[The KG9 Kid]

Comments?

[Britton J Wingfield]

So close the loophole. I don't care who gets married, either, but I don't think it should be either rewarded or penalized by the state.

[Fierce Allegiance]

Eliminate income taxes entirely!

[Tacis]

Hey, suck it up. Fairies are precious and superior to all others. Faggitude might become mandatory one of these days.

Where did perverted deviants get the political clout to accomplish something like this? Is the entire California legislature limp wristed?` Sure, there are lots of sensitive tinkerbells in Hollywood, but do they own the government?

[Integrityrocks]

I would like to hear Michael Reagan discuss this topic, since he's a Californian. Maybe he already has. Can you send your statement to him? I personally, am altogether against homosexual relationships - its against God, but it never helps to promote the cause, via, the financial angle. Thanks. Good post.

[Blood of Tyrants]

Allow me to preface my remarks by stating that I am not one of those Freepers opposed to the basic idea of homosexual marriage. I couldn't care less about two other people of any type living together in whatever manner they choose. I live in a committed heterosexual relationship:

The problem is that you live in San Francisco and are inured to the perversion to such a point that you aren't even able to see that it is WRONG anymore.

Walk away from the modern Sodom and look back from our vantage point and you will see the filth and perversion for what it is.

[Blue Screen of Death]

In the future the question will be if you marry your German Sheppard, will the vet bills be covered on your insurance before taxes.

[stylin19a]

I'm still scratchin my head about insurance premiums being taxable income. Am I understanding this right...? The Feds tax it...the state taxes it, then you pay a premium and the the state taxes it again ?

run....run for your life!

[Billthedrill]

A number of gay activists, even, are ambivalent over the issue of gay marriage for precisely this reason - it takes away the rationale for the extension of partnership benefits to unmarried couples, gay as well as straight. It is those activists who have insisted that there's more at issue here than a place at the trough. As there should be. We'll see if it's so.

Congratulations, by the way. Another one bites the dust...

[Zeroisanumber]

Yes, they're also legally banned from getting married and collecting whatever benefits come from a marriage.

That said, simply close the loophole and make the benefits taxable under law.

[King Black Robe]

Just wait till they sue for reparations for all those years of oppression.

[Imal]

Just another of many different aspects of a very complex issue, but noteworthy in and of itself.

The over all gay marriage debate is unappealing to me, however, because it is rife with blurred, shifting topics and tends to ignore the fact that gay marriage touches upon several different areas of interest, including social, cultural, legal, religious and financial domains.

Until those get worked out, we're left with little more than an incoherent, noisome din.

[davidosborne]

** ACTION ALERT ** SUPPORT S.J.RES.26 (7 Co-Sponsors) ** H.J.RES.56 (112 Co-Sponsors)

[swarthyguy]

Bingo. Again, the insights Freepers will come up with.

No one wants to touch this fact and that the recent tax cuts with ramifications for estate and probate law might be driving the push for legal marriage benefits.

Well Done!

[EdReform]

Ping

What We Can Do To Help Defeat the "Gay" Agenda

Homosexual Agenda: Categorical Index of Links (Version 1.1)

[tinamina]

This must be new. My understanding of the CCSF benefits for domestic partners is that since the Federal government doesn't recognize domestic partners, the cost of the insurance is deducted from the paychecks of the employee, but it cannot be pretaxed under Section 125 of the IRC, like it would be for married employees. Several years ago this was not taxable as income, and the only way it would be is if the employer paid the premium cost of the domestic partner, but I haven't seen this happen.
An employer can offer an employee $50K of life insurance for free, but if that same employer wants to give another $50K life insurance, the premium it pays for that $50K is taxable income to the employee. Is this the same sort of thing?

[WOSG]

Just another example of how recognition of gay partnerships chips away at traditional marriage.

The only way to "correct" this is to wipe away any privilege of marriage at all in the law. Presto -end of marriage!