Libertarian ping.To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here
Posted on 08/23/2006 8:35:50 AM PDT by sionnsar
Straight woman seeks equality under gay-rights law:
Unwed Redmond worker wants her male partner to receive health benefits
One of the first tests for Washington's new gay civil rights law has an intriguing twist: The complaint was filed by a heterosexual woman.
The state's discrimination watchdogs are investigating the case, which claims unmarried straight people should get the same domestic partner benefits as their gay and lesbian co-workers.
But officials are treading carefully, Human Rights Commission Director Marc Brenman said, because upholding the claim could set a sweeping new precedent for Washington businesses.
...
The complaint, filed last week, is one of four that have spawned full-fledged investigations under the sexual orientation section of Washington's anti-discrimination law.
It was signed by Sandi Scott-Moore, a Redmond-based employee of manufacturer Honeywell International. Scott-Moore claims health insurance coverage for her male partner was denied because the unmarried couple is not of the same gender.
...
Honeywell spokesman Robert Ferris said the company does provide health benefits for the partners of its gay and lesbian employees and has a zero-tolerance stand on discrimination. But the company disagrees with Scott-Moore, he said in a statement.
...
(Excerpt) Read more at kingcountyjournal.com ...
Sex discrimination.
Most large companies already give benefits to heterosexual "partners".
actually these cases are old news.
Generally, the straight people win.
Libertarian ping.To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here
I have been waiting for this to happen for years.
For those asking why she doesn't just marry the guy...she may just be trying to prove a point.
One wonders what the legal definition of a "homosexual" is, and more importantly perhaps, how is it proven in court?
Goose, meet Gander
"laughs at the left. What are they going to do now?"
Go along with it and take on the cause for having unweds who cohabitate receive bennies.
They will push this with all their might because it will be good for them politically.
Question is, what will Conservatives say? Because it now puts us into a position where the left will be pressing for equal rights of all.
Careful what you ask for. You might just get it.
Just another step to universal health care. It's part of the Lib/soc plan.
My company has domestic partner benefits for unmarried gays or straights, provided they can demonstrate that they have lived together for more than one year and share expenses.
Watch how many so-called judges who once ruled that gay-related domestic partner benefit restrictions were wrong because they were "discriminatory" will now rule that it is O.K to discriminate against the woman in this suit. Rule of "men" instead of rule of law.
In Liberalism, hypocrisy is the only rule.
In Liberalism, if a solution fits the result you want, it's right, and there are no other values or principles worth consideration. Of course that leads to the eradication of any real social contract of the people, with all results adjudicated by a elite judicial oligarchy, but, in fact, that is what the Marxists have trained the idiot Liberals to provide.
For the Marxists, the well-trained and indoctrinated judiciary is the vanguard of the proletariet, to achieve what the people would never agree to in their legislatures.
And shacking up is any better?
I had pretty much the EXACT same thing happen to me about oh four years ago...
Was a new employee at a workplace that is most recognized by three letters starting with the most common vowel and ending with the most common consonant...
At the time I was in a long term relationship (with my wife, but we were just living together at the time and not even engaged) going on about three years. She was self employed, so had no benefits of her own...not that either of us really needed any, we made enough money.
Anyways the presenter was talking about the benefits for married couples and such which sounded okay. Then she started talking about the "domestic partner" plan which was pretty much identicle to the married plan.
I asked "so what if I have a male roommate? Could I simply declare he was my partner?"
"Yes as long as you are in a commited relationship"
"Does a long term lease qualify?"
"No"
"So how do you KNOW that we are in a commited relationship"
"You fill out this form that says you are in a commited relationship with your partner, both of you sign it, and then for our benefits you are considered married, would you like the form?"
"Can my girlfriend, who I've been living with for three years now and I fill that paper out the same way?"
"No, opposite sex unmarried couples will be rejected from the benefits program"
to which I replied in front of 30 other people "so this is effectively special treatment for unmarried, gay couples, that us heterosexuals in this room are not entitled to? That's hardly fair"
"I think we should move on to the 401K"
Straight couples are legally allowed to marry, but homos are not allowed to marry in most states. An argument could be made that heterosexual partnerships are "more equal" than other types of partnerships.
As well as the natural Law of procreation, progression, and existence.
Sounds like a discourse I had with my son's elementary school teacher many years ago:
She had sent a list of words for spelling study home that contained two misspelled words.
I sent a note back explaining the proper spelling for the words and asking if she had corrected the other kids' lists.
She sent back a note saying that it was a transcription error and she pulled the lists and would issue a new one.
I sent back the comment that it would be much better if she used the list as an example of why proper spelling was important.
Her last note back to me began, "I'm sorry you don't like me..."
Ping!
Was it made by Fruit of the Loom?
List?
Disclaimer: 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.