The Federal Government Has No Business in Marriage

Let us cut to the chase.  This gay marriage issue is all about money.  It is about tax treatment and spousal benefits, both corporate and federal.

If I hear a liberal say one more time that two people should have the right to love and live together, I will fill a bucket.  No one -- nothing -- is stopping them now.

If the federal government had kept its nose outside the marriage tent, there would be no issue.  No 14th amendment argument.  No SCOTUS ruling.  If the people of a state wish to make "special" concessions for married people, thus eventually being forced to pick up the gay marriage gauntlet, have at it.

Let those states who choose to do so offer marriage benefits and even require corporations to do the same.  Let it be local.  And let the people and corporations vote on the issue and, if need be, vote with their feet (i.e., leave).

The word "marriage" can not be found in the Constitution, and especially not in Article I, Section 8.

Joint tax returns, Social Security spousal survival benefits, estate tax treatment, etc. are all special federal treatments for married people.  What's the point?  It would be a good idea to revisit this notion if and when the tax code is ever reworked.

But in the meantime, let's be certain.  It's about money.  They don't want to talk about that.  The emotion and the inherent unfairness of it all is the framing of the issue they choose.  These are the pillars of the liberal world, not money, for heaven's sake.  Money is something only Republicans care about. Pardon my mirth.

Bruce Johnson

 

Let us cut to the chase.  This gay marriage issue is all about money.  It is about tax treatment and spousal benefits, both corporate and federal.

If I hear a liberal say one more time that two people should have the right to love and live together, I will fill a bucket.  No one -- nothing -- is stopping them now.

If the federal government had kept its nose outside the marriage tent, there would be no issue.  No 14th amendment argument.  No SCOTUS ruling.  If the people of a state wish to make "special" concessions for married people, thus eventually being forced to pick up the gay marriage gauntlet, have at it.

Let those states who choose to do so offer marriage benefits and even require corporations to do the same.  Let it be local.  And let the people and corporations vote on the issue and, if need be, vote with their feet (i.e., leave).

The word "marriage" can not be found in the Constitution, and especially not in Article I, Section 8.

Joint tax returns, Social Security spousal survival benefits, estate tax treatment, etc. are all special federal treatments for married people.  What's the point?  It would be a good idea to revisit this notion if and when the tax code is ever reworked.

But in the meantime, let's be certain.  It's about money.  They don't want to talk about that.  The emotion and the inherent unfairness of it all is the framing of the issue they choose.  These are the pillars of the liberal world, not money, for heaven's sake.  Money is something only Republicans care about. Pardon my mirth.

Bruce Johnson

 

RECENT VIDEOS