Your point fails for one simple reason: Obamacare doesn't mandate employers offer family health care. Some don't. As long as they offer individual coverage to the employee they have met their statutory requirement. Meijer is one example off the top of my head that operates on this basis.
Furthermore, and this is much more common: some employers only subsidize the individual (employee) portion of the plan and the cost of the family portion is paid fully by the employee. It would be trivial on the scale of things HR does to calculate a "per spouse per pay" figure to be passed to the employee.
Your point is a good one, but the fact is that many, many companies do subsidize family healthcare. If poly marriages became legal, the existence of poly "families" consisting of tens or even hundreds of individuals would clearly force companies to change their policies to cover employees only, which would have a very real effect on workers. That effect simply doesn't exist for same sex marriages.
And in my post, I never addressed the very real complications to "community property" law posed by poly marriages. Imagine a couple that has been married for many years. They then marry a third person. And a few years later, a fourth person. Children are born. Then one of the original two people wants a divorce. How should community property be divided equitably? If you think this area of law is complicated now, imagine how much more complicated it could become.
And what about child custody? If a child is born in a poly marriage involving more than one man, are all of the men the "father?" Are all of the women the "mother?" When divorces occur, how will custody be determined? Will genetic testing be required whenever a child is born? None of this is insurmountable, but clearly new laws would need to be written. Again, this isn't an issue at all with same-sex couples.
Facebook
Twitter