[sinkspur]

Your company may be subsidizing the health insurance of "gays". Is there a cost to business for this? Do they pass that cost on to the "straight" employees?

So? I could care less. If they contribute to the welfare and profitability of the company, they deserve the same benefits I do.

My company does NOT provide for health benefits of domestic partners, gay or straight.

[Dolphy]

So? I could care less. If they contribute to the welfare and profitability of the company, they deserve the same benefits I do.

I feel the same way. My company does provide benefits for gay partners. Looking around at a recent national meeting I see they also provide benefits for the obese, smokers, pregnant women, etc. It never occurred to me to wonder what this cost me.

[narses]

If you are correct about your firm, then your firm isn't the question. BUT, as an alleged "deacon" of the Roman Catholic Church, why do you not care about the mortal sins of your neighbors? Is your love for them lacking somehow?

[Jorge]

So? I could care less. If they contribute to the welfare and profitability of the company, they deserve the same benefits I do.

Exactly.
But I expect this debate will lead to complaints about how our insurance premiums are helping to pay for meds for gays who have AIDS and really deserve to die because they might have done something wrong to catch it etc. etc.

Excuse me if this hasn't come up already. I haven't read all the posts.

[I got the rope]

I wonder...when is it appropriate to talk about sex in the workplace. Why would the topic even come up?

[Romulus]

So? I could [not]care less.

Well you should, because employee benefits cost money. The fact that many companies discriminate against singles by extending health benefits to marrieds is at least excusable with the argument that marriage serves a social purpose (and it's this that keeps me from complaining too loudly about the disproportionate way premiums -- and tax burdens -- are distributed). But since the gay lifestyle actually imposes additional stress on the social fabric, while contributing nothing, there's no justification for its subsidy.