By Emily Geiger
So, we have federal legislation defining marriage as an institution between one man and one woman, but now we have liberals trying to make an end run around that, too.
Despite DOMA, there is now legislation being proposed that would require the federal government to provide federal employee benefits to same-sex partners of gay federal employees.
Hmm… requiring tax payers to provide health insurance for an extremely high-risk group of people doesn’t seem like a super smart thing to do in the midst of horrendous budget deficits and a recession. The CBO says this is going to cost about $900 million dollars. More specifically, this new spending provision would cause “the largest increase in both mandatory and discretionary spending — $590 million and $266 million, respectively” of all projected expenditures.
So, tell me again, why do we have this law if we’re going to treat gay couples as if they were married anyways?
Of course, now that I think about it, this sounds eerily familiar. Iowa had a DOMA law defining marriage. But then some in the legislature started chipping away at it by providing same-sex domestic partner benefits for state employees, an anti-bullying bill that protected certain specific groups including gays, etc. And the next thing we knew, our courts were using those pro-gay actions by the legislature as justification to overturn Iowa’s DOMA law.
Déjà vu all over again.
blog comments powered by Disqus