• Flax
    link
    fedilink
    English
    219 hours ago

    That’s a whole abuse of the purpose of marriage, though

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      11
      edit-2
      19 hours ago

      A loop hole that is technically correct is still correct.

      What is the purpose of marriage?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        217 hours ago

        Legally it is a shortcut to establishment of a number of implied contracts, tells the courts how to unwind those contracts, and rights. In some cases the implied contracts are more effective than written ones. Medical decisions and visitation rights being first ones I can think of.

        I sm not a lawyer.

      • Flax
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -417 hours ago

        Two people bound together for life for the purposes of creating a family

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          14 hours ago

          “You shouldn’t use marriage to stop yourself being legally chained to your parents. The purpose of marriage is to legally chain you to your spouse.”

          If people could “divorce” their parents you wouldn’t have to worry about this.

        • @Ledivin
          link
          112 hours ago

          Yeah, you can miss me with the religious bullshit. This is a legal loophole in a legal system.

          • Flax
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -111 hours ago

            If it was for religious reasons, I would have specified it as a “man and a woman”

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              28 hours ago

              Then what is your basis for it only being between two people? You’re defining it just like religion does because that’s where you got the idea even if you don’t realize it.

          • Flax
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -414 hours ago

            Only as a last resort. You shouldn’t get married without intending to stay together for life.

        • Dragon Rider (drag)
          link
          fedilink
          English
          012 hours ago

          Only two? That seems needlessly restrictive. Is it for religious reasons? Church and state should be separated.

          • Flax
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -1
            edit-2
            11 hours ago

            If it was for religious reasons, I would have specified it as a “man and a woman”

            Also, if it’s more than two, that’s not a marriage; that’s a group chat.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      3
      edit-2
      17 hours ago

      You’re thinking about this all wrong. The age of marriage and childbearing have been going up. Think of the kids who would just decide fuck it might as well just stay married and do this. This could be the arranged marriage of the future.