Comments on: Obama Signs Same Sex Benefits Memorandum
President Announces Extension Of Benefits To Fed. Employees' Same-Sex Partners, But Move Unlikely To Quell Gay Groups' Anger
Add a Comment See all 75 Comments
- The correct answer IS bigotry.
- Reply to this comment
- by tautomer June 17, 2009 6:36 PM PDT
I guess we all knew that whatever he did it "wouldn't be enough". This is a very self-centered, contentious segment of the population. Next, they'll be demanding reparations and a mandatory gay studies curriculum in the high schools!
All they want is "equal rights".
Why do you people oppose "equal rights"? - Reply to this comment
- You seem to speak for everyone and no one. Run for office and make your superstitions and fantasies come true.
Tell us when you CHOSE to believe as you do. We'll get you help. - Reply to this comment
- Next we will be asking for the same health care coverage benefits, the same Social Security benefits, the same retirement and pension benefits, the same property ownership and inheritance benefits. You know, the same things you "enjoy" as special privileges. We all pay the same taxes, serve in the same military, hold the same jobs.
Try not to be afraid of being equal and American. - Reply to this comment
- The correct answer would be "bigotry".
- Reply to this comment
- I should have said gay people cannot get married on the federal level. There are some states that allow gay marriage now of course.
- Reply to this comment
- Based on this, I'm assuming that this policy change will apply to those who have a heterosexual significant other and/or girlfriend/boyfriend who live together.
by winstrv June 17, 2009 9:02 PM PDT
Of course not. Straight people can get married to receive the benefits. Gay people cannot, so this is an attempt to let gay people do what straight people already can do - get the benefits. - Reply to this comment
-
- I should have said gay people cannot get married on the federal level. There are some states that allow gay marriage now of course.
- Edit:
"... IN a state where it is legal and recognised." - Reply to this comment
- I hope it isn't that open ended. These benefits should be for those couples who have entered into a marriage/civil union is a state where it is legal and recognised.
It's the only way where this memorandum could be concidered fair. - Reply to this comment
- Based on this, I'm assuming that this policy change will apply to those who have a heterosexual significant other and/or girlfriend/boyfriend who live together. What are the rules? How long must they be together to qualify? What happens if and when they break up? Will the nonfederal significant other have a claim to benefits such as health, insurance, pension, etc.. after the break up or the federal employee dies? Many more questions, not enough room to ask. I assume once the announcement is made, the laws will be changed and OPM will comply.
- Reply to this comment
-
- I hope it isn't that open ended. These benefits should be for those couples who have entered into a marriage/civil union is a state where it is legal and recognised.
It's the only way where this memorandum could be concidered fair.
- I hope it isn't that open ended. These benefits should be for those couples who have entered into a marriage/civil union is a state where it is legal and recognised.
- Army of twelve what - bigots? LOL! Common trash from this one, folks.
- Reply to this comment
- Thank god we don't have WBC (Westburough Baptist Church) members around here... I hope.
- Reply to this comment
- Very well written sir.
- Reply to this comment
- Thanks Mr President! You've had a slow start on Gay and Lesbian issues but I do realize that we are not your top priority. Unlike some of my brothers and sisters I am more patient and more than willing to acknowledge you've only been in office 6 months, and I believe you'll pull through on your commitments to equal civil rights and marriage equality for gay and lesbian people. Thank you!
- Reply to this comment
- My bad... is should have typed "until they are in LINE.."
- Reply to this comment
- it could be a cycnical attempt to deflect frustration at an all but meaningless gesture that is more symbolic than real and helps only a small fraction of the target audience.
by lloydbest1 June 17, 2009 5:00 PM PDT
Not cynical...just driven by money and power. Totally at odds with other stuff the administration has done this month. The only reason he did this was to keep the campaign contributions rolling in. How very clintonesque!
He shouldn't have done anything until he is prepared to open a larger public discussion on civil unions and crack down on the states until they are in lone with the USG: a marriage is between one man and one woman! - Reply to this comment
-
- What you call the "larger public discussion" (the "culture wars") ended. No one won. No one lost. Don't look to this President to resurrect that fiasco.
He's been saying "civil unions" for months and months. The opposition hasn't picked up on that option or even bothered to discuss it.
Why should states' rights be curtailed ("crack down on states?").
By all means continue pretending to have the belief "one man and one woman." Beliefs are not arguments or even opinions in the political arena. A degree of rationality has returned to politics.
Tell us about Senator Ensign, part of that "one man and one woman" fantasy.
- What you call the "larger public discussion" (the "culture wars") ended. No one won. No one lost. Don't look to this President to resurrect that fiasco.
- What a steaming pile of nothing. It was scheduled late in the day, to make the minimum of news. I just saw the film from the Oval Office (I do not believe it was live). The President was discovered seated, surrounded by people intending to attend the LGBT dinner next week who need something face-saving to say. He made a very brief statement announcing that he was .... get this .... directing the State Department and the OPM to give same sex partners employed by the Executive Branch all benefits they determine are consistent with the law. If there aren't any, I guess there aren't any. God knows the President didn't name any. He then signed the "memorandum" and took no questions. It was a photo op (flash cameras whirred distractingly all through it), and not a lengthy one. He held his nose, did it, made it as undramatic as possible, and got out of Dodge. Even worse than I expected. There was speculation that he might dramatize it by surrounding himself with affected couples. If there were any, he didn't mention it. He thanked Barney Frank and Joe Lieberman, both of whom attended, and endorsed Lieberman's proposed act recognizing gay partners of federal employees. That was it. Oh, and it started more than half an hour late.
- Reply to this comment
-
- Maybe it says equal rights for gays is going to be pretty routinely handle, efficiently, within the law, and congress and the courts. Maybe you should lower your expectations, realize this civil rights movement in mature enough and the President is too, to start conducting change as a regular part of government, every day.
Howls and fanfare can be left for ... Senators like Ensign.
- Not to mention that he didn't do a thing until the the LGBT pulled all their funding from his happy campaign, the DNC, and withdrew their support.
But what's really hilarious is these people think they're going to get something out of the benefit of having a marriage license.
There is absolutely no benefit whatsoever in a marriage license unless you are establishing equal parental rights over children you conceived TOGETHER, which same sex couples cannot do.
And for every issue they claim they are discriminated against, there is a very viable alternative legal way to achieve it, other than a marriage license. And it doesn't help their income tax whatsoever because when it is combined, it throws them into a higher bracket.
As for insurance, an employer does NOT contribute a dime to your spouses insurance premiums, they simply allow you to enjoin your spouse with the group, for the group rate...when in fact, if you shopped around you could pro'bably find a better single rate policy with the same benefits...just not with the fancy title of Blue Cross/Blue Shield or UniCare or Travelers on it. I get mine from a little known local insurance group.
The LGBT has been duped by the liberals into staying all stirred up over discrimination issues that are HOGWARSH in the area of benefits, and it's not going solve a thing about their PERCEIVED discrimination against what they do in their bedroom.
- Maybe it says equal rights for gays is going to be pretty routinely handle, efficiently, within the law, and congress and the courts. Maybe you should lower your expectations, realize this civil rights movement in mature enough and the President is too, to start conducting change as a regular part of government, every day.
- "Homosexuality is wrong. It has always been wrong and always will be."
Nope. Not "wrong"........
Maybe unseemly, maybe icky, Maybe personally distasteful. Maybe thinking about it is like rubbing a nail across a blackboard but it is NOT wrong; neither you nor the local minister nor even the Apostle Paul saying so doesn't make it so.
Go ahead and demonize homosexuality if you feel you must but regardless of what any authority claims, Homosexuality is morally neutral. It is not "wrong". It isn't even "right". It just is. - Reply to this comment
- Homophobia is repulsive, repugnant and nauseatingly wrong. It is sickening to see people continue to be a part of it. Don't associate yourself with this foul stench of irrationality and end up in a social fringe group--at least for the sake of your children. Look around you, it is becoming a repulsive position just like being a member of the Klu Klux Klan or Neo-Nazi Party. The Dark Ages continue to lift from society.
- Reply to this comment
-
- Just as bad are the hate-mongering homosexual Christianphobes that bash a persons religious beliefs.
- repulsive, repugnant, nauseating, foul stench... all the things that come to mind when gay boy sex is mentioned. It is sickening to see people continue to be a part of it. Don't associate yourself with this destructive liberal agenda. Its an anti-American lie, and its tearing the country apart, while the liberals point the finger at the Americans who are holding tight to our traditional values which the liberals hate so much.
- by wtfever19 June 18, 2009 7:59 AM PDT
repulsive, repugnant, nauseating, foul stench... all the things that come to mind when gay boy sex is mentioned.
==============================
So... you're all for lesbian sex? You would deny the rights of gay men, but condone the rights of gay women?
Oh man.. are you a real number....
- Just like a liberal to make twisted assumptions to their favor. No, I find the lesbian lifestyle equally repulsive. Thank you for allowing me to make that clarification.
- Science, Theory and Reality, The Koran, The Bible,Hinduism, Judaism,
Buddaism, etc...... The list goes on... - Reply to this comment
International recording artist Shakira on love, career and more.
