Posted on 12/22/2009 6:16:58 AM PST by Tigen
CNSNews.com) – Taxpayers will pay almost $900 million over the next 10 years to extend federal employee benefits to homosexual couples, according to an analysis of “domestic partners” legislation by the Congressional Budget Office. However, supporters of the bill say the costs will be offset in other areas.
President Barack Obama has voiced support for the measure. The Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee approved the measure last Wednesday, while the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee approved a measure last month.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnsnews.com ...
another billion taxpayer dollars
for sodomy support
no wonder obama approves
then they would have to pay for my live in girlfriend too??
Homo couples don't abort babies, so this will more than pay for itself in reduced abortion costs!
However, supporters of the bill say the costs will be offset in other areas.
The Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligations Act of 2009
The bill provides that a federal employee and his or her domestic partner be entitled to benefits available to a married federal employee and his or her spouse. Surprisingly, it was sponsored by Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee Chairman Joe Lieberman (I-CT) and Ranking Member Susan Collins (R-ME). Lieberman is a Dem, so it is expected with him, but there is no excuse for Collins.
It does not cost taxpayers. It costs SINGLE HETERO taxpayers who pay for all “family” benefits. If TOTAL benefits remain the same, then it comes out of the pockets of normal families and children for whom single people agreed to shoulder these subsidies. THAT is the secular objective argument againt gay “marriage” and it is irrefutable.
Nope he was too conservative for Dems...they booted him
Lieberman failed the litmus test on only two issues, being pro-war in Iraq and pro Israel. He is a solid liberal in every other issue there is. As one Freeper here once noted (perhaps quoting someone else) Joe often very publicly wrestles with his conscience; I just wish he'd let his conscience win every once in a while
He’s way to the left of center, stands for the same principles as the Dems on matters such as abortion (100% NARAL rating) and caucuses with the Dems so there really isn’t a dime’s worth of difference.
So-called “Employee Benefits” in the workplace is discriminatory in many ways. Single people end up subsidizing health/dental for married people with kids and now the gays want single people to subsidize them.
The system should be revamped with each employee getting ONE unit of health/dental for ONE person as part of their compensation. Then if someone has 10 kids or a homosexual so-called “domestic partner” and is a burden on the system (more than the one single person), they would have to have more deducted from their pay to correspond to the added cost of their coverage.
This would be the fairest way to do it.
1) This single person doesn't remember agreeing to subsidize families of any kind. 2) Gays don't pay taxes? Did they agree at some point to subsidize only traditional arrangements? There are obviously sociological arguments in favor of subsidizing traditional families, but I'm not sure your argument holds water.
From June 29, 2004:
..should the gay lifestyle be encouraged? Health care professionals are familiar with the medical challenges of homosexual men living the gay lifestyle. For you, the taxpayer, to be willing to pay government benefits for gay marriage or civil unions, you should consider what lifestyle your tax dollars will be supporting.....
In addition to the physical, psychological, and emotional devastation of HIV/AIDS is the high cost of treatment. The wholesale cost for the combination drug therapies treating HIV is about $14,000 annually per patient. (Medication costs can be much higher depending on the drugs included in the regimen.) A study completed in 2002 estimated that costs treating patients who had progressed to an AIDS disease were around $34,000 annually per patient. [14] Variations in this approximation include medications, hospitalization, diagnostic costs and clinic costs. The health care costs of AIDS diseases and drugs for treating HIV have impacted your health insurance premiums tremendously. The direct costs of HIV/AIDS are similar to other very serious illnesses; however, the indirect costs are higher since HIV affects predominantly working-age persons. [15]
http://theroadtoemmaus.org/RdLb/22SxSo/PnSx/HSx/PhrmGayMrg.htm
From July 7, 2007
... Of course, the promulgation of knowledge and data concerning the link between alternative sex and disease is hampered by the bullying tactics of the elite. Thus, only a few facts are known at all to some of the public (such as the results of a study in Scandinavia showing that men in same-sex marriages die 24 years earlier than their counterparts in the general population), and these facts aren’t mainstream, thanks to the media blackout on this issue and the muzzling of opponents under color of law. And that, in turn, is thanks to the activists.
...Note the remarkable parallels with the smoking craze: In both cases, the promoters of the respective dangerous habits had been or are withholding evidence that undoubtedly would have led people not to indulge or to quit. Today, public elementary and secondary schools are doing just that, and in addition, some are teaching, as part of “sex education,” methods for carrying out harmful sexual perversions...
http://theroadtoemmaus.org/RdLb/22SxSo/PnSx/HSx/XGayVsHsx.htm
Ahah! Just as I thought! It’s just another example in the long history of Democrat hypocrisy. Of course, studies have also shown that homosexuals are much more prone to spousal violence than normal people.
The list, ping
Obambi will be the first one in line, then he can get married to Larry Sinclair all proper and stuff.
We are living in it my friend
I know, we've come a long way from this "radical" ideal, but we can wish.
You’re absolutely right. I see I didn’t make that clear in my writing: I don’t want the gov’t enforcing my notion of health care fairness in corporation.
Rather, I was hoping companies and workers would realize that adding domestic homo partners to coverage plans costs the pool more, just as single employees now subsidize those with large families under health care.
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.