Yesterday it was Senator Bob Casey, today it’s Tom Carper. There are only seven Senate Dems who have yet to evolve on gay marriage - Heitkamp, Donnelly, Tim Johnson, Landrieu, Manchin, Pryor and Nelson.

Via Sen. Tom Carper:

As our society has changed and evolved, so too has the public’s opinion on gay marriage – and so has mine. I pray every day for God to grant me the wisdom to do what is right. Through my prayers and conversations with my family and countless friends and Delawareans, I’ve been reminded of the power of one of my core values: the Golden Rule. It calls on us to treat others as we want to be treated. That means, to me, that all Americans ultimately should be free to marry the people they love and intend to share their lives with, regardless of their sexual orientation, and that’s why today, after a great deal of soul searching, I’m endorsing marriage equality.

http://weaselzippers.us/2013/04/02/comic...test-to-evolve/

Zitat

---

That means, to me, that all Americans ultimately should be free to marry the people they love and intend to share their lives with,

---

Do these assholes realize they are also endorsing Polygamy with these evolutions? There is no half step in this direction if you believe in gay marriage.

Quote: Eglman wrote in post #1

---

Via Sen. Tom Carper:

That means, to me, that all Americans ultimately should be free to marry the people they love and intend to share their lives with, regardless of their sexual orientation, and that’s why today, after a great deal of soul searching, I’m endorsing marriage equality.

---

Quote: Frank Cannon wrote in post #2

---

Zitat

---

That means, to me, that all Americans ultimately should be free to marry the people they love and intend to share their lives with,

---

Do these asshole realize they are also endorsing Polygamy with these evolutions? There is no half step in this direction if you believe in gay marriage.

---

Exactly. What is the difference between "Adam & Steve" and "Adam & Eve & Susan & Mary & Kate"?

The tax implications would have to be addressed so that there is no more than one IRS marriage tax deduction for every two people in the polygamous marriage.

On constitutional grounds, it could be argued that four wives nagging at you at the same time would violate your Eighth Amendment protection against "cruel and unusual punishment".

Quote: Justme wrote in post #4

---

Odd. We keep hearing how no one cares about this issue

---

Even though some people deny it, there's many homosexuals that are born being attracted to the same sex. My husband's nephew has been the same way since he was born. He's lived with another man for several years and of course, they can't marry.
Even though marriage between the two is not acceptable to my beliefs, I do think some kind of civil union would be the right thing to do.
The only thing....that's not what they want. Homosexuals want to use the word marriage and nothing else will do.

If it's approved by the courts, what is to happen when they ask my southern baptist preacher to marry them & he refuses to do it on his own personal religious beliefs? Are the homosexual's belief suppose to trump my pastor's belief? Or mine?

This is the question that I would like answered because if the answer is yes, our churches will be destroyed in the process.

Quote: Olivia wrote in post #9

---

This is the question that I would like answered because if the answer is yes, our churches will be destroyed in the process.

---

Quote: Polybius wrote in post #7

---

Quote: Justme wrote in post #4

---

Odd. We keep hearing how no one cares about this issue

---

As long as "married" couples and "single" couples are treated differently by the Federal Government in regards to Federal income taxes and inheritance taxes, millions of people are going to care because a lot of money is involved.

If a "married" heterosexual spouse dies, the other spouse inherits everything, tax-free. If a homosexual partner dies, the Federal Government takes a giant bite out of the inheritance left to the surviving partner.

Once you mix up monetary interests with religious beliefs, the fireworks fly. I fully understand the gays wanting protection against the IRS. I also understand that the term "Marriage" has a religious significance that should be respected. That is why I favor the Government dealing only with "Civil Unions" (tax and inheritance matters) for everybody and leaving the "definition of marriage" to each individual Church.

---

Quote: Mechanicos wrote in post #11

---

Quote: Polybius wrote in post #7

---

As long as "married" couples and "single" couples are treated differently by the Federal Government in regards to Federal income taxes and inheritance taxes, millions of people are going to care because a lot of money is involved.

If a "married" heterosexual spouse dies, the other spouse inherits everything, tax-free. If a homosexual partner dies, the Federal Government takes a giant bite out of the inheritance left to the surviving partner.

Once you mix up monetary interests with religious beliefs, the fireworks fly. I fully understand the gays wanting protection against the IRS. I also understand that the term "Marriage" has a religious significance that should be respected. That is why I favor the Government dealing only with "Civil Unions" (tax and inheritance matters) for everybody and leaving the "definition of marriage" to each individual Church.

---

This is not true. Adults of any sex can contract with each other to avoid tax pitfalls, share benefits, allocate rights, etc. Example titling property in both names with right of survialship. No death tax or estate issues as its already owned in tenancy in common... Marriage is for children not adults, its why there are blood tests and siblings can't marry in most states.

---

Zitat

---

http://www.e-personalfinance.com/estate-planning/what-is-a-joint-tenancy-with-right-of-survivorship-jtwros

What Is a Joint Tenancy with Right of Survivorship (JTWROS)?

JTWROS is different from any other way for two or more people to own property because it gives all joint tenants the "right of survivorship." This means that if one of the joint tenants dies, his or her share automatically goes to the other joint tenant(s) who survives. .....

Some of the benefits of a JTWROS include the following:

-- Each party has an equal share in the property. If there are two owners, each owns 50%; three owners would each own 33.33%; four owners would each own 25%, etc.

-- Each owner can sell, mortgage, borrow on, or devise his or her share of the property; however, that owner must have the permission of all the other owners to do so.

-- Unlike many other types of ownership, JTWROS owners do not have to be married to each other or even related.

-- There are usually no costs associated with the transfer of the property from the owner to the survivor(s).

The main benefit of a JTWROS is that upon the death of one joint tenant, no probate administration is required to transfer the property. The property automatically passes to the surviving joint tenant(s), hence avoiding the expense and delay of probate court.

The Disadvantages of a Joint Tenancy with Right of Survivorship

Some of the disadvantages of JTWROS include the following:

-- In some situations, other legal proceedings besides probate court will be required to properly terminate a joint tenancy with right of survivorship interest—including the determination of inheritance taxes due, clearing the property of inheritance tax liens, and placing a record of it in the survivor’s name.

-- JTWROS is not a way to avoid paying taxes. Federal estate taxes and state inheritance taxes must still be paid on interests received and may result in gift taxes.

-- Before a property can be sold, mortgaged, borrowed on, or devised by one owner, permission from the other owners must be garnered.

---

Quote: Polybius wrote in post #12

---

Quote: Mechanicos wrote in post #11

---

Quote: Polybius wrote in post #7

---

As long as "married" couples and "single" couples are treated differently by the Federal Government in regards to Federal income taxes and inheritance taxes, millions of people are going to care because a lot of money is involved.

If a "married" heterosexual spouse dies, the other spouse inherits everything, tax-free. If a homosexual partner dies, the Federal Government takes a giant bite out of the inheritance left to the surviving partner.

Once you mix up monetary interests with religious beliefs, the fireworks fly. I fully understand the gays wanting protection against the IRS. I also understand that the term "Marriage" has a religious significance that should be respected. That is why I favor the Government dealing only with "Civil Unions" (tax and inheritance matters) for everybody and leaving the "definition of marriage" to each individual Church.

---

This is not true. Adults of any sex can contract with each other to avoid tax pitfalls, share benefits, allocate rights, etc. Example titling property in both names with right of survialship. No death tax or estate issues as its already owned in tenancy in common... Marriage is for children not adults, its why there are blood tests and siblings can't marry in most states.

---

That depends on how much money you are talking about, how complicated your finances are and what tax changes Congress is playing around with.

In 2013, the Death Tax Exclusion was supposed to have plummeted to $1 million. Now, the exclusion is $5.25 million. In the future, who knows what it will be. A year ago, with the looming repeal of all the Bush Tax cuts and the looming Death Tax, survivorship taxation issues were a very big incentive for "marriage" rights.

When Teresa Thierstein Simões-Ferreira married H. John Heinz III, he was worth hundreds of millions of dollars. When he died, Teresa Heinz inherited those hundreds of millions of dollars .... Tax free.

Without marriage, how would H. John Heinz III have been able to transfer those hundreds of millions of dollars in assets to Teresa prior to his death without triggering any gift taxes or inheritences taxes?

To avoid taxes, a partner would have to "gift" the assets but tax-free gifts are limited to $13,000 per year.

If one partner dies at a younger age, how does the surviving partner collect Federal Social Security death benefits?

In regards to titling property, Joint Tenancy with Right of Survivorship (JTWROS) requires each partner to own an equal share while living. While living, that share belongs to you and only to you. In a X-way partnership, you are a single owner that only legally owns 1/X of the property and not one of X owners each of which share 100% ownership of the property.

At death, the deceased partner's ownership percentage share automatically passes on to the other surviving partner or partners. That ownership transfer is automatic just as your direct deposit paycheck is automatic. However, "automatic transfer" does not mean "tax-free". When your ownsership share increases as a result of the death of a partner, that is a taxable event. In other words, JTWROS simply saves you from Probate hassles. JTWROS will NOT save you from the bite of the IRS.

If there are two partners, once your deceased partner's percentage share ownership of the JTWROS property is transfered to you, free of Probate hassle, the IRS will have it's hand out to collect the inheritance taxes that must still be paid on the 50% interest that you just received.

Today, with the $5.25 million exclusion, that is not such a big deal. A year ago, with the expiration of the Bush Tax cuts looming, it was a huge deal.

Zitat

---

http://www.e-personalfinance.com/estate-planning/what-is-a-joint-tenancy-with-right-of-survivorship-jtwros

What Is a Joint Tenancy with Right of Survivorship (JTWROS)?

JTWROS is different from any other way for two or more people to own property because it gives all joint tenants the "right of survivorship." This means that if one of the joint tenants dies, his or her share automatically goes to the other joint tenant(s) who survives. .....

Some of the benefits of a JTWROS include the following:

-- Each party has an equal share in the property. If there are two owners, each owns 50%; three owners would each own 33.33%; four owners would each own 25%, etc.

-- Each owner can sell, mortgage, borrow on, or devise his or her share of the property; however, that owner must have the permission of all the other owners to do so.

-- Unlike many other types of ownership, JTWROS owners do not have to be married to each other or even related.

-- There are usually no costs associated with the transfer of the property from the owner to the survivor(s).

The main benefit of a JTWROS is that upon the death of one joint tenant, no probate administration is required to transfer the property. The property automatically passes to the surviving joint tenant(s), hence avoiding the expense and delay of probate court.

The Disadvantages of a Joint Tenancy with Right of Survivorship

Some of the disadvantages of JTWROS include the following:

-- In some situations, other legal proceedings besides probate court will be required to properly terminate a joint tenancy with right of survivorship interest—including the determination of inheritance taxes due, clearing the property of inheritance tax liens, and placing a record of it in the survivor’s name.

-- JTWROS is not a way to avoid paying taxes. Federal estate taxes and state inheritance taxes must still be paid on interests received and may result in gift taxes.

-- Before a property can be sold, mortgaged, borrowed on, or devised by one owner, permission from the other owners must be garnered.

---

---

The exception is not the rule. I gave only one contract option that adults can do. There are so many other methods adults can use like Trusts, etc. The point is that Marriage has always been and is intended for the benefit of those who cannot legally negotiate or protect their rights. Adults have many many options to do the same things marriage does by mutual agreements.