• Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.

Separate Property vs Community Property

N

NS4Liberty

Member
Male
Some legal food for thought from today's Wills class reading.

Separate Property: Spouses own separately all earnings and acquisitions from earnings during the marriage unless they agree to a joint form of ownership.

Community Property: Spouses retain separate ownership of property brought to the marriage, but they own all earnings and acquisitions from earnings during the marriage in equal, undivided shares. The death of one spouse dissolves the community. The deceased spouse owns and has testamentary power over his or her half of the community. The surviving spouse owns the other half.

In all but 1 (Georgia) of the separate property states, a surviving spouse is entitled to an elective or forced share, typically one-third, of the decedent spouse’s estate.

In the community property states, each spouse owns all earnings during the marriage in equal, undivided shares.

This means that poly families may have issues upon the death of the husband if one of the wives is a earthly legal marriage and the others are spiritual marriages only. In a community property state, the husband can only distribute half the property to the other wives after death. In some separate property states, the legal wife gets 1/3 of the property no matter what. Depending on the number of wives and children involved, that could be a big problem.

One solution would be to not have any legal marriages. Then all the wives are on the same footing. Unmarried men should give that serious consideration. Of course many people get married before they realize poly is an option and I don't think encouraging a husband to legally divorce his first wife while remaining spiritually married is a good idea.

When I am a practicing lawyer next year, I plan to work through a plan for poly families. For now though, this is just information to help ask the right questions when you do talk to a real lawyer about estate planning.

This map shows which states are which:
20221027_085313.jpg

*Not legal advice. Not a lawyer.*
 
On that same note, has anyone here talked to a lawyer about having a poly family? Is there push back or resistance to help?
 
I will be but have not discussed it yet.
 
NS4Liberty said:
On that same note, has anyone here talked to a lawyer about having a poly family? Is there push back or resistance to help?
Click to expand...

Our family holds everything in a family LLC and each of the adults has an equal share. Christie set this up years ago and when Shari and then Macy left (for a while) her wisdom was made clear because there were no disputes over who was entitled to what. That decision had already been made.
 
@NS4Liberty, would you like to write up some content for our main website on this? If you go to biblicalfamilies.org and explore the "Resources" dropdown menu in the "legal" section, you'll find that @andrew intended to write summaries of the legal situation in some key states, but did not complete this. There is a New Zealand section which I wrote up (not a lawyer at all) which might give you an idea of what this could look like - but you may like to suggest improvements to that of course. If this is something you'd like to write just let me know.
 
The 'legal' situation (and the entire concept of 'licensed marriage' anyway - which is ALL about serving "another master" as opposed to the One, YHVH, and was anathema to the Founders and even most 'denominations' prior to Jim Crow and the New Deal, etc) has been designed, in the US certainly, to be a minefield. The key concept is "by agreement," or, put another way, consent to a 'deal with the devil.'

This is a large part of what I've done the "Come out of her, My people" show about for well over a decade, with more guests and resources than I can count. What is called "US citizenship" (check a law dictionary - multiple definitions abound - almost all of them traps) is a BIG part of the puzzle.

Suffice it to say, you CANNOT take a 'license' ("permission from a qualified authority..." yada, yada, yada) without CEDING "rights" (which then become revocable privileges) to "another master."

It really is about "Who your serve", and whether you know your Rights, and are willing to fight for them - in every way. ("If you don't know them, and won't exercise them - you don't have 'em.")

One good place to start the research is with what has been called the "Red Amendment" (the "questionably" ratified 14th, which openly establishes TWO classes of 'citizenship' - one obviously inferior) and a lot of history that touches on SO many things Scripture calls 'abomination':

'dishonest weights' chief among them. Much of the evil traces to 1913. This is where I often start with people who have no clue how they have been deceived into bondage.

Another item of interest to those with more than one Lawful (as opposed to merely 'legal' "partner" - see how it's done!? ) is what is called a "constitutional common law trust."

It's literally about "choice of Law". (Check that phrase out, both in Scripture, and an early edition of, for example, Black's Law.)
 
Mark C said:
The 'legal' situation (and the entire concept of 'licensed marriage' anyway - which is ALL about serving "another master" as opposed to the One, YHVH, and was anathema to the Founders and even most 'denominations' prior to Jim Crow and the New Deal, etc) has been designed, in the US certainly, to be a minefield. The key concept is "by agreement," or, put another way, consent to a 'deal with the devil.'

This is a large part of what I've done the "Come out of her, My people" show about for well over a decade, with more guests and resources than I can count. What is called "US citizenship" (check a law dictionary - multiple definitions abound - almost all of them traps) is a BIG part of the puzzle.

Suffice it to say, you CANNOT take a 'license' ("permission from a qualified authority..." yada, yada, yada) without CEDING "rights" (which then become revocable privileges) to "another master."

It really is about "Who your serve", and whether you know your Rights, and are willing to fight for them - in every way. ("If you don't know them, and won't exercise them - you don't have 'em.")

One good place to start the research is with what has been called the "Red Amendment" (the "questionably" ratified 14th, which openly establishes TWO classes of 'citizenship' - one obviously inferior) and a lot of history that touches on SO many things Scripture calls 'abomination':

'dishonest weights' chief among them. Much of the evil traces to 1913. This is where I often start with people who have no clue how they have been deceived into bondage.

Another item of interest to those with more than one Lawful (as opposed to merely 'legal' "partner" - see how it's done!? ) is what is called a "constitutional common law trust."

It's literally about "choice of Law". (Check that phrase out, both in Scripture, and an early edition of, for example, Black's Law.)
Click to expand...
This is really not true. Whether you get their license or not the courts will impose the same “authority” over you anyway. They used to call it common law marriage, now it’s just referred to as domestic partnership.

There is no legal or intellectual contortions that will protect you from the legal system if it decides to get involved.
 
The Revolting Man said:
This is really not true. Whether you get their license or not the courts will impose the same “authority” over you anyway. They used to call it common law marriage, now it’s just referred to as domestic partnership.

There is no legal or intellectual contortions that will protect you from the legal system if it decides to get involved.
Click to expand...
Living true to your convictions is smart, and might keep you on the blessed side of life and not reaping the kind of havoc we see the system impose on some. The state of affairs in our nation is simply judgement upon us, so now that the monster has been created, it is wise not to think with any degree of certainty that this legal system will respect some nuance of law you believe protects you.

What @The Revolting Man says is especially true with divorce, or allegations of abuse. I was surprised to hear that even without a marriage license my friend had a long legal process when her husband filed for divorce in Idaho.
 
Joleneakamama said:
I was surprised to hear that even without a marriage license my friend had a long legal process when her husband filed for divorce in Idaho.
Click to expand...
This is why terms like "common law marriage," or even, "married for TAX purposes," have become part of the scam.

As Jefferson put it, way back in the Declaration of Independence, it's an attempt to "extend an uwarrantable jurisdiction over us." Even the fact that it's "pretended legislation" hasn't stopped the Adversary from his ancient attempt to destroy marriage, and all that follows from it.

But we have to know Who we serve, and which "choice of Law" brings blessings.
 
PS> Please consider: Not one person reading this who has actually embarked on the path of "lawful, Scriptural polygyny" -- as opposed to "illegal bigamy," or polygamy or whatever term is used to demonize what He makes provision for -- should be fooled. The Adversary, and those who serve him and his lies, "call good, 'evil,' and evil, 'good'." And they subsidize what YHVH forbids, and now MANDATE what He says carries a death penalty, and teach it to children over which they claim that same unwarrantable jurisdiction.

There is no longer even a pretense of 'protection' under what has become of "law" in a world where what is Written doesn't matter, a man's "word" isn't worth a fake fiat $ (especially if he puts his hand on a Bible) and liars openly destroy the Truth.

So just walk the narrow path you've already chosen, and trust in the One who provides the Light.
 
Last edited:
FollowingHim said:
@NS4Liberty, would you like to write up some content for our main website on this? If you go to biblicalfamilies.org and explore the "Resources" dropdown menu in the "legal" section, you'll find that @andrew intended to write summaries of the legal situation in some key states, but did not complete this. There is a New Zealand section which I wrote up (not a lawyer at all) which might give you an idea of what this could look like - but you may like to suggest improvements to that of course. If this is something you'd like to write just let me know.
Click to expand...
I would love to, but currently can't commit to such an undertaking. Maybe in December, after finals, I can do an overview of the U.S. post Obergefell and Lawrence. I finish law school in the spring and then I start bar prep followed hopefully by a job. When things settle down I may be able to do more.
 
Mark C said:
This is why terms like "common law marriage," or even, "married for TAX purposes," have become part of the scam.
Click to expand...
However @Mark C, there is a legitimate reason for the state to recognise common-law marriages. A major reason for the existence of some sort of state apparatus is to provide a justice system to resolve disputes, and when resolving disputes that justice system needs to recognise the reality of people's lives in order to even comprehend what the dispute might be. The issue is not that the state recognises the relationship, it is what authority the state seeks to take over that relationship.
 
FollowingHim said:
However @Mark C, there is a legitimate reason for the state to recognise common-law marriages. A major reason for the existence of some sort of state apparatus is to provide a justice system to resolve disputes, and when resolving disputes that justice system needs to recognise the reality of people's lives in order to even comprehend what the dispute might be. The issue is not that the state recognises the relationship, it is what authority the state seeks to take over that relationship.
Click to expand...
States don't have to provide dispute resolution themself. They could accept separate system of courts. Historically, polities used to have multiple competiting court systems.
 
FollowingHim said:
However @Mark C, there is a legitimate reason for the state to recognise common-law marriages.
Click to expand...
There's ALWAYS [at least in appearance] a legitimate reason for the State to do what it does. And just as certainly an ulterior motive, which ironically always seems to ultimately win out.

And, 'recognize' is not at all the same as what usually follows: an overt attempt at control.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top