-09-09 04:49 AM   #41 
  - Deleted message  Name removed   Apr-08-09 09:03 PM   #7 
  - That's funny, considering you got ripped about four new assholes in your last thread  Occam Bandage   Apr-08-09 09:16 PM   #13 
  - He's an expert now.  tekisui   Apr-08-09 09:20 PM   #22 
  - I've become more enlightened since last night. ;)  Pryderi   Apr-08-09 09:21 PM   #23 
  - No I didn't address polyandry -- because it has been exceedingly rare in the history of humanity.  smalll   Apr-08-09 09:18 PM   #16 
     - Your replies are thoughtful and interesting.  Matariki   Apr-09-09 12:23 PM   #62 
  - delete. replied to wrong subthread  Smith_3   Apr-09-09 04:00 AM   #34 
  - I don't care who gets married as long as it's not me and as long as  Warpy   Apr-08-09 08:55 PM   #2 
  - And if "Mommy Rabbit' wants to hop on top of mulitple "Daddy Rabbits", that's fine  Pryderi   Apr-08-09 09:00 PM   #5 
  - Younger talent?  Kalyke   Apr-09-09 12:05 PM   #58 
     - No, men in search of lost youth devalue women  Warpy   Apr-09-09 12:30 PM   #63 
  - I think only Polyandry should be legal  Canuckistanian   Apr-08-09 08:59 PM   #3 
  - Oh boy........  marmar   Apr-08-09 09:00 PM   #4 
  - Only if the partners agree to sterilization. It fucks up the kids. NT  MADem   Apr-08-09 09:10 PM   #8 
  - Does gay adoption "fuck up the kids"?  Pryderi   Apr-08-09 09:12 PM   #10 
     - Oh geez...  SemiCharmedQuark   Apr-08-09 09:16 PM   #14 
     - No, because they have two parents in a committed relationship.  MADem   Apr-08-09 09:19 PM   #18 
        - Probably the same number of disaffected princesses  verdalaven   Apr-09-09 04:50 AM   #42 
  - As a practice, it's obviously already legal (in most states)  htuttle   Apr-08-09 09:11 PM   #9 
  - Oh godamn...  Texasgal   Apr-08-09 09:12 PM   #11 
  - So he can't start a thread comparing polygamy to gay marriage, but  Occam Bandage   Apr-08-09 09:15 PM   #12 
  - Afraid of being hypocritical?  Pryderi   Apr-08-09 09:17 PM   #15 
  - Nope. There are many good reasons to ban polygamy.  Occam Bandage   Apr-08-09 09:20 PM   #21 
  - And polyandry?  Pryderi   Apr-08-09 09:22 PM   #24 
     - Extraordinarily rare. nt  Occam Bandage   Apr-08-09 09:24 PM   #26 
        - I don't think the issue is if it's rare  JonLP24   Apr-09-09 11:55 AM   #51 
  - I don't think you know what that word means.  Richard Steele   Apr-08-09 09:23 PM   #25 
  - At least he hasn't brought "man on dog" into it.  Ken Burch   Apr-09-09 04:06 AM   #38 
  - Whoof!  davidpdx   Apr-10-09 08:26 AM   #89 
  - +1  Midlodemocrat   Apr-09-09 11:50 AM   #48 
  - that would be called Pollygamy  omega minimo   Apr-09-09 03:07 PM   #69 
  - It depends  notesdev   Apr-08-09 09:19 PM   #17 
  - sure, why not?  northzax   Apr-08-09 09:19 PM   #19 
  - Sure ... legal grounds to be declared insane.  TahitiNut   Apr-08-09 09:20 PM   #20 
  - As long as it's between consenting adults, yes.  AnnieBW   Apr-08-09 09:29 PM   #27 
  - The "shit about marrying underage women" is part and parcel.  Occam Bandage   Apr-08-09 09:35 PM   #30 
  - What an enormous broad brush.  Lyric   Apr-09-09 04:14 AM   #39 
  - Well said Lyric  shadowknows69   Apr-09-09 04:39 AM   #40 
  - Hmmmm  PatGund   Apr-09-09 11:53 AM   #50 
  - As far as human's being monagamous isn't true  JonLP24   Apr-09-09 11:59 AM   #53 
  - Nice broad brush you got there  Hugabear   Apr-09-09 12:10 PM   #59 
  - Well said, Occam! nt  Kitty Herder   Apr-09-09 04:35 PM   #72 
  - I disagree  MadrasT   Apr-09-09 06:10 PM   #79 
  - As long as it's AMONG consenting adults you mean.  Silent3   Apr-09-09 11:57 AM   #52 
     - Busted...  AnnieBW   Apr-10-09 08:27 PM   #93 
  - Polygamy yes, polyandry no.  Renew Deal   Apr-08-09 09:32 PM   #28 
  - Polyandry is a kind of polygamy.  Kitty Herder   Apr-09-09 04:43 PM   #75 
  - between consenting adults, yes nt  WolverineDG   Apr-08-09 09:34 PM   #29 
  - I don't think it should be legal OR criminal.  Systematic Chaos   Apr-08-09 09:45 PM   #31 
  - The word "consenting" gets thrown around a lot here  Believing Is Art   Apr-08-09 09:53 PM   #32 
  - Here's the flip side to old&fat versus young&hot  XemaSab   Apr-09-09 04:55 AM   #43 
  - And that's supposed to be a good thing?  Believing Is Art   Apr-09-09 11:48 AM   #47 
  - That would NEVER happen.  Kalyke   Apr-09-09 12:11 PM   #60 
  - Never?  Believing Is Art   Apr-09-09 08:15 PM   #86 
  - No woman deserves that.  Kitty Herder   Apr-09-09 04:39 PM   #73 
  - And the guy didn't get old in that scenario? And this is different from monogamy how?  Matariki   Apr-09-09 07:10 PM   #83 
  - No; have you ever even tried to give decent reasons why it should be?  muriel_volestrangler   Apr-09-09 03:36 AM   #33 
  - No. Monogamy is to sex what socialism is to wealth.  Smith_3   Apr-09-09 04:01 AM   #35 
  - Interesting take... this thread reminded me of the 'Lost Boys' issue.  redqueen   Apr-09-09 12:00 PM   #55 
  - I agree. Harems contribute to social instability and injustice.  lumberjack_jeff   Apr-09-09 02:22 PM   #66 
  - If all the adults in the party consent to multiple husbands/wives...  Lucian   Apr-09-09 04:01 AM   #36 
  - Because there are lots of legal issues involved that a marriage between  cali   Apr-09-09 12:01 PM   #56 
  - Too much of a risk of the guy getting shot.  Ken Burch   Apr-09-09 04:01 AM   #37 
  - Hell, I'd shoot a man for even suggesting such an arrangement.  Kitty Herder   Apr-09-09 04:41 PM   #74 
     - Well, there's that.  Ken Burch   Apr-09-09 07:13 PM   #84 
  - kick  wuushew   Apr-09-09 09:55 AM   #44 
  - We actually have a serious issue here in NYC--West African immigrants  HamdenRice   Apr-09-09 10:00 AM   #45 
  - Dupe  HamdenRice   Apr-09-09 10:00 AM   #46 
  - I don't care if it is or not. Should it be legal? Don't really care.  TexasObserver   Apr-09-09 11:51 AM   #49 
  - Consenting adults...sure.  FedUpWithIt All   Apr-09-09 12:00 PM   #54 
  - What about the legal complications? A marriage involving more than  cali   Apr-09-09 12:12 PM   #61 
     - That's why God made lawyers  shadowknows69   Apr-09-09 02:41 PM   #67 
     - Legal complications are not good enough justification to refuse people the right to marry/love  FedUpWithIt All   Apr-09-09 06:02 PM   #78 
        - They have the right to marry/love.  wickerwoman   Apr-10-09 02:49 PM   #91 
  - I don't know.  closeupready   Apr-09-09 12:03 PM   #57 
  - Uh, polyandry *is* polygamy  Lilith Velkor   Apr-09-09 01:26 PM   #64 
  - polygamy is its own punishment  rampart   Apr-09-09 01:59 PM   #65 
  - It IS legal.  NorthernSpy   Apr-09-09 02:51 PM   #68 
  - You should be able to live with anyone you want  wickerwoman   Apr-09-09 03:22 PM   #70 
  - So even if three people spend their lives together  shadowknows69   Apr-09-09 04:00 PM   #71 
     - What's the alternative?  wickerwoman   Apr-09-09 05:38 PM   #76 
        - That would be one less barrier to the free flow of labor across borders  wuushew   Apr-09-09 06:10 PM   #80 
        - The fraud and abuse goes on anyways between two people  shadowknows69   Apr-10-09 08:11 AM   #88 
           - But that fraud/abuse is directed towards the partner, not the government.  wickerwoman   Apr-10-09 03:12 PM   #92 
  - Long as they aren't hurting anyone people can do what they want  walldude   Apr-09-09 06:01 PM   #77 
  - Should be left up to the states. nt  anonymous171   Apr-09-09 06:16 PM   #81 
  - No, but I wouldn't complain about a threesome every now and then.;-)  TheManInTheMac   Apr-09-09 06:17 PM   #82 
  - Everyone should be in one at least once  shadowknows69   Apr-10-09 09:58 AM   #90 
  - Do you mean "should the state recognise multiple marriages" or "should polyamoury by legal"?  Donald Ian Rankin   Apr-09-09 07:57 PM   #85 
  - I always say  underseasurveyor   Apr-09-09 09:05 PM   #87 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC