Dad - I didn't mean to "bugger up" your My Yahoo - I didn't think I accessed it from your computer. If I did, you can sign in as yourself again on My Yahoo.

H - I think we shouldn't mention details about the car on the blog (which is public) until the whole chain of events that is in motion right now is finished. Use the phone instead. Less chance of potential problems.

Regarding our conversation on Christmas about gay marriage and polygamy (in which Gavin took part and noted potential complications with polygamy and the tax code), I noticed an article today in the Daily Telegraph of London, by Mark Steyn, where he discusses exactly this issue - gay marriage, polygamy and the (British) tax code. Article here. Steyn quotes a Sunday Times article which reports that the British tax authorities are considering recognizing polygamy for tax purposes. For example, if you have 4 wives and you die, each wife would receive her share of your estate tax-free. The issue is also important for people who pay out pension obligations. If a pensioner dies with 4 wives, does each wife get 1/4 of his pension? Or does each get a full pension?

I agree with Steyn's logic in this paragraph:
"Logically, one can be either opposed to both (as I am) or in favour of both, but activists who maintain that homosexual marriage is fine but multi-sexual marriage isn't sound awfully like those couples who build their dream home in the country and then want to stop anybody else from moving in."
And earlier in the article: "If the gender of the participants is no longer relevant, why should the number be?"

It's a minority opinion at the moment, but it makes sense to me...

C

- posted by Christoph Roggenkamp @ 12/28/2004 03:01:00 PM