Skip to content

The immoral chain-reaction to the income tax problem.


Our country doesn’t allow personal partnerships to reduce income tax penalties, unless you are married. So we rearranged marriage laws to include different kinds of partnerships. Gay marriage is necessary if one wants the tax benefits.

But would it be better to just be rid of the arbitrary thing called “income tax” than the morally grounded thing called “marriage”? Changing the natural definition of marriage is a postmodern word game. Marriage doesn’t change, we just assign it new unrelated words. It’s like changing the definition of Yellow to Orange to get into a club that happened to require Orange. Why change Yellow (which cannot change) rather than change the club rules (which can!). Why is the club more important than Yellow itself!? Why the energy to preserve the club? Why the yellow hate?

See what happened? The IRS became the universal moral arbiter and we bent to its unfixed deified ways. Question it. Why can’t free people choose all their domestic partnerships? They don’t have to be romantic in nature. Can’t two sisters who never married form a partnership to pool their assets? Or two friends? Or even more friends for that matter? Kick the tax man out!

We get stuck in the rut of laws and arbitrary social norms and forget to re-examine them in light of nature and morality. The definition of marriage transcends human laws. No need to tinker with it. Abolish income tax instead and be rid of the temptation to call Yellow “Orange.” After all, the IRS club is the arbitrary, thieving, immoral, bigoted thing.

Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Related Posts