| Archived - Ethics & Morality Archived threads from Ethics & Morality |
16th July 2008, 01:46 AM
| | Senior Member
27     
 | | Join Date: 29th October 2004
Posts: 605
Blessings: 89,377
Reps: 24,356 (power: 32) | | Originally Posted by Maren  Actually, this is easily proven false. Rather, pretty much any law involving economic benefits for children have no ties to marriage whatsoever. All the child benefits (and actually it could be argued more) are available to a single woman as to a married couple. A child born to a married woman is not automatically assigned to her husband but rather the father is recognized by the birth certificate. Marriage laws are all designed around the husband and wife. And children in divorce are only taken into account only if both husband and wife are the child's parent.
Economic benefits from marriage is not about the children, but a child-production incentive.
Child welfare is about the children.
__________________ ---> You're going to use a SPELL CARD?! <--- |
16th July 2008, 01:52 AM
| | Senior Member
27
| | Join Date: 29th October 2004
Posts: 605
Blessings: 89,377
Reps: 24,356 (power: 32) | | Originally Posted by HannahBanana By "people production," you mean "having children," correct? If so, then what about infertile couples, elderly couples, and couples that want to remain child-free? Are you saying that those couples should be denied marriage rights, too?
A marriage wherein one or both parties are unable to have children due to damage, disease, genetic defects etc. or do not want to have children is the exception rather than the rule.
Elderly couples receive benefits for services that have in theory been rendered.
__________________ ---> You're going to use a SPELL CARD?! <--- |
16th July 2008, 01:53 AM
| | Senior Member
27
| | Join Date: 29th October 2004
Posts: 605
Blessings: 89,377
Reps: 24,356 (power: 32) | | Originally Posted by lawtonfogle Unless he means for 'having children' to include those who adopt. The no problem for homosexual men. Also, homosexual women can have children anyways.
As noted earlier, adoption of children is not child-production. Raising children is supplemented with child welfare services.
__________________ ---> You're going to use a SPELL CARD?! <--- |
16th July 2008, 01:58 AM
| | Veteran
    
| | Join Date: 20th October 2007
Posts: 5,309
Blessings: 11,224
Reps: 12,773,578,371,522,452 (power: 12,773,578,371,532) | | Originally Posted by Madcoil Economic benefits from marriage is not about the children, but a child-production incentive.
Child welfare is about the children.
Then please tell me exactly what those "child-production incentives" are?
__________________
You know everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects. -- Will Rogers
The more you read and observe about this Politics thing, you got to admit that each party is worse than the other. The one that's out always looks the best. -- Will Rogers |
16th July 2008, 02:27 AM
| | Senior Member
27
| | Join Date: 29th October 2004
Posts: 605
Blessings: 89,377
Reps: 24,356 (power: 32) | | Originally Posted by Maren Then please tell me exactly what those "child-production incentives" are?
First and foremost the economical benefits given to married couples, from which the society does not immediately benefit. I have a compiled listing of laws in which marital status is a factor, and you can purvey them at your leisure: http://www.gao.gov/archive/1997/og97016.pdf
__________________ ---> You're going to use a SPELL CARD?! <--- |
16th July 2008, 02:55 AM
| | Veteran
| | Join Date: 20th October 2007
Posts: 5,309
Blessings: 11,224
Reps: 12,773,578,371,522,452 (power: 12,773,578,371,532) | | Originally Posted by Madcoil First and foremost the economical benefits given to married couples, from which the society does not immediately benefit. I have a compiled listing of laws in which marital status is a factor, and you can purvey them at your leisure: http://www.gao.gov/archive/1997/og97016.pdf
So in other words, you have no evidence. As was previously pointed out, those benefits have nothing to do with children but rather are granted by simply being married. You are merely Begging the Question (circular reasoning). You have provided no evidence to support your claims -- even your own evidence shows that marriage is to encourage coupling and does not encourage having children.
__________________
You know everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects. -- Will Rogers
The more you read and observe about this Politics thing, you got to admit that each party is worse than the other. The one that's out always looks the best. -- Will Rogers |
16th July 2008, 03:43 AM
| | Senior Member
27
| | Join Date: 29th October 2004
Posts: 605
Blessings: 89,377
Reps: 24,356 (power: 32) | | Originally Posted by Maren So in other words, you have no evidence. As was previously pointed out, those benefits have nothing to do with children but rather are granted by simply being married. You are merely Begging the Question (circular reasoning). You have provided no evidence to support your claims -- even your own evidence shows that marriage is to encourage coupling and does not encourage having children.
'I have no evidence', yet 'my own evidence shows' ? Well done.
Indeed those benefits have nothing to do with children, but with child-production. Child-production and children are separate subjects.
Society has no reason to encourage coupling, but it HAS reason to encourage child production. Of course, increased coupling will increase chance of producing children, but I do not see where I have produced evidence showing that marriage encourages coupling.
You asked me for a specification of what benefits I consider incentives to child production, and since this is an international message board, I answered generally what sort of benefits I consider to fall under that category. You didn't ask for proof, but chose to tout some logical fallacy without implying how it applies in this situation.
If you want me to prove my opinion, then just ask, but I consider this discussion to be based in philosphy rather than physics, so any hard-evidence discussion with me concerning this topic I fear will devolve into handwaving rather than an exchange of ideas.
Would you like to start a separate thread on specific marriage benefits, or the role of marriage in society?
__________________ ---> You're going to use a SPELL CARD?! <--- |
16th July 2008, 04:39 AM
|  | Queer non-theist, with added jam.
25 
| | Join Date: 20th February 2007 Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 6,254
Blessings: 44,247,412
Reps: 122,811,221,000 (power: 122,811,232) | | | Why do we need more babies?
__________________ Jesus says we die a little death for him every day.
~ La Petite Mort, Erin McKeown
|
16th July 2008, 04:45 AM
| | Senior Member
27
| | Join Date: 29th October 2004
Posts: 605
Blessings: 89,377
Reps: 24,356 (power: 32) | | Originally Posted by cantata Why do we need more babies?
Who knows, they're probably some kind of economic safety net.
__________________ ---> You're going to use a SPELL CARD?! <--- |
16th July 2008, 05:29 AM
| | Queer non-theist, with added jam.
25
| | Join Date: 20th February 2007 Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 6,254
Blessings: 44,247,412
Reps: 122,811,221,000 (power: 122,811,232) | | Originally Posted by Madcoil Who knows, they're probably some kind of economic safety net.
Do we really have that much of a shortage of babies that we need to deny benefits to couples who don't intend to have them?
__________________ Jesus says we die a little death for him every day.
~ La Petite Mort, Erin McKeown
|
| Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes |  Linear Mode |
| | |
