Navy To Offer Same-Sex Partner Benefits

[carlie]

"Navy to Offer Same-sex Partner Benefits

Week of February 18, 2013

The Department of Defense announced the extension of benefits to same-sex partners to ensure fairness and equal treatment to the extent allowable under law on Feb. 11.

The U.S. Navy will begin offering these benefits no later than Oct. 1.

To qualify, Sailors and their same-sex domestic partner will be required to sign a Declaration of Domestic Partnership, which is similar to that in use by other federal agencies.

Servicemembers will file the declaration at their PSD, where a DD Form 1173 ("dependent" ID card) will then be issued allowing access to benefits.

Children of same-sex domestic partners will also qualify for the ID card and benefits.

Benefit information and updates to policy on benefits for same-sex partners and families will be posted as they become available on Navy's Don't Ask Don't Tell Post Repeal website on Navy Personnel Command's web page under Support and Services.

For more military family support resources, visit the Military.com Family Center."

Full article:

http://www.military.com/military-report/navy-to-offer-same-sex-partner-benefits?ESRC=miltrep.nl

[Teac]

Just thinking out loud...

Does this also mean that male/female partners not married are going to be afforded the same consideration? I knew a lot of unmarried couples when I served that did not get ID's... Some of them have been together for better than 20 years.

Edited February 19, 2013 by Teac

[71M10]

Teac

You missed the fine print "ensure fairness and equal treatment to the extent allowable under law" People that have lived, loved, sweated, bled, and raised kids together arn't necessarilly covered under the new law or interpretations of it. The law views unmarried hetrosexual couples as slackers that just wern't willing to commit on a piece of paper!

I know a couple of lesbian couples and a gay couple. They fight about the same stuff, bitch about each other in much the same way as married couples. I guess I can be OK with civil unions, but when they want to call it a marriage I FEEL that they are trying to redefine my relationship with my wife.

If it wasn't for the financial implications, I believe elements in the federal government would have just removed the concept of marriage from the federal laws. But all the people that would qualify for assistance and the drop in tax receipts (people would shift to lower tax brackets when you stopped adding two salaries together) would be a financial armageddon.

[carlie]

Just thinking out loud...

Does this also mean that male/female partners not married are going to be afforded the same consideration? I knew a lot of unmarried couples when I served that did not get ID's... Some of them have been together for better than 20 years.

Sure they will and they have been getting va bennies for decades.

All it takes is living and representing themselves as husband and wife

(even tho not married) in a state that acknowledges "common law marriage".

Those couple you mentioned, male/female partners - some of them have been together for better than 20 years -

at least they were afforded the LEGAL opportunity to LEGALLY get married, during all of those - 20 years.

Which is a completely different scenario.

JMHO

[carlie]

Teac

You missed the fine print "ensure fairness and equal treatment to the extent allowable under law" People that have lived, loved, sweated, bled, and raised kids together arn't necessarilly covered under the new law or interpretations of it. The law views unmarried hetrosexual couples as slackers that just wern't willing to commit on a piece of paper!

I know a couple of lesbian couples and a gay couple. They fight about the same stuff, bitch about each other in much the same way as married couples. I guess I can be OK with civil unions, but when they want to call it a marriage I FEEL that they are trying to redefine my relationship with my wife.

If it wasn't for the financial implications, I believe elements in the federal government would have just removed the concept of marriage from the federal laws. But all the people that would qualify for assistance and the drop in tax receipts (people would shift to lower tax brackets when you stopped adding two salaries together) would be a financial armageddon.

71,

Personally and with all the peeps I know - WE don't necessarily even want or need for our "civil unions" as you put it,

to be labeled as "marriage".

The word "marriage" is merely for contractual agreement that provides a multitude of benefits to the

legally "married" couple.

Here's my pet - peve on the issue.

As an example the way legalities currently stand is that,

A hetero veteran, male, can be buried at a VA National Cemetery

and their legal female "wife" can be buried there with them.

They not only get this very last right in their benefits but also many others

like additional dependent allowance, ChampaVA, etc . . .

Me and mine have done over 20 years together, raised our children

and help with our grand children.

I am SC'd at 100 percent, P&T with SMC/S -

As law currently stands

I am compensated as a single veteran,

her cremains can not go into the VA's National Cemetery hole

for perpetual care,with my cremains.

She is not yet 65 years old - she is 63 years old so,

as the law currently stands we do not receive ChampaVa for medical needs

and any medical expenses for her, will continue to be out of pocket for 2 more years.

I can only stay in hopes that before too long, me and Rosa Parks won't have as much in common,

other than to obtain the dignity of being an equal, on this planet.

JMHO

[Teac]

Teac

You missed the fine print "ensure fairness and equal treatment to the extent allowable under law" People that have lived, loved, sweated, bled, and raised kids together arn't necessarilly covered under the new law or interpretations of it. The law views unmarried hetrosexual couples as slackers that just wern't willing to commit on a piece of paper!

I know a couple of lesbian couples and a gay couple. They fight about the same stuff, bitch about each other in much the same way as married couples. I guess I can be OK with civil unions, but when they want to call it a marriage I FEEL that they are trying to redefine my relationship with my wife.

If it wasn't for the financial implications, I believe elements in the federal government would have just removed the concept of marriage from the federal laws. But all the people that would qualify for assistance and the drop in tax receipts (people would shift to lower tax brackets when you stopped adding two salaries together) would be a financial armageddon.

Actually I didn't miss the point..... perhaps because I don't accept the point as being valid when it comes to this issue, and I was just thinking if gay and lesbian couples are going to get benefits so shouldn't those in common-law marriages... which the US Military does not recognize.

I don't see how the law views people in common law marriages as slackers, many states recognize common law marriage, and some states even allow for palimony when couples separate. Also the society as a whole accepts common law marriage as legal, and same sex marriage as morally wrong. In addition, most states allow for recognizing a marriage that took place in another state or country, and while the laws are changing most still don't recognize same sex marriage....

What is going on right now is the Liberal US Government by their actions are trying to force the states to accept same-sex anything... this is an area of law that is usually reserved for the states to decide , and the Feds play follow the leader. Even in the case of medical marijuana the feds have taken a step back, and in states where medical marijuana is legal the VA is not refusing care to veterans that use marijuana....

I think our society is eroding from the top down, and before to long, those of us in our 50's and above will not recognize American.

Edited February 19, 2013 by Teac

[Teac]

Sure they will and they have been getting va bennies for decades.

All it takes is living and representing themselves as husband and wife

(even tho not married) in a state that acknowledges "common law marriage".

Actually, the military does not recognize common law marriage for any purpose, while the VA does in some states. Just as some states recognize same sex marriages.

Those couple you mentioned, male/female partners - some of them have been together for better than 20 years -

at least they were afforded the LEGAL opportunity to LEGALLY get married, during all of those - 20 years.

Everyone has the legal opportunity to get married, however to redefine the definition of marriage for the sake of a small percentage of the population in my opinion is wrong. There are a lot of things in life that exclude certain groups from benefits.. congress passes laws all the time that exclude certain benefits to certain veterans, for example the care givers benefit is only payable to care givers of recent wars and to hell with the rest of the veterans some of which have been paying for care out of their pockets for years.

Which is a completely different scenario.

JMHO

I guess that would depend on which side of the issue you find your self....for what ever reason....

Edited February 19, 2013 by Teac