[lbo-talk] Re: Kerry Says He Might Support Constitutional Ban on Gay Marriage

Jessica LaBumbard jesslabumbard at hotmail.com
Tue Feb 10 15:30:16 PST 2004


Off the top of my head, another right I would have in mind is being recognized as "next of kin". If my partner is injured, incapacitated, in a coma, etc. in the ICU or emergency room, the only way I can get in there to see her and to act on her behalf is to claim some immediate family relationship to her other than partner (i.e. sister). As far as I am aware, this still holds true as it did in the past.

Also, I think, but am not entirely sure if this is an across the board thing, that "domestic partner" is defined as unmarried couples who cohabitate - same sex or het couples qualify. Our union contract where I work uses that definition anyway.

jessica


>As I understand it, the only rights that marriage guarantees are those
>to tax exemptions (but beware of marriage penalty!) and social security
>benefits. Everything else is conditional e.g. you may be entitled to
>benefits offered by your partner's employer if such benefits are
>provided, but the fact of the matter is that many companies (such as
>Johns Hopkins) already provide benefits to domestic partners of the same
>sex (different sex partners need marriage license, though). Moreover,
>if your employer provide benefits to employees only, or do not provide
>them at all, the "rights" of homosexuals and heterosexuals are exactly
>the same - the right to nothing.


>Common property - this depends whether the state is a "community
>property state" and most states in the Union are not. MD is, PA is not.
>As a result, my PA wife has the right to 50% of my MD assets earned
>since marriage, but I have the right to 0% of her assets hidden in the
>vast wastelands of PA :). Therefore, my rights in PA in this respect
>are not much those different than those of same sex partners.


>Children or rather adoption thereof (obviously) - heterosexual marriage
>does not guarantee any rights to adoption, singles can adopt and that
>puts them on equal footing with same sex partners (who are legally
>single).


>I do not think there is a "right" to sexual favors for anyone, married
>or not (there is, after all, such a thing as marital rape).


>I am not quite sure what other rights you have in mind.


>Wojtek

_________________________________________________________________ Find great local high-speed Internet access value at the MSN High-Speed Marketplace. http://click.atdmt.com/AVE/go/onm00200360ave/direct/01/



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list