Same-sex partners to get fed benefits

[Winnie]

No matter how much you fuss, people aren't going to stop being gay, so why can't we just treat gay people as equals? Homosexuality has been around for millennia, it isn't some passing fad that will go away if you are mean to them or treat them as second class citizens.

BTW, just because I don't hate gay people doesn't mean I have no religious faith. Many Christian sects have openly gay clergy - and all of them have closeted gay clergy. And most heterosexuals don't exactly limit themselves to procreation only by the Bible sex.

Who is doing this?

I went back and re-read this entire thread and don't find anyone fussing or treating gay people as unequals or second class citizens nor being mean to them.

 

[Lynnie]

No matter how much you fuss, people aren't going to stop being gay, so why can't we just treat gay people as equals? Homosexuality has been around for millennia, it isn't some passing fad that will go away if you are mean to them or treat them as second class citizens.

BTW, just because I don't hate gay people doesn't mean I have no religious faith. Many Christian sects have openly gay clergy - and all of them have closeted gay clergy. And most heterosexuals don't exactly limit themselves to procreation only by the Bible sex.

Yep, Ditto. My church is very open about this.
I knew of a church that wouldn't hire a choir director because he was gay.....I was mortified at this news.

 

[poppy]

Being allowed to marry can't really be a qualifier.

Consider this: If you are in a same-"gender" relationship in a state where it is legal to marry and you choose not to, then you aren't eligible for the benefits. But if you live in a state where same-"gender" marriage isn't legal you are automatically eligible. That is just taking for granted that everyone in a committed relationship would marry if they could. It isn't true for opposite-"gender" couples. It isn't true for same-"gender" couples either. There isn't a way to do this fairly in the current climate.

Maybe I'm the one confused. I thought we were discussing federal employees benefits not state employees. You have a good point but that would need to be argued state by state.

 

[Winnie]

Maybe I'm the one confused. I thought we were discussing federal employees benefits not state employees. You have a good point but that would need to be argued state by state.

I don't think you are confused at all. I'm just saying that if the federal employee resides in a state that allows same "gender" marriage they would be legally married and if they do not reside in such a state, they would not.

 

[Lynnie]

Interesting times.....my Big Sister defied all family values when she stated at the supper table that she was going to live with her boyfriend and not get married......afterall, "a marriage certificate is just a piece of paper." Turned the house upside down. This was 30 something years ago and she blazed the Sexual Revolution.

She did marry. Times have changed.

Same sex/gender marriage or union is the decision of the states. Fed has nothing to do with it, the decision of the states, that is. However, I understand the complication from the respect that if you were 'grandfathered' in the dates of acceptable gay union in CA last year and you are still recognized as married, but you move to NC or another state where it is not recognized, then what happens to your piece of paper?

You still have what's on your heart, don't you? And, each other? But, it seems that each State will have to place into effect something recognizing the marriage based upon where it was domiciled.....without reducing this to sounding too business-like.

 

[wrobert]

Interesting times.....my Big Sister defied all family values when she stated at the supper table that she was going to live with her boyfriend and not get married......afterall, "a marriage certificate is just a piece of paper." Turned the house upside down. This was 30 something years ago and she blazed the Sexual Revolution.

She did marry; an officer in the military. Times have changed.

Same sex/gender marriage or union is the decision of the states. Fed has nothing to do with it......

Same sex/gender marriage or union is the decision of the individuals. What the heck has the State got to do with it? Government needs to govern and get out of people's bedroom.

 

[Lynnie]

Same sex/gender marriage or union is the decision of the individuals. What the heck has the State got to do with it? Government needs to govern and get out of people's bedroom.

Doesn't the States' Legislature pass or deny this Bill? Isn't that what this is and has been about for a few years?

 

[wrobert]

Doesn't the States' Legislature pass or deny this Bill? Isn't that what this is and has been about for a few years?

My point. In the old days I guess I could see the argument for the license and the piece of paper in regards to property ownership and such. But there has to be a better way. I do not want a bunch of old white guys sitting around tell me who I can or can not fall in love with and choose to share all my stuff. If I remember to go get it off the beach.

 

[LuciferSam]

Maybe not, but it would certainly put a stop to the countless millions who have died trying to prove who has the toughest imaginary friend.:angry:

Immoral theistic society.

 

[Lynnie]

Immoral theistic society.

Yes, Consistent Inconsistencies.