[Lorianne]

Only a small sampling of changes in family law, not to mention strong-arming of businesses, that will come about due to the same-sex marriage issue.

Not that government wouldn't be trying some other way to meddle in private affairs if this issue didn't exist ... but still.

[Clintonfatigued]

If this covered married men only, there would be no problem with it. Fathers are important and should not be denied time with their children during the early phasas of their development by their employers.

[Onelifetogive]

we didn’t think it was in keeping with our mandate by statute, which is to eliminate, eradicate and prevent discrimination jobs in Massachusetts.”

[Army Air Corps]

Would not a male be eligible for paternity benefits rather than maternity benefits. Damned journalists and their chimpanzee-like attention to detail.

[2harddrive]

On the other hand, if women get to have sex, then go on paid leave...why shouldn’t men get to also?

[Libertarianize the GOP]

In response to criticism raised by those who believe the MCAD overstepped its bounds by changing the law, Ebel said his office enjoys broad discretion.

The only thing worse than courts legislating from the bench is unelected bureaucrats writing laws in direct opposition to the plain language in the measure passed by the legislature.

[Rockitz]

We’ve had this in California for over 4 years and after paying into state disability insurance for over two decades, I’m glad to have gotten a small portion back recently with the birth of my daughter. The California law allowed me 6 weeks of leave with a maximum benefit of $917 per week (currently).

[M203M4]

I am against it, but Massachusetts has legitimate authority to impose such a requirement. On the other hand, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT DOES NOT

: Unlike the federal Family and Medical Leave Act, which allows for men to take paternity leave but only applies to businesses with 50 or more employees...

The above is what boils my blood. Allow the decisions made by individual states to be corrected by the flux of people, businesses, and money to and from other states. Federalization is what inhibits this corrective behavior from occurring. Let Massachusetts experiment with state-wide medical coverage. Let California experiment with all of its liberal idiocy. Let Michigan expel its remaining jobs via its insane tax policies. Yes, all these things are antithetical to liberty, but long term, a system of federalism is the only system CAPABLE of preserving liberty and prosperity. It may not, but every other system will necessarily fail.

Ballot-box democracy is worthless, save for theoretically limiting corruption. Voting with our wallets and feet - the natural democracy of capitalism - is what, if anything, can restore and strengthen the treasures of civilization.

[healy61]

What is troubling is that Ebel has a brain and a job.