Ruling sparks debate on retroactive gay rights

Associated Press ^ | Jul 17, 2014 5:15 PM EDT | Dave Collins

[Olog-hai]

A new Connecticut Supreme Court ruling is adding to the debate on whether gay marriage rights should be applied retroactively and qualify same-sex couples for rights and benefits for which they weren’t entitled before state laws allowed them to marry.

Although no states that allow gay marriage have made their laws retroactive, many same-sex partners believe they should have received Social Security survivor payments, tax breaks, inheritances and other benefits that were afforded only to heterosexual married couples before gay marriage laws were passed. …

[icwhatudo]

So marry your dog now, in 20 years you can get retroactive benefits when the freaks run out of freaky things to legalize.

[USFRIENDINVICTORIA]

No slippery slope here — just a precipice and the abyss.

[yefragetuwrabrumuy]

I have a feeling that this dog doesn’t hunt, in that it would mean money coming out of the state for which they get bupkus.

[Steve_Seattle]

I thought I saw something in the local (Seattle) news a week or two ago that gay marriage was in fact being imposed retroactively for those who had previously enacted “civil unions.” The story said something like, “This week some gays will be officially married whether they realize it or not.”

[tet68]

I thought ex-post facto laws were unconstitutional...
Wait, this is Obama’s amerika... nevermind.

[grobdriver]

Follow the money.
That's all the queers have ever been after.

[Scrambler Bob]

Retroactive???

How about all those gay fetuses that have been aborted?

We need reparations. And counseling and education.

[a fool in paradise]

Mueller was diagnosed with ovarian cancer in 2001. In 2005, however, Mueller and Stacey learned the diagnosis was wrong and she actually had appendix cancer. Mueller died in 2009 at age 62. Stacey said her death could have been prevented if the original diagnosis had been correct. Mueller sued for malpractice. After her death, a jury issued a $2.4 million verdict in her favor against one of her doctors, while another doctor settled for an undisclosed amount. The trial court and the state Appellate Court, however, ruled against Stacey in her effort to sue a doctor for loss of spousal "consortium," saying Stacey and Mueller weren't married as required under the law at the time of the malpractice.

So $2,400,000 + an undisclosed sum wasn't enough money for her yet? Go on...

[GeronL]

wow

Someone was getting really greedy