@Still Growing,
By sharing insurance benefits, I mean my husband has the option through his company to add me to his health insurance plan and to take out life insurance for me.
The biggest problem I see with G.I.M. is that gov't gets to say who you can marry (no polygamous or, in some cases, homosexual marriages). However, if you are going to allow the gov't the power to decide which corporate contracts to honor then I don't see how that solves the problem. Prenups are a legitimate way to modify the marriage contract within the current system. For instance, a church could require everyone it marries to sign additional prenups and I'd bet there are some pretty standard prenups you can by from lawfirms.
The 50% divorce rate I don't see as a problem. You claim it is a problem because of the cost of judges, etc. People have pointed out that (1) there will still be legal costs when people dissolve contracts and (2) there are ways of reducing these costs without privatising marriage. We could have a debate (and have been) about how to reduce costs associated with marriage and maybe a private system would emerge as the best idea. That requires things like researching the actual costs and doing cultural comparisons.
|