THE NEED FOR BENEFITS: Maggie responds

Dale, Jonathan and Paul all made interesting points, which I will respond to but probably not until later tonight or tomorrow, because hey the kids want breakfast and I have a funeral to attend. (Actually a Hindu puja for my nephews' grandfather).

But I do want to say Dale that while sex partners may be hard to determine, registered relationships are hard data. The main point I was making is that the demand for practical benefits seems to be small and a personal desire for marital or quasi-marital registered relationships seems to be a distinct minority position among gays and lesbians.

Further evidence comes from Hawaii. In the first years after Hawaii created reciprocal beneficiaries (giving partners access to health insurance and workman's comp) only a few hundred people signed up. Data here.

Are a significant number of Americans being deprived of needed benefits because of our marriage laws? Will civil unions distribute needed health care benefits, etc., widely in the gay community? I think the answer is no and no. Are we agreed? In which case we can move on to the question of creating new norms and social support for love in the gay community, which I agree Jonathan I only partially and incompletely have addressed. I told you these were two different questions that require two different conversations, didn't I?

posted by maggie at 10:07 AM | link

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home