"Nothing is more dreaded than the national government meddling with religion." John Adams

Featured Posts

Creative Minority Reader

Seattle Now Wants to Pay People to Get Same-Sex Married

I have to admit I didn't see this one coming. I should have. But I didn't.

Seattle officials now want to pay people to get married to people of the same sex. Seriously.

Seattle officials want to provide a small, monthly payment to employees in same-sex marriages because they will pay higher federal income tax than married heterosexual couples on medical benefits.

Mayor Mike McGinn was poised to introduce legislation Wednesday to make up for the inequality created by the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which bars federal recognition of gay marriage.

But late Tuesday, the City Attorney's Office advised McGinn that that approach might not be legal...

Mayor Mike McGinn included the money in his 2013 budget recommendation to the council. At a news conference Tuesday morning, he said that providing what he called a "gay allowance for health care" is the right thing to do.

"If the federal government has an unjust law, it's not fair to punish city workers," McGinn said.
This seems to me to be a bit of vote buying. Sure, they might argue that it's straightening out the tax code. But it seems to me that politicians can always find a reason to fund something that's got votes attached to it.

They're talking about giving $90 a month to people who get married to people of the same sex. So if two employees hooked up they'd be raking in $180 a month. Not bad. Now, if we can get polygamy rolling we could be talking some crazy cash here.

What government likes, government federally subsidizes. It's pretty simple. That's why we have the HHS mandate. The government has had a long and steadfast commitment to contraceptives until it took the plunge and just forced employees to cover it.

Now they want to fund same-sex marriage.


Your Ad Here


flanoggin said...

This is a very misleading article. For clarity, same sex couples who marry in states where allowed pay more federal taxes because of DOMA. This "stipend" ONLY applies to employees of the city of Seattle and will only offset unfair Federal taxes to gay employees who are married. Several companies, including Microsoft and Google, do the same thing in fairness to their legally married gay employees. Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to set the record straight.

debval said...

Microsoft and Google are private companies that may do as they wish with their money. Thier income comes from customers who CHOOSE to do business with them. If you don't like their business practices then you can CHOOSE to not do business with them. The city is a funded by mandatory taxes paid by the TAX PAYERS and may NOT do what they wish with the TAX PAYERS' money. BIG DIFFERENCE. You are not required to work for the government. If you don't like their policies get a job somewhere else (like Microsoft or Google).

John said...

I saw this one coming. We are already paying for abortions, contraception, and IVF. It is only a matter of time until the other morally depraved acts are officially promoted and funded by the government or forcibly mandated in insurance plans.

As for the first commenter - it makes little sense to hold up the example of 2 companies run by liberals as the standard by which to judge the actions of other liberals.

Anonymous said...

Sorry, flanoggin, but disparities exist all over the place and most citizens are not compensated for ways in which government goes about its business in inconvenient or unfair ways.

With fewer people living in their house than mine, but a more consuming lifestyle, my neighbors throw away way more trash than we do every week. Is the city planning to give me any refunds for not asking them to haul away as much stuff as others do?


Anonymous said...

This is rich coming from you, you closet case. Come on Matty. Come out of the closet.

Anonymous said...

Hey, look! Anonymous ad hominem attack accusing the writer of that which he disapproves as an implication duplicitous disingenuousness. Who would have predicted that?

Anonymous said...

So you're saying because managers of a commercial firm use their taxpayers' money to promote an economic advantage for one minuscule minority, elected government has the duty to do the same with taxpayer money? Why?

Anonymous said...

Sorry, shareholders money, then taxpayers, obviously. Question remains: what makes this imperative on elected officials?

Sophia's Favorite said...

@last two anonymouses (who appear to be the same person): I think it's long past time we all acknowledged that homosexuals are a minority with special privileges.

The legal term for which, is aristocrats.

Post a Comment