On civil unions
Apparently, I'm actually being discriminated against because I'm straight.
Republicans should love this...
...in response to an email from my HR director:
---
I must apologize for giving you incorrect information. I reviewed our policy and we have “same sex partner coverage”, and not domestic partner coverage. The insurance industry won’t allow us to cover domestic partners, because they view their situation as not being married by choice. There is no law that states the two individuals can’t get married. It is different with same sex partners, most states won’t allow the couple to get married so as not to penalize the individuals, they can apply for coverage. Again, I apologize for giving you the wrong information.
---
In my response, I state the following:
---
I have serious issues with getting married when my friends aren’t allowed to. There’s a certain amount of chivalry in this, I know, but why should I be afforded benefits just because I happen to be of a certain persuasion that happens to be the majority? That’s not fair.
So, to go further: “There is no law that states the two individuals can’t get married.”
Technically, that’s not true in OR. In OR, same-sex couples (two individuals) can’t get married. That makes the whole notion of a civil union moot, considering it is dependent upon gender, not upon choice. In a democratic society, the rights of every individual to choose the way they live their life falls under the ‘pursuit of happiness’ clause that guides our necessitation for writing our Constitution. Therefore, I choose M Nowacki as my domestic partner as an individual and as my partner, regardless of gender.
---
I put these poor people through the wringer.
Republicans should love this...
...in response to an email from my HR director:
---
I must apologize for giving you incorrect information. I reviewed our policy and we have “same sex partner coverage”, and not domestic partner coverage. The insurance industry won’t allow us to cover domestic partners, because they view their situation as not being married by choice. There is no law that states the two individuals can’t get married. It is different with same sex partners, most states won’t allow the couple to get married so as not to penalize the individuals, they can apply for coverage. Again, I apologize for giving you the wrong information.
---
In my response, I state the following:
---
I have serious issues with getting married when my friends aren’t allowed to. There’s a certain amount of chivalry in this, I know, but why should I be afforded benefits just because I happen to be of a certain persuasion that happens to be the majority? That’s not fair.
So, to go further: “There is no law that states the two individuals can’t get married.”
Technically, that’s not true in OR. In OR, same-sex couples (two individuals) can’t get married. That makes the whole notion of a civil union moot, considering it is dependent upon gender, not upon choice. In a democratic society, the rights of every individual to choose the way they live their life falls under the ‘pursuit of happiness’ clause that guides our necessitation for writing our Constitution. Therefore, I choose M Nowacki as my domestic partner as an individual and as my partner, regardless of gender.
---
I put these poor people through the wringer.