California Ghey Marriage

[Tommy]

Steve,

A person can enter into three different legal partnerships with three different people. If it turns out that doing the right thing in one partnership puts pressure on another partnership, that's life. If one of the partnerships goes sour and ends up in court for settlement, that's not unusual. If government would get out of the business of defining marriage and let each pair of adults define their relationship and legal entanglement as they choose, we would be much better off. .... When I grew up in the deep south, the Christian majority considered it immoral to operate a business on Sunday, so there were Blue Laws that prohibited businesses from opeing on Sunday. It didn't matter that some business owners and customers were not Christians and didn't consider opening on Sunday to be immoral. I have no problem with laws that exist to protect public safety, but I don't like laws that attempt to impose the majority's moral standards just because they are the majority.

[VRM]

Tommy,
I don't like government being involved either. But they are, and I don't really see any way for them to get out of it.
One of the problems I see would be a Terry Shiavo type case (another waste of government money and time) where one spouse wants to pull the life support plug and the other does not. You can't even do a King Solomon solution because one of them is trying for that result.

Steve

[computerworks]

Originally Posted by VRM

.... You can't even do a King David solution ...

...King Solomon?

[VRM]

Originally Posted by computerworks

...King Solomon?

Yep...thanks for the correction.

[Tommy]

Here are three examples of the "husband on life support" situation and each has a reasonable solution if government allows the people to define their legal relationship.

Example 1: Man signs agreement with Wife One giving her legal power over his care if he is incapacitated. His agreements with Wife Two and Wife Three do not give them that power.

Example 2: Man signs agreements with all three wives giving them joint power to decide his care if he is incapacitated. Best two out of three wives decides.

Example 3: Man signs agreements with all three wives giving each power over his care if incapacitated, but foolishly does not specify how to resolve disagreements. In case of a dispute a court would decide whether the first or last agreement superceded the others, or whether the majority would decide. It would not be unlike a case where an ailing father has no wife but has two children who disagree on his care. As long as the legislative and executive branches don't inject themselves into the situation for political reasons, the problem is resolved.