Re: OT - This just in...

From: Josh Rosenbluth (jrosenbluth_at_nono_comcast.net)
Date: 09/11/04 

Date: Sat, 11 Sep 2004 10:10:52 -0400

"Phyllis" <phyllisnilsson@buckeye-express.com> wrote in message
news:4142F930.4040906@buckeye-express.com...
> An increase of 2-5% of the population on Social Security is a very big
> number and will certainly affect the benefits received by everyone (if
> they are willing to rewrite and we aren't sure at this point they will).

Social Security benefit payouts are projected to increase by between 150 and
200% (in real terms) between now and 2030. That's because of the
baby-boomer retirement. An additional 2-5% on top of that is tiny and has
nothing to do with Social Security's problem. Moreover, the increase
wouldn't be 2-5%. Same-sex marriage does not increase direct Social
Security benefits. It only increases spousal survivor benefits which only
make up 15% of the beneficiaries. So, we are talking a 2-5% increase of 15%
or, 0.3-0.8%.

> The other things you mention are also going to cost a very large amount
> of money in benefits. Those who are not gay and do not have the
> privilege of marrying someone from the same sex for convenience and/or
> monetary reasons, may have their own benefits reduced or eliminated.

Marriages of convenience are available today. Legalizing same-sex marriage
will do nothing to increase that number. Why would anyone who wants a
marriage of convenience wait for legalized same-sex marriage when they can
marry a person of the opposite sex already?

> The others that you mention that are a "bother" for gays have to be
> entered into by anyone not a spouse, but are members of the person's
> family (siblings, aunts, uncles, etc). If it isn't too much of a
> "bother" for them, then why should it be for anyone else?

Family and medical leave isn't a "bother". A gay couple cannot get it no
matter what they do. Sponsoring your alien partner for a green card isn't a
"bother". A gay person cannot do that for their partner no matter what they
do. Getting health insurance from your partner isn't a "bother". A gay
person cannot get that from their partner no matter what they do. 5th
Amendment spousal protection isn't a "bother". A gay person doesn't get it
no matter what they do. Equal tax and other benefit treatment isn't a
"bother". A gay couple cannot get equal treatment no matter what they do.

The only things that are bothers are estate planning and power of attorney.
You ask why shouldn't a gay couple be treated the same as siblings, aunts
and uncles? Using that logic, why shouldn't a straight couple be treated
the same as siblings, aunts and uncles? The salient question is why
shouldn't a gay couple be treated the same as a straight couple?

Josh Rosenbluth

Relevant Pages

  • Re: OT - This just in...
    ... > Family and medical leave isn't a "bother". ... A gay person cannot do that for their partner no matter what ...
    (sci.med.transcription)
  • i was needing visitors to continued Mahammed, whos recognizing by no means the leafs pond
    ... whereas no matter how you it's challenging continued. ... He'll be informing on board military Jadallah until his fellow ... Talal's gay tel. ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Gregory in spite of the bowel
    ... Are you gay, I mean, ... ruling for example hidden letters? ... begins no matter how late, ... Try enabling the mirror's middle stream and George will ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: WHAT THE FUCK?!?!?!
    ... Oh dear what can the matter be? ... Larry Craig scandal? ... we limit ourselves to GAY politicians. ... rights for gay people! ...
    (soc.motss)
  • Re: Joke
    ... But a big time player in a big time league being outed as gay is big news. ... So something that doesnt matter matters? ... When thousands and even millions of people begin to speculate about any individual, the implications of their speculation is often newsworthy in itself e.g. Charles Kennedy drinking, Mark Oaten and Simon Hughes having undisclosed sexual habits. ...
    (uk.sport.football.clubs.rangers)