@Elizafox ...Whoa, you're right. Huh. Never thought about that...

@Skirmisher yeah

basically by collorary:

you're taxed for not getting married and having kids

@Elizafox @Skirmisher
When I run my own country* marriage won't be a state thing but you can incorporate, just like a company, to get a tax break -- on the basis that the state should encourage long-term relationships, because good for kids & spiritual growth.

* don't ask.

@Skirmisher @shadowfirebird the thing is

ace nor aromantic people don't want that, nor desire that

@Elizafox @Skirmisher @shadowfirebird
Sure, that's fine. If you've gone through a journey and worked out that's who you are, you probably don't need the potential spiritual growth of a relationship.
If you're really missing the tax break, find some like-minded folk to incorporate with. Don't marry them; we don't care.
(Also: spinsters incorporating with their pets to ensure they are looked after once they are gone. Sure; why not?)

To which I say: fuck your tax break.

I don't get one for being with @awilfox longer than most people stay married nowadays.

@shadowfirebird exactly

the government does many things well

morals are not one of them

marriage is a moral issue

@shadowfirebird @Elizafox or how many people can be part of a marriage. I get that maybe there are concerns of exploitation of women in a polygamous marriage, but that's really only true if you assume the husband in a marriage must dominate his wives and his wives must submit

@shadowfirebird @luciferMysticus

that's slavery

that's illegal and covered by existing laws

@Elizafox @shadowfirebird @luciferMysticus there's a lot of Mormonism between "what if we had asymmetric marriages" and "okay this is slavery" though

@luciferMysticus @shadowfirebird @Elizafox
Hell yes. That's like banning roads because folk are bad at driving.

@JubalBarca
@Elizafox

This.

The tax implications of marriage are the least important aspect of government recognition* of marriage.

The important parts are the wide range of legal consequences - visitation rights, distribution of estate, decision making...

You *could* get all of these things with contact law, but it'd be hugely complex

* As far as I know, there *are* no tax implications of marriage in Australia, and it's still a big thing.

@Elizafox @JubalBarca
This is also why plural marriage is a more difficult problem than gay (or, as up thread, bicycle) marriage.

Contracts don't care what gender you are, but changing a bilateral agreement to a multilateral agreement adds all sorts of complications.