Honestly GSB your entire argument is "this is the law so that's that" without taking two seconds to acknowledge what this man, myself, and several others in this thread are ACTUALLY talking about---whether this law is right.
Law isn't about what is right or wrong. It is about setting guidelines for a society that works best. In this case, I don't think there is anything wrong with the idea that government takes marriage very serious to the point where it becomes an equal financial partnership. Where both members are entitled and responsible for the other.
But you've stated your 'the law sucks' opinion, what is your alternative?
I don't think I actually need to reference the hundreds of completely fucked up laws we've had on the books do I? Would you say the same things about "Well gee howdy IT'S THE LAW BUD" if we were talking about it being illegal for a black person to marry a white person?
Um, ok, interesting comparison. That would be an unfair law as I find it discriminatory and biased.
I'm not sure what that has to do with the idea that marriage is a financial partnership.
Absolutely no one in this thread has argued whether these were legal or illegal decisions.
Most people in this thread are confused as to the point. NorCal wisely pointed out how moronic BSE's uncle sounds. He's right. BSE's uncle probably should have never married this woman. He should have at least got a pre-nupt or found a way to will the house and car to his family if that's what he wanted.
Or maybe he wasn't a moron. Maybe he didn't give a shit if he died and his wife got everything.
Really? Because BSE seemed quite upset when NorCal pointed out that it is normal for a wife to get their spouse's possessions when he dies.
Your argument completely misses the entire fucking point. We're arguing whether these laws and rules are just and right, not their validity in a court of law. Address the issue we're raising or leave the conversation because you're contributing nothing whatsoever.
Read the OP again. He asks why the spouse gets everything, the answer is simple. I answered it simply and kind of obnoxiously.
You ranted about some ideal of marriage that does not exist and some giant conglomerate of boogie women that prey on the desperate. Marriage is a choice. Like I said before, you can get a pre-nupt or will your possessions elsewhere OR NOT GET MARRIED. If you don't do those things you run the risk of losing them. A woman can lose them the same way.
Again this is very simple.
You know how many millions of people have been conned out of their money through "legal" schemes that pray on peoples trust and naivete? If you think thats A-Okay when a senile old man gives away his entire life savings to a con artist who sweet talked him, you're a pretty scummy human being.
And the courts would open a case against the woman if there were some evidence that she killed him or married him under false pretenses or that he wanted something to go to someone other than his wife but those things have not been shown to exist.
The point (which I thought was obvious as fuck but lo and behold here I actually having to explain it) is that the laws and courts themselves routinely fuck men over like it was one of the ten commandments.
You have to be kidding me. Where do you get this knowledge? Are some type of legal scholar? Where is this coming from beyond your opinion? How are men getting screwed when they know the ramifications of marriage going in to it?
The law can, and SO MANY times in history has been show to be morally wrong and often disgusting. If your only argument is "its the law!" then your argument is dogshit. The law also says marijuana is as dangerous as heroin. Shall we argue that one next?
What law says marijuana is as dangerous as heroin? How is that even a law?
You don't have to get married. BSE's uncle didn't have to get married. BSE's family didn't have to gift him a house or car. They could have been co-signers on the deed if they felt those items were anything less than gifts.
BSE - I'm sorry I missed the comment where you said you talked to a lawyer. You can ignore my comment on going to one. You may want to seek out a private investigator. But keep in mind that even if a court found that the wife is not entitled to your uncle's stuff, the person who gifted him the home and car may not be the heir to those assets.