Re: There They Go, Bad-Mouthing Divorce Again

Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: Dave Long (
Date: Thu Sep 28 2000 - 11:45:48 PDT

Perhaps I'm oversimplifying; here are my guesses as
to statements of positition thus far:

If marriage were a business relationship, it should be:
  Ernie: a merger
  Xander: a definite-term partnership
  Jeff: a joint venture (strategic partnership?)

If marriage were a programming environment, we should use:
  legal codes: Visual Basic (my interpretation)
  legal codes: INTERCAL (Jeff's interpretation?)
  Jeff: the S & K combinators

Given that we have suitably powerful legal system, I'm
not sure what all the fuss is about. Most people can
choose "happy matrimony meal #1" for whatever state in
which they reside, and if there's a desire for a delta
from that, prenups can handle the case of separating a
married couple's affairs, and powers of attorney and a
partnership can entangle those of an unmarried couple.


As far as I can tell, the "risk of common law marriage"
is an urban legend. In reality, all that the legal code
asks is that one be in a pure eigenstate; the IRS may be
able to deem someone an employee over their objections,
but in common law states, one can't be a spouse without
having already represented oneself as such to others.

Also, keep in mind that both TX and WA are community
property states, so most of the US states have a less
strict interpretation of marital property than given
thus far in the thread. For instance, CA (due to its
origins) is also a community property state, and I've
been told that by default, married people can't acquire
real property individually here, even though it's easy
enough back east. (how does it work if the couple and
the property are in different jurisdictions? no se.)

Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Sep 28 2000 - 11:33:44 PDT