Results 1 to 7 of 7
-
08-29-2015, 02:59 PM #1UnregisteredGuest
Domestic Partner policies now a moot point
Now that gays can marry, should they be entitled to receive benefits while living together, but not married? This applies to heterosexual non married partners as well. Get married, share everything, get divorced, lose everything should apply to everybody now!
-
09-01-2015, 05:28 PM #2UnregisteredGuest
This policy should be discontinued. Living together and not married has tax advantages and this additional coverage increases costs of healthcare. There really is no legal reason now that prevents anybody from getting married. No taxpayer monies should be spent on partner benefits as all the reasons for partner benefits no longer apply. Getting married or staying single is a choice now.
-
09-05-2015, 12:55 PM #3UnregisteredGuest
Very true. You fought for and the SCOTUS gave gays the right to marry across this land. Your equal now on marriage. Enjoy the divorce process, and the additional costs of being married like everybody else. No special considerations now.
-
09-05-2015, 03:22 PM #4UnregisteredGuest
please don't say this a moot point or outdated. The next chapter has yet to be written. What about my right to "marry" 6 men and 19 woman. We all will live in the same house as a "family unit". Why should the government not have to pay for all their health coverage. If I can marry any consenting adult why not 2 3 or 300? My rainbow flag has a multiplication sign on it. Own it!!!!
-
09-05-2015, 05:33 PM #5UnregisteredGuest
-
09-06-2015, 01:17 PM #6UnregisteredGuest
Well get married then! Dump the domestic partner benefits, they no longer apply!
-
09-07-2015, 12:40 PM #7UnregisteredGuest
How can the city justify domestic partner benefits now. This topic should be addressed and done away with. No taxpayer monies should be spent providing this benefit now.
Bookmarks