“The DPRRA requires that domestic partners be treated the same as spouses for most purposes under California law. “To qualify as “registered domestic partners,” both individuals must file a declaration of domestic partnership with the Secretary of State and satisfy certain additional requirements. Specifically, domestic partners must share a common residence, be over the age of 18, be capable of consenting to the partnership, not be married to someone else or be a member of another domestic partnership, and not be related by blood in such a way that would prevent the individuals from being married to each other. In addition, the domestic partners must be of the same sex or, if they are of the opposite sex, at least one of the partners must be over the age of 62.”
TheStateOf . . . Domestic Partner Benefits. I (J) laugh when I hear that distinguishing between married and non-married couples is “discrimination.” Gimme a break. Once upon a time, my wife was my “girlfriend.” She was not on my health plan until we made the commitment to be married. Any two persons who happen to be simply living together can register as domestic partners, which “discriminates” against those who earned their benefits through the commitment of marriage. In order to receive time off for the Family Medical Leave Act, one must first be family. Further, forcing companies to supply benefits to any Tom, Dick and Harry (no pun intended) is costly and burdensome. That means if your Illinois-based business offers health benefits to its employees’ legal spouses and their children, then it must give the same benefits to its employees’ domestic partners and their children. Additionally, why limit domestic partnerships to two people? Why not three? Four? It’s really not an issue of gay marriage; it’s an issue of committed relationships that have been formalized.
The State Of . . . the 21st century. Justin, check your calendar. Society is moving forward not backward. The law is not for gay people who are simply living together. They have to show evidence of a relationship. See the article above. You talk about how you and the misses earned your benefits through the commitment of marriage. Well what do you do if people won’t let you marry? You apply for Domestic Partner Benefits. It’s not like the church is recognizing gay marriage, it’s the state. The state, by definition, is soul-less and does not favor religion. So why not let the state recognize marriage or to a lesser degree domestic partners. And why should we limit domestic partnerships to two people? Because it reflects reality. Nobody is living 3 and 4 to a household trying to claim one another as spouses or domestic partners (unless you are polygamist leader Warren Jeffs). Since two people who have shown a commitment to one another cannot be married and they have shown evidence of such commitment to the state, then they should be allowed Domestic Partner Benefits.
Filed under: Uncategorized
