Tell Me true ...this ain't true?...Aussie Taxpayers Pay for Polygamus Relationships

Heard something about this on John Laws Radio show in Australia as I was pondering Collomation of Dobsonian Telescopes...and I thought it must be a sensationalised piece of misinformation.
But according to wki encyclopedia Australia and the UK , whilst they do not recognise Polygamus marriages performed on their soil...do for Welfare purposes , recognise Polygamus marriages if they are performed in nations that do recognise the practice.

Therefore if I understand correctly Australian and Uk taxpayers are paying for the welfare payments to a person who arrives in the country as a recognised one of many wife of a man?

The main recipents seem to be wives of Polygamus Muslim imigarnts?

To add insult , the law seems to allow these Polygamists to marry after being citizens in Australia and adding to their stable?
Is this true?
Is this a subversive way of increasing the numbers of Islamnic Settlers?

The children are also eligible for welfare from the UK and Australian Governments.

Is this true...I cannot believe these two nations who asked so many of their young to be butchered in world war one espescially against the Islamic Ottoman empire would spit on th eface of the fallens descendants by legislating this anti christian , anti democratic practice of allowing Polygamists to rort the Taxpayers of these nations.

If this is true ...my oh my, what kind of traitors from Stalin are running these two nations.

reply to post by Dr Expired


The point you make about benefits is a bit of an issue, but apart from that there really is no issue with accepting Polygamy as long as the marriages are performed in another country. I've always been of the view that marriage is a religious ceremony and has nothing to do with the governmenet anyway.

after having had a wife, i cant see how you coudl stand to have one, let alone multiples!!

always talking, hassling you to do things..

imagine that x2 or 4!!

*hangs self in shed over ute*

reply to post by Dr Expired


This is true and I'm surprised you just found it out. It was only recently they found a Muslim with 3 wives with each of them having between 3-7 children.....ALL on welfare.

reply to post by okamitengu


But, if you had multiples they could complain and nag to each other not you.
Or think of it like a business more competition means better service.

reply to post by Dr Expired


This is hardly "anti-democratic" and I fail to see how it's "anti-christian" either?? If anything it is pro-non-denominational which is what Australia's all about.
I honestly don't have a problem paying welfare to these people, keep in mind that those who can afford to settle here in the first place are unlikely to need welfare, and those who mission overseas for a new wife once they're a citizen here are even less likely to be welfare recipients? I think it's great that our welfare system is inclusive of people from all different cultures and walks of life, which are the values our great nation is internationally esteemed for.

edit - and maybe the recognition of these unions (for humanitarian purposes no less) are not in alignment with christian theology, but that's fine, in fact that's great - religion has no part in the governance of our nation. If Christians were suffering specific persecution as a result of these welfare laws then that would be a different story...

Originally posted by bluemirage5
reply to post by Dr Expired

 

This is true and I'm surprised you just found it out. It was only recently they found a Muslim with 3 wives with each of them having between 3-7 children.....ALL on welfare.

This is no different, and probably just as rare an occurance as Catholic families with 12 kids on welfare, are you happy paying for their survival because they've got jesus?

Originally posted by bluemirage5
reply to post by Dr Expired

 

This is true and I'm surprised you just found it out. It was only recently they found a Muslim with 3 wives with each of them having between 3-7 children.....ALL on welfare.

I don't know if the rest of the replies so far are intentionally obtuse or haven't read the crux of this thread.
Perhaps I need to make it clearer.

Imperialistic settlers can only succeed if their numbers are reinforced and those numbers have means to sustain themselves.

Think marriages of convenience but multiplied by several per Polyginamst man , ...and the motivation to an imperialistic one.

Each wife may be impreganated overseas after marriage several times over years , then each wife is allowed family reunion migration into a nation and each wife and each child is entitled to Welfare, can we join the dots?

A trojan horse let in and fed by traitors .

So as an Australian taxpayer i can't have multiple wives,but it's ok for Mohammad come lately?And the taxpayer foots the bill,what a joke.

Polygamous marriages may not be performed in Australia, and the practice of polygamy is prohibited in the country.[1] A person who marries another person, knowing that the previous marriage is still subsisting, commits an offense of bigamy under sect 94 of the Marriage Act 1961, which carries a maximum penalty of 5 years imprisonment, and the second marriage is void.[2

Originally posted by Travlla
So as an Australian taxpayer i can't have multiple wives,but it's ok for Mohammad come lately?And the taxpayer foots the bill,what a joke.

Polygamous marriages may not be performed in Australia, and the practice of polygamy is prohibited in the country.[1] A person who marries another person, knowing that the previous marriage is still subsisting, commits an offense of bigamy under sect 94 of the Marriage Act 1961, which carries a maximum penalty of 5 years imprisonment, and the second marriage is void.[2

Pretty sure that only applies if the second marriage is performed here; you can have two wives if you want (only one will be legally recognised here except for welfare purposes), just go somewhere where it's legal and go to town.

reply to post by Dr Expired


So is this now an anti-immigration thread? As I stated before, the majority of these families would not be receiving welfare.

Originally posted by posthuman
reply to post by Dr Expired

 

So is this now an anti-immigration thread? As I stated before, the majority of these families would not be receiving welfare.

This is certainly not an anti immigration thread, it is an anti Polygamy thread espescially if it is the fuel for Religious or cultural imperialism, which it is most certainly, if you think about , how the law can be harnessed .

As polygamy isn't recognised in Australia for aussie land based marriages it is unlikely the true number of Polygamists and their wives/children will be on any offical government website.

Are we all so apathetic and callous about our own sacrifices that were made by the "premature dead" are we so bloody sociopathic?

reply to post by posthuman


But a majority of these families ARE receiving welfare. Thats the problem.

reply to post by bluemirage5


Oh, well that settles it then...























Once you provide some evidence.

Originally posted by bluemirage5
reply to post by Dr Expired

 

This is true and I'm surprised you just found it out. It was only recently they found a Muslim with 3 wives with each of them having between 3-7 children.....ALL on welfare.

Sadly the OP is correct.

In AU the law is very specific in case of how many wives you can have, but sadly is also ambigious when it comes to overseas marriages.

Here is a scenario to work with:

My Cousin John, moved to Japan and found a lovely girl to settle down with.
In Japan John married Mary in a Japanese ceremony and registered the marriage with the Japanese authorities
1 week after the marriage, John returned to AU, with his spouse declared as a "future spouse" as per her visa.
Of course in the end he married her in an Australian ceremony, which thus means they are married in 2 countries (and recognised)

Now if you apply this to these scenarios:
1. Dude marries girl in country x
2. Dude comes back to AU, doesnt register the marriage
3. Dude flys off to another country with girl b and gets married
4. Dude returns with girl B and they all live together and have kids.

Sadly as long as only ONE marriage is registered to the Australian authorities, he can have as many "wives" as he wants, however only one is recognized in the country.

SO in saying that here is where the laws become blurred. The other wives can register for Single Parents Pension (when they have kids) along with rent assistance and various other welfare options available. "How?! How does he get away with paying no child support etc", he doesnt have a job or his job is classified as "low income" and probably pays as little as 1 dollar a week in C/S.

Before our previous government was outted (and sadly we are now landed with this current bunch......) they where going to re-vamp it to limit the amount of welfare someone can apply for in any given specific relationship classification (IE: Spouse or/and children under wedlock).

Hope that sheds some light on the scenario listed above.

Originally posted by Travlla
So as an Australian taxpayer i can't have multiple wives,but it's ok for Mohammad come lately?And the taxpayer foots the bill,what a joke.[

Hahaha, that cracked me up The thing I wonder is, what will Mohammad and his footy team sized family do when the welfare money runs out? I can't really see them asking nicely for food & shelter - I don't think I'll ever venture out to the western suburbs again if this scenario ever unfolds

Originally posted by Spruk

Originally posted by bluemirage5
reply to post by Dr Expired

 

This is true and I'm surprised you just found it out. It was only recently they found a Muslim with 3 wives with each of them having between 3-7 children.....ALL on welfare.

Sadly the OP is correct.

In AU the law is very specific in case of how many wives you can have, but sadly is also ambigious when it comes to overseas marriages.

Here is a scenario to work with:

My Cousin John, moved to Japan and found a lovely girl to settle down with.
In Japan John married Mary in a Japanese ceremony and registered the marriage with the Japanese authorities
1 week after the marriage, John returned to AU, with his spouse declared as a "future spouse" as per her visa.
Of course in the end he married her in an Australian ceremony, which thus means they are married in 2 countries (and recognised)

Now if you apply this to these scenarios:
1. Dude marries girl in country x
2. Dude comes back to AU, doesnt register the marriage
3. Dude flys off to another country with girl b and gets married
4. Dude returns with girl B and they all live together and have kids.

Sadly as long as only ONE marriage is registered to the Australian authorities, he can have as many "wives" as he wants, however only one is recognized in the country.

SO in saying that here is where the laws become blurred. The other wives can register for Single Parents Pension (when they have kids) along with rent assistance and various other welfare options available. "How?! How does he get away with paying no child support etc", he doesnt have a job or his job is classified as "low income" and probably pays as little as 1 dollar a week in C/S.

Before our previous government was outted (and sadly we are now landed with this current bunch......) they where going to re-vamp it to limit the amount of welfare someone can apply for in any given specific relationship classification (IE: Spouse or/and children under wedlock).

Hope that sheds some light on the scenario listed above.

Thanks for the concise supporting post, socaialism gone mad, while Australian Grannies can't afford to turn on the heater in a bleak and dismal cold winter in Australia.

There are Aussie men with one wife and sometimes only one kid who are being bled dry by the demands of maintenance payments and these sociopathic bigamists in truth are laughing at us all.

Thanks for the concise supporting post, socaialism gone mad, while Australian Grannies can't afford to turn on the heater in a bleak and dismal cold winter in Australia.

There are Aussie men with one wife and sometimes only one kid who are being bled dry by the demands of maintenance payments and these sociopathic bigamists in truth are laughing at us all.

who is being bled dry for maintenance. it sis your privilege as a father to support your child. the amound you pay is based on what you earn.
i make around $40000 a year, im required by law to pay $138 a month

i pay more than that,

how is $138 per month for one child.. "being bled dry"?

you earn more, you have more kids. you pay more.

simple.

reply to post by Dr Expired


I hope it is true. Just because they move to your country demanding all the citizenry of your country pay them money for the pleasure of their company doesn't mean you have any right to impose your values on them. All they want is for you and all your country persons to break out your checkbooks and keep the monies flowing! The payments are coming up for all those wives' Mercedes!

What's funny, is that there is historical precedent for Polygamy.

The best gene's win. In Tribal society it was important to have successful gene's. Ever wonder why in civilized countires sometimes people look alike? Its because we are descended from successfull tribes, and they were inbred. Now see if people who look familiar too you share personality traits, with the same people who you think look like them, but have never met them personally.

-Matthew13