Ninth Circuit rules Prop 8 unconstitutional.

[HST1948]

Consummation that may or may not lead to pregnancy is a leading indicator of whether a marriage is valid or not.

Oh My God.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Consummation that may or may not lead to pregnancy is a leading indicator of whether a marriage is valid or not.

My God.  Not only is that statement idiotic, but it is also vile and mean.

[Bacon King]

milhouse: Consummation is not legally required for a marriage to be binding, and is not grounds for annulment or divorce under US law (the only exception to this is when one partner is physically unable to consummate the marriage, this condition is incurable, and that this condition was known but withheld from the other spouse prior to the marriage). Marital rape is indeed a rape. Regardless, this issue is entirely separate from marriage fraud, which I highly doubt is as common as you seem to think.

If someone's getting married for government benefits, it's not like they can just sign a contract and be done with it- even courthouse marriages without some big ceremony still get published in the newspaper, no? This would mean that everyone would know they're married, so they'd still have to commit wholesale to this "fraudulent" marriage. And this applies doubly to homosexual couples, because someone isn't going to pretend to everyone that they're gay just so they can get foodstamps or whatever you think people are doing.

Besides, most legal benefits to marriages are not financial anyway, but pertain to things like child custody, adoption, hospital visitation, and other things that grant them legal acceptance as a member of their spouses family.

[HST1948]

Go down the street and ask anyone who has ever had a spouse die if they could have only one thing back from their marriage what it would be.  I can guarantee you wont find anyone who would say that they want the sex back.

[Brittain33]

Weren't we moving milhouse's contributions to their own thread?

[Free Palestine]

Consummation that may or may not lead to pregnancy is a leading indicator of whether a marriage is valid or not.

This sentence is absolutely disgusting.

Not to mention painfully paternalistic and communitarian.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Consummation that may or may not lead to pregnancy is a leading indicator of whether a marriage is valid or not.

This sentence is absolutely disgusting.

Not to mention painfully paternalistic and communitarian.

Don't insult communitarianism by affiliating it with that sentence, please.

[Free Palestine]

Can we just ban milhouse?

[Badger]

Millhouse: Virgin of the Year.

[milhouse24]

Marriage is not a "delicate entity," and there are not marauding government teams going door to door to ensure that marriages are valid. The government does not actively investigate marriages to ensure that they are valid.

Further, there is literally no difference in research required for a ICE agent looking into a heterosexual marriage and one looking into a gay marriage. Literally none.

Marriage is by definition a sexual contract, so it is expected in healthy circumstances that the man would want to have intercourse with the woman.  If your lesbian friend married someone, then he would have the legal right to have intercourse with her.  It would be very difficult for her to prove that it was non-consensual rape. If he paid her for the green card marriage, then she would go to jail.

No, it is not. You are advocating in favor of marital rape, which I would like to point out is a crime in just about every civilized, Christian country. A wife is under NO obligation to have sex with her husband if she does not wish to, and if a husband forces himself on her anyway he can — and should — go to prison.

Your logic is vile and perverse.

The end.

I am also speaking about fraud when it comes to the individuals involved in the marriage.  If the man or the woman refuses to consummate the relationship after the marriage ceremony, then that is perfectly grounds for an annulment or divorce. 
When an ICE agent interviews a foreign couple, they will need to determine whether the relationship is platonic or sexual and if the relationship has been consummated or how often.  If the relationship is indeed platonic, it raises a lot of red flags. 

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Well, it shouldn't.

[milhouse24]

If someone's getting married for government benefits, it's not like they can just sign a contract and be done with it- even courthouse marriages without some big ceremony still get published in the newspaper, no? This would mean that everyone would know they're married, so they'd still have to commit wholesale to this "fraudulent" marriage. And this applies doubly to homosexual couples, because someone isn't going to pretend to everyone that they're gay just so they can get foodstamps or whatever you think people are doing.

Besides, most legal benefits to marriages are not financial anyway, but pertain to things like child custody, adoption, hospital visitation, and other things that grant them legal acceptance as a member of their spouses family.

Marriage fraud will certainly increase if benefits like gay green card marriage are available.  
The government does have laws against bigamy and used to have laws against infidelity.  Even if a couple fraudulently gets married just for show, the government can get involved if either spouse strays or starts living with another person.  Divorced can be granted by default.  Sure people separate and have open marriages, but there are still laws against bigamy, whatever your definition.

[Alcon]

I'm starting to wonder whether milhouse's next claim will be that ICE officials will have to watch as the couple consummates the marriage -- just, you know, to be absolutely sure.

[The Mikado]

Milhouse keeps reinforcing my image of him as a time-traveling eugenicist.

[Torie]

I'm starting to wonder whether milhouse's next claim will be that ICE officials will have to watch as the couple consummates the marriage -- just, you know, to be absolutely sure.

That was often the way it was often done with royalty. We don't want any stray sperm, you know. So there is precedent.