'Gay marriage' ruling could affect Florida

Florida opponents to a proposed ban gay marriage ban say a Michigan court ruling  invalidating benefits for same sex-sex partners provides a strong justification to defeat the measure.

"This should be a major, bright red warning sign to Florida voters. If you don't want to take away existing protections and benefits, don’t vote for Amendment 2," Heddy Pena, a member of Florida Red and Blue group running the SayNo2 campaign, said in a news release.

Today, the Michigan Supreme Court ruled 5-2 that the state's 2004 ban against gay marriage also blocks domestic-partner policies affecting gay employees at the University of Michigan and other public-sector employers. The decision affirms a February 2007 appeals court ruling.

According to Florida Red and Blue, Florida has at least a dozen domestic partnership programs recognized by public entities including the City of Tampa, Broward County, MonroeCounty, City of Miami Beach and the City of Gainesville. Florida’s largest county, Miami-Dade, is due to vote on a domestic partnership benefit plan this month. 

John Stemberger, a leader of Yes2marriage.org, said the opposition is using scare tactics and that the proposed constitutional amendment is narrowly drawn as to not affect domestic partnerships.

"Michigan's language was extremely broad," Stemberger said.  "I’m not sure a domestic parternship is the best public policy, but we're not opposing them.

Comments

Florida's Amendment 2 will win with 68%.

Agreed. Sounds like the Gay Rights Advocates oare reaching.

[George]

If Florida's amendment wins, it will be another sign that this State is hostile to business. Not only can we not teach our kids well enough to bring in knowledge industry, now we're going to slam the big companies in Florida that need to bring in outside talent and offer them health benefits for their cohabiting partners. Nice.

John Stemberger wants to harm as many people as he can.

If this Amendment passes, it will likely strengthened Republican control in Florida.

[Hetero Joe!]

If this Amendment passes, it will likely strengthened moral control in Florida.

... I'm good with that!

Since when did the Michigan Supreme Court start overseeing the Florida court system? Red and Blue folks are using fear tactics and not alot of logic.

forgive me but isn't this the same red and blue team that told us all we should ignore a Mass. court ruling that legalized gay marriage...saying "that's a totally different state?"

[Michael M]

How is passing this amendment, which basically confirms the only stable family unit in all of recorded history, hostile to business? The very fact that we have to do this shows the sheer weight of the number of crazy advocates and bored lawyers and an increasing number of activist judges today. I think it is good for the community and society as a whole (aka business) to have strong families (i.e. 1 man and 1 woman). Any other variation generally is not stable (yes, a 1 parent family can do well but it is very difficult). For those heterosexuals "cohabitating", tell them to get their own insurance. That's what other "single" people have to do. Or maybe.... we can become liberal in thinking and make every class of union on the planet (single, homosexual, heterosexual, transsexual, multi-sexual, tri-sexual, metro-sexual, married, divorced, widowed, etc...) the EXACT same. It's kind of like making the other geese equal with that one lays the golden egg! Or making kids not actually receive a grade in school, but just a pass or fail where everyone passes! Brilliant!

Right on 10:59!

[John C]

Typical idiotic slippery-slope logic from a typical self-proclaimed "pro-family" right-winger like Michael M... If we allow partners in a committed, consensual, adult relationship to be able to financially protect each other and their children, next thing you know, we'll be passing laws allowing men to have sex with horses and adopt lizards. Their stupidity is simply breathtaking, and while they pontificate their utopian family ideals, the damage they do to real American families is unforgivable.

[Gary Glenn, AFA-Michigan]

Curiously, the opponents of Michigan's Marriage Protection Amendment disagree with the opponents of Florida's amendment:

Attorney Jay Kaplan of the Michigan ACLU, lead counsel for homosexual plaintiffs in the lawsuit decided Wednesday by the Michigan Supreme Court, said last June, as reported by Lansing City Pulse:

"'The Michigan Court of Appeals decision never said that public employers could not provide health care coverage to domestic partners of employees,' Kaplan wrote in an e-mail. He said that employers can provide health insurance coverage for domestic partners as long as they do not specifically recognize the domestic partner relationship — by filing domestic partner benefit forms, for example — when determining criteria for insurance eligibility."

http://www.lansingcitypulse.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1133&Itemid=2

Between the Lines, a homosexual activist newsweekly in Detroit, reported:

"(ACLU-Michigan lawyer Jay) Kaplan says that even under the Appeals Court ruling, benefits can be offered, but they have to be done in a way which does not recognize same-sex partners or relationships."

http://www.pridesource.com/article.shtml?article=25497

Kalamazoo Alliance for Equality, a homosexual activist group, said last June in a news release:

"The Michigan Court of Appeals did not say that health insurance coverage for domestic partners is illegal. The court said that public employers cannot use criteria that recognizes the domestic partner relationship."

http://www.tri.org/docs/Kzoodprallies.doc

Clearly, homosexual activists in Florida should stop lying about the Michigan court decision. In fact, because public employers in Michigan were required by the amendment to broaden their eligibility requirements so as to no longer give benefits only to homosexual couples, more Michigan citizens are today eligible for coverage under govt. employees' healthcare plans.

The Bacon, Lettuce, and Tomato Group did this to themselves. You simply would not shut up about it, so the voters will do it for you. When you look for someone to blame for this, check your freaking mirror.

“Two wrongs don’t make a right, and two men can’t make a baby.”

My company just informed us that our health insurance contribution would increase $27.83 a pay period or $723.58 a year. Why is this? Because they decided to allow same sex partners to be part of the policies. Interestingly enough they will not be allowing non same sex domestic partners to be part of the policies. Rational given was that hetrosexual partners have the ability to marry and thus obtain benefits while homosexual couples don't.

Bottom line is homosexuals are known to be affluent consumers so the average family folks like me are now going to subsidize their health care costs which are known to be more expensive on average than others (I can just imagine why).

This is not right and now I am going to vote against the homosexual marriage plan. What benefits will they get next and how much will that cost me?

What benefits will who get next?

I'm betting it will be Veterinary Benefits for your dog; brought to you by the supporters of the Doggie Dining bill.

My company just informed us that our health insurance contribution would increase $57.85 a pay period or $1388.40 a year. Why is this? Because the homosexual lifestyle choice is un-natural and dangerous to their health, by exposing themselves to life-threatening disease through promiscuous sexual encounters in public restrooms with hypocritical politicians.

Bottom line is homosexuals are known to be affluent consumers so the average family folks like me are now going to subsidize their dangerous lifestyle choice and practices, which are known to be more expensive on average than others (I can just imagine why).

This is not right and now I am going to vote for the homosexual marriage plan. What pandering benefits will they get next and how much will that cost me?

I got no beef with gays getting partner benefits, but I should get the same benefits with my girlfriend. You can't have your cake and eat it too

I do not mind folks being homophobic as long as they do so in the privacy of their own home and not flaunt it in public.

I use to be "homophobic"... but I finally moved out of my apartment and bought a home... now, I'm condophobic!

I don't get it 11:21, how is wanting equal (not special) rights homophobic?

Anything that doesn't agree with the Bacon, Lettuce, and Tomato Group's agenda is homophobic. King of like how anyone who disagrees with Dubya or McSame is anti-American.

2:29 I'm just tired of these idiots trying to preserve the family when they are on their third marriage. I would love to study the personal lives of folks who think they should ban civil unions between adults. I suspect most spend more time raising dust over this issue than with their spouse or children. If you want to get biblical then all 2+ marriage people and living in sin folks are just as culpable as active gays.

How can most committed gay couples cost more to insure than couples who have kids if the employer offers family medical insurance? AIDS is way rare these days in that population.

If you are worried about the American family, leave work tonight and go be a loving spouse or parent. Lather, rinse and repeat. You have a bunch more control over yourself than forcing your definition of a couple on someone who probably wishes they were not born gay.

Save the gay rhetoric, 2:55. The first gay married couple in Mass is already “legally” divorced.

3:05 So what's the problem? Sounds like most couples these days.

Call my rhetoric Christian instead, that is where I'm really coming from.

It is old time religion where we don't single out sinners as we all are. It is the Christianity that was around before politicians sewed up the evangelical vote with empty gestures and church leaders were whoring out their voter blocs.

"You have a bunch more control over yourself than forcing your definition of a couple on someone who probably wishes they were not born gay."

Sorry slick, that dog don't hunt anymore thanks to your bisexuals and trannies! It's a choice, and you know it. People should not get special laws based on thier lifestyle choice!

The gay community was making strides until they embraced trannies under their umbrella

BANG-O-RANG, 3:46!

Trannies I'll give you as unusual but let's exempt Eddie Izzard.

Point well taken about the choice thing, but most gay people I know wish they were attracted to the opposite sex as it would simplify their lives greatly.

Hey 2:55, I'm not hopping in this debate, but you are wrong--dare I say, dead wrong?-- about AIDS/HIV being rare in the community. Attitudes like that are contributing re-explosion amongst young males in the community. Just ask TAN and any activist in SFrancisco.

BTW, hep and all sorts of other sexually caused health risks are up, too. Just so ya know.

Gov. Crist is letting down conservatives on this issue (like so many others). he will not be McCain's VP nominee and he will be a one-term Governor.

Trannies? How about Michelle Obama? That's one weird "lady"!

Trannies? How about McSame's Stepford wife? That's one weird "lady"!

This constitutional initiative amendment is supported by some Christians who would like to exterminate homosexuals and lesbians, however such a "Final Solution" is not possible in the United States.

[H.S.]

Studies show that 79% of people who actively protest, like posting on this discussion, against gay rights, have strong homosexual tendencies themselves. Further, 38% of said posters have cheated on their wives/husbands with a a same sex partner. I'm not sure why the homophobes are so scared to be who they are. Take the time to find out who you are, give yourself a hug, and leave your cowardace in the closet. It'll be OK, really.

[Omega83]

10:55

just out of curiosity - do you smoke or drink alcohol? Are you overweight? Do you have high blood pressure or cholesterol? Diabetes?