Rhode Island is poised to approve a bill that would allow gay men and women to make funeral arrangements for their domestic partners. While this is relatively good news, it still seems strange that they've yet to provide what sixty-percent of the state approves of–gay marriage.
To make matters worse, domestic partnerships are defined as two individuals in “an exclusive, intimate and committed relationship” who have "cohabited for at least a year at the time of the death". The widowed partner would also have to provide evidence that the two were financially dependent on one another. Um, how many gay couples do you know with joint credit cards or "relationship contracts"?
– Dewitt
Hubby and I (coming up on 18 years) have had joint banking accounts, credit cards, mortgages, etc. for most of our relationship. I’m not sure your snark is valid, except for those couples who would need something like a pre-nup if they ever split up.
Another couple here with joint checking, savings and credit card accounts.
Our blogger wants to have it both ways. He wants the right for gay couples to marry, but he doesn’t expect that they should take on the responsibilities of what “hetero marriage” generally entails. Marriage *is* a contract, and for people of faith, it’s even more. If you don’t want all those responsibilities, that’s fine. Then don’t get married, and don’t make the thing you’re supposedly fighting for meaningless!
Widows from a heterosexual marriage do not have to prove at the time of their husbands death that they were financially dependent on one another. AAA, these are never requirements for a hetero marriage. Why should they be requirements for gay guys in a committed relationship, whether they depended on each other for financial stability or not?
btw, my partner and I will celebrate our 22nd anniversary this month. We have never had a joint checking account, or credit card, or mortgage, or any other joint financial arrangement.
Shawn,
Because Rhode Island obviously doesn’t offer marriage to homosexual couples. If they let homosexuals marry, it’d be a non-issue.
Since they don’t, they’ve decided this is the way to prove the relationship was real. Lame? Yeah. But it’s a stepping stone. Should marriage even be an issue meddled with by the Fed? No. But we’re getting closer…