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.
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.
A loop hole that is technically correct is still correct.
What is the purpose of marriage?
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.
Two people bound together for life for the purposes of creating a family
“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.
Yeah, you can miss me with the religious bullshit. This is a legal loophole in a legal system.
If it was for religious reasons, I would have specified it as a “man and a woman”
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.
So divorce shouldn’t be allowed in this philosophy?
Only as a last resort. You shouldn’t get married without intending to stay together for life.
Only two? That seems needlessly restrictive. Is it for religious reasons? Church and state should be separated.
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.
You still didn’t explain why.