Ramifications of Same Sex Marriage

[Skylar]

So why haven't any of your ramifications actually happened? Same sex marriage has been legal in the US for 10 years depending on location. And nothing you've predicated has occurred.

Your record of predicting ramifications of same sex marriage is so far, a perfect failure.

They have, it appears that the only exclusions to marriage in Iowa is opposite sex, closely related with the exception of 1st cousins ( yes and great grandparents silly)

'Its appears', huh? Then where, pray tell, is a single instance of incestuous marriage in Iowa. Lets put your assumptions to the test.

I mean, Iowa crimianalizes incest, punishing it as a felony. And Iowa law explicitly forbids the recognition of marriages prohibited under the law.

Which incest is.

But if you've got this all figured out, then show us the consequences you claim must happen; a single legally recognized instance of incestuous marriage in Iowa.

And as an aside....do you understand how causation actually works? Because you're making wild predictions of the consequence of same sex marriage. With the legalization of same sex marriage causing all sorts of things to happen, including incestuous marriage.

But the Iowa law you 'appear' to be citing was passed in 1962. While same sex marriage was legalized first in 2005. With the Obergefell ruling coming down in 2015. See, the order of events is 'cause' and then effect'. First one and then the other.

What you're describing is effect....and then half a century later, cause. Um, I don't think 'ramifications' means what you think it means.

 

[Syriusly]

Essentially no.

Couple A has no children- estate of $3,000,000
Couple B has 12 children- estate of $3,000,000

Couple A has 1 spouse die- Surviving spouse inherits entire estate tax free.
Couple B has 1 spouse die- Surviving spouse inherits entire estate tax free

Both spouses get the exact same amount of money- regardless of children. Neither spouse has any obligation to use that money for children or share that money with children.

Other 'marriage benefits'? Visitation rights? Again- unrelated to children. Able to sign up for company medical benefits- again unrelated to children.

AND at no time did either couple spend any resources on raising these children?

You did say essentially no.

THEN YOU SPEAK OF $3,000,000 estate.

You do realize what the federal estate tax minimum is dude.

Not even close. Looks as though it's equal UNDER YOUR EXAMPLE

LOL.....Pop dancing with words.

Is everyone else enjoying watching Pops meltdown just because same gender couples can marry now in all 50 states as much as I am?

Not sure about that, but I sure am enjoying turning progressives into trolls.

So, if the wife and/or the children get exactly the same amount of cash, you've proved what?

The wives get the exact same amount of money- regardless of whether there are any children or not.

You do understand that children do not remain children, right? With you being the possible exception that is.

Once a child reaches the age of majority the parents (if they are biological always are male/female by the way) have no longer a financial obligation to them, with the obvious exclusion to those handicapped and Obamacare.

But you prattle on dude, you are chuckle worthy.

Well I indulge you in your prattling about your angst about same gender couples being able to marry now....so you can indulge me when I point out your foolishness.

 

[Syriusly]

So why haven't any of your ramifications actually happened? Same sex marriage has been legal in the US for 10 years depending on location. And nothing you've predicated has occurred.

Your record of predicting ramifications of same sex marriage is so far, a perfect failure.

They have, it appears that the only exclusions to marriage in Iowa is opposite sex, closely related with the exception of 1st cousins ( yes and great grandparents silly)

Hmmm why do you find 'grandparents' germaine- but great grandparents 'silly'?

I mean other than 'great grandparents' doesn't suit your silly thesis?

 

[Pop23]

So why haven't any of your ramifications actually happened? Same sex marriage has been legal in the US for 10 years depending on location. And nothing you've predicated has occurred.

Your record of predicting ramifications of same sex marriage is so far, a perfect failure.

They have, it appears that the only exclusions to marriage in Iowa is opposite sex, closely related with the exception of 1st cousins ( yes and great grandparents silly)

Hmmm why do you find 'grandparents' germaine- but great grandparents 'silly'?

I mean other than 'great grandparents' doesn't suit your silly thesis?

Except, that using ordinal number, a great grandparent is simply the 2nd grandparent.

And a male grandparent is prohibited from marrying a female that is closely related.

Next?

 

[Syriusly]

So why haven't any of your ramifications actually happened? Same sex marriage has been legal in the US for 10 years depending on location. And nothing you've predicated has occurred.

Your record of predicting ramifications of same sex marriage is so far, a perfect failure.

They have, it appears that the only exclusions to marriage in Iowa is opposite sex, closely related with the exception of 1st cousins ( yes and great grandparents silly)

Hmmm why do you find 'grandparents' germaine- but great grandparents 'silly'?

I mean other than 'great grandparents' doesn't suit your silly thesis?

Appears I got that right.

 

[Pop23]

So why haven't any of your ramifications actually happened? Same sex marriage has been legal in the US for 10 years depending on location. And nothing you've predicated has occurred.

Your record of predicting ramifications of same sex marriage is so far, a perfect failure.

They have, it appears that the only exclusions to marriage in Iowa is opposite sex, closely related with the exception of 1st cousins ( yes and great grandparents silly)

Hmmm why do you find 'grandparents' germaine- but great grandparents 'silly'?

I mean other than 'great grandparents' doesn't suit your silly thesis?

Appears I got that right.

You posted to soon, I just kicked your donkey ass again

Don't get two down on yourself, Maryland progressive was saying something about marrying s mule!


Because you will say something stupid if I don't link to how ordinal numbers in the law, here's a link dummy:

Ordinal Numbers Law Legal Definition

 

[Pop23]

So why haven't any of your ramifications actually happened? Same sex marriage has been legal in the US for 10 years depending on location. And nothing you've predicated has occurred.

Your record of predicting ramifications of same sex marriage is so far, a perfect failure.

They have, it appears that the only exclusions to marriage in Iowa is opposite sex, closely related with the exception of 1st cousins ( yes and great grandparents silly)

'Its appears', huh? Then where, pray tell, is a single instance of incestuous marriage in Iowa. Lets put your assumptions to the test.

I mean, Iowa crimianalizes incest, punishing it as a felony. And Iowa law explicitly forbids the recognition of marriages prohibited under the law.

Which incest is.

But if you've got this all figured out, then show us the consequences you claim must happen; a single legally recognized instance of incestuous marriage in Iowa.

And as an aside....do you understand how causation actually works? Because you're making wild predictions of the consequence of same sex marriage. With the legalization of same sex marriage causing all sorts of things to happen, including incestuous marriage.

But the Iowa law you 'appear' to be citing was passed in 1962. While same sex marriage was legalized first in 2005. With the Obergefell ruling coming down in 2015. See, the order of events is 'cause' and then effect'. First one and then the other.

What you're describing is effect....and then half a century later, cause. Um, I don't think 'ramifications' means what you think it means.

Provide an example of how a same sex straight couple performs an incestuous act?

This should be funny.

 

[Syriusly]

So why haven't any of your ramifications actually happened? Same sex marriage has been legal in the US for 10 years depending on location. And nothing you've predicated has occurred.

Your record of predicting ramifications of same sex marriage is so far, a perfect failure.

They have, it appears that the only exclusions to marriage in Iowa is opposite sex, closely related with the exception of 1st cousins ( yes and great grandparents silly)

Hmmm why do you find 'grandparents' germaine- but great grandparents 'silly'?

I mean other than 'great grandparents' doesn't suit your silly thesis?

Appears I got that right.

You posted to soon, I just kicked your donkey ass again

by 'to soon' you mean- after you posted?

You imagining your are kicking anyone's ass is just amusing.

 

[Syriusly]

So why haven't any of your ramifications actually happened? Same sex marriage has been legal in the US for 10 years depending on location. And nothing you've predicated has occurred.

Your record of predicting ramifications of same sex marriage is so far, a perfect failure.

They have, it appears that the only exclusions to marriage in Iowa is opposite sex, closely related with the exception of 1st cousins ( yes and great grandparents silly)

Hmmm why do you find 'grandparents' germaine- but great grandparents 'silly'?

I mean other than 'great grandparents' doesn't suit your silly thesis?

Except, that using ordinal number, a great grandparent is simply the 2nd grandparent.

And a male grandparent is prohibited from marrying a female that is closely related.

Next?

So you are just repeating what I said- you find a great grandparent marrying a great granddaughter 'silly' but a grandfather marrying his granddaughter....'not silly'.

Because Iowa thought to make one illegal- but not the other.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

I firmly oppose incestuous marriage and have been struggling to find a legal basis as to how many incestuous marriages could be banned. I've been called foolish, but it appears it's already legal in at least one state, or at least, not prohibited, if I read the statute correctly.

The link below is to the State of Iowa code addressing who is eligible to marry:

Iowa Code 595.19

Did you notice that only opposite gender closely related individuals are listed as those prohibited to Marry? Same sex closely related relatives are not prohibited from marriage.

The law was written prior to same sex marriage being ruled legal obviously, but it is now the law.

This creates an interesting paradox.

A straight farmer, looking to pass his farm onto his son without the burdon of the inheritance tax could simply Marry his son and POOF, no inheritance tax, but he could not do that with his daughter?

I came across this odd situation from a brief submitted to the ninth circuit, and apparently ignored. That lead me to research if anyone thought that same sex siblings actually wanted the right.

In a marriage equality forum a couple of people posted that they were in same sex sibling relationships and were upset that they could not Marry as other same sex couples now could.

It also appears that several other states have similar laws to Iowa, and others define incest as vaginal penetration.

What a mess we made.

If you follow your link to 595.2 it says

1. Only a marriage between a male and a female is valid.

...so your link appears to be obsolete.

If you check Idaho's website, it also states that same sex marriages are not valid or recognized. The Supreme Court overturned all bans on same sex marriage, but that doesn't mean the laws are instantly rewritten in every state. Each state legislature has the task of changing their laws to comply with the Supreme Court's ruling and a website link is going to reflect the legal language of the pre-existing law until it is changed officially.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Darn, it doesn't prohibit them from marrying their mule, either...

Sounds like a Lib paradise!!!!

wait, I can marry my mule?
Finally, I can come out of the barn.

If this was Colorado, you and your mule could also take a trip without leaving the farm!!

True story

I wish you both great happiness in you're future together (I guess)

It's interesting because mules can't reproduce either. What a fitting mascot for SSM.

 

[Pop23]

I freaking conceed, the statute is written in a manner that great grandparents are not excluded!