PDA

View Full Version : Gay congressman’s spouse denied benefits



4moreyears
10-18-2006, 09:15 PM
thank god for this. what a waste of American tax dollars this would have been to just give money to a faggot for nothing.


BOSTON - When same-sex marriage became legal in Massachusetts, among those who tied the knot were former Rep. Gerry Studds and Dean Hara.

But getting married didn’t protect them under federal law: Hara has learned he is not eligible for any portion of Studds’ estimated annual $114,337 pension following his partner’s death last week.

The 1996 federal Defense of Marriage Act blocks the federal government from recognizing the 2004 marriage between Studds and Hara or other same-sex couples.


Studds voted against the act, which was passed July 12, 1996, by a vote of 342-67, according to the House Clerk’s office.

Studds, a Democrat, became the first openly gay member of U.S. House when his homosexuality was exposed during a 1983 teenage page sex scandal. He retired from political life in 1997 and died Saturday at age 69.

Gary Buseck, legal director for Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders, said the death of Studds may illuminate an inequity Congress enacted in “an era of fear and trepidation of gay marriage” when it appeared Hawaii might allow same-sex marriage.

“This is maybe a moment of education for Congress,” he said. “Now they have a death in the congressional family of one of their distinguished members whose spouse is being treated differently than any of their spouses.”

Hara, 48, declined comment.

Peter Graves, a spokesman for U.S. Office of Personnel Management, which administers the congressional pension program, said same-sex partners are not recognized as spouses for any marriage-related benefits.

First of its kind
He said Studds is the first case of its kind as far as the office could determine. “Our office could not think of a similar situation having occurred,” he said.

Graves said Studds had other options. He could have had an insurable interest annuity, similar to buying an insurance policy, which is allowed under both the civil service and the federal employee retirement system and does not come under the restrictions of the Defense of Marriage Act. Graves said he didn’t know if Studds used that option.

Pete Sepp, spokesman for National Taxpayers Union, a nonprofit citizen watchdog group, estimated Studds’ annual pension at $114,337, adjusted for inflation.

That would have made Hara eligible for a lifetime annual pension of about $62,000, which would grow with inflation, if the marriage was recognized by the federal government, Sepp said.

In 2003 the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled that the state couldn’t deny marriage licenses to same-sex couples under the state constitution. The ruling paved the way for the first gay marriages in Massachusetts the following year.

Massachusetts is the only state to allow same-sex couples to marry, although there is a push to amend the state constitution to define marriage as the union of a man and woman.

Studds was first elected in 1972 in a conservative district, and quickly became known for his work to protect the marine environment and fishing industry.

In 1983, a 27-year-old man stepped forward to disclose that he and Studds had had a sexual relationship a decade earlier when he was a teenage congressional page. The House censured Studds, who revealed that he was gay. Voters re-elected him until he retired in 1997.Link (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15314130/)

DEMON CUNT
10-18-2006, 09:22 PM
Another self-loathing gay in denial chimes in.

Poor cock hungry faggot, so full of hate.

You should call your Pastor right away!

FORD
10-18-2006, 09:32 PM
Obviously, this is headed for a court challenge. If the marriage is legal, then any survivorship issues should be treated as in any other marriage.

That's the only issue here. The genders of either party are irrelevant.

Nickdfresh
10-19-2006, 03:33 AM
"But getting married didn’t protect them under federal law: Hara has learned he is not eligible for any portion of Studds’ estimated annual $114,337 pension following his partner’s death last week."

Look at the fucking child celebrate destroying people's financial decisions.

My advice to you ass4moronqueers is to just keep giving anonymous park-blowjobs and skip out on all that commitment hassle.

binnie
10-19-2006, 03:34 AM
Can Gay people get married in the States, whats the legal standing?

FORD
10-19-2006, 03:47 AM
Originally posted by binnie
Can Gay people get married in the States, whats the legal standing?

Marriage is legal in Massachussettes, where this particular gay couple lived and were married.

Civil unions (sort of a "seperate but almost equal" marriage) are legal in Vermont.

A national Supreme Court case is inevitable. An honest court would likely rule that the equal protection clause in the 14th ammendment to the Constitution means that the government cannot deny a marriage license to a same sex couple.

But with a Bush corrupted court, the outcome is uncertain.

binnie
10-19-2006, 05:47 AM
Gay people can have civil partnerships here too, although no-one is really sure what that means: I get the impression that it's marriage in all but name...

Hardrock69
10-19-2006, 09:39 AM
I personally think it is stupid.

IF they got married in Massachusetts, and it is legal there, then there should be no problem.

Guitar Shark
10-19-2006, 10:55 AM
I think the difference here is that it's a federal law that's preventing distribution of the pension funds. Massachusetts law is irrelevant, if I'm understanding it correctly.

EAT MY ASSHOLE
10-19-2006, 10:59 AM
I'd say Studds' partner bebnefitted enough while Studds was alive.

His name wasn't "Studds" for nothing, you know...

4moreyears
10-19-2006, 03:30 PM
I hope they get the constitution ammended to state that a marriage is between a man and a woman. Regardless of what these liberal dick sucking faggots like Nic and Demon say.

Nickdfresh
10-19-2006, 05:21 PM
Originally posted by 4moreyears
I hope they get the constitution ammended to state that a marriage is between a man and a woman. Regardless of what these liberal dick sucking faggots like Nic and Demon say.

LOL Look at the insecure little queer obsessed with "dick sucking faggots!" He hates them so much he just can't stop thinking about them.

BTW, you're the one that obsessively stalks other men (Ford, Steve Savicki).

But you know, you can only ever get angry over what you really care about, in your case it's liberal men, and gays. Interesting, you remind me of the "down-low" macho "I'm not a faggot just 'cause you fucked my asshole" cliche...

ELVIS
10-19-2006, 05:38 PM
Is that all you have to offer ??

Nickdfresh
10-19-2006, 05:53 PM
Originally posted by ELVIS
Is that all you have to offer ??

Well, I have a bag of Elvisisms:

"You're ignorant." "Shut up Idiot!" "Shut the fuck up!" "No!" etc.

LoungeMachine
10-19-2006, 06:03 PM
Originally posted by 4moreyears
I hope they get the constitution ammended to state that a marriage is between a man and a woman. Regardless of what these liberal dick sucking faggots like Nic and Demon say.

What are you worried about?

Why do you need the government to regulate marriage?

Are you scared you might slip up and accidently marry a guy?


Out of curiosity, would you have the balls to call any of us liberal dick sucking faggots if we met face to face?


Are you really this insecure?



The towel snapping in the locker room must've really got to you.;)

LoungeMachine
10-19-2006, 06:05 PM
Originally posted by Nickdfresh
Well, I have a bag of Elvisisms:

"You're ignorant." "Shut up Idiot!" "Shut the fuck up!" "No!" etc.

Don't forget his famous:

"Hmmm......"


;)

LoungeMachine
10-19-2006, 06:07 PM
Originally posted by 4moreyears


what a waste of American tax dollars this would have been to just give money to a faggot for nothing.



No shit.

You should really expect something in return when you give a faggot money, right?

LMAO

4moreyears
10-19-2006, 06:12 PM
Originally posted by LoungeMachine
What are you worried about?

Why do you need the government to regulate marriage?



For the exact reason of this post. If this fag was to get benefits it would cost over 100K per year. There is better use of that money like curing Aids, Cancer, or funding clean up efforts in the ghetto than offering this money to a boyfriend (the federal law looks at their relationship that way) of a diseased male congressman.

4moreyears
10-19-2006, 06:14 PM
Originally posted by LoungeMachine
No shit.

You should really expect something in return when you give a faggot money, right?

LMAO

No he should be entitled to it!!!

Being a liberal you should understand entitlement.

EAT MY ASSHOLE
10-19-2006, 08:18 PM
If nothing else, 4more, you certainly BITCH and employ sarcasm like a queen.

DEMON CUNT
10-19-2006, 08:59 PM
Originally posted by 4moreyears
I hope they get the constitution ammended to state that a marriage is between a man and a woman. Regardless of what these liberal dick sucking faggots like Nic and Demon say.

Careful 4morequeers. When you are finally man enough to reveal your latent homosexuality to your parents you will not be able to marry your gay lover!

We know why you conservatives hate gay people so much. You are not fooling us.

Hardrock69
10-20-2006, 09:57 AM
Look at Foley.
4morequeers' hero.
:rolleyes:

4moreyears
10-28-2006, 10:10 PM
Originally posted by DEMON CUNT
Careful 4morequeers. When you are finally man enough to reveal your latent homosexuality to your parents you will not be able to marry your gay lover!

We know why you conservatives hate gay people so much. You are not fooling us.

Don't hate them. Just don't thing being gay today is what being black was 35 years ago. I think it is an insult to black people to imply that.

DEMON CUNT
10-28-2006, 10:31 PM
Originally posted by 4moreyears
I think it is an insult to black people to imply that.

What a patronizing douchebag this 4morequeers fag is.

http://www.shortandhappy.com/images/jerkoff.gif

BigBadBrian
10-29-2006, 07:17 AM
Fags don't need to be married, and don't deserver spousal benefits.

:)

4moreyears
10-29-2006, 08:55 AM
Originally posted by DEMON CUNT
What a patronizing douchebag this 4morequeers fag is.

http://www.shortandhappy.com/images/jerkoff.gif

And what an internet hard on you are. You are a bad ass on your key bard but probably got your ass kicked every day after school growing up. You remind me of the type of guy that would not say 99 out of 100 things in person that you say here. Because you are a pussy.

Nickdfresh
10-29-2006, 10:32 AM
Golly, seems 4hardcorequeers and BigGayBrian are on a roll of bitchiness from their cybersessions. here's something for you two fags to jack-it too...

http://www1.istockphoto.com/file_thumbview_approve/671140/2/istockphoto_671140_gay_underwear.jpg

DEMON CUNT
10-29-2006, 10:47 AM
Originally posted by BigBadBrian
Fags don't need to be married, and don't deserver spousal benefits.


Originally posted by BigBadBrian
I just don't have the time for this silliness anymore. If any of you want to debate sensibly, fine...I'll usually have a little time for that.

Look at BigBlandBrian the great sensible debater go!

Once a fake Christian hypocritical liar, always a fake Christian hypocritical liar.

http://www.paintitblack.com/swaggart.jpg

DEMON CUNT
10-29-2006, 10:59 AM
Originally posted by 4moreyears
And what an internet hard on you are. You are a bad ass on your key bard but probably got your ass kicked every day after school growing up. You remind me of the type of guy that would not say 99 out of 100 things in person that you say here. Because you are a pussy.

Dang! Look at the reptile brain on 4morequeers!

You remind me of the typical conservative bully that must resort to violence when your rhetoric is exposed as the confused stupidity it is.

What's the matter? Did the happy jerk-off monkey graphic hit too close to home?

I think it is an insult to happy jerk-off monkeys to imply that.

LoungeMachine
10-29-2006, 12:14 PM
Originally posted by BigBadBrian
Fags don't need to be married, and don't deserver spousal benefits.

:)


Who the FUCK "needs" to be married?

And let's not cuntfuse Holy Matrimony with marriage.




Who is more worthy of spousal benefits and adoption rights, Brie?

a] Hetero couple on their third marriage.......

or

b] Gay couple in long term monogamous relationship for decades?


And lastly, who the FUCK are YOU to determine who should be in charge of someone's personal private life?

4moreyears
10-29-2006, 06:03 PM
Originally posted by LoungeMachine
Who the FUCK "needs" to be married?

And let's not cuntfuse Holy Matrimony with marriage.







And lastly, who the FUCK are YOU to determine who should be in charge of someone's personal private life?

I do not care what they do but they should not be entitled to any government or company benefits enless the company chooses to provide them.

LoungeMachine
10-29-2006, 06:05 PM
Originally posted by 4moreyears
I do not care what they do but they should not be entitled to any government or company benefits enless the company chooses to provide them.

Should we collect taxes from "them"?

Are "they" American Citizens?

If so, how does your argument hold water?

LoungeMachine
10-29-2006, 06:07 PM
Originally posted by 4moreyears
I do not care what they do


Bullshit

You do care what they do...

Just like you care what women are "allowed" to do with their bodies....

You're not for freedom, democracy, or equal rights, so why not just admit it?

4moreyears
10-29-2006, 06:35 PM
Originally posted by LoungeMachine
Should we collect taxes from "them"?

Are "they" American Citizens?

If so, how does your argument hold water?

They still use public services so they should pay taxes. Should we legalize poligimy also? they pay taxes. They do not think what they do is wrong. Lets just let anyone do what they want. Let the ACLU run the country.

4moreyears
10-29-2006, 06:38 PM
Originally posted by LoungeMachine
Bullshit

You do care what they do...

Just like you care what women are "allowed" to do with their bodies....

You're not for freedom, democracy, or equal rights, so why not just admit it?

Should we release murderers and rapists from prison? If I agree to that would that mean I support freedom?

DEMON CUNT
10-29-2006, 06:46 PM
Originally posted by 4moreyears
Should we release murderers and rapists from prison? If I agree to that would that mean I support freedom?

One of the most ridiculous arguments ever offered here in The Front Line. Even by a neocon dummy like 4morequeers.

Nickdfresh
10-29-2006, 06:55 PM
Originally posted by 4moreyears
They still use public services so they should pay taxes. Should we legalize poligimy also? they pay taxes. They do not think what they do is wrong. Lets just let anyone do what they want. Let the ACLU run the country.

First of all, most polygamists DON'T PAY TAXES!! They have towns set up where the old men marry young teen girls, and dupe the younger men into working construction, for free! And then they give the cult leaders their salaries as well as their women as they collect welfare from the state. :mad: How is that at all akin to monogamous gay relationships? If you saw the median statistics, you'd find that most gays earn more money than their hetero counterparts, and have made many contributions throughout history.

And spare me the whole ACLU wrap you ignorant spoon-fed little homophobe trying to suppress your urges to lather your friends up in the high school locker room shower. Real conservatives like Barry Goldwater could give a fuck what two consenting adults do, it's part of their inalienable rights as Americans to pursue life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness and to control their own property and financial destinies without hourly workers such as thou lecturing them on morality...

DEMON CUNT
10-29-2006, 07:29 PM
Originally posted by 4moreyears
Let the ACLU run the country.

All that 4morequeers and his ilk know about the ACLU is what they have learned from liars such as Bill O'Really.

What neocon dummy superstar 4morequeers does not know is that the ACLU even came to the aid of Rush Limbaugh in relation to his drug abuse problems.

FOX NEWS: ACLU Comes to Rush Limbaugh's Defense (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,108140,00.html)

Excerpt:
"For many people, it may seem odd that the ACLU has come to the defense of Rush Limbaugh," ACLU of Florida Executive Director Howard Simon said in a released statement.

"But we have always said that the ACLU's real client is the Bill of Rights, and we will continue to safeguard the values of equality, fairness and privacy for everyone, regardless of race, economic status or political point of view," Simon said.