From: Richard Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
patents. In the one case, the state gains the benefit of new citizens by granting tax breaks and other advantages to married couples. In the
I'm not a tax expert, but AFAIK, there aren't any tax breaks for being married
here in the US. In fact, it's generally been the opposite, where married people
can end up paying more tax than two equivalent single people would. I think
Bush's recent tax cuts may have reduced or eliminated the marriage penalty,
but I don't know if it would be justifiable to now consider it to be a tax break.
A friend of mine who is vaguely anti-SSM was just telling me that part of his
objection was because he perceived it as a big handout to a specialized interest
group, with no public benefits. I totally disagreed on several fronts, the most
pertinent (to his argument) being that I don't think SSM really entails much
additional governmental cost. As I see it, the primary benefits provided by
the government for marriage are in terms of the automatic legal rights and standings
it provides to married couples.
I believe these legal rights and standings aren't provided by the government
to reward baby production, or even as a "reward" at all, but because the government
is recognizing that marriage joins two people together as next of kin for all legal intents
and purposes.
_________________________________________________________________
Click, drag and drop. My MSN is the simple way to design your homepage. http://click.atdmt.com/AVE/go/onm00200364ave/direct/01/
_______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
