Views (cont'd): Corporations; marriage
Sep. 2nd, 2017 02:13 pmI have my doubts about the typical status of corporations. Glossing over the difference between civil and criminal offenses, it unnerves me to protect people from being fully punished for their bad acts. Sure, perhaps most employees and owners ought not be jointly liable. However, ( often some of them should. )
People also come together via marriage to form another kind of entity which again can receive various favorable tax benefits, which often has some legal notion of community property within it, joint liability for debt, etc., though to various degrees and with varying flexibility depending on the jurisdiction. My inclination is to regard the spiritual and emotional dimensions of marriage as being outside the law: let the churches or others have whatever unofficial ceremonies they like for whomever they like, even call it
I do not see any particular reason to limit this legal change of status, what I am calling
Of course, how things now seem to have settled is that same-sex marriage is becoming another kind of marriage but among only two people, which at least makes many happy; ( those wanting recognized polygamy must yet wait. )
Speculating wildly: If I am thinking that the corporate veil ought not to have such great power and that the legal side of marriage could be generalized then I wonder if I can workably stretch corporations and marriage enough to become technically the same in law. For example, with the above visa issue, in some circumstances corporations can apply for visas for employees given evidence of adequate support and similar; workers on H-1B visas are permitted even intent to immigrate.
People also come together via marriage to form another kind of entity which again can receive various favorable tax benefits, which often has some legal notion of community property within it, joint liability for debt, etc., though to various degrees and with varying flexibility depending on the jurisdiction. My inclination is to regard the spiritual and emotional dimensions of marriage as being outside the law: let the churches or others have whatever unofficial ceremonies they like for whomever they like, even call it
marriage, leaving the less-loaded
civil partnershipterm for the legal state wherein by mutual agreement people become next of kin, somewhat able to act on each other's behalf and jointly face the consequences, be considered together for means testing, etc.
I do not see any particular reason to limit this legal change of status, what I am calling
civil partnership, by sex or even group size. ( Worrying cases may be few. )
Of course, how things now seem to have settled is that same-sex marriage is becoming another kind of marriage but among only two people, which at least makes many happy; ( those wanting recognized polygamy must yet wait. )
Speculating wildly: If I am thinking that the corporate veil ought not to have such great power and that the legal side of marriage could be generalized then I wonder if I can workably stretch corporations and marriage enough to become technically the same in law. For example, with the above visa issue, in some circumstances corporations can apply for visas for employees given evidence of adequate support and similar; workers on H-1B visas are permitted even intent to immigrate.