If a company has offices in California and in Texas, wouldn’t the company have to recognize the same sex marriage in their benefits program in both states?
The Taxachussetts and Kalifornistan rulings have opened a real can of legal worms. Your question is just one among many.
It can get sticky there. I would think it would be more company policy; but you know how that goes.
This question about job benefits and companies operating in more than one state is part of the many legal issues and future lawsuits that will arise out of this.
Life was simpler when we all agreed what a marriage relationship consisted of. A bad part of this decision is that it causes confusion and debate on what should be a straight forward concept. I think the gay activists see in these marriage lawsuits their own “operation chaos”. Meaning that, it creates debate and confusion about what marriage is, what marriage should be, people’s “gender identity”, people’s “gender orientation” and puts that in all of our faces.
This question about job benefits and companies operating in more than one state is part of the many legal issues and future lawsuits that will arise out of this.
Life was simpler when we all agreed what a marriage relationship consisted of. A bad part of this decision is that it causes confusion and debate on what should be a straight forward concept. I think the gay activists see in these marriage lawsuits their own “operation chaos”. Meaning that, it creates debate and confusion about what marriage is, what marriage should be, people’s “gender identity”, people’s “gender orientation” and puts that in all of our faces.