XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.politics.usa, alt.politics.usa.constitution   
   XPost: alt.tv.oreilly-factor, rec.arts.tv.news.oreilly-factor   
   From: none@none.com   
      
   On 7/4/2015 12:22 PM, Josh Rosenbluth wrote:   
   > On 7/4/2015 2:10 PM, Peter Franks wrote:   
   >> On 7/3/2015 5:30 PM, Josh Rosenbluth wrote:   
   >>> On 7/3/2015 7:51 PM, Peter Franks wrote:   
   >>>> On 7/3/2015 4:42 PM, Josh Rosenbluth wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>> That's not true.  For example, you can't collect spousal Social   
   >>>>>>>>> Security benefits if you are not married.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> Then modify the law to have the person name a beneficiary.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> There are over 1000 federal laws that would have to be changed.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> No, just one.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Huh?  I gave one example (Social Security).   
   >>>>   
   >>>> And in that one example, one law has to be changed.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Next.   
   >>>   
   >>> And over 1000 laws have to be changed in order for your solution to be   
   >>> implemented (Social Security was merely an *example*).   
   >>   
   >> Sticking with your example, what is the justification for having   
   >> /spousal/ SS benefits, as opposed to named beneficiary?   
   >   
   > I don't know, but the answer is not relevant   
      
   The answer is most definitely relevant for manifold reasons.   
      
   If it is because of bad law (or bad purposes for bad law), then we are   
   perpetuating bad law with more bad law.   
      
   The current law is exclusionary to those that can't marry, choose not to   
   marry, or have extralegal relationships, cohabitation, polygamy,   
   polyandry, etc.   
      
   Let's replace bad law, regardless of quantity, with good law that is not   
   exclusionary.  Moving to designated beneficiary is a step in that direction.   
      
   >to this debate which is   
   > focused only on whether gays should have equal footing with straights   
   > when it comes to marriage.   
      
   No, this debate is on justice, respect, and equality.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)