Bible Question (short): Doc and EdB: regarding common-law |
Question (full): Doc and EdB, I greatly apologize for getting heated on this topic. I've obtained legal counsel which has informed me, that I would have to engage in a common-law marriage to retain my medical benefits. Thus, if I get married with a marriage contract, I will lose precious medical treatments, but if I am declared to have a common-law marriage by the government, I will actually retain my medical benefits. This is because I have made no legal agreements with the government concerning either medical disability or marriage liabilities. Rather, I have successfully legally adjured the court to provide medical disability, in the absence of any agreements with them on my part. I'm sorry to say that, although I've read the scriptures you've each provided, I fail to see their applicability in my situation. As per Romans 13:1-7, I will abide by legal counsel and embrace common-law marriage, as afforded by the government, whereby I will retain vital medical treatments. The government had previously left me without vital medications for many years, due to legal loopholes and weaknesses within the governmental system, so that I had lost several times by body's blood supply over a course of twelve years. Basically, my internal organs had leaked blood for 2000 days out of 4000 days (twelve years), so that my blood hemoglobin levels were at one-half of what they should be (anemia). Nonetheless, God has sustained me, despite the government's repeated failings. However, with the government's track record of acute medical negligence, I do not find it feasible to place my health at risk in this way again. Although, I would gladly break the law to avoid the unnecessary removal of my digestive tract, it appears that I won't have to, with the government's gracious provision of common-law marriage. In this way, my foods will not have to be liquified and permanently injected through tubes. I am 36 years old. It appears that the previous thread was locked down, so I'll refrain posting further than this on the matter. As I say, I did read each of your scripture units, and could not make the applicable connections with my situation. Romans 13:1-7 directs me to go with the government's provision of common-law marriage, in the absence of a written marriage contract. - Romans 13 1 Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God. 2 Therefore whoever resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves. 3 For rulers are not a cause of fear for good behavior, but for evil. Do you want to have no fear of authority? Do what is good and you will have praise from the same; 4 for it is a minister of God to you for good. But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath on the one who practices evil. 5 Therefore it is necessary to be in subjection, not only because of wrath, but also for conscience' sake. 6 For because of this you also pay taxes, for rulers are servants of God, devoting themselves to this very thing. 7 Render to all what is due them: tax to whom tax is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honor to whom honor. (NAS95) - Doc and EdB, I thank each of you for your energies on the matter. I will not respond to this thread further. - Blessings, Reighnskye |
Up | Down View Branch | ID# 135390 | ||
Questions and/or Subjects for Bible general Archive 2 | Author | ||
|
OMOIFE | ||
|
OMOIFE | ||
|
PrettyTae21 | ||
|
PrettyTae21 | ||
|
Chusarcik | ||
|
Chusarcik | ||
|
godwins03 | ||
|
Reighnskye | ||
|
EdB | ||
|
Reighnskye | ||
|
Reighnskye | ||
|
flinkywood |