Benefits = Marriage?

Hurray for the 3rd District Court, for ruling that Salt Lake City's plan to provide health benefits to domestic partners does not constitute marriage and therefore is not in conflict with Amendment 3.

It seemed obvious to me that providing equal benefits to all employees is simply fair and just. But some consider it a slippery slope. They think all sorts of things will lead to gay marriage: allowing Gay Straight Alliances or creating legal partnerships, or even allowing stores to sell Cosmopolitan magazine without a little screen to block it's racy cover. Utah politicians have not always been the most logical. It's obvious that gay marriage is a political hot button, a wedge issue that they use to bolster their arguments for things like tax cuts or road-widening or building a huge fence along the border or some other completely unrelated thing.

I tip my hat to the founders of this country that created the judicial branch (or "Activist Judges") that are the last, and sometimes only, line of defense for minorities and others who's rights are substandard to the majority. The majority is not always right.

No comments: