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

[71M10]

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

Carlie I have no beef with you or same sex couples. I typed I FEEL in all caps to indicate it was an emotional state not a rational argument. However, their are elements withing the GLBT community that have made it quite clear that "civil union" is not acceptable, it has to be a "marriage".

Edited February 19, 2013 by 71M10

[71M10]

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

Slackers was a POOR Choice of words on my part. I was trying to convey an attitude towards people who don't do things the way the majority does. Common law marraige is not the norm, it is legal in many places, but even where legal I would guess that traditional "got married - got the paper to prove it" marraiges are more common. It was not ment to be a slight to anyone in any type of relationship.

[john999]

Where common law marriage is accepted I see it as OK. Where it is not accepted it can be hell for older spouse and children. Divorce and marriage laws have huge history of precedents and accepted practice. Lawyers and judges know very well what is acceptable divisions of property, pensions, child issues etc. When people who are not in legal common law marriage separate it is anyone's guess how property will be divided. For an older common law couple where one partner is sick or in need and the other is not the less able partner is apt to end up sitting on the curb. Marriage is important because it is a legal and moral vow. It should not be easy to walk away from it.

John

[Ridehard2208]

"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

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

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,

According to my good buddy Ron,

Ron on Common Law .tiff

Here's a link for Navy / Marine - Common Law Marriage:

http://www.hqmc.marines.mil/Portals/61/Docs/HQ%20Svc%20BN/BAH%20Manual%5B1%5D.pdf

" DEPENDENCY DETERMINATION AND BAH MANUAL

4. Common-Law Marriages. A common-law marriage is an informal marriage

recognized as valid in some states and in some foreign countries. For a

common-law marriage to be valid, three required documents must be

provided:

a. a present mutual intent of the parties to contract a marriage;

b. proof of cohabitation; and

c. a representation to the public by the parties that they are

husband and wife.

A common-law marriage, if valid where contracted, is valid elsewhere.

Cohabitation alone will not create a common-law marriage. A

NAVMC Form 10922, with supporting documentation, must be forwarded

to the CMC (MRP-1) for determination and/or approval."

Here's a Link for Air Force - Common Law Marriage

http://www.usafa.edu/superintendent/ja/CommonLawMarriage.cfm?catname=JA

"The provisions for handling questions concerning military benefits for common law spouses are as follows.

First, common law spouses in Colorado may be entitled to the same military benefits as legally married spouses.

The procedure for common law spouses obtaining a military identification card is provided in AFI 36-3026I, Identification Cards for Members of the Uniformed Services, Their Eligible Family Members, and Other Eligible Personnel, Para 2.4.2.

The common law marriage must have been entered into within a state that recognizes common law marriages. Colorado recognizes common law marriages as established in the case of Graham v. Graham, 130 Colo. 225, 274 P.2d 605 (1954) and in C.R.S. 14-2-104 (2004). Since a common law marriage is valid in Colorado, it is entitled to be given recognition by the jurisdiction of any other state of the United States. In a common law marriage, the parties are in fact married and the marriage can only be terminated by divorce. To obtain a divorce, the Colorado state divorce procedures must be followed in state court.

There is no specific formula as to how parties become common law married. Generally, the mutual consent or agreement of the parties to be husband and wife, followed by a mutual and open assumption of a marital relationship, establishes a common law marriage.

The assumption of a marital relationship consists of cohabitation as husband and wife. Cohabitation alone does not establish a common law marriage. The strongest evidence of the assumption of a marital relationship is the general reputation in the community that the parties hold themselves out as husband and wife.

The problem with a common law marriage is the difficulty proving the relationship since there is no process for registration of the marriage. It may be subject to challenge at any time if it appears the requirements of a common law marriage have not been met. It will also be more difficult to prove the marriage to governmental agencies for entitlement to benefits.

In order to receive benefits, common law marriages require the sponsor or spouse to prove to the satisfaction of the local legal authority that the relationship is valid (e.g., tax returns, bank statements, statements from disinterested parties attesting the couple was holding themselves out as husband and wife).

A statement from the local legal office attesting to the validity of a common law marriage constitutes acceptable documentation to establish eligibility as a spouse.

Common Law marriage cannot be a sham to collect benefits. The marriage may be scrutinized if it appears not to be valid.

Legal Assistance attorneys can advise clients on common law marriages and produce affidavits for clients, if needed."

You posted,

"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."

That is simply not true - now the hetero's that you mentioned that have been together

for 20 years - YES - they have had the legal opportunity to be married

BUT for whatever their reasons are - they have CHOSEN to NOT be married.

teac,

The issue and topic is benefits for service members and veterans, so don't start throwing the political crap

in there as YOU, surely know better.

http://www.hadit.com/forums/index.php?app=forums&module=extras&section=boardrules

No political discussions we are not a political forum our focus is VA disability claims. Political discussions lead to flame wars, it takes up valuable space and is not what this board was set up for. There are many other boards to discuss politics, this is not one of them.

Carlie, As a Moderator/Admin & Elder of hadit you should have presented this benefit info as you would have any other without the bold large letters,then showing your personal side and taking offence in posting of others opinions and kept going tit for tat then finally pulling the political issue of the forum laws makes it seem it's ok for some but not all way of thinking. I've seen a few slips from you sinse I have been reading and posting this forum (EG this and the book issue), but have always thought of you as a well imformed professional. Don't make the same misstakes as other forums' leaders who made their forums a personal agenda losing members and dieing. Until this post I had no idea you were a member of the gay community nor was it any of my business or even mattered. However you seem to have a strong opinion of it and don't seem to respect other members rights to their opinions, Right Or Wrong every one has an opinion and should have a right to theirs, You better that most should recognize that American Right, and as a hadit leader should not let someones opinion get to a heated discussion exspecily with you keeping it going. Don't blame Teac, or 71M10 for their part the blame lays with you (JMHO), You should Apologize to them and bury it now and let opinions be opinions!

Sorry Just as I See It, Rich!

[Ridehard2208]

Where common law marriage is accepted I see it as OK. Where it is not accepted it can be hell for older spouse and children. Divorce and marriage laws have huge history of precedents and accepted practice. Lawyers and judges know very well what is acceptable divisions of property, pensions, child issues etc. When people who are not in legal common law marriage separate it is anyone's guess how property will be divided. For an older common law couple where one partner is sick or in need and the other is not the less able partner is apt to end up sitting on the curb. Marriage is important because it is a legal and moral vow. It should not be easy to walk away from it.

John

John999, Thanks for being a true Moderator of this issue and trying to bring a ballance and peace to this issue a true Elder God Bless Rich!

[Teac]

teac,

DUH - it deals directly with benefits for veterans and service members.

There is plenty of room for discussion - but not for political discussion.

For some reason you see as political - I see it as a civil right matter of equality,

that directly relates to all benefits and protections, enjoyed by those that are

legally recognized as "married".

How about this, try to explain to me how my same-sex partner of over 20 years

having her cremains buried in the same hole as mine at my nearest VA National Cemetery -

negatively effects, changes or belittles the marriage of someone such as yourself

or someone that is recognized as having the benefits and protections of a legally, contractual marriage.

I think we can remain civil and without dragging in politics on this.

Carrie,

Honestly, I don't see this as a political issue, however, I see the policy change as a consequence of this administration.

I don't see it as a civil rights matter either....again were not talking about denying rights to anyone while I understand that is your stand, technically and legally anyone can get married, if they are of the opposite sex... What you are advocating for are additional rights not available under most state laws...and even some of the states that do allow it, the majority of the people opposed it, and in some cases judges made the final call. This used to be a country where majority ruled, not anymore.....

Now the harm I see in such a law is additional cost to the American People, and a society in moral decay..... this is being pushed by a very small minority .... and to what end?... no one really cares what we do as people as long as it doesn't effect others.. however, this affects the American People as a whole in more that one way.... much like abortion laws affect the country.... thru taxpayer funds, and moral decay, the cost of this move is going to be astronomical. This country is already borrowing from China and each day adding to the nation debt.... were are the funds to come from to pay for everything that everyone wants from our great grand children and beyond?

Also, if this becomes the law of the land... what is the next step.. group marriage ? Presently it is against the law to marry more than one person ... yet I can see in the distant future that marriage to more than one person could be legalized.. after all .. using your argument what harm could such marriages due to anyone else. heck there are even TV programs that have actual bigamist as stars who are not being pursed legally or otherwise.....and we the taxpayers are supporting them.

Again, I think it is best to end this conversation because I think it is not going to solve anything.......

Edited February 19, 2013 by Teac