Straight and gay marriages alike can be based solely on financial benefits
Yesterday, I told you HERE about the Georgia Republican chairwoman’s theory that some so-called gay marriages might just be schemes to gain certain tax breaks and health-care benefits.
Steve Benen says HERE that such schemes can apply as well to marriages of the heterosexual variety:
[W]hat really gets me about Sue Everhart’s argument is its broader applicability.
As she sees it, two consenting adults could marry in order to expand access to health care benefits. This could happen, she says, even if you’re “straight as an arrow, and you may have a friend that is as straight as an arrow.”
This may be tough for Everhart to fully appreciate, but here’s the follow-up question: if this is an argument against same-sex marriage, isn’t it also an argument against opposite-sex marriage? After all, what’s to stop a man and a woman who are friends from pulling the same scam? Or, I don’t know, perhaps using marriage to help a friend with his or her immigration status?
If avoiding fraud is paramount, does the chairwoman of the Georgia Republican Party want to prohibit all marriages?