You're fundamentally mistaken in your assertions about these laws. The vast majority have absolutely nothing to do with children.
The purpose of these laws, are for government to allow people to care for one another, without having to rely on the government to provide for them, not the reverse as you suggest.
If two people are willing to be responsible for each other, and take care of each other, it's in the government's fiscal interest to support that arrangement.
As for your other claim, it's asinine. There are a multitude of ways to "invest" in the future of a country other than reproducing. And as I said before, there is no stipulation in any federal law that marriage benefits should only be granted to those having children, which is another strike against your logic (or lack there of).
The purpose of these laws, are for government to allow people to care for one another, without having to rely on the government to provide for them, not the reverse as you suggest.
If two people are willing to be responsible for each other, and take care of each other, it's in the government's fiscal interest to support that arrangement.
As for your other claim, it's asinine. There are a multitude of ways to "invest" in the future of a country other than reproducing. And as I said before, there is no stipulation in any federal law that marriage benefits should only be granted to those having children, which is another strike against your logic (or lack there of).







Avail of the $10 per gallery, promo!! Highend Designs at Low Price. 
Comment