Emily Lake
Might be a replicant
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2014
- Messages
- 6,278
- Location
- It's a desert out there
- Gender
- Agenderist
- Basic Beliefs
- Atheist
Meh. I don't think it's that so much as a pretty substantial Christian influence overall. I also think the government as a whole doesn't want to grant the tax benefits of marriage to larger groupings, purely for financial reasons. It would also really complicate divorce and inheritance law. If a wealthy women has five husbands, and she dies... who is the closest relative by default? Would a polygamandrous marriage be required to keep explicit wills defining every detail? What happens when a quadruple has four earners of varying levels of income, and one of them divorces the other - who pays p/alimony?
I don't have any problems at all about polyamory. To be quite honest, it would be lovely to have a housespouse who is a good cook and likes to clean! It's the legal and legislative repercussions that get complicated when I start thinking about it.
This argument boils down to "It cannot change, because that would require changes". It's not particularly complicated, except in the sense that all legislative change is complicated. Literally the ONLY reason why it can't be done is that legislators don't want to do it. If and when that changes, not only can it happen, it will happen.
You're reading malice into this for no good reason. Me noting that it would need to change and might be complicated is not in any way me saying that it cannot or should not be done.