News and Politics | January 01, 2009 | 55 comments

Bush signs Gay Retirement Rights Bill

source: http://minnesotaindependent.com/21528/bush-signs-gay-rights-bill

Image
occono
President Bush has signed a bill that makes it mandatory for businesses to roll over retirement benefits to a same-sex partner in the event of the employee’s death.


...I believe Hell has officially frozen over now.
  1. groups:
    News and Politics,   Politics,   Current News UK,   Current News US
  2. tags:
    Politics,  News and Politics,  Current News UK,  Current News US
  3.     
    |

55 comments // Bush signs Gay Retirement Rights Bill

  • fatulove
  • nazbags
  • Brunothebear
  • Susieee
  • crispyfritters
  • randallr01
  • arcticspirit
  • donkeyfly69
  • Solar_Wind
    • 0
      Solar_Wind  

    • What makes this so ridiculous is that the bill could have just enabled ANY single beneficiary to be listed with the applicant. Why the need for this to be a GAY right, I don't know...

    • 4 years ago
  • arcticspirit
  • mojojuju
    • 0
      mojojuju  

    • Cool, now non-gay single people on their death beds can "play gay" allowing their best buddy to receive their retirement benefits.

      But maybe this "play gay" plan wouldn't work. Is there some kind of "gay test" that must be passed to verify that the deceased and his benefactor are indeed gay?

      Maybe a post mortem test for the alleged "gay gene" would serve this purpose.

    • 4 years ago
  • uroborus8
    • 0
      uroborus8  
    • mojojuju:

      You don't have to even play gay. This law allows you to choose anyone you want to receive your retirement account tax free. It can be your best friend, your brother, your sister, or even the nurse wiping your butt.

    • 4 years ago
  • mojojuju
  • uroborus8
  • shmaldo
  • outtheinside
  • EddieStarr
    • 0
      EddieStarr  

    • I have been with my partner for 9 years. He works in law enforcement. We are domestic partners with no intentions of ever being "Married". We both dislike the term "Marriage" due to the fact that it is commonplace. What we have together is far more profund than can be described with a simple term. The Worker, Retiree and Employer Recovery Act of 2008 is a move in the right direction providing one less roadblock on the path towards equality.

    • 4 years ago
  • dirtyemowords
    • 0
      dirtyemowords  

    • better late than never i suppose...but pushing this through now is really just attempting to get some good PR for W. before he slopes off into the sunset.

    • 4 years ago
  • donttellthemitwasme
  • damienad
    • 0
      damienad  

    • Imagine being with your ( same sex) partner for most of your life. Unable to get married to the one you love because the law ( IN THE LAND OF THE FREE) does not recognise your union. They pass away and all their pension, savings and hard earned benefits and assets are denied to you because the law dictates you are a gay couple and cannot get married. Equally not every gay couple wants or feels the need to get married to consummate their love for each other. However a gay couple unmarried is now recognised by law as having the same rights as a married couple in terms of legality upon your partners death
      Not only grieving the death of your partner but also the fact that your love for your partner and your union isn't recognised. I think if America is not ready for Gay Marriage at least recognise that gays live together , work together and save together and should have the same legal rites as any other citizen regardless of sexual orientation. My argument is that gay couples should have the same rites as all when it comes to legality and state pensions.

      This is one small step for gays, one giant leap for gay mourners

    • 4 years ago
  • Gyefinger
    • 0
      Gyefinger  
    • damienad:

      This is not just a gay issue but rather what we recognize as a union/relationship--It is fair to say that you would not want the person that you are sleeping with at the time to recieve those benefits but at the same time the whole legal aspect doesn't hold water either and those that only believe legally married people should have the rights shouldn't be sleeping around before marriage anyway:)--whether domestic partner, gay couple, married couple until we start treating the "relationship" as the relevant aspect of things it will not be settled. I have known peolple to be married multiple times claiming till death do they part:) and yet many others that have had a relationship for their whole lifes--what the latter have is what marriage was intended to be and yet not considered "real" because of a legal aspect--Law and intent need to start changing in order for any of these things to work. Perhaps a common sense law? example --If I have lived with someone for 40 years and I die I do not want you giving my assets to my drug addict sister because they have a blood relation?

    • 4 years ago
  • maisry
  • kaecvtionr
  • uroborus8
    • 0
      uroborus8  
    • kaecvtionr:

      Our rights are still very limited. We can't adopt children in several states, we can be fired for being gay in several states, we can be denied housing for being gay in several states. Have you ever run into those problems?

    • 4 years ago
  • cerealforeal
  • J_Jammer
  • telcod
    • 0
      telcod  

    • Ockham's razor - no puzzle here. Bush is closet case and Barbara is trans-sexual. Taking care of #1. Also, didn't we see a lot of men's room action on his watch by the "good old boy" Republicans. False flags everywhere.

      Remember, always vote your wallet, not your sexual preference.

      Like to see some protection for domestic partners as well.

    • 4 years ago
  • outtheinside
    • 0
      outtheinside  
    • telcod:

      while you raise some good points, reminding people to always vote their wallets makes you appear to be a money-grubbing republican with no other higher priorities. how about, remember, always vote with your gut.

    • 4 years ago
  • chowmein2012
  • FallenMorgan
  • donkeyfly69
  • alfitude
    • 0
      alfitude  

    • "It seems to me that "whoever I have my cock in gets the dough"... Which should never be the case. It should go to LEGAL marriages."

      apart from being offensive, that is BULLSHIT.

    • 4 years ago
  • arcticspirit
  • chowmein2012
  • donkeyfly69
  • outtheinside
    • 0
      outtheinside  
    • chowmein2012:

      if you were screwing your family member, i agree, he/she shouldn't get benefits. it's about benefits for those you love regardless of sex, not like love for blood family or friends. your rational needs some reconsidering..

      also, if you were living with your best friend for 30 years and wouldn't wish them to get benefits from your job, you must be a stone-cold person.. that or just way too young to have your eyes open all the way yet.. give it some time little tyke.

    • 4 years ago
  • 200131294
    • 0
      200131294  

    • The last time he talked about gay rights he was trying to distract us. We need to look into what hes doing on the side.Mayby he's invading Iran as I type this.

    • 4 years ago
  • artemis6
  • unimatrix0
  • arcticspirit
  • freeus
  • Yoshi1
  • Chuck_st_chuck
    • 0
      Chuck_st_chuck  

    • wow the liberals were right
      He is the WORST president ever....

      btw that was Sarcassim lol

      Good job bush.
      Oh and Bush also did alot more for the gay community like the aids fund and support of civil unions and abolishment of inherentece taxes so when a person leaves his/her possions to their partner no legal actions can be taken.

    • 4 years ago
  • occono
  • jb83
  • mojojuju
  • katedarling
    • 0
      katedarling  
    • Chuck_st_chuck:

      If the word is common and very easy to spell, then probably yes, that person is a "moran".

      But even with this, I think liberals (and many other people) would still agree that he is the worst president ever. It's not like a couple of good moves can make up for a whole 8 years of fuck ups.

    • 4 years ago
  • uroborus8
  • fuhleesha
  • RoBot_rOcKer
  • sgwhites
  • Solar_Wind
  • ChrisWT
    • 0
      ChrisWT  
    • sgwhites:

      I thought the end of the world wasn't for another three years? lol. You never know. Bush could be that devil dude they are always talking about on National Geographic.

    • 4 years ago
  • poppys4cast
  • Tori
    • 0
      Tori  

    • "...I believe Hell has officially frozen over now. "

      No kidding! I think this is the second thing in 8 years that President Bush has done that I agree with/appreciate.

      The other was the do-not-call list. :)

    • 4 years ago
more from News and Politics:
from the community

top videos