Skip to comments.
Ruling sparks debate on retroactive gay rights
Associated Press ^
| Jul 17, 2014 5:15 PM EDT
| Dave Collins
Posted on 07/17/2014 4:05:57 PM PDT by 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 werent 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.
(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...
TOPICS: Chit/Chat; Miscellaneous; Religion; Society
KEYWORDS: gaymarriage; gaynewsrooms; gaystapo; homosexualagenda; pinkjournalism; retroactive; retrocrimes; revisionisthistory
posted on 07/17/2014 4:05:57 PM PDT
So marry your dog now, in 20 years you can get retroactive benefits when the freaks run out of freaky things to legalize.
posted on 07/17/2014 4:09:29 PM PDT
(Low taxes and less spending in Sodom and Gomorrah is not my idea of a conservative victory)
No slippery slope here — just a precipice and the abyss.
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.
posted on 07/17/2014 4:19:44 PM PDT
("Don't compare me to the almighty, compare me to the alternative." -Obama, 09-24-11)
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.”
I thought ex-post facto laws were unconstitutional...
Wait, this is Obama’s amerika... nevermind.
posted on 07/17/2014 4:57:12 PM PDT
( " We would not die in that man's company, that fears his fellowship to die with us...." Henry V.)
Follow the money.
That's all the queers have ever been after.
posted on 07/17/2014 5:23:57 PM PDT
(Where is Wilson Blair when you need him?)
How about all those gay fetuses that have been aborted?
We need reparations. And counseling and education.
To: Olog-hai; GeronL
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...
posted on 07/18/2014 9:44:33 AM PDT
by a fool in paradise
(The new witchhunt: "Do you NOW, . . . or have you EVER , . . supported traditional marriage?")
To: a fool in paradise
Someone was getting really greedy
posted on 07/18/2014 9:45:31 AM PDT
(Vote for Conservatives not for Republicans)
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson