Massachusetts is
challenging the constitutionality of the "Defense of Marriage Act of 1996," which the state believes
discriminates against same-sex couples.
As I stated in a
previous post, the issue should not be about the different treatment of same-sex couples from married couples, but the difference in treatment between
single persons and married persons.
Single persons should be actively protesting along with the LGBT folks about
preferential treatment given to married persons. Eliminating benefit extensions to spouses regarding health and retirement, ending the more favorable tax treatments to married couples, and other largess would end any
controversies about married vs. same-sex couples' rights. Let all individuals have the same rights.
Marriage is a religious institution and/or a contractual arrangement between two (or more) people. Burial rights, health care issues, financial support, property ownership, child-rearing
responsibilities, estate benefits and end of life issues should all be handled within that contractual arrangement. Family and bereavement leave should be negotiated
between employees and employers. The State should have no power to regulate or over-rule those
individualized agreements. If the State must have regulations (and that may very well be a future post), there certainly should not be one set of rules for married and one set for single people.
Therefore, employers should not be forced to pay for spousal health benefits, tax rates and deductions should be the same for married and single persons, retirement benefits should only be paid to direct
participants or as the participant directs, and no additional exceptions or
accommodations should be given to married people over single people, gay or straight.
This is a civil rights issue about equality for all people, not a LGBT marriage issue. It is the bestowing of
preferential treatment by government rules and regulation that is the root of this problem.