Prop 8 aftermath in California

[Parabellum]

Originally Posted by leemajaz

i don't care either way if they get married or not but it seems a lil strange. do they not already have the right to form a legal union and partake in all the benifits of a traditionally married couple????

Nope, not without being legally *married*...but that is going to be a per state issue.

[leemajaz]

give'em the right to form a legal union for christ sakes. that leaves the church out of it and they still get to play legal grab ass.

[SXSMITH]

Originally Posted by Parabellum

You should be able to include any domestic opposite sex partner if you can prove you have been living together for more than 6 months...that is usually how it works.

This is a limit from Aetna and Kaiser. Who else is in the game? Blue Cross?

Anyone have BC and can confirm that only same sex partners can get insurance and heteros are denied?

The only reason I'm bringing this up is because everyone thought it would be so nice to get same sex domestic parterners insurance, and the slipperly slope ends up being discrimination against heteros. Ahhh, the unintended consequences of good deeds.

You're going to see a lot of them in the coming 'changes'.

[Parabellum]

Originally Posted by SXSMITH

This is a limit from Aetna and Kaiser. Who else is in the game? Blue Cross?

Anyone have BC and can confirm that only same sex parterns can get insurance and heteros are denied?

When I worked for Motorola (Humana iirc) they did cover domestic partners of any sex, but you had to prove that you had been living together for 6 months AND sign a statement that you are in a committed romantic relationship.

[SXSMITH]

Originally Posted by Parabellum

When I worked for Motorola (Humana iirc) they did cover domestic partners of any sex, but you had to prove that you had been living together for 6 months AND sign a statement that you are in a committed romantic relationship.

Yeah, the open enrolement form I saw yesterday had it in bold for domestic partners. SAME SEX ONLY! No exceptions. And that's a national plan in multiple states. I don't recall seeing that on past forms.

[Parabellum]

Originally Posted by SXSMITH

Yeah, the open enrolement form I saw yesterday had it in bold for domestic partners. SAME SEX ONLY! No exceptions. And that's a national plan in multiple states. I don't recall seeing that on past forms.

That seems kinda strange...and by strange, I mean kinda unfair...but I can see both sides of the argument. They are making a special case for gays because they don't want to be accused of being discriminatory, and because gays can't marry in most states.

But it seems like a double standard I guess.