“SAME-SEX” BENEFITS AND MARRIAGE: WHO WILL STAND UP TO THE COURT?
Our Legislature has been called into yet another Special Session, this time to deal with “same-sex” benefits. The question is, who will stand up to Alaska’s out-of-control judiciary? Who will stand up for marriage? I will, and I think other legislators will too.
The only appropriate and legal marriage is between one man and one woman. A mere “sex partnership” – whoever it is between, isn’t a legal marriage and therefore doesn’t form the proper basis for benefits to one or more of the partners. The fact that such partners are not permitted by law to marry is irrelevant. If someone cannot get legally married, for whatever reason, they should not be treated by the law as if they are married. That’s common sense – which, unfortunately, is not too common.
Furthermore, how do we determine who a “partner” is anyway? Would/could state health benefit household “partners” include same-sex siblings, a same-sex parent or child, or same-sex roommates not involved in a sexual relationship?
It is said that Alaska already faces a substantial unfunded retirement and health care benefits liability for its employees. Adding who-knows-how-many sex partners to the state benefit rolls (and they could even come in from Outside to “partner” up for benefits) would add huge costs to our retirement and health care costs.
But much more importantly in the total scheme of things, marriage is special. It’s been special since time immemorial. Marriages (both civil and religious), and resultant nuclear families, have been the cornerstone of civilization. It’s difficult to comprehend questions of same-sex benefits to same-sex “partners” from the government are worthy of debate between reasonable people, let alone court rulings that denigrate legitimate marriage, or the need for legislation to prohibit the absurd. If this court ruling is allowed to stand, the next step down the slippery-slope will be court mandated same-sex state “benefit” being mandated for private businesses.
The Legislative, the Judiciary, and the Executive are co-equal branches of our constitutional government and one cannot dictate to the other – it’s termed "separation of powers." The court has created a constitutional crisis by legislating benefits, making appropriations, and mandating regulations in the process. The constitutional crisis has been precipitated by the court, not by the legislature, not by the governor and his administration. If our Legislature doesn’t stand up to the Court, (and for the legitimate partnership of marriage) who will?
The only appropriate and legal marriage is between one man and one woman. A mere “sex partnership” – whoever it is between, isn’t a legal marriage and therefore doesn’t form the proper basis for benefits to one or more of the partners. The fact that such partners are not permitted by law to marry is irrelevant. If someone cannot get legally married, for whatever reason, they should not be treated by the law as if they are married. That’s common sense – which, unfortunately, is not too common.
Furthermore, how do we determine who a “partner” is anyway? Would/could state health benefit household “partners” include same-sex siblings, a same-sex parent or child, or same-sex roommates not involved in a sexual relationship?
It is said that Alaska already faces a substantial unfunded retirement and health care benefits liability for its employees. Adding who-knows-how-many sex partners to the state benefit rolls (and they could even come in from Outside to “partner” up for benefits) would add huge costs to our retirement and health care costs.
But much more importantly in the total scheme of things, marriage is special. It’s been special since time immemorial. Marriages (both civil and religious), and resultant nuclear families, have been the cornerstone of civilization. It’s difficult to comprehend questions of same-sex benefits to same-sex “partners” from the government are worthy of debate between reasonable people, let alone court rulings that denigrate legitimate marriage, or the need for legislation to prohibit the absurd. If this court ruling is allowed to stand, the next step down the slippery-slope will be court mandated same-sex state “benefit” being mandated for private businesses.
The Legislative, the Judiciary, and the Executive are co-equal branches of our constitutional government and one cannot dictate to the other – it’s termed "separation of powers." The court has created a constitutional crisis by legislating benefits, making appropriations, and mandating regulations in the process. The constitutional crisis has been precipitated by the court, not by the legislature, not by the governor and his administration. If our Legislature doesn’t stand up to the Court, (and for the legitimate partnership of marriage) who will?
posted by Blogs by Rep Bob Lynn | 10:24 PM
1 Comments:
This is one of the best commentaries I've read on the subject. Thanks, Bob
Post a Comment
<< Home