[CJ Wolf]

Here is something that peeves me. My company is 'progressive' and has this 'life partner/dependent' compensation but it only applies to those that a 'same-gender life partner'.

Thus, even though I may have shacked up with a chick and consider her a life partner unless I am 'married' I don't get to claim her as a dependent and thus I can not get all the goodies that a 'same gender' partner would. What kind of case do I have here, it seems discriminatory.

[Political Junkie Too]

My company instituted civil unions of any gender coupling. All that was required was a notarized affidavit stating that the relationship existed for longer than six months and that the couple was cohabitating.

-PJ

[MEGoody]

"What kind of case do I have here, it seems discriminatory."

It is. It also discriminates against the guy who wants to call his dog his 'life partner.'

[retrokitten]

My company has that, too. We all think it's BS and raised the same issue you did about living with someone of the opposite sex. Of course, that is not covered. Total BS.

[Modernman]

Thus, even though I may have shacked up with a chick and consider her a life partner unless I am 'married' I don't get to claim her as a dependent and thus I can not get all the goodies that a 'same gender' partner would

Your company only grants those rights to homosexuals since they do not have the right to get married. If they could get married, then the rule would change to cover all married couples and exclude all unmarried couples, regardless of the innie/outie combinations involved.