Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Stew
. . .
I don't have the entire list at my disposal, but I'll offer 25 of the benefits that are only available to married couples....
- Joint parental rights of children
- Joint adoption
- Status as "next-of-kin" for hospital visits and medical decisions
- Right to make a decision about the disposal of loved ones remains
- Immigration and residency for partners from other countries
- Crime victims recovery benefits
- Domestic violence protection orders
- Judicial protections and immunity
- Automatic inheritance in the absence of a will
- Public safety officers death benefits
- Spousal veterans benefits
- Social Security
- Medicare
- Joint filing of tax returns
- Wrongful death benefits for surviving partner and children
- Bereavement or sick leave to care for partner or children
- Child support
- Joint Insurance Plans
- Tax credits including: Child tax credit, Hope and lifetime learning credits
- Deferred Compensation for pension and IRAs
- Estate and gift tax benefits
- Welfare and public assistance
- Joint housing for elderly
- Credit protection
- Medical care for survivors and dependents of certain veterans
. . . . |
Exactly. Some of these can be contracted into if you have the money. But, most cannot and that contract can be contested while the automatic rights cannot. Moreover, why should gay people have to spend thousands of dollars to obtain the handful of rights that are actually obtainable that way when straight people get all the rights automatically, for free, and, once again, based solely on a religious idea.
Once again, the 14th Amendment says:
Quote:
|
No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
|
When the state makes a law that is not applied to all people the same and it does not have a valid (the def. varies) reason for doing so, the law is invalid
[U]See/U]
Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003), which held that intimate consensual sexual conduct was part of the liberty protected by substantive due process under the Fourteenth Amendment. Many, but not all, scholars and jurists think that the application of the 14th Amendment in Lawrence coupled with the case of Loving v. Virgina (cited earlier) and the separation of church and state clause in the First Amend. and the related cases, will result in the Supreme Court finding giving rights to one group over the over based solely on a religious idea is anything but equal protection under the law.