Gay MO Highway Patrolman killed in the line of duty, survivor benefits denied

[davjohns 1]

grue

Just another casualty of religion and government mixing.

Government should not recognize marriage between ANYONE. NOBODY. If people need to be able to have a legal status for tax crap or insurance/benefits, whatever, they can have a registered domestic relationship which can be between any consenting adults.

I'll go just a bit further: eliminate all government legislation regarding mariage, domestic relations, etc. If two or three or a dozen people want a relationship, they can put in writing what the expectations are and the terms should one of them want to terminate the relationship. They can provide for inheritance and require in their contract that individual wills conform with the contract. They can lay out what individuals get and what they are to put in. The government need never get involved unless there is a contract dispute.

There should be no (so called) rights created by marriage. No tax breaks. No child deduction. No automatic inheritance. Nothing. To give married people these 'extras' is to coerce people into a relationship they might not want. It is the antithesis of freedom. Why should individuals be deprived of these 'rights'?

I understand the existing laws were to protect the women who were in a disadvantaged position by giving up careers to support their family, played the traditional housewife role, etc. Those days are gone. We now claim we are all equal. So, why do we still have a system that encourages inequality? If women who wanted a traditional role had a contract saying what they would get should the man cheat, find someone younger, etc., wouldn't she be in a stronger position than what the current system provides? Wouldn't she be more equal?

The current form of marriage is a leftover of an archaic system. If you want equality, do away with systems that encourage inequality.

I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet..

But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

[turtlespeed 226]

1) I bet they knew this before he was killed.
2) Knowing this, they should have prepared in the way of life insurance with the partner as the beneficiary, at least until the law changes.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[labrys 0]

Quote

I'd like to know more about the "Survivor Benefits" that were denied.

http://www.odmp.org/benefits/state/missouri

Owned by Remi #?

[labrys 0]

Quote

2) Knowing this, they should have prepared in the way of life insurance with the partner as the beneficiary, at least until the law changes.

You have no way to know that they didn't prepare. Challenging the law like this is the best way to bring these kinds of things to light and try to cause that change.

Owned by Remi #?

[SkyDekker 1,465]

labrys

Quote

2) Knowing this, they should have prepared in the way of life insurance with the partner as the beneficiary, at least until the law changes.

You have no way to know that they didn't prepare. Challenging the law like this is the best way to bring these kinds of things to light and try to cause that change.

You mean those uppity gays don't only fight for money and attention?