"Obama OKs some benefits for employees' same-sex partners"

Join Our Community

Collarchat.com

Home Login Search

"Obama OKs some benefits for employees' same-sex partners"

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> "Obama OKs some benefits for employees' same-sex partners"

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

"Obama OKs some benefits for employees' same-sex p... - 6/18/2009 2:22:46 PM

Posts: 10297
Joined: 1/15/2005
Status: offline

The latest information on same-sex partner benefits for Federal workers.

"Obama OKs some benefits for employees' same-sex partners"

updated 6:55 p.m. EDT, Wed June 17, 2009

"WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Obama signed an executive order granting some benefits to same-sex partners of federal employees Wednesday, calling it "a historic step" but promising more action to come.

"We've got more work to do to ensure that government treats all its citizens equally, to fight injustice and intolerance in all its forms and to bring about that more perfect union," Obama said.

The signing followed sharp criticism of the president over a Justice Department motion filed last week in support of the Defense of Marriage Act -- which effectively bars the federal government from recognizing same-sex unions. Obama said he still wants to repeal the act.

"I believe it's discriminatory. I think it interferes with state's rights, and we will work with Congress to overturn it," he said.

The memorandum he signed Wednesday means same-sex partners of civil service employees can be added to the long-term care program, employees can use their sick leave to take care of domestic partners and children and same-sex partners of Foreign Service employees will be included in medical evacuations and housing allocations, according to the White House.

But it does not grant full health-care coverage, which would require an act of Congress, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said."

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/06/16/obama.same.sex.benefits/index.html

_____________________________

"Beware, the woods at night, beware the lunar light.
So in this gray haze we'll be meating again, and on that
great day, I will tease you all the same."
"WOLF MOON", OCTOBER RUST, TYPE O NEGATIVE

http://KinkMeet.co.uk

RE: "Obama OKs some benefits for employees' same-s... - 6/18/2009 2:25:07 PM

Posts: 9556
Joined: 11/14/2006
From: The Desert
Status: offline

Sounds like a good start, lets hope it continues

_____________________________

Pirate King,

The nicest man you'll ever bleed for

Posting Help

Vitam Piratae Eligo

The Rainmaker

(in reply to Vendaval)

RE: "Obama OKs some benefits for employees' same-s... - 6/18/2009 3:33:36 PM

Posts: 10297
Joined: 1/15/2005
Status: offline

My thoughts exactly.

_____________________________

"Beware, the woods at night, beware the lunar light.
So in this gray haze we'll be meating again, and on that
great day, I will tease you all the same."
"WOLF MOON", OCTOBER RUST, TYPE O NEGATIVE

http://KinkMeet.co.uk

(in reply to Asherdelampyr)

RE: "Obama OKs some benefits for employees' same-s... - 6/18/2009 5:37:42 PM

Posts: 6363
Joined: 3/8/2006
Status: offline

Any other changes have to be voted on by both houses of Congress. It won't pass anytime soon.

(in reply to Vendaval)

RE: "Obama OKs some benefits for employees' same-s... - 6/19/2009 1:39:34 AM

Posts: 599
Joined: 3/31/2006
Status: offline

As a single (partly paying for the benefits for couples) I am opposed to benefits for same or opposite sex partners. It makes no sense to me why singles (who are majority of adults) pay for other people partners. Nobody even asks from me. The same with children: why are childless supporting other people children?

(in reply to Vendaval)

RE: "Obama OKs some benefits for employees' same-s... - 6/19/2009 4:37:10 AM

Posts: 10297
Joined: 1/15/2005
Status: offline

You could well ask why are taxes used for road and highways, since not all people own cars; or for schools and hospitals, since not all people have offspring or need to have hospital level care.

_____________________________

"Beware, the woods at night, beware the lunar light.
So in this gray haze we'll be meating again, and on that
great day, I will tease you all the same."
"WOLF MOON", OCTOBER RUST, TYPE O NEGATIVE

http://KinkMeet.co.uk

(in reply to awmslave)

RE: "Obama OKs some benefits for employees' same-s... - 6/19/2009 6:44:33 AM

Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline

because you do benefit from the education of other people's children... you even benefit from the health of those who live in your community.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to awmslave)

RE: "Obama OKs some benefits for employees' same-s... - 6/19/2009 11:00:48 AM

Posts: 599
Joined: 3/31/2006
Status: offline

quote:

because you do benefit from the education of other people's children... you even benefit from the health of those who live in your community.

Why to dilute the point? If I do not pay does not mean children would be uneducated: their parents will pay for children education. The same for other things: partners, spouses etc.. pay for their needs themselves. How for example home-less benefit from the subsidies home-owners get?

(in reply to tazzygirl)

RE: "Obama OKs some benefits for employees' same-s... - 6/19/2009 11:44:50 AM

Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline

maybe im too bored.. maybe im too sleepy... but your post isnt making sense to me.

eh... its friday

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to awmslave)

RE: "Obama OKs some benefits for employees' same-s... - 6/19/2009 11:53:01 AM

ThatDamnedPanda

Posts: 6060
Joined: 1/26/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: awmslave

quote:

because you do benefit from the education of other people's children... you even benefit from the health of those who live in your community.

Why to dilute the point? If I do not pay does not mean children would be uneducated: their parents will pay for children education. The same for other things: partners, spouses etc.. pay for their needs themselves. How for example home-less benefit from the subsidies home-owners get?

If you truly believe in a world where every human being is completely self-sufficient, I respectfully suggest you buy an axe, a rifle, and a box of matches and head for the mountains instead of posting on an internet partially funded by my tax dollars and created by people who were partially educated with my tax dollars. The cost of living in a civilized society is that individuals pay out of their own pocket for services that are considered essential to the common good. If this concept goes so completely against your principles, why not have the courage of your convictions and reject those aspects of it that benefit you, as well as those you find inconvenient?

_____________________________

Panda, panda, burning bright
In the forest of the night
What immortal hand or eye
Made you all black and white and roly-poly like that?

(in reply to awmslave)

RE: "Obama OKs some benefits for employees' same-s... - 6/19/2009 11:54:21 AM

Posts: 599
Joined: 3/31/2006
Status: offline

quote:

maybe im too bored.. maybe im too sleepy... but your post isnt making sense to me.

eh... its friday

No problems. It just has to do with differences in political views. As a libertarian I oppose questionable social engineering where certain groups are in favored status (couples, homeowners, ethnic groups... ).

(in reply to tazzygirl)

RE: "Obama OKs some benefits for employees' same-s... - 6/19/2009 12:12:14 PM

Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline

so unless you are among the "favored" its questionable

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to awmslave)

RE: "Obama OKs some benefits for employees' same-s... - 6/19/2009 1:50:23 PM

Posts: 599
Joined: 3/31/2006
Status: offline

quote:

so unless you are among the "favored" its questionable

No, "favored" should also question the system; it could be immoral for some.

quote:

If you truly believe in a world where every human being is completely self-sufficient, I respectfully suggest you buy an axe, a rifle, and a box of matches and head for the mountains instead of posting on an internet partially funded by my tax dollars and created by people who were partially educated with my tax dollars. The cost of living in a civilized society is that individuals pay out of their own pocket for services that are considered essential to the common good. If this concept goes so completely against your principles, why not have the courage of your convictions and reject those aspects of it that benefit you, as well as those you find inconvenient?

This is again criticism that (without any base) assumes I have certain views. I am talking only about certain things (like supporting couples at the expense of singles) without questioning the rationale. I am not against using tax dollars for things clearly considered essential to the common good.

For example, if you would conduct a survey among working singles asking the following question: Do you support the system where 20% of your pay and 30% of your health insurance payments goes to support you coworkers spouses and children?
Or ask from renters and homeless; do you support the tax benefits to homeowners knowing that otherwise you would pay 20% less taxes?
I made up the numbers, but they can be calculated with good precision.
What would be the response? I may have more supporters than you think. I bet even for the majority.

(in reply to tazzygirl)

RE: "Obama OKs some benefits for employees' same-s... - 6/19/2009 1:57:39 PM

Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline

when you ask those renters, remind them they have little to no responsibility for repairs or taxes.. they are also the ones who pay, not renters, for the schools, libraries, hospitals, and any other kind of levy the community can get passed against property taxes....when you ask the singles about health care. remind them they have little to no responsibility for their own health care, while the parents have an enormous amount towards their children... you can let your own health go.. they cant the kids, and, while we are at that, childhood illnesses are on the rise, some we havent seen in decades... lets let their health care go.. sure... then you and i can both contract things we havent had to worry about in years. i dont have a car, but i have no doubt part of what i pay in taxes is spent on road repair. whats the use of complaining? its for the common good of everyone.

you can make a survey for anything... and skew the results in your favor, depending on what information you give to leave out.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to awmslave)

RE: "Obama OKs some benefits for employees' same-s... - 6/19/2009 2:28:06 PM

Posts: 599
Joined: 3/31/2006
Status: offline

I sense your anger. Renters actually pay for repairs and property taxes: it is included in the rent payment. Perfect road repair tax in my world would be appropriate gasoline and diesel fuel tax. I do not want to expand the topic to everything. I read from your response you are in favor of the current system where singles support with their labor lifestyle of couples and their children.

(in reply to tazzygirl)

RE: "Obama OKs some benefits for employees' same-s... - 6/19/2009 3:03:24 PM

Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline

then you sensed wrong. no anger. just understanding. so you want to pay for only those things you use directly. did you, by chance, have a private education?

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to awmslave)

RE: "Obama OKs some benefits for employees' same-s... - 6/19/2009 3:38:46 PM

Posts: 599
Joined: 3/31/2006
Status: offline

I had public elementary education. This belongs to the services that I consider essential to the common good (you understood wrongly that I support paying taxes only for services I use directly). Regarding the couples lifestyle; in most cases they are able to support themselves and their children without subsidies. Or, if not, just have less children (good for environment). In essence, I would end marriage as state institution. It was necessary historically but has lost its importance. I would set up special tax for support of the poor instead.

(in reply to tazzygirl)

RE: "Obama OKs some benefits for employees' same-s... - 6/19/2009 4:09:59 PM

Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline

take a look around. the institution of marriage is on a sharp decline. and with that decline, and the acceptance of such a decline, unwed motherhood has become the norm. as a result, our taxes are paying for the aid these mothers get (at least in the US) along with the insurance, food stamps.. ect.

yeah, lets do that.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to awmslave)

RE: "Obama OKs some benefits for employees' same-s... - 6/19/2009 4:41:25 PM

Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline

I have this last point to make, then im done with this thread. Couples pay more for insurance than single people do, families even more (them kids you consider a luxury are costly). Im not sure what you think people pay, but i think you need to look into it a bit more.

when you start limiting some benefits, others will demand other benefits be limited as well. reminds me of a movie, Logan's Run...

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to awmslave)

RE: "Obama OKs some benefits for employees' same-s... - 6/19/2009 5:02:02 PM

Posts: 599
Joined: 3/31/2006
Status: offline

I doubt couples pay more per person. If you are correct where are the benefits? If my wife stays home would my workplace health insurance payments be double? Regarding the health care I would recommend for US single payer government run system that would eliminate employer need for participation and cover everybody. Just now I am listening discussion about Obama plan that is trying to please everybody (esp. health care industry) but the cost numbers do not add up. Why do they come out with this?

(in reply to tazzygirl)

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> "Obama OKs some benefits for employees' same-sex partners"

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Jump to:

New Messages	No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages	Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages	Locked w/o New Messages

Post New Thread

Reply to Message

Post New Poll

Submit Vote

Delete My Own Post

Delete My Own Thread

Rate Posts

Collarchat.com © 2024

Terms of Service

0.047