[koolba]

> Wow. Just wow. For some people, marriage is more than a financial arrangement.

In the eyes of the government the only thing in marriage that's more than a financial arrangement is hospital visitation privileges and the right to not testify against your spouse.

I didn't say to annul their wedding vows or diminish whatever non-financial meaning their marriage has.

> They'd also save a bundle by not having kids. Maybe they should sell one of them, it would help pay for the others?

That's disgusting.

[bykovich2]

That's the point, dude.

[kittiepryde]

The point seemed to me, they were saying that selling a kid to pay for the others was equivalent to not being legally married.

[bykovich2]

I believe the point was that selling a kid to pay for the others is a suggestion similarly (if not identically) indifferent to emotional realities as suggesting that a committedly-married couple get a divorce to change their tax status.

[chii]

It's a nasty analogy, since they are not the same class of event.