Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: longtermmemmory
The ORIGINAL reason argued for non-married but living together benefits was that they might produce children.

Maybe in some instances. In this case, and many others, I get the impression that they had to include hetrosexuals in order to avoid discrimination lawsuits when they included homosexual "partners".

So instead they are getting this "invasion of privacy" thing, as if just applying for the "cohabitation" health insurance wasn't pretty much changing "private" to "not so private" in the first place.

119 posted on 01/23/2006 8:59:34 PM PST by El Gato (The Second Amendment is the Reset Button of the U.S. Constitution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies ]


To: El Gato

Marriage goes with the presumption of sexual relations.

Seriously, the honeymoon is a "sex vacation" in essence.

You are probably right about this situation including sexually active unmarried normal people.

The interesting question is whether the soon to be passed FL marriage amendment will end this after it passes in NOV.

That will simply end the gravy train for everyone cohabiting for sex. It will just put marriage for insurance back to opposite sex couples.


120 posted on 01/24/2006 8:50:09 AM PST by longtermmemmory (VOTE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson