In the spirit of happy negotiations…
You go ahead. Ask me ONE question, I will answer it, I will then ask if I answered it to your satisfaction, and if you say yes, then I will ask you a question, and then the process will repeat.
Okay, why? If he had not been married to her, he would have been eligible for the benefits. If she had died, he would have been eligible for the benefits. She is contemplating divorcing him because she cares about him and because no longer being married to her will make him eligible for the benefits.
As for cheating the system, several posters already have made it clear that you are being a hypocrite; you decide when something is morally right or wrong, fraudulent or OK. Sorry, but the rest of us don’t play that game.
You stand convicted as having admitted, by innuendo, of theft of music via the Internet. Au Gratin stands convicted of nothing more than being placed in the antinomy of having to divorce the husband she loves in order to make him eligible for the help he needs, thanks to the rules under which our medical assistance system works. May I respectfully suggest that you are standing on a Teflon-coated banana skin on thin ice in making moral judgments about whether she is committing any sort of theft or fraud?
You also are doing an extremely good job of showing the moral myopia that characterizes much of American conservatism these days. Thank God we have a few decent conservatives on the board to counteract that.
What, precisely, do you suggest that Au Gratin and Mr. Gratin do? And why would that be more moral than what she asks about?
And while we’re at it, what do you think of the regulations that put them in this position?
They wouldn’t be “pretending” to be divorced-there would be a real, legal, lawful divorce. They would simply continue LIVING TOGETHER.
There’s certainly nothing fraudulent about that. Hell, the Duke and Duchess of York still live in the same residence, IIRC, despite their divorce. Are they committing fraud?
If lying is always a BAD IDEA (your words) is it a bad idea to lie in order to prevent a loved one from suffering horribly and dying BEFORE HER TIME (your words)?
I’m not even going to mention stealing music; the definition of when it’s okay to lie is not what I’m discussing with you here. So no worries from me on that one.
I will tell you why I think it’s okay. Unfortunately after that we’ll probably go round and round in circles with Nocturne believes/matt believes, and I doubt we’re going to change each others’ minds.
Why I Think It Is Okay:
I think her husband needs treatment
He cannot get treatment because of their marriage
If they divorced, he could, and he would not have to suffer
Because I am in favor of the State, such as it is, helping out the less fortunate (to a point, but I don’t know that I can get bogged down in explaining it tonight)
However, if there are indeed cases or statutes that would point to this being illegal fraud, then I would not advise doing it.
Is that clear? Those are my reasons. You can pick them apart if you wish, but I can’t respond anymore tonight–it’s now officially my 22nd birthday and if I’m going to be able to do anything fun tomorrow, I have to get some sleep. I haven’t been able to sleep well for nearly a week now. But I’ll try to make it back sometime tomorrow amidst celebrations to try to answer you further if I need to do so.