Possibly tax breaks are a form of showing societal approval of the state of public promised legal commitment which marriage - as opposed to cohabitation - entails. (I cohabbed for a few years before marriage, don't get me wrong, but.)
I don't believe that in the days when there were tax breaks that they were a significant factor in yea or nay decisions. Perhaps for the very rich?
I think Lady Butler-Sloss has an interesting point about het relationships; there are civil marriages to cover that sort of relationship but other relationships are unevenly covered. It is possible for friends/ sibs to make mutually accommodating wills, but not under the financial terms which cover married/legally united persons. There's an argument to be had about whether all relationships need or should be viewed with the same long-term perspectives which predicate committed love between previously unrelated people...
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
chiming
no subject
Date: December 6th, 2005 01:52 pm (UTC)From:I don't believe that in the days when there were tax breaks that they were a significant factor in yea or nay decisions. Perhaps for the very rich?
I think Lady Butler-Sloss has an interesting point about het relationships; there are civil marriages to cover that sort of relationship but other relationships are unevenly covered. It is possible for friends/ sibs to make mutually accommodating wills, but not under the financial terms which cover married/legally united persons. There's an argument to be had about whether all relationships need or should be viewed with the same long-term perspectives which predicate committed love between previously unrelated people...