Apparently there is some division in the commentariat as to whether or not this shouldn't be an acceptable form of marriage.
I believe everyone has the right to marry, regardless of sexual preference. For some people being alone is what feels most natural. Shouldn't they too be entitled to tax breaks?Sure, why not? And this way no one will ever interfere with their right to visit their spouse in the hospital.
(I also like the suggestion that this approach to marriage really streamlines the adultery process.)
I guess we've reached the point that the two-parent family has been so completely undercut that no one remembers why married couples were given tax breaks at all. If mostly we're raising kids with single or divorced parents, what's the point? In fact, it's downright unfair: the married couple already has natural advantages. They shouldn't get a tax break, too: the tax breaks should go to the ones who are doing it the hard way. (As, indeed, they already mostly do, since EITC is tied to relative poverty, and poverty correlates strongly with these "hard way" types of families.)
2 comments:
Next, celibate people will be demanding tax credits for not needing birth control or maternity/paternity leave from work. (Although providing proof of celibacy night be tricky. Getting men to claim their celibate tax credit would also be a bit challenging, from what I've been told ;) )
You know, I keep thinking we've reached the maximum societal level of weirdness, and I keep being surprised.
LittleRed1
"I guess we've reached the point that the two-parent family has been so completely undercut that no one remembers why married couples were given tax breaks at all."
Ding! Ding! Ding!
That's it exactly. Perhaps this is precisely the sort of development that allows us to open minds back up to the explanation that the traditional way was worth keeping intact, as they can see that it's truly getting preposterous. Maybe.
Post a Comment